Aloka wrote:Speculative papanca Alex-
The Buddha didn't find Rebirth, Kamma, Hell Beings to be speculation or papañca.
Aloka wrote:Speculative papanca Alex-
Well, you see, these are called "Views", and they are not "A Knowledge". You may call "Right View" as "Right Belief" and "Wrong View" as "Wrong Belief".Unless you can show them to me Zom, then in my own view its all purely speculative and has no connection to my practice here and now.
Oh - you're the Buddha now are you ?....and you keep twisting what I've said Alex and adding your own speculations about views I haven't even expressed - plus I said previously that I didn't want to engage with you because I find your posting manner aggressive.Alex123 wrote:Aloka wrote:Speculative papanca Alex-
The Buddha didn't find Rebirth, Kamma, Hell Beings to be speculation or papañca.
I believe in Rebirth, and have some logical reasons to believe in it:PeterB wrote:Have you Alex ?
I do, the Buddha. I also read a lot on what other teachers have said to see different interpretations and points of view, but I leave the final word with Buddha Himself.Aloka wrote: Do you have a teacher ? Maybe it would be a good idea to find one.
I've posted the quotes from the suttas. They are clear about rebirth.Aloka wrote: Oh - you're the Buddha now are you ?....
I don't have clairvoyant powers to see my rebirth or of others. I also do not have clairvoyant powers to read the mind of others and see their level of attainment.PeterB wrote:You didnt answer my question.
Alex123 wrote:I do, the Buddha. I also read a lot on what other teachers have said to see different interpretations and points of view, but I leave the final word with Buddha Himself.Aloka wrote: Do you have a teacher ? Maybe it would be a good idea to find one.
I've posted the quotes from the suttas. They are clear about rebirth.Aloka wrote: Oh - you're the Buddha now are you ?....
So does it mean that one should reject those things (like Hell, rebirth, Kamma) that one doesn't like and doesn't think exist?PeterB wrote:Or approach the suttas with an entirely different set of questions of a non- ontological kind.
As did Ajahn Buddhadasa for example. And as does Ajahn Sumedho.
It's obvious that the 2 venerables did use non-ontological approach for some group of audience. But it does not mean both venerables endorsed the view that literal rebirth and moment-to-moment rebirth must be 2 mutually exclusive concepts. If they did, please provide the appropriate references.PeterB wrote:
Or approach the suttas with an entirely different set of questions of a non- ontological kind.
As did Ajahn Buddhadasa for example. And as does Ajahn Sumedho
These are false dichotomies, as neither accepting nor rejecting views on rebirth is possible while still practicing the Dhamma.Alex123 wrote:...Should one pick and choose what one accepts and what one rejects?
Do you accept, reject or agnostic regarding Rebirth?daverupa wrote:These are false dichotomies, as neither accepting nor rejecting views on rebirth is possible while still practicing the Dhamma.Alex123 wrote:...Should one pick and choose what one accepts and what one rejects?
Ajahn Buddhadasa's writings are so replete with with his eschewing of the three lifetimes model that you could stick a pin in them almost anywhere and hit a suitable passage to that end.santa100 wrote:It's obvious that the 2 venerables did use non-ontological approach for some group of audience. But it does not mean both venerables endorsed the view that literal rebirth and moment-to-moment rebirth must be 2 mutually exclusive concepts. If they did, please provide the appropriate references.PeterB wrote:
Or approach the suttas with an entirely different set of questions of a non- ontological kind.
As did Ajahn Buddhadasa for example. And as does Ajahn Sumedho