Athiesm

NOTaGangsta

Do you homeboys reckon dat Athiesm is just another religion thats attached to god? Attachment to the disapproving of god?

Hence if this attachment is kept upon discovering Buddhism, it's still going to be a good hinderance? Because it will prevent people to believe the more supramundance aspects of the teaching, such as rebirth etc?

Know wat imah sayin?

DhammaDhatu

Athiesm accords with what can be seen & experienced. This is the same as Buddhism

The Buddha described his Dhamma as follows:

Praise for the Dhamma

(LEADER):

Handa mayaṃ dhammābhithutiṃ karoma se:

Now let us give high praise to the Dhamma:

(ALL):

[Yo so svākkhāto] bhagavatā dhammo,

The Dhamma well-expounded by the Blessed One,

Sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko,

to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting all to come & see,

Opanayiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhi:

leading inward, to be seen by the wise for themselves:

Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ abhipūjayāmi,
Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ sirasā namāmi.

I honor most highly that Dhamma,
To that Dhamma I bow my head down.

(BOW DOWN) :bowdown:

DhammaDhatu

Because it will prevent people to believe the more supramundane aspects of the teaching, such as rebirth etc?

Homeboy

Rebirth is not 'supramundane'. Try to avoid misrepresenting the Buddha.

Know wat imah sayin? :wtf:

Paradox

Do you homeboys reckon dat Athiesm is just another religion thats attached to god? Attachment to the disapproving of god?

How can you disapprove of something that doesn't exist?

zenff

There’s some attachment in all concepts we hold.
Even when we’re right by any standard; having to be right is an attachment.

I heard a story about relationship-therapy.
The therapist talked to he guy alone. He asked “what’s the color of this table?”.
The guy answered “black” and he was right about that by any standard.
But the therapist said “no it is white”.
They got into an argument about that until the therapist finally explained: “see, this is your problem.”.
(The guy never went back to the therapy).

I like that story.
Why on earth should we argue about futile matters? Just because we know that we are right? Just because we want others to agree with us?

We can all make this mistake – Buddhists certainly are not free from it.

CaliGuy819

"Dhammu" - How is rebirth not supramundane?
Definition of supramundane: Su`pra*mun"dane\, a. Being or situated above the world or above our system; celestial

The concept of rebirth does indeed seem to fit into this.

Here is a good article to read about rebirth and the impossibilityof separating it from the teachings of the Buddha. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_46.html

Notagangsta - thanks again for bringing up a good topic and insight!

justbe

@NotaGangsta I don't mean to create any rifts here or anything, but as a black man from the so called "hood" where theres gangbanging going on and people who struggle mightily, I am hypersensitive to instances of (perceived) mockery/stereotypings of black men; something I feel that you with your username and this posting have engaged to a degree. Granted, it's not the most obscene thing I've ever seen, but on a forum dedicated to clarity and truth I feel that you should be a bit more sensitive with how you conduct yourself here "do you homeboys reckon" and "Know what imah sayin", come on with that..

Mr_Serenity

Lol ^ I will also prefer to see NotaGangster type like he talks in real life. Unless he is actually a Buddhist hoodlum that only knows how to talk ebonics. Which I sort of doubt, since I've actually grown up in the hood around people who actually talk that way naturally, NaG seems to do it just for show.

aMatt

How is rebirth not supramundane?

Some buddhists consider rebirth a description for asava that arise again and again in this life, this mind, here and now, in response to observing changing phenomena. The notion of an eternal soul that goes from body to body is not the only way of interpreting rebirth.

SimpleWitness

@CaliGuy819

"Dhammu" - How is rebirth not supramundane?
Definition of supramundane: Su`pra*mun"dane\, a. Being or situated above the world or above our system; celestial

The concept of rebirth does indeed seem to fit into this.

Here is a good article to read about rebirth and the impossibilityof separating it from the teachings of the Buddha. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_46.html

Notagangsta - thanks again for bringing up a good topic and insight!

There is no soul. Anatman means that all things are interconnected and interdependent, so that nothing -- including ourselves -- has a separate existence.

Rebirth is not supramundane. It is a part of transformation, which is towards a renewal of awareness in this world. It is set neither above the world nor below it. It is interconnected with all worlds.

Though Buddhist rebirth SEEMS to fit into this, it, in fact, does not as "supramundane" is within context of being a soul or an alien. LOL! Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh!

There is no creator god. There is no soul. There is nothing to prove if they do not exist. So why are we arguing? Just Witness it all and chill dawg! LOL!

DhammaDhatu

"Dhammu" - How is rebirth not supramundane?!

Because the Buddha said so

Here is a good article to read about rebirth and the impossibilityof separating it from the teachings of the Buddha

You must be a newbie to this forum. Dhamma Dhatu would demolish the reasoning in the article easily, especially if it is written by Jeffrey Block (Bhikkhu Bodhi).

Kind regards

DhammaDhatu

"Dhammu" - How is rebirth not supramundane?
Definition of supramundane: Su`pra*mun"dane\, a. Being or situated above the world or above our system; celestial.

The Buddha used the word 'world' (loka) as a synonymn for suffering (see AN 4.45; SN 12.44; SN 35.82).

Lokkutara ('above the world'; 'supramundane') means the mind is beyond suffering (rather than in a spaceship in outerspace); it is the realisation of emptiness (see MN 117; SN 20.7).

As Bhikkhu Bodhi has mentioned in his article, the Buddha advised rebirth is right view (see MN 117). However, what Bhikkhu Bodhi fails to mention is the Buddha taught rebirth is mundane right view, i.e., it sides with morality (as Bhikkhu Bodhi emphasised) but it also sides with asava (defilement; mental pollution) and upadi (attachment; burdens), which Bhikkhu Bodhi did not mention (see MN 117).

In MN 60, the Buddha makes it clear, for the unenlightened householder, the view of continued existence is (mundane) right view. But in SN 12.15, the Buddha makes it clear both the views of existence & non-existence are not right view on the supramundane level.

Now the ultimate goal of the Buddha's teachings is for the mind to be free from the asava (see MN 121). This is Nibbana, which is the here & now end of greed, hatred & delusion (see Iti 2.17). The asava are threefold, namely, sensual desire, becoming & ignorance (see MN 9).

Thus, to adhere to rebirth view means to maintain the asava. To maintain the asava is to never realise Nibbana. To never realise Nibbana is to not realise the goal of the Buddhist teachings.

In MN 2, the Buddha advises, on the supramundane level, to give attention to matters of rebirth is inappropriate attention because it maintains the asava.

To end, the views of Jeffrey Block (Bhikkhu Bodhi) are tenuous. They promote morality but hinder liberation.

Kind regards

SimpleWitness

@Dhamma-Dhatu

"Dhammu" - How is rebirth not supramundane?
Definition of supramundane: Su`pra*mun"dane\, a. Being or situated above the world or above our system; celestial.

The Buddha used the word 'world' (loka) as a synonymn for suffering (see AN 4.45; SN 12.44; SN 35.82).

Lokkutara ('above the world'; 'supramundane') means the mind is beyond suffering (rather than in a spaceship in outerspace); it is the realisation of emptiness (see MN 117; SN 20.7).

As Bhikkhu Bodhi has mentioned in his article, the Buddha advised rebirth is right view (see MN 117). However, what Bhikkhu Bodhi fails to mention is the Buddha taught rebirth is mundane right view, i.e., it sides with morality (as Bhikkhu Bodhi emphasised) but it also sides with asava (defilement; mental pollution) and upadi (attachment; burdens), which Bhikkhu Bodhi did not mention (see MN 117).

In MN 60, the Buddha makes it clear, for the unenlightened householder, the view of continued existence is (mundane) right view. But in SN 12.15, the Buddha makes it clear both the views of existence & non-existence are not right view on the supramundane level.

Now the ultimate goal of the Buddha's teachings is for the mind to be free from the asava (see MN 121). This is Nibbana, which is the here & now end of greed, hatred & delusion (see Iti 2.17). The asava are threefold, namely, sensual desire, becoming & ignorance (see MN 9).

Thus, to adhere to rebirth view means to maintain the asava. To maintain the asava is to never realise Nibbana. To never realise Nibbana is to not realise the goal of the Buddhist teachings.

In MN 2, the Buddha advises, on the supramundane level, to give attention to matters of rebirth is inappropriate attention because it maintains the asava.

To end, the views of Jeffrey Block (Bhikkhu Bodhi) are tenuous. They promote morality but hinder liberation.

Kind regards

You, Dhamma Dhatu, are well versed. Your premise was copied and pasted to my memo. I will read every Dhamma that was posted and meditate on what the Buddha said in his Suttas.

What you are doing is a very compassionate deed. (:

sndymorn

Lol ^ I will also prefer to see NotaGangster type like he talks in real life. Unless he is actually a Buddhist hoodlum that only knows how to talk ebonics. Which I sort of doubt, since I've actually grown up in the hood around people who actually talk that way naturally, NaG seems to do it just for show.

Gangsta , it seems to me, is this forum's Will Rogers: folksy and insightful.
Sorry to be off topic. Sorry for obscure reference.
(not too sorry mind you)

aMatt

In MN 2, the Buddha advises, on the supramundane level, to give attention to matters of rebirth is inappropriate attention because it maintains the asava.

Does this mean both theist and atheist views maintain asava? Because the attention is away from what is present and verifiable?

SherabDorje

Is spelling atheism wrong in the title and the post part of NaG's folksy appeal? I mean, for such an important topic it should at least be spelled right.

DhammaDhatu

Does this mean both theist and atheist views maintain asava? Because the attention is away from what is present and verifiable?

Not really, imo. The supramundane path is concerned with extinguishing or seeing the delusion of 'self-views'. Now theism is a 'self-view'. So atheism accords with 'not-self'. But non-belief in the BIG SELF in the sky with belief in the 'small self' on earth is not true atheism. True atheism does not reify/deify the laws of nature as "God" nor reify/deify the five aggregates as 'self'. True atheism sees the delusion of both Brahma & atman. Regards

seeker242

Do you homeboys reckon dat Athiesm is just another religion thats attached to god? Attachment to the disapproving of god?

Hence if this attachment is kept upon discovering Buddhism, it's still going to be a good hinderance? Because it will prevent people to believe the more supramundance aspects of the teaching, such as rebirth etc?

Know wat imah sayin?

I think it is quite obvious that some people, who are atheist, are very attached to the idea that "there is no God". They go out of their way to try and even prove it to devout believers and get into great arguments about it. What a pointless endeavor... There is no such thing as a "good hindrance" IMO.

MindGate

Just a complete facepalm to this whole thread.

Daozen

The word atheism means 'without theism', and in that sense is defined by what it isn't, not by what it is - whatever that may be.

Namaste

NOTaGangsta

wow, why yall discriminatin on how I post on da internet?!! Yall obviously understand what Im sayin! Know wat im sayin? :P

vinlyn

The only way we can interpret the kind of person you are, is by what you write here. And what you write here sounds like exactly what you say you're not.

And cut the discrimination baloney. If a candidate for job came in my school and talked like that, whether he was white, black, latino, etc., it wouldn't make any difference. He wouldn't get the job. In fact, he wouldn't even get the interview.

You decide how you talk (write). We decide what you have communicated to us.

I have an idea you're an intelligent guy, but the language above isn't what gives me that impression.

NOTaGangsta

Rebirth is not 'supramundane'. Try to avoid misrepresenting the Buddha.

Know wat imah sayin? :wtf:

yo! Your right about that! Rebirth is within Samsara hence is mundane! Thanks for saving my blunder! Better repent tonight

NOTaGangsta

Hey Dhamma Dhatu, thanks for correcting my incorrect view on categorising "rebirth"!!! Samsara is mundane, hence the whole rebirth business!!!

D'oh!!!! lol, back in the days I would have blamed you for "making me look wrong!"

KarmaDondrupTashi

NOTaGangsta you are awesome.

andyrobyn

Indeedy :clap:

NOTaGangsta

Sadly I will drop the attics on account of justbe's comments

However, is "homes" and "know what im sayin?" still okay? They are actually my favourite saying on the internet

justbe

@NotaGangsta

no hard feelings lol. go for it..