ancientbuddhism wrote:For the agnostic the matter is simple and easeful. .... From this perspective one can let rebirth lay right where it is in the dustbin with other anomalies such as:
Putting teachings you don't like in the "dustbin" sounds much more like skepticism than agnosticism.
Saying they are in the dustbin because they "aren't liked" sounds very much like a straw man fallacy.
I understood dust bin to mean simply "category of unused content" - various things are in there for many people, including such 'teachings' as the Marks of a Great Man.
A dustbin is where we put our rubbish with a view to throwing it out. The use of this language points to rejection and skepticism.
I think an agnostic would use a phrase like putting these teachings "on the back burner".
Jerrod Lopes wrote:I've found that rebirth can't be seen by someone who doesn't want to know it. It's not a matter of belief anyway, it's a matter of knowledge. This knowledge doesn't make one better than the other any more than long legs or brown hair does. Knowing it is an eventuality for every living being. In my experience, anatta must be understood first. Without knowledge of non-self you don't have a clue what is reborn in the first place. If one's views are way off, then one just won't get it until they're not way off. I think, after many dozens, if not more discussions, that problem with seeing rebirth stems from still believing in an eternal soul or personality that gets passed from one being to the next. That is reincarnation, not rebirth. YOU are not reborn. If that were the case, YOU would have full recollection of all the past lives. Sorry to bust in. Be well.
OK... please explain clearly and without waffling, from your own knowledge, the step-by-step details of the process of rebirth when someone dies, for the benefit of those members who can understand anatta (not-self).
Many thanks.
Dear sir or madam,
Respectfully, those who already understand non-self don't need an explanation of the process of rebirth. All they need is to think on it momentarily and it is quite clear in all its anticlimactic and boring glory, IMO. I have found that trying to explain rebirth to someone who doesn't realize non-self is non-productive and tends to make people upset. Perhaps when I'm felling a bit less lazy I'll try and start a thread with a link to an explanation entitled "What Gets Reborn" from another web site I contribute to. The tone I perceive from the words you've chosen above does not seem so much like someone who wants an explanation in order to learn something as much as someone who wants an explanation to argue over. I apologize in advance if I am incorrect about this.
I didn't mean to infer that you didn't understand anatta as I'm assuming you do given your post. While Buddhism is not new to me, this forum is and I don't see a way to edit posts just yet. I apologize for any inconveniences. I work hard to follow the ideal of right speech, but right typing is a whole other thing.
Jerrod Lopes wrote:Respectfully, those who already understand non-self don't need an explanation of the process of rebirth... etc etc
Lol, Mr Purple Haze, I'm assuming that you are implying that you are one of those people. What's your opinion of Buddhadasa's "Annata and Rebirth", then ?
Perhaps when I'm felling a bit less lazy I'll try and start a thread with a link to an explanation entitled "What Gets Reborn" from another web site I contribute to
porpoise wrote:A dustbin is where we put our rubbish with a view to throwing it out. The use of this language points to rejection and skepticism.
I think an agnostic would use a phrase like putting these teachings "on the back burner".
It's tough to predict what agnostics will say agnostically, and which phrases they will agnosticize. Your connotative take is one thing, but to assert that your connotative take is the right interpretation of a phrase used by another is a rather odd approach... to then say that agnostics would use phrases which conform to your expectations boggles the mind as well.
"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.
"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
Jerrod Lopes wrote:Respectfully, those who already understand non-self don't need an explanation of the process of rebirth. All they need is to think on it momentarily and it is quite clear in all its anticlimactic and boring glory, IMO.
Many people in the world who believe in re-birthing also believe in Supreme Self, rather than understand non-self.
Jerrod Lopes wrote:Respectfully, those who already understand non-self don't need an explanation of the process of rebirth... etc etc
Lol, Mr Purple Haze, I'm assuming that you are implying that you are one of those people. What's your opinion of Buddhadasa's "Annata and Rebirth", then ?
Perhaps when I'm felling a bit less lazy I'll try and start a thread with a link to an explanation entitled "What Gets Reborn" from another web site I contribute to
Lets hope its not about 2 candles !
Hello Ms. Aloka,
I read that link you put up, and yes, that's how I see it. I should say that's how I see it when I'm mindful of it, etc. I have plenty of dukkha, so I'm still an I despite knowing that there is no I in Jerrod. In truth there's no Jerrod in Jerrod. I've said for several years that we might be better off if our parents didn't give us names. I sometimes think that when monastic ordain they should shed names altogether, but I'm not going to argue with the wisdom of the sangha over that.
As to the candles thing... I don't use that analogy myself... Now I'm so self-conscious.
porpoise wrote:A dustbin is where we put our rubbish with a view to throwing it out. The use of this language points to rejection and skepticism.
I think an agnostic would use a phrase like putting these teachings "on the back burner".
It's tough to predict what agnostics will say agnostically, and which phrases they will agnosticize. Your connotative take is one thing, but to assert that your connotative take is the right interpretation of a phrase used by another is a rather odd approach... to then say that agnostics would use phrases which conform to your expectations boggles the mind as well.
I'm not sure whether or not you agree with my observations.
Lol, Mr Purple Haze, I'm assuming that you are implying that you are one of those people. What's your opinion of Buddhadasa's "Annata and Rebirth", then ?
I'm assuming also that you are implying you are one of those people too. What is your opinion of the link you provided for Buddhadasa's "Annata and Rebirth"?
I'm assuming also that you are implying you are one of those people too. What is your opinion of the link you provided for Buddhadasa's "Annata and Rebirth"?
No I'm not really meaning to imply anything. My opinion is that the essay at the link makes a lot of sense.
I'm neutral about rebirth, because it has absolutely no relevance to my practice here and now. Whether I believe or disbelieve is just "belief," because its speculation about a distant past or future about which we don't really know anything much at all.
I think you've written in your quote space, by the way.
In my view I see rebirth as factual natural process. Most of the confusion I think lies in the term rebirth itself. No one is actually reborn, so.... Yeah, I couldn't agree more that speculation on past and future are a waste of time. This is also why I see rebirth, for lack of a better term, as wonderful motivation to practice well in the present. Then again I may be one of the few who believe nibbana can be realized in this lifetime. I'm just enjoying samsara for now. Thanks for your above post. It does make a lot of sense to me, even if I don't quite see it the same way.
Jerrod Lopes wrote:In my view I see rebirth as factual natural process. Most of the confusion I think lies in the term rebirth itself. No one is actually reborn, so.... Yeah, I couldn't agree more that speculation on past and future are a waste of time. This is also why I see rebirth, for lack of a better term, as wonderful motivation to practice well in the present. Then again I may be one of the few who believe nibbana can be realized in this lifetime. I'm just enjoying samsara for now. Thanks for your above post. It does make a lot of sense to me, even if I don't quite see it the same way.
Yes, I can understand how people need rebirth as a kind of morality system and comforter - and that's fine. I used to be a believer rather than agnostic when I was involved with Tibetan Buddhism, before discovering Ajahn Chah on the internet and then two teachers of his lineage (Ajahn Sumedho and Ajahn Amaro) at Amaravati in the UK.
Anyway, to conclude,..... like you I certainly believe that Nibanna can be realised in one lifetime!
But Ajahn Chah taught Rebirth, so did Ajahn Sumedho and so does Ajahn Munindo.
So your post puzzles me
Aloka wrote:
Jerrod Lopes wrote:In my view I see rebirth as factual natural process. Most of the confusion I think lies in the term rebirth itself. No one is actually reborn, so.... Yeah, I couldn't agree more that speculation on past and future are a waste of time. This is also why I see rebirth, for lack of a better term, as wonderful motivation to practice well in the present. Then again I may be one of the few who believe nibbana can be realized in this lifetime. I'm just enjoying samsara for now. Thanks for your above post. It does make a lot of sense to me, even if I don't quite see it the same way.
Yes, I can understand how people need rebirth as a kind of morality system and comforter - and that's fine. I used to be a believer rather than agnostic when I was involved with Tibetan Buddhism, before discovering Ajahn Chah on the internet and then two teachers of his lineage (Ajahn Sumedho and Ajahn Amaro) at Amaravati in the UK.
Anyway, to conclude,..... like you I certainly believe that Nibanna can be realised in one lifetime!