RongzomFan

Are you serious? Are you actually serious?

yeah its absolutuely necessary. He doesn't even read the links HE HIMSELF keeps posting. See post 395 Is no one else tired of Vaj's bullshit? And I am not just talking about this thread. I am talking about every thread he shits on.

Hi Vaj, The primary source for the Shramana wikipedia page is on google books Why don't you fucking read it? Gavin D. Flood (1996), An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University Press. Dealing with you is just a waste of time. You are wrong about everything. Type in Sramana in the search box when you load up that book. "all sramana groups....rejected the Veda" "Yet while Brahmanism rejects the authority and teachings of the sramana schools, teachings akin to those of the Sramanas, concerning rebirth, retributive action, and liberation, come to dwell in the ...."

Hi Vaj, Why don't you answer post 395? Pretty please with sugar on top. http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/17287-dependent-origination/page__view__findpost__p__241451 Its obvious you didn't even read the link YOU kept posting as some sort of evidence. You basically wasted pages of forum space, as always. You are not knowledgeable about anything eastern, especially buddhism which you purport to know about. Basically you are some sort of super troll, but thats all.

I just checked page 35 is available again. But if it goes offline again, just read 38

Let everyone judge for themselves. I think you probably did if I had to bet, but I can't say for sure. And secondly you are a ****** ****** as I have logically proven in the latter half of post 395 , so I don't hold it past you.

Nevermind, it doesn't really support Vaj's argument, but its still really fishy changing terms to "vedism".

There are a series of edits made to change the terminology, and not in a correct way, to support Vaj's arguements. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shramana&action=history Compare the last on Feb 7 to Jan 30

Holy shit, have you been editing the Shramana wikipedia page?

The scholar I sourced is arguing that pretty convincingly with supporting arguments. So yes he invented the karma concept as we know it today. And it went into hinudism from there. Apparently the upanishads has a couple of vague references to karma, and definitley not the karma concept as we know it today. I don't own the book. Its on google books. Again I never claimed Buddha invented the word karma, only the karma concept, as shared by Hinduism. Buddha was the first one to come up with karma, and he was the first one to tie it to reincarnation. And this is an interesting sentence in wikipedia "Scholarly research and evidences have shown that philosophical concepts considered typically Indian – Karma, Ahimsa, Moksa, reincarnation and like – either originate in the sramana school of thought or were propagated and developed by Jaina and Buddhist teachers." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism Vaj did you even read the Shramana page on wikipedia that ***YOU*** kept referencing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shramana "Because the Sramanas rejected the Vedas...." "Rejection of the Vedas as revealed texts" "Following are the two main schools of Sramana Philosophy that have continued since ancient times in India:" Where the fuck is Hinduism listed? " According to Gavin Flood, concepts like karmas and reincarnation entered mainstream brahaminical thought from the sramana or the renounciant traditions." If you are going to source something, why don't you fucking read it. What a fucking moron. Fuck you Vaj.

you should read page 35 of Philosophy of Indian Sociology By G.S. Ramesh

and ______ too Vaj. Did you even read the the source I posted? Its on google books. Karma as we know the concept today (INCLUDING THE HINDU VERSION) is from the Buddha.

You are an ***. You can just spout off all sorts of idiocy, and when you are proven wrong you can patronize them. Nice tactic. **** ***.

No Vaj was claiming karma was from the Vedas. Lets keep it fucking real bro. Secondly, again I said from the beginning that Buddha invented the concept of karma as we know today, which I was right. And fuck I even mentioned Shramana precursors five pages ago. What more do you want?

Read page 35-38 of Philosophy of Indian Sociology By G.S. Ramesh, especially page 38 I win. EPIC FAIL

By the way, do you acknowledge that karma is not in the Vedas?

No its not. Thats why you don't have a fucking clue. They are not the same. Shramanas don't accept the Vedas as authority. And Sharamanas were way earlier. I win. You lose. Shramana is pre all those things. You JUST argued with me about that? Dude all this stuff we are discussing is documented in Khecharividya of Adinatha by James Mallinson. You are a complete moron.

will you respond? By the way, where are the links for these wikipedia quotes? And yes the Buddha invented the concept of karma, just not the word.

"This tradition influenced the Brahmanic religion in the early Vedantic (Upanishadic)" Ok its saying that the karma concept in the shramana tradition influenced the Vedantic tradition, yet you still claim the Upanishadic tradition is first. EPIC FAIL If I am a pre-teen, you must be a preschooler, since you don't understand the english language.

The term kamma meant nothing like what we talk about karma. Just the word, doesn't mean shit.

All Upanishads are post Buddha *******.

You are not even quoting the whole sentence. What an ass. Maybe you should grow up.

I quote myself

--->But how does that make karma vedic?<---- Jesus fucking christ. And didn't I say this about 5 pages ago. Do I really have to quote myself? And my point was that buddhism invented karma when it took the prototype from shramana. Jesus fucking christ.