Moderator: Mahavihara moderator
Dhammanando wrote:It is held to be an indispensible doctrine.
Kammic efficacy and rebirth are part of mundane right view. To reject or doubt rebirth is to suppose that there are some causes that don't yield effects – specifically, that there can be ignorance and craving that will not issue in further becoming. Those of such a view have not understood the conditionality of dhammas even at the intellectual/pariyatti level. To not understand this is to not understand the four noble truths, the three characteristics, or anything else that is of decisive importance in the development of paññā.
Peter wrote:... it is important to adopt the view that it actually happens.
Jechbi wrote:In this respect, I tend to agree with the approach Ben suggests, namely, to set aside for the moment those views that one cannot bring oneself to accept, and to continue on with the rest of practice.
But I wonder if this approach is in line with classical Theravada thought, because an argument seems to be made that the correct method for adopting right view regarding rebirth is to simply accept it, regardless of whether one believes it. To me that seems like putting the cart before the horse, although I stand to be corrected.
"I inform you, great king, I announce to you, great king: aging and death are rolling in on you. When aging and death are rolling in on you, great king, what should be done?"
"As aging and death are rolling in on me, lord, what else should be done but Dhamma-conduct, right conduct, skillful deeds, meritorious deeds?
mikenz66 wrote:... attempting to develop insight without establishing Right View will cause problems (falling into nihilism, as I recall).
Jechbi wrote:mikenz66 wrote:... attempting to develop insight without establishing Right View will cause problems (falling into nihilism, as I recall).
If right view and right thought are wholly encompassed by paññā, which I think is the classical Theravada position, then how can right view be established without insight?
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Manapa,Manapa wrote:...due to another group where a similare thread is going on, and a person their seams to hold an almost mahayana Boddhisatva vow view of the importance of rebirth.
Any chance you could provide a link?
Ben wrote:Hi Jechbi
Have a look at the following:
MN 60: Apannaka Sutta: The Incontrovertible Teaching
MN 74: Dighanakha Sutta: To Dighanakha
These probably represent the tip of the iceberg but they are two I have been reading today.
If you don't have Ven Bodhi's translation, please let me know and I'll transcribe the notes.
Manapa wrote:It is a private group so I cant unfortunately.
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Manapa,
No problems... I was hoping it might provide some context, but that's okay.
Ben wrote:Hi Manapa
They're in A translation of the Majjhima Nikaya. I don't known whether they're in In the Buddha's Words as I don't yet own a copy of that volume.
I'm in the middle of transcribing the notes to MN 60.
Jechbi wrote:What is the classical Theravada position with regard to how one goes about adopting a view that might conflict with views one has had for a long time, perhaps even for many lifetimes? What is the method for adopting this right view?
I had thought that the correct method to address this type of phenomenon would be:
1) To recognize any such thoughts as not right view.
2) To continue with the practices of right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right awareness, right concentration, right intention, and right view to the best of one's ability, recognizing that right view has not been perfected, and that in fact none of these practices has been perfected.
3) And as a result of applying all of these practices, right view will develop according to kamma.
But I wonder if this approach is in line with classical Theravada thought, because an argument seems to be made that the correct method for adopting right view regarding rebirth is to simply accept it, regardless of whether one believes it.
To me that seems like putting the cart before the horse, although I stand to be corrected.
Manapa wrote:I used the Boddhisatta/Tulku references to help with context as that is probably the closest that I know of to how strongly this belief is being expressed without the Mahayana overtones.
Manapa wrote:But is it important to the path?
the unshakable belief that it actually happens, so much so that you go out looking for the evidence ie tulkus, or the stories that abound of children remembering their past lives.
is it that important to the path in the clasical sense?
Users browsing this forum: SarathW and 8 guests