Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
For example, let's return to the OP subject of question --- I neither accept nor deny the doctrine of rebirth because it's of no consequence if one's practice is in the present moment, the here and now.
Same here, but I do wonder why the Buddha taught all that stuff about kamma, rebirth and the realms if it's of no relevance to daily practice.
I think you make a very good point.
But, what if one does not believe or disbelieve in rebirth (which is my position...I have an open mind about the issue). There are still aspects of Buddhist principles which are valuable -- compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path.
It, at it's most simplistic, is still more objective than the alternative of accepting without a critical analysis.
Excellent point. Critical analysis cannot be devoid of personal viewpoints. But that doesn't mean critical analysis is not useful and cannot lead toward wise decision making. All of us here are inclined toward some degree of a Buddhist environment. Some of us are respectful of Buddhist principles and bring them into our lives (that's probably more the philosophical argument), while others of us are fully into religious Buddhism. So our viewpoints are already tainted to one degree or another. Yet there can be some very good discussions...and sometimes not.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited May 2012
There's a story of a fireman who's crew was battling a building fire. He was up on the roof when seemingly out of nowhere he got a really bad feeling and he pulled his guys out of the building. A few moments later the roof caved in, people would have died if he hadn't followed his feeling. Later reflecting on it he realized that his feet felt too warm, the conscious thought that his feet were too warm and that meant the roof might give way never came to him and he didn't make his decision based upon critical analysis.
The subconscious mind is often making decisions and judgements that aren't available to our conscious thought process. My point being that the opposite of critical analysis isn't automatically irrationality and nonsense choices. Note that he needed knowledge and experience to enable a proper intuition about the situation.
There are other methods available to reach proper decisions, not that that means they are always right either.
@pearson: I totally agree with you on the need for knowledge and experience, as well as proper intuition about any given situation, but this is what distinguishes the proper application of critical thought from the improper.
For example, Vinlyn raises a very point, that there are still valuable aspects related to Dharma practice, such as compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, ect., though there's a rule of thumb I've kind of adopted when it comes to the practical application of critical thought --- it can be expressed in one of two ways:
(1) don't fix it, if it ain't broken - or - (2) don't throw the baby out with the water unless it's stillborn
It's also important to keep in mind that if you break it, you've bought it
Hi Vinlyn. Certainly I didn't mean that the lack of critical thought is wiser --- sorry for any misunderstanding. What I meant is that critical thought is necessary, that sometimes there's not enough of it.
Although you're very correct in that not every decision made through critical thinking ends up being the right decision, can we say the same when critical thought is not applied?
Agreed.
But in this context "critical thinking" involves assumptions, interpretation and judgement, in other words it's qualitative analysis, which is highly subjective. The subject matter doesn't lend itself to quantitative analysis ( number crunching ) which does have an element of objectivity.
(1) don't fix it, if it ain't broken - or - (2) don't throw the baby out with the water unless it's stillborn
Though in the context of this thread these rules of thumb would seem to point to fully including kamma, rebirth and the realms in our understanding of the Buddhist path?
But, what if one does not believe or disbelieve in rebirth (which is my position...I have an open mind about the issue). There are still aspects of Buddhist principles which are valuable -- compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path.
It does seem that rebirth is more central to practice in some Buddhist traditions than others.
Hi Vinlyn. Certainly I didn't mean that the lack of critical thought is wiser --- sorry for any misunderstanding. What I meant is that critical thought is necessary, that sometimes there's not enough of it.
Although you're very correct in that not every decision made through critical thinking ends up being the right decision, can we say the same when critical thought is not applied?
Agreed.
But in this context "critical thinking" involves assumptions, interpretation and judgement, in other words it's qualitative analysis, which is highly subjective. The subject matter doesn't lend itself to quantitative analysis ( number crunching ) which does have an element of objectivity.
So what?
Virtually every word written in this forum is subjective. Does that make it less valuable?
One of my minors at university was geography, particularly physical geography. And the field was in the midst of a change over from what had been "descriptive" physical geography to quantitative physical geography. And guess what, most of the time quantitative simply reaffirmed what had been discussed for years qualitatively. I also remember that one day I walked into the office of a geography professor I was assisting, and he had a new toy...a computer (I told you it was back a while). And on the screen were these odd looking curved lines. I asked him what that was, and he replied hill slopes. I said I had never seen hillslopes with any of those shapes, and he responded that they were just mathematical theoretical hillslopes. So, just because something is quantitative doesn't mean it is always real.
But, what if one does not believe or disbelieve in rebirth (which is my position...I have an open mind about the issue). There are still aspects of Buddhist principles which are valuable -- compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path.
It does seem that rebirth is more central to practice in some Buddhist traditions than others.
One of the concepts that I totally detest in Buddhism is this idea that there are certain things man is not to "ponder" -- the "imponderables" -- and this idea that if you do ponder them you will "go mad". In my view, that's a crock. Now, to say that those same things are not likely to be brought to a conclusion may make sense, and one of those things, to me, is rebirth, et al.
"These four imponderables are not to be speculated about. Whoever speculates about them would go mad & experience vexation. Which four? The Buddha-range of the Buddhas [i.e., the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha]... The jhana-range of one absorbed in jhana [i.e., the range of powers that one may obtain while absorbed in jhana]... The results of kamma... Speculation about [the first moment, purpose, etc., of] the cosmos is an imponderable that is not to be speculated about. Whoever speculates about these things would go mad & experience vexation."
What would you have us do other than critically analyse? Blindly accept?
Not atall. I'm just saying that critical analysis is subjective and limited, and only one of the tools available.
Back to my question again then; what would you have us do other than critically analyse? What are these 'other tools'? (and in addition to that, what are the tools that are less "limited" than critical analysis?)
Though in the context of this thread these rules of thumb would seem to point to fully including kamma, rebirth and the realms in our understanding of the Buddhist path?
It could, but it would really depend on where the person is in their practice.
But in this context "critical thinking" involves assumptions, interpretation and judgement, in other words it's qualitative analysis, which is highly subjective. The subject matter doesn't lend itself to quantitative analysis ( number crunching ) which does have an element of objectivity.
Critical thinking can be used to serve two incompatible ends: self-centeredness or fair-mindedness, where the latter implies that we have learned to see the mistakes in our own thinking, not just in the thinking of others.
This requires what's best described as "fair-mindedness" or a conscious awareness to treat all viewpoints alike, regardless of our own feelings or self-interests, regardless of the interests of others, such as friends and family, or in this particular instance, the feelings and self-interests of the greater Buddhist community at large.
But in this context "critical thinking" involves assumptions, interpretation and judgement, in other words it's qualitative analysis, which is highly subjective. The subject matter doesn't lend itself to quantitative analysis ( number crunching ) which does have an element of objectivity.
Critical thinking can be used to serve two incompatible ends: self-centeredness or fair-mindedness, where the latter implies that we have learned to see the mistakes in our own thinking, not just in the thinking of others.
This requires what's best described as "fair-mindedness" or a conscious awareness to treat all viewpoints alike, regardless of our own feelings or self-interests, regardless of the interests of others, such as friends and family, or in this particular instance, the feelings and self-interests of the greater Buddhist community at large.
What would you have us do other than critically analyse? Blindly accept?
Not atall. I'm just saying that critical analysis is subjective and limited, and only one of the tools available.
Back to my question again then; what would you have us do other than critically analyse? What are these 'other tools'? (and in addition to that, what are the tools that are less "limited" than critical analysis?)
I've found that just trying to understand what is being said is a useful strategy, keeping an open mind, not rushing to judgement, not overthinking.
One of the concepts that I totally detest in Buddhism is this idea that there are certain things man is not to "ponder" -- the "imponderables" -- and this idea that if you do ponder them you will "go mad". In my view, that's a crock. Now, to say that those same things are not likely to be brought to a conclusion may make sense, and one of those things, to me, is rebirth, et al.
Yes, the Buddha advised against speculation, not against understanding the principles of what he taught - which I guess you could call Right View.
What would you have us do other than critically analyse? Blindly accept?
Not atall. I'm just saying that critical analysis is subjective and limited, and only one of the tools available.
Back to my question again then; what would you have us do other than critically analyse? What are these 'other tools'? (and in addition to that, what are the tools that are less "limited" than critical analysis?)
I've found that just trying to understand what is being said is a useful strategy, keeping an open mind, not rushing to judgement, not overthinking.
I'm still not seeing any point in what you're saying other than "don't try and weight the value of things before you accept them"
What you've just suggested is a horrible alternative to critical thinking
An analogy about this that I am comfortable with is that we are all water. And each sentient being is like a raindrop falling to earth during our individual lives. Each raindrop is an individual being. But then that life ends when the raindrop falls into the lake. Now, that raindrop is not a raindrop but part of the lake. And it's impossible to get that particular drop of water out of the lake ever again. But the water that made up that raindrop still exists. Then, the nature of the universe evaporates some water that was part of you when you were the raindrop and eventually another raindrop is formed. Is the new raindrop you as you were? No. Are you now a different raindrop? No. You are all the water in the lake and in the sky. We all are. Your essence as water remains but is unrecognizable as it once was.
I'm still not seeing any point in what you're saying other than "don't try and weight the value of things before you accept them"
What you've just suggested is a horrible alternative to critical thinking
I'm questioning the need to accept and reject, and questioning the primacy of thought. Horrible as that may sound!
You mean you're questioning the need to question..
I don't know about you and everyone else but I would much rather continue to have some sort of 'quality control' system when approaching any situation to do with my brain. We need to think. We need to accept and reject ideas. The idea of critical thinking being more limited than just letting anything into your head without judgement is insane
Right now you're questioning the need to question and rejecting the idea that we need to accept and reject ideas
I shouldn't need to point out that what you're saying is pseudo-philosophical nonsense that doesn't have any application in the real world It's not actually possible to live without accepting/rejecting ideas, a simple introspection of your life on a day-to-day basis will show you that
Comments
But, what if one does not believe or disbelieve in rebirth (which is my position...I have an open mind about the issue). There are still aspects of Buddhist principles which are valuable -- compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path.
The subconscious mind is often making decisions and judgements that aren't available to our conscious thought process. My point being that the opposite of critical analysis isn't automatically irrationality and nonsense choices. Note that he needed knowledge and experience to enable a proper intuition about the situation.
There are other methods available to reach proper decisions, not that that means they are always right either.
For example, Vinlyn raises a very point, that there are still valuable aspects related to Dharma practice, such as compassion, morality, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, ect., though there's a rule of thumb I've kind of adopted when it comes to the practical application of critical thought --- it can be expressed in one of two ways:
(1) don't fix it, if it ain't broken
- or -
(2) don't throw the baby out with the water unless it's stillborn
It's also important to keep in mind that if you break it, you've bought it
The subject matter doesn't lend itself to quantitative analysis ( number crunching ) which does have an element of objectivity.
Blindly accept? I'm not seeing any rational alternative being proposed by you other than that we should be ignorant and gullible.
Not atall. I'm just saying that critical analysis is subjective and limited, and only one of the tools available.
Virtually every word written in this forum is subjective. Does that make it less valuable?
One of my minors at university was geography, particularly physical geography. And the field was in the midst of a change over from what had been "descriptive" physical geography to quantitative physical geography. And guess what, most of the time quantitative simply reaffirmed what had been discussed for years qualitatively. I also remember that one day I walked into the office of a geography professor I was assisting, and he had a new toy...a computer (I told you it was back a while). And on the screen were these odd looking curved lines. I asked him what that was, and he replied hill slopes. I said I had never seen hillslopes with any of those shapes, and he responded that they were just mathematical theoretical hillslopes. So, just because something is quantitative doesn't mean it is always real.
— AN 4.77
(and in addition to that, what are the tools that are less "limited" than critical analysis?)
This requires what's best described as "fair-mindedness" or a conscious awareness to treat all viewpoints alike, regardless of our own feelings or self-interests, regardless of the interests of others, such as friends and family, or in this particular instance, the feelings and self-interests of the greater Buddhist community at large.
What you've just suggested is a horrible alternative to critical thinking
I don't know about you and everyone else but I would much rather continue to have some sort of 'quality control' system when approaching any situation to do with my brain. We need to think. We need to accept and reject ideas. The idea of critical thinking being more limited than just letting anything into your head without judgement is insane
I shouldn't need to point out that what you're saying is pseudo-philosophical nonsense that doesn't have any application in the real world