mikenz66 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:46 am
robertk wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:26 am
One idea is adding a forum called "secular Buddhism' and limiting posts that dispute rebirth to that forum..
I take your point that "you shouldn't have to fall into a debate over rebirth on every single thread".
Sounds like a superb idea. For the same reason that having the Classical forums is wonderful, because there the Abhidhamma and Commentaries can be carefully examined without constant sniping that "The Abhidhamma was not taught by the Buddha". [And, of course, it's proper that members can debate that elsewhere if they wish.]
robertk wrote:Thanks mike- I am in full agreement. Having the classical forum is a real refuge for anyone wanting to discuss orthodox theravada without unnecessary distractions. And also Early Buddhism allows those members to discuss without people like me sniping them about their perceived lack of orthodoxy.
It seems though that "General Theravada " needs a bit more refinement which an additional forum - like 'secular ' would add.
i want to point this out again as a great suggestion. there are plenty of secular buddhists who are not offended by being called secular buddhists. stephen batchelor as i recall accepts that - even tho he believes he's truer to the original intentions of the buddha - that his position is a
deviation from buddhism as we know it. (i watched the debate between him and ajahn brahmali)
if someone can't accept that their position is quite evidently and flat-out contrary to the theravāda that's their problem.
again: similarly, we don't eject mahayana, vajrayana, etc. but we also don't allow them to take over the forum and turn it into a safe space for their ideas. if someone wants to challenge rebirth they can do it in their own thread. literally, if nothing else, stop letting threads be derailed by rebirth denial!
Another approach would be to move all posts debating rebirth to The Great Rebirth Debate:
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=41, but that would be an incredible burden on the moderation team, given their sheer volume.
Mike
If you proceeded with an argument using rebirth as a given, would it have to be moved, or would it just be the (off-topic) response someone makes challenging rebirth? If the latter then I also like this suggestion, but if every post or topic that relied on accepting rebirth had to be moved, then secular buddhism would basically be the default position of the forum.
Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:31 am
Make it a true free speech page then and let anything go. It’s clearly not a Theravadin discussion forum. Why suppress the Mahayana? To me it seems if you want this to be broadly a Theravadin discussion page then certain views need to be limited, which is what you do already. The OP is merely asking for consistency. A sub-section is a perfect compromise between having a free for all general Dhamma discussion and enforced dogma. It’s worked well in past. It can work well here. Having certain people constantly derail threads on basic Theravadin teachings isn’t a sensible way to run a Theravadin discussion page, it seems to me. If I join a Christian forum I don’t expect atheists to be running around everywhere, derailing conversations left, right and centre. Some of my own views of late shouldn’t really be tolerated here, but that’s what the early Buddhism sub-section is for. A place where other views can be expressed whilst keeping the main page for what it was intended for.
yes, this is what i'm talking about. these diversions have been going on for quite a while and are obvious and frustrating to long-standing members, including apparently moderators. this suggestion is for forum management, not for creating an echo chamber.
perkele wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 12:27 pm
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:08 amMy general suggestion would be to be less intolerant of people who see things differently to you. I know it's 2021, but not everything and everyone needs to be cancelled. It's a discussion forum, not the Gestapo or the Ministry Of Truth.
Seems like an extreme and disingenuous misrepresentation of the OP's request, unncessarily wrapped into the politicized language of a culture warrior.
There are forum sections here in which the commentaries are considered authoritative and not allowed to be questioned, where the Abhidhamma is considered authoritative and not allowed to be questioned, etc., all of which is considered fair and reasonable for the scope of this forum.
It seems a bit strange then that the view that rebirth is merely mythological or metaphorical is considered fair game everywhere.
Not that I want to shut anyone up. And I did not vote. I just think an explicit secular buddhist section could be useful to channel such discussions and not derail others.
well said, simply
BrokenBones wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 3:34 pm
Since rebirth is such a fundamental part of the Buddha's teaching I can't see why it should be undermined in every other thread. If the Abhidhamma (a much disputed teaching) is given special treatment then I can see no other reason than partisanship for not giving similar consideration to a foundation of the Buddha's teaching. I'm sure that there are many Buddhist forums which accept that rebirth is a myth but surely a Theravadin forum should only allow such debate in its own sub forum. That way certain people's posts can proliferate to their hearts content in a fenced off section and the rest of the forum won't have to be plagued.
it honestly might be more popular in america/the western world taking what you want out of the buddha's teaching and dismiss what doesn't fit in with a secular worldview than actual religious buddhism. there might be
more places where rebirth denial is the default view. that's why i consider it important to protect and preserve this as a place where you should be able to come to discuss authentic buddhism (from a theravada perspective). i would like to understand the site admins' hesitancy in intervening in this scenario. they appear to be people of faith. listen to the input of long-standing members, including moderators and understand that this suggestion has good intentions
TRobinson465 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 4:58 pm
The complaint isn't about rebirth. It's about secular buddhism which happens to have a very specific interpretation about it. Is this view allowed? Of course. Should ppl be allowed to preach about it on basically every thread when it's not relevant? that's the bigger question here.
yep
SarathW wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:22 am
Isn't outright no rebirth meaning a nihilism that was rejected by Buddha?
Why do we give a separate section for annihilates?
because they pervade and suffuse the forum without respecting basic criteria that determine a theravada buddhist from a secular one.
and because ejecting them is considered too harsh
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:08 am
Greetings,
This all seems like a storm in a teacup to me.
I don't know a single member here who denies that the Buddha taught rebirth. All that differs is interpretations of its significance and meaning...
Is it central and essential, or is it a Right View with Asavas that is ultimately to be transcended by Right View without Asavas?
I don't think either perspective should be made to be unwelcome as they're both very much arguable with recourse to the Suttas.
My general suggestion would be to be less intolerant of people who see things differently to you. I know it's 2021, but not everything and everyone needs to be cancelled. It's a discussion forum, not the Gestapo or the Ministry Of Truth.
Metta,
Paul.
DooDoot wrote:
Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṁ veditabbo viññūhī
The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.’
The above Dhamma refuge appears to exclude any belief in a post-mortem rebirth. End of story. End of discussion.
this is why i would say you were being disingenuous. and you're aware not just of my reports because i'm not the only one
you're also informed by your political views as regards 'cancel culture'. which i find to be a fairly concerning trend in this day and age. you really shouldn't assume otherwise because i am reporting off-topic, derailing content. if you knew about my political positions you'd actually be surprised, i think - maybe not.
DooDoot wrote:Individuals who were fanatics about drugs, sex, etc, with addictive personalities, should avoid making Buddhism their next fanatical addiction. Instead, they should learn to remove their defilements. This is what a beginner must learn to do. Remove or reduce their defilements.
Individuals who have just recently (tried) given up sexual fundamentalism, such as BDSM, should not be encouraged into religious fundamentalism.
Instead, these individuals with fanatical tendencies (anusaya) should reduce or temper their defilements (kilesa).
this is the weird, rude, gaslighting ad hom that he pulls in various threads in addition to antagonizing and derailing. sure, i can use it as a personal point of reflection, but it's bad forum etiquette. anyway, there's a lot more here than trying to silence one single (but very disruptive) forum member, and you should read what others and i say more charitably
i put a lot of work into making the OP focused and easy to read because i genuinely care and want y'all to consider it
even if you wanted to you couldn't banish secularism but you can make it more obvious that it is distinct from theravāda
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested