YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

The Secular Buddhist - Page 4 - Dhamma Wheel

The Secular Buddhist

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:24 pm


nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:36 pm


Buckwheat
Posts: 956
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Buckwheat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:53 pm

Nowheat,
I like many of your points but I would add that for those who see the wisdom of what the Buddha taught, he did teach having conviction and faith in the truth of some of the things he saw yet could not prove to us until after we ourselves found enlightenment, such as the fact of enlightenment itself. He is not advocating blind faith, but a trust that "Ah, the Buddha is really onto something. I trust him and therefore will gently embrace some of the things he taught until I have further evidence one way or another."

I believe the reason for this aspect of dhamma is to get us through some of the toughest moments of practice without giving up or rejecting a difficult practice. Is there room for such a concept in Secular Buddhism?
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.

nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:21 pm


nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:26 pm


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:07 pm

Hi Nowheat,
You seam to confuse knowing with faith!
how you describe agnosticism is how I am using it, and I am sorry but no straw man, just the fact that faith requires trust that something is, agnosticism requires leaving it aside.
we can not verify enlightenment is possible the dhamma is true in all its details, but we can test and through inferance trust that the path does what it says on the tin, so to speak.

Agnosticism says until it is proven I wont use it.
Saddha says I have no proof for this but I will trust it is correct and test it as I go.

I do not know who ted is, but setting something aside because it maybe wrong, but open to it being correct is not faith.

Through my experiance of practice I have found what is said on the tin to be true so far, and have faith that what I have not seen for myself is true also so it is part of my working model until I can either prove it is false or which I believe is more likely to be true.

and what the Buddha put aside due to it not being useful for the training, is quite well documented, and can you prove the Buddha was enlightened and taught what he said on the tin, through direct experience of the end result? or do you have saddha that it is so?


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:54 pm


User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:00 pm


rblumberg
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:55 pm

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby rblumberg » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:23 pm

"Cherry picking the suttas" has nothing to do with belief or disbelief, and I'm not sure that I understand what it means to have a particular text "speak" to me. I read the suttas for the practical wisdom to live with a measure of joy and equanimity in a world distinguished by impermanence and pervasive dukkha. I read them regularly, and I try to distinguish what I see as a remarkably consistent and coherent system of understanding the experience we have of such a world. Throughout the texts of the Pali Canon, the man Gotama Siddhatha is revealed as a master teacher, who presented his dhamma in terms that were always appropriate to the types of experience that his listeners could be presumed to have had; the teachings he delivers to renunciant bhikkhus and bhikkunis were different from those which he delivered to kings and headmen, and different again from those delivered to householders. Even further, he had a different approach to transmitting the dhamma to old people and young people, to novices and experience meditators, and so forth. So, in reading the suttas, I try to find the particular expression of the dhamma that matches my experience most closely. And the more deeply I understand and internalize my understanding of the dhamma, the more I can get from the teachings delivered to those whose experience is very different from mine.

Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Nyana » Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:43 pm


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:51 am



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Goofaholix » Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:33 am


User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:57 am

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:02 am



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
Lazy_eye
Posts: 996
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: Laurel, MD
Contact:

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Lazy_eye » Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:19 am

To me, the argument that secular/skeptical Buddhists are cherry-picking based on arbitrary, subjective preference is somewhat misleading. That may be true for some New Agey types, or for people who have a superficial attraction to Buddhism without having really explored it.

But for the serious-minded "skeptical Buddhist", the selection process is actually fairly systematic. It's shaped by reference to naturalism, empiricism and critical thinking processes (what constitutes a reasoned argument, etc). It's not matter of personal whim, in other words. It's a fairly consistent and coherent set of benchmarks. There are objective criteria set forth for evaluating assertions; it isn't important that one "likes" or "dislikes" a particular teaching.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:30 am


User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Prasadachitta » Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:16 am

"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby Goofaholix » Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:57 am

Last edited by Goofaholix on Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:02 am


nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: The Secular Buddhist

Postby nowheat » Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:35 am



Return to “General Theravāda discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 2600htz, Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 55 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine