the Dhamma without rebirth: amoral and what else?

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

In the Gradual Sayings, Book of Threes, Andha Sutta, the Buddha says that there are three kinds of people: 1) the blind, 2) the one-eyed, 3) the two-eyed.

1. The blind cannot see their benefit in this life.
2. The one-eyed can see their benefit in this life, but not the next.
3. The two-eyed can see their benefit, both for this life and the next

[mikenz66]

Hi NoWheat,

My concern is that if this is true, rebirth accepters spread a meme that seriously slows ability to gain liberation.

Please explain why you think that rebirth in the sense explained by the Buddha supports a sense of self. It seems to me that that would be a misreading of the Suttas (and, of course, the Abhidhamma).

Metta
Mike

[Kare]

If I may try to explain, I believe he's saying that rebirth exists or not regardless of any moral reasons we may put forth, and that the moral line of reasoning is entirely pointless because regardless of _our beliefs_ on morality and morality's link with rebirth, rebirth still just either exists or doesn't exist (as an ontological truth).

Put a different way: Belief in god doesn't make him exist if he doesn't really exist. Belief in a lack of god doesn't make him not exist if he really does exist. Our beliefs are completely and entirely irrelevant.

Kare's correct in that it is a totally irrelevant and invalid line of argument, but the fact remains that, just like with christians, this is a very common argument made by buddhists. The argument tends to be made by people entirely unfamiliar with the philosophy of ethics.

[/quote][/quote]

Thank you for making the point clearer.

[Lazy_eye]

So for me, a "don't know" position is conducive to wisdom. For you, maybe accepting a rebirth view is conducive. For others it may be the opposite, i.e. that the idea that we only have this one life, that gives them a sense of urgency.

Do we really need to hold a view on rebirth? Can we not just remain honest and agnostic, unless we truly know better? I don't know any better, so the whole idea of debating and putting forward "arguments" about it is just totally irrelevant.

Best wishes

Katy

Without wanting to getting bogged down in the Great Rebirth Debate, what I can say from personal experience is that when I began studying Buddhism, rebirth was not something I factored in, and there were aspects of Buddhist teachings that didn't add up. For example, it wasn't quite clear why one should follow precepts or even try to live a good life. If it's all about recognizing that phenomena are impermanent, arising and passing away, etc, well then the same can be said for wars or crime or any number of ills. Why sweat it? Just chill and savor the emptiness, man...

In other words, there's a risk of slipping into a kind of relativistic nihilism...and this has happened, arguably, within the Zen tradition more than a few times.

However, when we add kamma and rebirth back into the equation, we get the basis for Buddhist ethics. Now somebody is going to come along and say "well, but this is just selfish...you don't want to make bad kamma because you personally don't want to suffer, and how does that go along with no-self and all of that?" To which my answer is, yes, most of us are not that far along the path. We need "conventional" dhamma until we get to a certain level of realization.

On another note, I think the rebirth teaching helps with developing compassion towards other beings, particularly animals. Instead of thinking of them with an attitude of separation and superiority, we start to think "well, I was like this in a past life, and this being might be me in another life. This could be me."

Let me also say that I'm fairly agnostic about the whole issue, having gone from intense skepticism to a more accepting view. If we were having a discussion with scientists and skeptics and non-Buddhists, I couldn't honestly say that the evidence out there is particularly supportive of rebirth. And I have no problem, personally, with what you are saying or what Stephen Batchelor is saying, etc...this may turn out to be the right road for Buddhism in the West. We'll see. But as practitioner, I've found it helpful to take rebirth as a provisional assumption and try to work with it to see where it leads.

All best,

LE

[mikenz66]

Hi nowheat,

Yes, I understand that's your argument. The alternative argument is that it is essential to have mundane right view in order to make progress towards liberation.

This assumes that there is something offered by holding the rebirth view that is not available in the whole of the Buddha's teaching (without rebirth).

The argument I usually hear is that we have no reason to be moral unless we'll be punished if we are amoral. Am I correct in my understanding that this is THE reason rebirth is “necessary”? Or are there other points not having to do with encouraging morality?

I presume we agree that sila is an absolutely essential part of the Path, but this rather trivailized version of sila wasn't my point at all.

The point is the the Buddha invites us to try out his teaching. Follow the instructions and see for ourselves. I don't (yet) know which of the instructions are absolutely essential, so I keep an open mind about them.

If I were to point to a "reason" why having some sort of "post-mortem continuation attitude" would be helpful, it would be to do with countering annihilationistic tendencies of the mind, not some kindergarten idea about "crime and punishment". And, of course, it needs to be taken with a dose of anatta, to counter eternalistic tendencies...

Metta
Mike

[seanpdx]

I presume we agree that sila is an absolutely essential part of the Path, but this rather trivailized version of sila wasn't my point at all.

The point is the the Buddha invites us to try out his teaching. Follow the instructions and see for ourselves. I don't (yet) know which of the instructions are absolutely essential, so I keep an open mind about them.

If I were to point to a "reason" why having some sort of "post-mortem continuation attitude" would be helpful, it would be to do with countering annihilationistic tendencies of the mind, not some kindergarten idea about "crime and punishment". And, of course, it needs to be taken with a dose of anatta, to counter eternalistic tendencies...

Metta
Mike

What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?

[Abyss]

I agree that if we do not hold the view that rebirth is a possibility, there is no urgent reason to seek total liberation.

What about death? I don't want to die, therefore I seek liberation from death in this very life, which is possible according to the Buddha.

Can anyone find wording that makes it sound like he was exhorting others to follow his path, failure to do so was at their peril?

Maybe this (MN 8, Sallekha Sutta):

"What should be done for his disciples out of compassion for them, that I have done for you, Cunda. There are these roots of trees, these empty huts. Meditate, Cunda, do not delay or else you will regret later. This is our instruction to you"

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?

It's an interesting point... the 62 foundations for Wrong Views outlined in the Brahamajala sutta surround annihilationism and eternalism, as distinct to matters of rebirth.

Metta,
Retro.

[mikenz66]

What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?

How do you propose to do that?

Mike

[Ben]

Hi Mike

I presume we agree that sila is an absolutely essential part of the Path, but this rather trivailized version of sila wasn't my point at all.

Well said. Just on the issue of the importance of sila to the path, what isn't highlighted in many of these discussions is the impact of moral and immoral conduct on one's state of mind and whether that state of mind is then open and conducive to the development of samadhi and panna. And for me, personally, abiding by sila is pragmatic having seen and known the impact of immoral conduct on my own life and my own happiness.

As for rebirth - until we become ariya with the supernormal powers of being able to see our past lives, it remains an unknowable. So developing a view as to whether rebirth is a real phenomenon or is a metaphorical device is just speculation based on our own predelictions. What we do know is that the concept of rebirth is repeated hundreds of thousands of times throughout the suttas, there is scant evidence that the Buddha reserved teachings of rebirth to the dumb peasantry and that the excision of rebirth from the Dhamma makes it largely unintelligible.
As you know, when the Buddha was questioned by the householders of sala who were sceptical of rebirth, in the Apannaka Sutta (MN 60), he didn't try to convince them that they were wrong but used logical inference to direct them to the conclusion that living one's life as though one believed in rebirth will lead to their welfare. And I think that remains a potent message for all of us.
kind regards

Ben

[seanpdx]

What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?

How do you propose to do that?

Mike

You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.

[mikenz66]

What if we simply drop any and all notions of annihilationism and eternalism? Does belief in rebirth then remain a necessary belief?

How do you propose to do that?

You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.

Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...

Metta
Mike

[mikenz66]

Hi Ben

... what isn't highlighted in many of these discussions is the impact of moral and immoral conduct on one's state of mind and whether that state of mind is then open and conducive to the development of samadhi and panna. And for me, personally, abiding by sila is pragmatic having seen and known the impact of immoral conduct on my own life and my own happiness.

Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu...

Mike

[seanpdx]

As you know, when the Buddha was questioned by the householders of sala who were sceptical of rebirth, in the Apannaka Sutta (MN 60), he didn't try to convince them that they were wrong but used logical inference to direct them to the conclusion that living one's life as though one believed in rebirth will lead to their welfare. And I think that remains a potent message for all of us.
kind regards

Just an FYI, but that's simply a buddhist form of Pascal's Wager.

[seanpdx]

How do you propose to do that?

You do it by simply doing it. As a corollary, how does one cling to notions of annihilationism or eternalism? Figure that out, then stop doing those things. =D It may sound like a rather glib answer, but... heck, it's true.

Yes, I'm sorry, it does sound rather glib. I salute your abilities...

Metta
Mike

I have never claimed to be as good a teacher as the Buddha. When I figure out exactly how I dropped such notions in an easy-to-teach step-by-step format, I'll let you know.