clw_uk wrote:The point im trying to make is that mundane right view isnt wrong understanding of the buddhas teachings, only that it should be seen for what it is, a mundane teaching that one needs to eventualy let go of so one can realise the higher dhamma and be liberated.
The point is the buddha has stated rebirth is mundane view, it is not the central teachings and is something that needs to be done away with eventually. The buddha has stated that it is a view with effluents.
One who holds rebirth stays in the mundane, they hold that it is central and for this they are mistaken. To hold rebirth as central is to hold the mundane as central and is to cut one off from the higher dhamma and from nibbana.
I dont deny rebirth was taught, just that its meaning and centrality have been distorted through the centuries.
Can you please provide any canonical textual support for your contention that the doctrine of rebirth was taught to one class of disciple while a negation of rebirth was taught to another class of disciple.
Further, could you please provide analysis of the Tipitaka and commentaries by credible scholars and textual historians that support your argument.
If not, can you please reference the original source of your argument. Is it a conclusion that you have come to or is it based on the discourses of a teacher and/or writers who you hold dear?