clw_uk/Craig wrote:So ok yeah, there is literal rebirth in the Suttas
In the suttas, tied directly to the Four Noble Truths and conditioned co-production, as has been clearly shown above using a number of sutta texts.
Craig wrote: From what I have read Buddhadasa taught the same (would it shock you to know he does say that "I am" happens after death if there is still ignorance)
That was already clearly established above that Buddhadasa did only not deny post mortem rebirth, but accepted it.
Craig inaccurately wrote:The main point of contention is that people with a rebirth belief see the psychological teaching of D.O. as undermining rebirth and going against the Suttas. I just don't see how it does though.
It would seem, rather, that the psychologicalists often obstinately deny any actual utility to the idea of literal rebirth, setting up a stawman argument in regards to literal rebirth, as we can see with Craig’s numerous missives above.
Craig wrote: My main issue is when people take the view that one must have a view of rebirth to be a Buddhist, or that the four noble truths and D.O. describe a purely 3 lifetime model.
Those who hold that the Buddha did, in fact, teach literal rebirth have been a great deal more flexible on this point than have the psychologicalists in their attempted dismissal of the literalist position.
Craig wrote: So this would extend to using Dhamma as a philosophical tool to use for arguments (credo) instead of using it for insight (Buddhadhamma), which leads to freedom from dukkha ... The raft properly used
The psychologicalist point of view can, just as easily as the literalist position, be abused by becoming a “credo,” as Craig has shown.
In reading through this latest round of exchanges, it is interesting to see that 2500 plus years after the death of the Buddha that, at long last, someone, who does not read Sanskrit, Classical or Vedic, nor reads Pali, nor has shown any evidence of looking at the corresponding Agama literature, someone seems not to understand at all what text critical
methodology is, someone is going to set us straight, finally, as to what the Buddha actually, really, and truly meant, and that the Buddha taught using a twilight language, sāṃdhyābhāṣā, not meaning literally what he said, which becomes, of course, an all too easy trope for dismissing what one wants to dismiss.