daverupa wrote:There's only one section in the entirety of MN 9 that makes even an oblique reference to rebirth (24-27, from within 1-71), and the whole thing is couched within terms of alternative and equivalent ways of coming to Right View. The idea that rebirth is a necessary part of Right View is wholly incorrect.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
A2. "Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is no next world' is his wrong view.
B2. "Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is a next world' is his right view.
MN 60 is preached to brahmin householders and incorporates rebirth as a component of right view based on this audience.
MN 9 is preached to bhikkhus who repeatedly ask Sariputta "But, friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma?" and rebirth shows up after a number of other descriptions are explicated, and other descriptions without rebirth follow along, all of it summing Right View, whence the name of this Sutta.
In other words, MN 9 showcases that rebirth is one among many, and definitely not the only way, which is your claim. MN 60, your evidence for rebirth-as-required, rather showcases that the Buddha felt that these brahmin householders would benefit from having the rebirth assumption accepted for argument's sake as a way of setting up a version of Pascal's wager for them, the "safe bet" approach for which the Sutta was named.
daverupa wrote:The idea that rebirth is a necessary part of Right View is wholly incorrect.