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.
The statement that "law" is a descriptive of a normative is accepted (grudgingly) by even the most die-hard newtonian types. This does not mean that one places The dance traditions of Garden Gnomes in the same category as Fluid dynamics. You stressed that this is not about "Ye Olde" "isms" but that is precisely, clearly, without any ambiguity, what you are expressing (muddled as it is). The joke is that the old time arguments between materialsts and Idealists, were both rooted in the fiction of a transcendent law. Lets be clear here Mat the Law you are describing is inherently transcendent. To deny this is just to fall into nonsense.
I think you really miss the point here. let's try a different way.
Do you believe there is a set of true statements about this universe?
If you do do you believe some of these are generalisations?
Do you you believe there is a consistent set of general statements?
I will assume you will answer yes to all three, if not, please REASON why not:)
So this set of general statements we can call "U". U contains all kinds of statements some of them are lawlike in the sense that so trouble you and others will be probabilistic and others predictive etc etc etc.
My point is simply that there seems to be no way to include mystcial statements into U.
Its beginning to look like debating you is pointless, not because you are too philosophical , but because of a systemic categorical confusion in you position.
That's pretty poor:) What exactly is my confusion. In simple terms? In one line?
Does this mean I accept Ufos, the cosmic origins of the plains of Nazca, and my nieghbours assertion that there is a family of mauve crocodiles living under his porch? no.
But all of those things are nomologically possible! (Apart from maybe the crocodiles skin color?) That is my whole point!:) UFOs are not mystical.
Philisophical debates are great fun. Lets have one some time.
so, mat, i'm moving away from imagining how to engage you in discussion and toward how to be helpful in influencing you to resolve the very apparent mental affliction you have that obstructs any true progress on this path.
this assumes that you actually have such an interest. it's not apparent by your behavior.
philosophical debates with you appear useless aside from feeding your need to be right by making others appear wrong - i assume you'll be doing that reactively now!
so, what to do. maybe abandoning you is the easiest but it doesn't agree with my take on the vows i live by. i may follow your posts and make sure everybody else knows that they're probably going to feel really frustrated and be subject to mat's habitual negativity, blaming and criticizing - that need to make others wrong, i may contact the moderators and request a troll hunt, i may invite other members of this community to an intervention; like offering you noble silence when you start threads as a bait to feed your pathology. so, i don't know. maybe the community is interested in discussing this? i am!
That's pretty poor:) What exactly is my confusion. In simple terms? In one line? Mat
Your positions is that of scientific materialism, and is absolutist in its assumptions, of immutable transcendent law and so forth, yet you deny that and default into " realist" rhetoric, an anti-metaphysical position that rests on purely metaphysical assumptions.
so, mat, i'm moving away from imagining how to engage you in discussion and toward how to be helpful in influencing you to resolve the very apparent mental affliction you have that obstructs any true progress on this path.
In one line, what is this affliction?
this assumes that you actually have such an interest. it's not apparent by your behavior.
I have zero interest in you or anyone here telling me how to be a better buddhist etc etc. I am not here for that. Its an internet forum.
so, what to do. maybe abandoning you is the easiest but it doesn't agree with my take on the vows i live by.
I want you to abandon all hopes of saving me! Please! I am fine thanks:)
, i may contact the moderators and request a troll hunt, i may invite other members of this community to an intervention; like offering you noble silence when you start threads as a bait tofeed your pathology. so, i don't know. maybe the community is interested in discussing this?
That's fine. Please just ignore me. I would prefer everyone who gets heb up by my quyestioing the Buddhist orthodoxy to simply ignore me. i am not here to cause arguments as you so deludedly seem to think.
Try not to take yourself too seriously online bob:) That's what the real world is for.
"True" ? Absolutely true? No. Functionally true, meaning truthfull in so far as it serves a function. Yes.
Hmmmm.... not really sure what that means. Do you mean a cultural function? Scietific? But i guess either way we can say something like
U is the total set of interconnected functionally true statements about this universe.
Statements about rebirth do not belong in U.
Your positions is that of scientific materialism, and is absolutist in its assumptions, of immutable transcendent law and so forth, yet you deny that and default into " realist" rhetoric, an anti-metaphysical position that rests on purely metaphysical assumptions.
Jeepers, and I thought i was verbose!:)
As said in my first reply to you in this thread, this is NOT about metapyshics, its not about the grounding of reality, but rather HOW reality fits togther into a contiguous consistent whole.
The statements in set U may be about heaven or hell or here or the realm of the lesser spotteed devas. The point is that the set contains no anomalous statements.
Maybe there is a universe where there is Rebirth. That universe will have a very different set U than this one!:)
Thats the point simply.
I wont go into ufos. sorry. Anal probes are a delicate matter for me.
Oh do tell! That sounds far more interesting than this:P
I appreciated that you are sincerely trying. Oh... I'm going to work now, I'll shred you response this evening
Thank you. I am glad you appreciate I aint a troll!:)
Sky: What gets reborn in my opinion are the habits, positive and negative of the being, the five poisons of the mind and the five wisdoms in varying degrees. Not the personality which IMO changes from lifetime to lifetime.
S9: My question would have to be, “Why are these poisons etc. reborn?”
That's fine. Please just ignore me. I would prefer everyone who gets heb up by my quyestioing the Buddhist orthodoxy to simply ignore me. i am not here to cause arguments as you so deludedly seem to think.
Mat
I dont think your questioning of Buddhist orthodoxy is what people find inflammatory Mat. Many people seem to be more than willing to discuss and analyze issues in a rational and open manner. What is inflammatory is your tone, use of pejorative terms in what appears to be an attempt to belittle those who disagree with you and an unwillingness to listen to the well thought out and validly supported arguments of others.
You may not be here to cause arguments but your posting history certainly makes it look like that is the only reason you post here.
Maybe a more skillful way of presenting your ideas would remedy the situation.
Hmmmm.... not really sure what that means. Do you mean a cultural function? Scietific? But i guess either way we can say something like
Mat
In the realm of Buddhist philosophy this refers to valid cognition of relative or conventional phenomena and their functional "reality".
It related to the so called two truths.
Of which this entire debate and its subject would fall into the relative or conventional, rather than the ultimate.
Sky: What gets reborn in my opinion are the habits, positive and negative of the being, the five poisons of the mind and the five wisdoms in varying degrees. Not the personality which IMO changes from lifetime to lifetime.
S9: My question would have to be, “Why are these poisons etc. reborn?”
Warm regards,
S9
Good question S9-
The short answer as to 'why are these poisons etc reborn' is karma is that they are reborn because they haven't been purified.
If you examine in meditation what arises in the mind from moment to moment and consider rebirth as a continuum of moment to moment experience then my answer may make a kind of intuitive sense.
I dont think your questioning of Buddhist orthodoxy is what people find inflammatory Mat. Many people seem to be more than willing to discuss and analyze issues in a rational and open manner. What is inflammatory is your tone, use of pejorative terms in what appears to be an attempt to belittle those who disagree with you and an unwillingness to listen to the well thought out and validly supported arguments of others.
I am sorry if that is how I come over, its certainly not my intention.
I speak my mind and say it how I see it, which is normally fine. I guess when I may get a bit more asshat than normal is when people react to what I say and then I get caught up in trying to defend my position and, unfortunatly my ego. I aint here as a perfect being:)
You may not be here to cause arguments but your posting history certainly makes it look like that is the only reason you post here.
Can we not all admit that my beief that the buddha taught rebirth is wrong view and my belief he was antimystic are also big catalysts of peoples negative reactions. That is certainly how it seems. To say its all my manner and not my content isnt true, I belive.
Maybe a more skillful way of presenting your ideas would remedy the situation.
so, mat, i'm moving away from imagining how to engage you in discussion and toward how to be helpful in influencing you to resolve the very apparent mental affliction you have that obstructs any true progress on this path.
this assumes that you actually have such an interest. it's not apparent by your behavior.
philosophical debates with you appear useless aside from feeding your need to be right by making others appear wrong - i assume you'll be doing that reactively now!
so, what to do. maybe abandoning you is the easiest but it doesn't agree with my take on the vows i live by. i may follow your posts and make sure everybody else knows that they're probably going to feel really frustrated and be subject to mat's habitual negativity, blaming and criticizing - that need to make others wrong, i may contact the moderators and request a troll hunt, i may invite other members of this community to an intervention; like offering you noble silence when you start threads as a bait to feed your pathology. so, i don't know. maybe the community is interested in discussing this? i am!
ah mat! no i'm not going anywhere yet! i guess as long as we're both here, hey, i'm going to express myself.
i imagine you're in need of some correction, so i'm giving it, it's not really up to you.
at this point i'm inviting advice and recommendation from the community. thank you for sharing yours.
Lol, wow, we're planning community interventions for Mat now?
And to say all that, right after making this post?: "Hey, nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway. Keep it up! Stuck on stupid can be entertaining!"
Yeah, it's proving impossible to have a productive conversation with Mat for the reasons people continue to point out, and it's clear that isn't going to change. But the quote above sounds like something from freakin' letjesusloveyou.com. :eek2:
Can we not all admit that my beief that the buddha taught rebirth is wrong view and my belief he was antimystic are also big catalysts of peoples negative reactions. That is certainly how it seems. To say its all my manner and not my content isnt true, I belive.
Mat
I think your use of the word "mystical" is problematic and pejorative.
You're entitled to your views and your entitled to defend them. I'm sure people have a negative reaction to your statements on these issues ( I can certainly agree with you there), and for good reason. There is no historic, academic, scriptural (I also agree with you that the scriptures were most likely tampered with) or other support for them.
That said, I dont want to dismiss your ideas, I dont think thats anyones intention, but many people have several years of background in Buddhist Studies, both in an academic and practitioners atmosphere and have tried to use that background to clarify and debate the bold statements that you make. I feel that their responses and opinions should be respected.
The biggest issue that contributes to argumentative responses to your threads is your use of terminology that can be seen as insulting, some examples are your use of mystical as I already stated, "rebirthers", dogma, the way you have used belief etc.
Debates can be inspired and vigorous without using terminology in the pejorative. I really feel that this is what instigates the argumentative tone of your threads. I dont think its your ideas.
so "Hey, nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway. Keep it up! Stuck on stupid can be entertaining!" was pointing, albeit crudely or rudely, to the behavior of being intellectually and emotionally stuck on stuff that is in itself merely relative and, as is known via the teachings, delusional/illusion anyway. So why not call it what it is? I also wrote, 'nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway.' I enjoy playing with this stuff, it can be entertaining, even if it's all just crap!
I think your use of the word "mystical" is problematic and pejorative.
Can you suggest another please:) Ie a word that describes phenomenon not captured by science.
There is no historic, academic, scriptural (I also agree with you that the scriptures were most likely tampered with) or other support for them.
I disagree:)
That said, I dont want to dismiss your ideas, I dont think thats anyones intention, but many people have several years of background in Buddhist Studies, both in an academic and practitioners atmosphere and have tried to use that background to clarify and debate the bold statements that you make.
Sure, and for what its worth I have twenty years of philosophy training and teaching experience and ten years Dharma. I dont think tehre are many people who have come from hard analytic western philosophy to Dharma, maybe thats why my views seem so out of kilter?
Debates can be inspired and vigorous without using terminology in the pejorative.
so "Hey, nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway. Keep it up! Stuck on stupid can be entertaining!" was pointing, albeit crudely or rudely, to the behavior of being intellectually and emotionally stuck on stuff that is in itself merely relative and, as is known via the teachings, delusional/illusion anyway. So why not call it what it is? I also wrote, 'nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway.' I enjoy playing with this stuff, it can be entertaining, even if it's all just crap!
Wait, so that "delusional blah blah stupid entertaining crap" comment was about him? :crazy:
Yes, Mat brings out the worst in all of us. We get intellectually and emotionally stuck on the stuff he posts here. He's good Buddhist practice. He doesn't need the collective NewBuddhist community to come together to "save" or "fix" him.
Wait, so that "delusional blah blah stupid entertaining crap" comment was about him? :crazy:
Yes, Mat brings out the worst in all of us. We get intellectually and emotionally stuck on the stuff he posts here. He's good Buddhist practice. He doesn't need the collective NewBuddhist community to come together to "save" or "fix" him.
No not about Mat, about blah blah blah crap.
Not save or fix Mat. Help us all have better communication; including Mat - as it is apparent that there is an issue there.
So, being in community may be my delusion as I imagine this forum as a kind of practice community based on the fact that I see all community as a place of practice. So, we're all in this together.
Sure, and for what its worth I have twenty years of philosophy training and teaching experience and ten years Dharma. I dont think tehre are many people who have come from hard analytic western philosophy to Dharma, maybe thats why my views seem so out of kilter?
Mat
I dont want to be a jerk but I find these statements to be impossible to believe. If you really had this background your posts would read with a much more sophisticated tone and you wouldnt need Richard Herman and others to define basic philosophical concepts to you. You would also have enough familiarity with Dharma to realize that your views are completely divorced of context and extremely limited in the scope of Buddhist philosophy. Not to mention rampant spelling errors and grammatical blunders.
Lets be honest, I dont think you are even old enough to have the background you just stated.
I dont want to be a jerk but I find these statements to be impossible to believe.
Errr... so now you call me a liar! I know such people are here but i assure you I am not one. You want references? My Phil Thesis,? PHD (unifinsed)?
And you say I am antagonistic! Ha!:)
If you really had this background your posts would read with a much more sophisticated tone and you wouldnt need Richard Herman and others to define basic philosophical concepts to you.
I am sorry, but thats simply not the case:)
Not to mention rampant spelling errors and grammatical blunders.
Dysliexia?
Lets be honest, I dont think you are even old enough to have the background you just stated.
Errr... so now you call me a liar! I know such people are here but i assure you I am not one. You want references? My Phil Thesis,? PHD (unifinsed)?
And you say I am antagonistic! Ha!:)
I am sorry, but thats simply not the case:)
Dysliexia?
38:)
Mat
All I said was that based upon what we have seen these statements are unbelievable. The response you have just given is no exception. I have no interest in seeing your "thesis".
Sky: Buddhist teachings are intended to be presented, discussed, questioned, contemplated, and meditated on.
S9: Indeed they are. But too often, people accept things before they actually look into them. For instance, I don’t understand why we think that our thoughts are so fertile that they can extend beyond the grave. Do you?
From what I see of thoughts, they are flimsy and seem to have a very short shelf life. ; ^ )
SKY: It's not just about concepts.
S9: Exactly, so one must ask what is my personal experience of this, or what have I witnessed that would make me say such a thing.
Sky: It's about how the teachings can open the mind and heart for meditation.
S9: Don’t you think that we open our mind and heart by not having preconceptions that go beyond our own personal experience? We meditate in the beginning, because we are curious, or know a meditator who seems to be very together. We continue to meditate, because we personally witness in ourselves a real lessening of suffering.
S9: Indeed they are. But too often, people accept things before they actually look into them. For instance, I don’t understand why we think that our thoughts are so fertile that they can extend beyond the grave. Do you?
I for one dont think that this is what Buddhist rebirth is.
Sky: Buddhist teachings are intended to be presented, discussed, questioned, contemplated, and meditated on.
S9: Indeed they are. But too often, people accept things before they actually look into them. For instance, I don’t understand why we think that our thoughts are so fertile that they can extend beyond the grave. Do you?
From what I see of thoughts they are flimsy and have a very short shelf life. ; ^ )
SKY: It's not just about concepts.
S9: Exactly, so one must ask what is my personal experience of this, or what have I witnessed that would make me say such a thing.
Sky: It's about how the teachings can open the mind and heart for meditation.
S9: Don’t you think that we open our mind and heart by not having preconceptions that go beyond our own personal experience? We meditate in the beginning, because we are curious, or know a meditator who seems to be very together. We continue to meditate, because we personally witness in ourselves a real lessening of suffering.
Warm Regards,
S9
S9-
You make an excellent point. Thoughts are flimsy with a short shelf life. Why would one think thoughts follow into the next life? Why would one have 'preconceptions' that go beyond our own personal experience?
I come to my understanding of the topic of karma and rebirth from listening to the teachings, asking questions, contemplating and meditating on the topic and looking at my own life in the present.
I need to be exceptionally careful with this topic. I'm not a scholar of Buddhist philosophy, or a great debater. It's important to me to discuss the topic and not argue, so I'm sitting with your questions for a spell. I'm guessing we study under different schools of Buddhism and have heard the rebirth topic discussed from different perspectives. Does your school teach rebirth at all?
Rebirth can be understood in a wisdom way and a skillful means way.
For some reason, this phrase 'if you want to keep getting what you're getting, keep doing what you're doing' comes to mind and may have some relevance to the rebirth question.
From what I see of thoughts, they are flimsy and seem to have a very short shelf life. ; ^ )
Almost all thoughts are absolutely flimsy and barely even scratch the surface of consciousness. There are thoughts that resound for centuries and impact the world. These thoughts by themselves are rather powerless, but when one is inspired by these emotionally charged thoughts they have freed/enslaved whole populations of people. Are not these thoughts then reborn in other people, such as Buddha's darhma or Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream"?
Almost all thoughts are absolutely flimsy and barely even scratch the surface of consciousness. There are thoughts, that resound for centuries and impact the world. These thoughts by themselves are rather powerless, but when one is inspired by these emotionally charged thoughts they have freed/enslaved whole populations of people. Are not these thoughts then reborn in other people, such as Buddha's darhma or Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream"?
Thank you. What we take with us when we die is our karma.
S: It is persistent "awareness" (for lack of a better term) that is naturally birthless.
S9: I find this statement (above) interesting. I wonder if I could get you to elucidate a bit further on this? : ^ )
S: If you ask me it is much more closely related to ideas in physics about a quality of "awareness" that permeates the universe than it is to any concept of "reincarnation".
S9: I wonder is it Awareness that permeates the universe, or is it rather that Aware is the prime mover or the fundamental essence of the universe, which simply allows thoughts to temporarily bloom, or is it solidify much like water might allow ice?
S: The driving evolutionary force in the universe is potent and pervasive.
S9: Again, let me ask, is it evolution, or is it merely constant change? Could it be possible that thoughts do not evolve, or become enlightened? Is it possible that change is like the clouds drifting across the sky and imagination makes of it what it will, much like we see create imaginary pictures in the clouds, when we look at them for any length of time. Mind is like the Energizer Bunny, and just won't quit, or like an imagination factory pumping out product. ; ^ )
S: In my opinion this is what rebirth is, and Buddhahood is full recognition and integration into this perfectly natural state. It is through that integration that the cycle of samsara is broken.
S9: Yes, samsara loses her hold upon us, and we stop suffering her "slings and arrows," although she seems to continue merrily on her natural way after Realization.
For what it's worth, I don't think Matt is dishonest, and I don't think he's arrogant. Most of what Matt posts I don't read, but in the posts I have read he's conducted himself very well. He's taken a certain amount of personal abuse without responding in kind. Assuming that what I've read is a random sampling of his posts, he argues in a way common in academia. He doesn't try to cover up differences for the sake of harmony and he doesn't soft pedal his criticisms.
I have a friend who has a BA in philosophy, and is married to a woman with a BA in philosophy. They were traveling on the subway with the wife's sister one day, and the couple got into a discussion of some philosophical point. At the end of the discussion, the husband looked around and asked "Why is everyone staring at us?" The sister replied "Because the two of you were yelling at the top of your lungs." Husband and wife both said "We were?"
If you're not used to heated, friendly debates, it's probably hard to distinguish between them and acrimonious arguments. The difference is the lack of personal comments in the friendly debates.
I am not a very good debater, either, nor am I a scholar.
I have a good friend, who could sell snow to an Eskimo.
; ^ )
And:
I certainly don’t mean to make you uncomfortable with my questions. : ^ (
You do seem to be very open and able to listen to others, which is an excellent quality that is much more rare than you might imagine. So please don’t underestimate yourself, or your capacity to know.
I guess you could call me a freelance Buddhist, as I have not signed on to any one school.
Sky: Rebirth can be understood in a wisdom way and a skillful means way.
S9: Could you flesh this out a bit? I really want to understand where you are coming from on this issue. Thanx
Sky: For some reason, this phrase 'if you want to keep getting what you're getting, keep doing what you're doing' comes to mind.
S9: Yes indeed, but why would this necessarily carry beyond the grave?
I always liked this quote:
“Insanity is when you keep on doing something the same old way, and expect a different outcome."
For what it's worth, I don't think Matt is dishonest, and I don't think he's arrogant. Most of what Matt posts I don't read, but in the posts I have read he's conducted himself very well. He's taken a certain amount of personal abuse without responding in kind. Assuming that what I've read is a random sampling of his posts, he argues in a way common in academia. He doesn't try to cover up differences for the sake of harmony and he doesn't soft pedal his criticisms.
I completely disagree, especially on the point about his arguments being academic. I have never seen academic arguments that were so poorly constructed or belligerent.
I do however feel he could be a little more open to what others are saying, instead of being caught in his expectations about how a discussion should unfold. Then he might be more open to what is called “a happy accident”…of growth.
You are very kind to try to shield him from what you saw to be abuse. I don't think he is that delicate. : ^ ) If he were, he would even talk to a 'pain in the neck' like me.
I am not a very good debater, either, nor am I a scholar.
I have a good friend, who could sell snow to an Eskimo.
; ^ )
And:
I certainly don’t mean to make you uncomfortable with my questions. : ^ (
You do seem to be very open and able to listen to others, which is an excellent quality that is much more rare than you might imagine. So please don’t underestimate yourself, or your capacity to know.
I guess you could call me a freelance Buddhist, as I have not signed on to any one school.
Sky: Rebirth can be understood in a wisdom way and a skillful means way.
S9: Could you flesh this out a bit? I really want to understand where you are coming from on this issue. Thanx
Sky: For some reason, this phrase 'if you want to keep getting what you're getting, keep doing what you're doing' comes to mind.
S9: Yes indeed, but why would this necessarily carry beyond the grave?
I always liked this quote:
“Insanity is when you keep on doing something the same old way, and expect a different outcome."
Miles of smiles, coming your way,
S9
Hey S9--
What is a 'freelance Buddhist?'
I didn't 'get' the topics of karma or rebirth for a long time. For me, they completely go together and need to be discussed at the same time.
All the teachings of the vajrayana can be understood either in a wisdom way or a skillful means way.
Wisdom is beyond concepts and comes from direct experience. If we understand that all we experience in mind and body are fleeting dreamlike experiences then rebirth is more of the same ineffable phenomena.
It can be skillful means to consider rebirth as a topic and to consider that what goes on in our minds continues uninterruptedly unless we train otherwise. Then considering rebirth as 'real' makes sense.
We can also hold both points of view without contradiction. That there is no life beyond the present moment, and that life is composed of moment after moment.
Do 'freelance Buddhists' consider rebirth relevant for training purposes at all?
What is it you hope to accomplish in this thread? Help me out here.
Hey Sky:)
In this thread I wanted to discuss rebirth from within this life. We all know the candle-flame idea of after this life, but I wanted some ideas on what it could be that was in the moment that is reborn.
I thought it might be a different way to look at an issue that perplexes many buddhists. sadly, and admittedly my faulty in part, its done another forum dukka implosion.
In the wider sense, I would like to look seriously and mindfully at the possibility that the Buddha was against rebirth rather than committed to it or agnostic about it.
For what it's worth, I don't think Matt is dishonest, and I don't think he's arrogant. Most of what Matt posts I don't read, but in the posts I have read he's conducted himself very well. He's taken a certain amount of personal abuse without responding in kind. Assuming that what I've read is a random sampling of his posts, he argues in a way common in academia. He doesn't try to cover up differences for the sake of harmony and he doesn't soft pedal his criticisms.
I have a friend who has a BA in philosophy, and is married to a woman with a BA in philosophy. They were traveling on the subway with the wife's sister one day, and the couple got into a discussion of some philosophical point. At the end of the discussion, the husband looked around and asked "Why is everyone staring at us?" The sister replied "Because the two of you were yelling at the top of your lungs." Husband and wife both said "We were?"
If you're not used to heated, friendly debates, it's probably hard to distinguish between them and acrimonious arguments. The difference is the lack of personal comments in the friendly debates.
I hadn't thought about this in this way before, but you might be right. I guess also in philosophy you are penned in by reason whereas in buddhism there are more avenues to explore and ice to fall through.
My wife and I have very heated debates about philosophy and politics, but never Dharma:)
In this thread I wanted to discuss rebirth from within this life. We all know the candle-flame idea of after this life, but I wanted some ideas on what it could be that was in the moment that is reborn.
I thought it might be a different way to look at an issue that perplexes many buddhists. sadly, and admittedly my faulty in part, its done another forum dukka implosion.
In the wider sense, I would like to look seriously and mindfully at the possibility that the Buddha was against rebirth rather than committed to it or agnostic about it.
Thanks
Mat
Thanks Mat-
The Buddha may have been opposed to rebirth. He did step away from tradition. He had been a Hindu and Hindus discuss rebirth. Perhaps he was being careful to not have Hindu concepts of rebirth enter into his teachings.
What can be challenging in these topics is we are all coming from different perspectives. A theravadin Buddhist is going to look at rebirth in one way, a mahayana Buddhist another way and a Vajrayana Buddhist another way too.
We're all in the same boat, faithfully listening to and applying our thinking minds and our passionate hearts to the teachings. It's only natural that we may get confused along the way.
Add to that teachings on emptiness, which may be understood conceptually and intuitively but discussing the topic with others who have heard different teachings is a whole other level of skill, that I know I, personally don't have.
I'm just klutzing along out of interest and love and noticing phenomena arising as we go about plodding through the topic.
I think we could just focus on this life as you suggest. It completely makes sense to me. Otherwise, I know I get into issues of 'faith' rather than reason which makes a lot of people uncomfortable.
I am not arrogant but dfor sure I can see that in text I come over like that. Even freinds say that about me:)
I do however feel he could be a little more open to what others are saying, instead of being caught in his expectations about how a discussion should unfold. Then he might be more open to what is called “a happy accident”…of growth.
Probably. but in fairness, on the issue of rebirth I am at the end of my path with it not the start. I have struggled trying to reconcile it with Dharma but just never managed it. Like heaven and god and all that, its very much in the "I certainly dont belive that".
I don't think he is that delicate.
I have at times come away from this forum very annoyed etc. That is hen it is time to stand back and see that you are taking yourself too seriously online:)
Mat I think it would be interesting if you asked an actual guru some of these questions. You might get a better answer than from 'forum dudes and dudettes who are also practicing a little buddhism'.
Mat I think it would be interesting if you asked an actual guru some of these questions. You might get a better answer than from 'forum dudes and dudettes who are also practicing a little buddhism'.
I have done:) As I have written about elsewhere here (gangaramaya) they couldn't answer the question other than "higher Dharma":)
I have done:) As I have written about elsewhere here (gangaramaya) they couldn't answer the question other than "higher Dharma":)
This was formative in my doubts on this issue!:)
Mat
Mat--
What did you take the answer 'higher dharma' to mean? If doubts arose after the teaching the best way to resolve the doubts is to go back to the teacher and continue to ask questions, contemplate and meditate until you have some insight into the teaching.
What did you take the answer 'higher dharma' to mean? If doubts arose after the teaching the best way to resolve the doubts is to go back to the teacher and continue to ask questions, contemplate and meditate until you have some insight into the teaching.
To be honest sky, the Monk was stumped. I asked him "ahibdharma?" he thought and said yes but well, by then I was sure there was some discontinuity between dharma and rebirth:)
Comments
I think you really miss the point here. let's try a different way.
Do you believe there is a set of true statements about this universe?
If you do do you believe some of these are generalisations?
Do you you believe there is a consistent set of general statements?
I will assume you will answer yes to all three, if not, please REASON why not:)
So this set of general statements we can call "U". U contains all kinds of statements some of them are lawlike in the sense that so trouble you and others will be probabilistic and others predictive etc etc etc.
My point is simply that there seems to be no way to include mystcial statements into U.
That's pretty poor:) What exactly is my confusion. In simple terms? In one line?
But all of those things are nomologically possible! (Apart from maybe the crocodiles skin color?) That is my whole point!:) UFOs are not mystical.
Well I was trying to have one here;)
Mat
this assumes that you actually have such an interest. it's not apparent by your behavior.
philosophical debates with you appear useless aside from feeding your need to be right by making others appear wrong - i assume you'll be doing that reactively now!
so, what to do. maybe abandoning you is the easiest but it doesn't agree with my take on the vows i live by. i may follow your posts and make sure everybody else knows that they're probably going to feel really frustrated and be subject to mat's habitual negativity, blaming and criticizing - that need to make others wrong, i may contact the moderators and request a troll hunt, i may invite other members of this community to an intervention; like offering you noble silence when you start threads as a bait to feed your pathology. so, i don't know. maybe the community is interested in discussing this? i am!
Your positions is that of scientific materialism, and is absolutist in its assumptions, of immutable transcendent law and so forth, yet you deny that and default into " realist" rhetoric, an anti-metaphysical position that rests on purely metaphysical assumptions.
I wont go into ufos. sorry. Anal probes are a delicate matter for me.
I appreciated that you are sincerely trying. Oh... I'm going to work now, I'll shred you response this evening
In one line, what is this affliction?
I have zero interest in you or anyone here telling me how to be a better buddhist etc etc. I am not here for that. Its an internet forum.
I want you to abandon all hopes of saving me! Please! I am fine thanks:)
That's fine. Please just ignore me. I would prefer everyone who gets heb up by my quyestioing the Buddhist orthodoxy to simply ignore me. i am not here to cause arguments as you so deludedly seem to think.
Try not to take yourself too seriously online bob:) That's what the real world is for.
Mat
i imagine you're in need of some correction, so i'm giving it, it's not really up to you.
at this point i'm inviting advice and recommendation from the community. thank you for sharing yours.
Thank you:)
Hmmmm.... not really sure what that means. Do you mean a cultural function? Scietific? But i guess either way we can say something like
U is the total set of interconnected functionally true statements about this universe.
Statements about rebirth do not belong in U.
Jeepers, and I thought i was verbose!:)
As said in my first reply to you in this thread, this is NOT about metapyshics, its not about the grounding of reality, but rather HOW reality fits togther into a contiguous consistent whole.
The statements in set U may be about heaven or hell or here or the realm of the lesser spotteed devas. The point is that the set contains no anomalous statements.
Maybe there is a universe where there is Rebirth. That universe will have a very different set U than this one!:)
Thats the point simply.
Oh do tell! That sounds far more interesting than this:P
Thank you. I am glad you appreciate I aint a troll!:)
Mat
waseva
M: That isn't the kind of philosophical answer I was looking for.
S9: When you put it that way, it sounds like your question should have been, “Can you guess what I think rebirth is? “ ; ^ )
Amused,
S9
Sky: What gets reborn in my opinion are the habits, positive and negative of the being, the five poisons of the mind and the five wisdoms in varying degrees. Not the personality which IMO changes from lifetime to lifetime.
S9: My question would have to be, “Why are these poisons etc. reborn?”
Warm regards,
S9
You may not be here to cause arguments but your posting history certainly makes it look like that is the only reason you post here.
Maybe a more skillful way of presenting your ideas would remedy the situation.
It related to the so called two truths.
Of which this entire debate and its subject would fall into the relative or conventional, rather than the ultimate.
The short answer as to 'why are these poisons etc reborn' is karma is that they are reborn because they haven't been purified.
If you examine in meditation what arises in the mind from moment to moment and consider rebirth as a continuum of moment to moment experience then my answer may make a kind of intuitive sense.
sky
I am sorry if that is how I come over, its certainly not my intention.
I speak my mind and say it how I see it, which is normally fine. I guess when I may get a bit more asshat than normal is when people react to what I say and then I get caught up in trying to defend my position and, unfortunatly my ego. I aint here as a perfect being:)
Can we not all admit that my beief that the buddha taught rebirth is wrong view and my belief he was antimystic are also big catalysts of peoples negative reactions. That is certainly how it seems. To say its all my manner and not my content isnt true, I belive.
I will try, and hope that people try back:)
Mat
Lol, wow, we're planning community interventions for Mat now?
And to say all that, right after making this post?: "Hey, nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway. Keep it up! Stuck on stupid can be entertaining!"
Yeah, it's proving impossible to have a productive conversation with Mat for the reasons people continue to point out, and it's clear that isn't going to change. But the quote above sounds like something from freakin' letjesusloveyou.com. :eek2:
I think your use of the word "mystical" is problematic and pejorative.
You're entitled to your views and your entitled to defend them. I'm sure people have a negative reaction to your statements on these issues ( I can certainly agree with you there), and for good reason. There is no historic, academic, scriptural (I also agree with you that the scriptures were most likely tampered with) or other support for them.
That said, I dont want to dismiss your ideas, I dont think thats anyones intention, but many people have several years of background in Buddhist Studies, both in an academic and practitioners atmosphere and have tried to use that background to clarify and debate the bold statements that you make. I feel that their responses and opinions should be respected.
The biggest issue that contributes to argumentative responses to your threads is your use of terminology that can be seen as insulting, some examples are your use of mystical as I already stated, "rebirthers", dogma, the way you have used belief etc.
Debates can be inspired and vigorous without using terminology in the pejorative. I really feel that this is what instigates the argumentative tone of your threads. I dont think its your ideas.
so "Hey, nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway. Keep it up! Stuck on stupid can be entertaining!" was pointing, albeit crudely or rudely, to the behavior of being intellectually and emotionally stuck on stuff that is in itself merely relative and, as is known via the teachings, delusional/illusion anyway. So why not call it what it is? I also wrote, 'nice delusional blah blah blah about illusion, anyway.' I enjoy playing with this stuff, it can be entertaining, even if it's all just crap!
Can you suggest another please:) Ie a word that describes phenomenon not captured by science.
I disagree:)
Sure, and for what its worth I have twenty years of philosophy training and teaching experience and ten years Dharma. I dont think tehre are many people who have come from hard analytic western philosophy to Dharma, maybe thats why my views seem so out of kilter?
Well, I hope we can get there here:)
Well wishes
Mat
Wait, so that "delusional blah blah stupid entertaining crap" comment was about him? :crazy:
Yes, Mat brings out the worst in all of us. We get intellectually and emotionally stuck on the stuff he posts here. He's good Buddhist practice.
No not about Mat, about blah blah blah crap.
Not save or fix Mat. Help us all have better communication; including Mat - as it is apparent that there is an issue there.
So, being in community may be my delusion as I imagine this forum as a kind of practice community based on the fact that I see all community as a place of practice. So, we're all in this together.
This is pretty cute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DHvPxw84jc
Lets be honest, I dont think you are even old enough to have the background you just stated.
Do you see in this a very clear and specific response that illuminates how others perceive your communication?
shenpen nangwa, I imagine your Bodhisattvic intention, even if it's only my delsuion!
Errr... so now you call me a liar! I know such people are here but i assure you I am not one. You want references? My Phil Thesis,? PHD (unifinsed)?
And you say I am antagonistic! Ha!:)
I am sorry, but thats simply not the case:)
Dysliexia?
38:)
Mat
Kamma? :coffee:
You're obviously intelligent and an accomplished scholar. The buddhist path is a wisdom path. Wisdom is beyond concepts and beyond extreme views.
The topic of karma and rebirth is useful to some and not useful to others.
What is it you hope to accomplish in this thread? Help me out here.
sky
Sky: Buddhist teachings are intended to be presented, discussed, questioned, contemplated, and meditated on.
S9: Indeed they are. But too often, people accept things before they actually look into them. For instance, I don’t understand why we think that our thoughts are so fertile that they can extend beyond the grave. Do you?
From what I see of thoughts, they are flimsy and seem to have a very short shelf life. ; ^ )
SKY: It's not just about concepts.
S9: Exactly, so one must ask what is my personal experience of this, or what have I witnessed that would make me say such a thing.
Sky: It's about how the teachings can open the mind and heart for meditation.
S9: Don’t you think that we open our mind and heart by not having preconceptions that go beyond our own personal experience? We meditate in the beginning, because we are curious, or know a meditator who seems to be very together. We continue to meditate, because we personally witness in ourselves a real lessening of suffering.
Warm Regards,
S9
How about "orthodox buddhism"?
To all; can we all take a few mindful breaths, maybe refrain from posting for a while before yet another thread of Mat's gets closed. Cheers.
Nios.
You make an excellent point. Thoughts are flimsy with a short shelf life. Why would one think thoughts follow into the next life? Why would one have 'preconceptions' that go beyond our own personal experience?
I come to my understanding of the topic of karma and rebirth from listening to the teachings, asking questions, contemplating and meditating on the topic and looking at my own life in the present.
I need to be exceptionally careful with this topic. I'm not a scholar of Buddhist philosophy, or a great debater. It's important to me to discuss the topic and not argue, so I'm sitting with your questions for a spell. I'm guessing we study under different schools of Buddhism and have heard the rebirth topic discussed from different perspectives. Does your school teach rebirth at all?
Rebirth can be understood in a wisdom way and a skillful means way.
For some reason, this phrase 'if you want to keep getting what you're getting, keep doing what you're doing' comes to mind and may have some relevance to the rebirth question.
sky
Almost all thoughts are absolutely flimsy and barely even scratch the surface of consciousness. There are thoughts that resound for centuries and impact the world. These thoughts by themselves are rather powerless, but when one is inspired by these emotionally charged thoughts they have freed/enslaved whole populations of people. Are not these thoughts then reborn in other people, such as Buddha's darhma or Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream"?
S: It is persistent "awareness" (for lack of a better term) that is naturally birthless.
S9: I find this statement (above) interesting. I wonder if I could get you to elucidate a bit further on this? : ^ )
S: If you ask me it is much more closely related to ideas in physics about a quality of "awareness" that permeates the universe than it is to any concept of "reincarnation".
S9: I wonder is it Awareness that permeates the universe, or is it rather that Aware is the prime mover or the fundamental essence of the universe, which simply allows thoughts to temporarily bloom, or is it solidify much like water might allow ice?
S: The driving evolutionary force in the universe is potent and pervasive.
S9: Again, let me ask, is it evolution, or is it merely constant change? Could it be possible that thoughts do not evolve, or become enlightened? Is it possible that change is like the clouds drifting across the sky and imagination makes of it what it will, much like we see create imaginary pictures in the clouds, when we look at them for any length of time. Mind is like the Energizer Bunny, and just won't quit, or like an imagination factory pumping out product. ; ^ )
S: In my opinion this is what rebirth is, and Buddhahood is full recognition and integration into this perfectly natural state. It is through that integration that the cycle of samsara is broken.
S9: Yes, samsara loses her hold upon us, and we stop suffering her "slings and arrows," although she seems to continue merrily on her natural way after Realization.
Respectfully,
S9
I have a friend who has a BA in philosophy, and is married to a woman with a BA in philosophy. They were traveling on the subway with the wife's sister one day, and the couple got into a discussion of some philosophical point. At the end of the discussion, the husband looked around and asked "Why is everyone staring at us?" The sister replied "Because the two of you were yelling at the top of your lungs." Husband and wife both said "We were?"
If you're not used to heated, friendly debates, it's probably hard to distinguish between them and acrimonious arguments. The difference is the lack of personal comments in the friendly debates.
I am not a very good debater, either, nor am I a scholar.
I have a good friend, who could sell snow to an Eskimo.
; ^ )
And:
I certainly don’t mean to make you uncomfortable with my questions. : ^ (
You do seem to be very open and able to listen to others, which is an excellent quality that is much more rare than you might imagine. So please don’t underestimate yourself, or your capacity to know.
I guess you could call me a freelance Buddhist, as I have not signed on to any one school.
Sky: Rebirth can be understood in a wisdom way and a skillful means way.
S9: Could you flesh this out a bit? I really want to understand where you are coming from on this issue. Thanx
Sky: For some reason, this phrase 'if you want to keep getting what you're getting, keep doing what you're doing' comes to mind.
S9: Yes indeed, but why would this necessarily carry beyond the grave?
I always liked this quote:
“Insanity is when you keep on doing something the same old way, and expect a different outcome."
Miles of smiles, coming your way,
S9
I do not think Mat is arrogant. : ^ (
I have enjoyed his company and ideas many times.
I do however feel he could be a little more open to what others are saying, instead of being caught in his expectations about how a discussion should unfold. Then he might be more open to what is called “a happy accident”…of growth.
You are very kind to try to shield him from what you saw to be abuse. I don't think he is that delicate. : ^ ) If he were, he would even talk to a 'pain in the neck' like me.
Warm Regards,
S9
What is a 'freelance Buddhist?'
I didn't 'get' the topics of karma or rebirth for a long time. For me, they completely go together and need to be discussed at the same time.
All the teachings of the vajrayana can be understood either in a wisdom way or a skillful means way.
Wisdom is beyond concepts and comes from direct experience. If we understand that all we experience in mind and body are fleeting dreamlike experiences then rebirth is more of the same ineffable phenomena.
It can be skillful means to consider rebirth as a topic and to consider that what goes on in our minds continues uninterruptedly unless we train otherwise. Then considering rebirth as 'real' makes sense.
We can also hold both points of view without contradiction. That there is no life beyond the present moment, and that life is composed of moment after moment.
Do 'freelance Buddhists' consider rebirth relevant for training purposes at all?
sky
Hey Sky:)
In this thread I wanted to discuss rebirth from within this life. We all know the candle-flame idea of after this life, but I wanted some ideas on what it could be that was in the moment that is reborn.
I thought it might be a different way to look at an issue that perplexes many buddhists. sadly, and admittedly my faulty in part, its done another forum dukka implosion.
In the wider sense, I would like to look seriously and mindfully at the possibility that the Buddha was against rebirth rather than committed to it or agnostic about it.
Thanks
Mat
I hadn't thought about this in this way before, but you might be right. I guess also in philosophy you are penned in by reason whereas in buddhism there are more avenues to explore and ice to fall through.
My wife and I have very heated debates about philosophy and politics, but never Dharma:)
Mat
Quiet: There are thoughts that resound for centuries and impact the world.
S9: Certainly as a species we share ideas, even over long periods of time. But this is not quite the same as it traveling beyond the grave, is it?
Quiet: Are not these thoughts then reborn in other people.
S9: That is very poetic. But sharing an idea, isn’t quite the same as rebirth of a idea. Rebirth might call for a death, don’t you think it?
Warm regards,
S9
The Buddha may have been opposed to rebirth. He did step away from tradition. He had been a Hindu and Hindus discuss rebirth. Perhaps he was being careful to not have Hindu concepts of rebirth enter into his teachings.
What can be challenging in these topics is we are all coming from different perspectives. A theravadin Buddhist is going to look at rebirth in one way, a mahayana Buddhist another way and a Vajrayana Buddhist another way too.
We're all in the same boat, faithfully listening to and applying our thinking minds and our passionate hearts to the teachings. It's only natural that we may get confused along the way.
Add to that teachings on emptiness, which may be understood conceptually and intuitively but discussing the topic with others who have heard different teachings is a whole other level of skill, that I know I, personally don't have.
I'm just klutzing along out of interest and love and noticing phenomena arising as we go about plodding through the topic.
I think we could just focus on this life as you suggest. It completely makes sense to me. Otherwise, I know I get into issues of 'faith' rather than reason which makes a lot of people uncomfortable.
sky
I am not arrogant but dfor sure I can see that in text I come over like that. Even freinds say that about me:)
Probably. but in fairness, on the issue of rebirth I am at the end of my path with it not the start. I have struggled trying to reconcile it with Dharma but just never managed it. Like heaven and god and all that, its very much in the "I certainly dont belive that".
I have at times come away from this forum very annoyed etc. That is hen it is time to stand back and see that you are taking yourself too seriously online:)
Best wishes
Mat
It is interesting to pose those kinds of questions to experienced and qualified Buddhist teachers aka 'gurus'.
We all should be so lucky to meet such sublime beings, let alone be receptive to their influence.
I have done:) As I have written about elsewhere here (gangaramaya) they couldn't answer the question other than "higher Dharma":)
This was formative in my doubts on this issue!:)
Mat
What did you take the answer 'higher dharma' to mean? If doubts arose after the teaching the best way to resolve the doubts is to go back to the teacher and continue to ask questions, contemplate and meditate until you have some insight into the teaching.
To be honest sky, the Monk was stumped. I asked him "ahibdharma?" he thought and said yes but well, by then I was sure there was some discontinuity between dharma and rebirth:)
mat
This hardly counts as research.