What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?mikenz66 wrote: I presume we agree that sila is an absolutely essential part of the Path, but this rather trivailized version of sila wasn't my point at all.
The point is the the Buddha invites us to try out his teaching. Follow the instructions and see for ourselves. I don't (yet) know which of the instructions are absolutely essential, so I keep an open mind about them.
If I were to point to a "reason" why having some sort of "post-mortem continuation attitude" would be helpful, it would be to do with countering annihilationistic tendencies of the mind, not some kindergarten idea about "crime and punishment". And, of course, it needs to be taken with a dose of anatta, to counter eternalistic tendencies...
Metta
Mike
the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
What about death? I don't want to die, therefore I seek liberation from death in this very life, which is possible according to the Buddha.nowheat wrote:I agree that if we do not hold the view that rebirth is a possibility, there is no urgent reason to seek total liberation.
Maybe this (MN 8, Sallekha Sutta):nowheat wrote:Can anyone find wording that makes it sound like he was exhorting others to follow his path, failure to do so was at their peril?
"What should be done for his disciples out of compassion for them, that I have done for you, Cunda. There are these roots of trees, these empty huts. Meditate, Cunda, do not delay or else you will regret later. This is our instruction to you"
-
retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Greetings,
Metta,
Retro.
It's an interesting point... the 62 foundations for Wrong Views outlined in the Brahamajala sutta surround annihilationism and eternalism, as distinct to matters of rebirth.seanpdx wrote:What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
How do you propose to do that?seanpdx wrote: What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Hi Mike
As for rebirth - until we become ariya with the supernormal powers of being able to see our past lives, it remains an unknowable. So developing a view as to whether rebirth is a real phenomenon or is a metaphorical device is just speculation based on our own predelictions. What we do know is that the concept of rebirth is repeated hundreds of thousands of times throughout the suttas, there is scant evidence that the Buddha reserved teachings of rebirth to the dumb peasantry and that the excision of rebirth from the Dhamma makes it largely unintelligible.
As you know, when the Buddha was questioned by the householders of sala who were sceptical of rebirth, in the Apannaka Sutta (MN 60), he didn't try to convince them that they were wrong but used logical inference to direct them to the conclusion that living one's life as though one believed in rebirth will lead to their welfare. And I think that remains a potent message for all of us.
kind regards
Ben
Well said. Just on the issue of the importance of sila to the path, what isn't highlighted in many of these discussions is the impact of moral and immoral conduct on one's state of mind and whether that state of mind is then open and conducive to the development of samadhi and panna. And for me, personally, abiding by sila is pragmatic having seen and known the impact of immoral conduct on my own life and my own happiness.mikenz66 wrote: I presume we agree that sila is an absolutely essential part of the Path, but this rather trivailized version of sila wasn't my point at all.
As for rebirth - until we become ariya with the supernormal powers of being able to see our past lives, it remains an unknowable. So developing a view as to whether rebirth is a real phenomenon or is a metaphorical device is just speculation based on our own predelictions. What we do know is that the concept of rebirth is repeated hundreds of thousands of times throughout the suttas, there is scant evidence that the Buddha reserved teachings of rebirth to the dumb peasantry and that the excision of rebirth from the Dhamma makes it largely unintelligible.
As you know, when the Buddha was questioned by the householders of sala who were sceptical of rebirth, in the Apannaka Sutta (MN 60), he didn't try to convince them that they were wrong but used logical inference to direct them to the conclusion that living one's life as though one believed in rebirth will lead to their welfare. And I think that remains a potent message for all of us.
kind regards
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.mikenz66 wrote:How do you propose to do that?seanpdx wrote: What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...seanpdx wrote:You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.mikenz66 wrote:How do you propose to do that?seanpdx wrote: What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?
Metta
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Hi Ben
Mike
Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu...Ben wrote: ... what isn't highlighted in many of these discussions is the impact of moral and immoral conduct on one's state of mind and whether that state of mind is then open and conducive to the development of samadhi and panna. And for me, personally, abiding by sila is pragmatic having seen and known the impact of immoral conduct on my own life and my own happiness.
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Just an FYI, but that's simply a buddhist form of Pascal's Wager.Ben wrote: As you know, when the Buddha was questioned by the householders of sala who were sceptical of rebirth, in the Apannaka Sutta (MN 60), he didn't try to convince them that they were wrong but used logical inference to direct them to the conclusion that living one's life as though one believed in rebirth will lead to their welfare. And I think that remains a potent message for all of us.
kind regards
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
I have never claimed to be as good a teacher as the Buddha. When I figure out exactly how I dropped such notions in an easy-to-teach step-by-step format, I'll let you know.mikenz66 wrote:Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...seanpdx wrote:You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.mikenz66 wrote: How do you propose to do that?
Metta
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Don't you mean that Pascal's Wager was just a Christian form of the Buddha's teaching?seanpdx wrote: Just an FYI, but that's simply a buddhist form of Pascal's Wager.
Metta
Mike
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
*grin* You know, I've always wondered if Pascal had read this sutta! =Dmikenz66 wrote:Don't you mean that Pascal's Wager was just a Christian form of the Buddha's teaching?seanpdx wrote: Just an FYI, but that's simply a buddhist form of Pascal's Wager.
Metta
Mike
Alas, the fallacy itself is rather commonplace, so I just refer to it as Pascal's Wager even though neither is really a form of the other. I blame my history of christian debate.
-
retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Greetings Mike,
What underpins annihilationism or eternalism is belief in an atman (soul)... either one than transmigrates (eternalism) or one that is destroyed at death (annihilationism). The dichotomy of annihilationism vs eternalism is elegantly transcended if one does not possess a soul view, such as thus espoused in the Brahamajala Sutta.
Therefore, to repose Sean's question against that setting, "Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief if you hold no wrong views with respect to atman?"
Metta,
Retro.
May I try then to answer your "How do you propose to do that?" question.mikenz66 to seanpdx wrote:Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...
What underpins annihilationism or eternalism is belief in an atman (soul)... either one than transmigrates (eternalism) or one that is destroyed at death (annihilationism). The dichotomy of annihilationism vs eternalism is elegantly transcended if one does not possess a soul view, such as thus espoused in the Brahamajala Sutta.
Therefore, to repose Sean's question against that setting, "Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief if you hold no wrong views with respect to atman?"
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
I disagree on one specific point, which is actually more of semantic matter in what you wrote. I disagree that "belief in an atman" necessarily underpins each view. I agree, however, that it's transcended if one "does not possess a soul view". Belief in an atman, and belief in a lack of atman, are both soul views. One, the view that a soul exists (leading to either eternalism or annihilationism). The other, the view that a soul does not exist (which obviously cannot lead to eternalism in any seemingly rational way, but could lead to materialism/nihilism/annihilationism).retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Mike,
May I try then to answer your "How do you propose to do that?" question.mikenz66 to seanpdx wrote:Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...
What underpins annihilationism or eternalism is belief in an atman (soul)... either one than transmigrates (eternalism) or one that is destroyed at death (annihilationism). The dichotomy of annihilationism vs eternalism is elegantly transcended if one does not possess a soul view, such as thus espoused in the Brahamajala Sutta.
Remember... when confronted with the actual question of the existence of a soul, the Buddha remained silent. Belief in a lack of soul, I believe, can be just as bad as belief in a soul. I'm not sure if that's what you were ultimately trying to get across, or whether you think that belief in a lack of soul transcends soul views. ???
Re: the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?
Hi Retro,
Metta
Mike
An extremely hypothetical question if you ask me, since all of us on this thread presumably have such wrong views...retrofuturist wrote: Therefore, to repose Sean's question against that setting, "Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief if you hold no wrong views with respect to atman?"
Metta
Mike