If the Buddha discovered....

[moseslmpg]

I see, that's helps a lot. So the lack of a supreme creator deity is to make sure that everyone takes responsibility for their own actions and does away with many other problems of monotheism. I thought as much. It's more like an evolution of consciousness rather than some guy saying "let there be people! (and lo, there were people)" etc. Makes sense to me...so I'm not even going to ask where everything came from...

[Vajradhara]

Namaste moseslmpg,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by moseslmpg

I see, that's helps a lot. So the lack of a supreme creator deity is to make sure that everyone takes responsibility for their own actions and does away with many other problems of monotheism.

hmm. this statement seems somewhat problematic. it is not that Buddha Dharma teaches the lack of a creator deity to ensure that beings take responsibility for their actions, it is that a belief in a creator deity leads beings to believe that this is not so. if that makes sense.

I thought as much. It's more like an evolution of consciousness rather than some guy saying "let there be people! (and lo, there were people)" etc. Makes sense to me...so I'm not even going to ask where everything came from...

yes, that is pretty fair summation.

where "everything" came from is, however, rather easily answered in the Buddhist paradigm. our teaching is called "Interdependent Co-Arising" and basically means that "this is because that is and that is because this is". what we mean to be saying is that phenomena arise in mutual dependence upon their causes and conditions and when those change, the phenomena will cease as it was. there is no discernable beginning to this as these things all arise in mutual dependence upon each other.

metta,

~v

[moseslmpg]

Yeah, I think the first part makes sense, seeing as how the Buddha did not just sit down and seek to create a religion.

Second part makes as much sense as any other explanation of the genesis of things.

[bodhi_mindisfree]

Forgive me if this has already been said, since I read only the first post. As described by my Eastern Religions teacher, imagine two balls laying ten feet apart. One starts rolling and hits the other. The one moving to begin with stops while the second takes its place. This is the effect of Kamma. It's not a soul that continues, much like the first ball didn't continue. Hope this helps...

SABBE SATTA SUKHITO HONTU!

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by moseslmpg

I see, that's helps a lot. So the lack of a supreme creator deity is to make sure that everyone takes responsibility for their own actions and does away with many other problems of monotheism. I thought as much. It's more like an evolution of consciousness rather than some guy saying "let there be people! (and lo, there were people)" etc. Makes sense to me...so I'm not even going to ask where everything came from...

Does not the "flow" of all at that time make the world? What we are, who we are how we act, this molds the world does it not? What changes the world? The "flow" of events that unfold? Or jah?

Indeed take responsibility... Doesn't that seem right? If you walk in error... Realise this and fix it, do not wait for someone to come and hold your hand... You are your salvation... You are also your demise. You are what you make of it.... Don't look for examples of how to live, give example of how to live.. If you do not realise your own error from "evil" acts sorrow grows.. And should help you to realise what you have done and continue to learn and try to wake from dream...

Just the thought, of blaming something like "satan" for all I do wrong... And praising jah for all I do that is right... Isn't. If I do something wrong it's me I am doing it, I am then punished by what I've done... If I do something that is right... Thank me/praise me/be appreciative/ whatever to me... not to something else. Anyway... My thought.

[Francis king]

no self... anatta... really though... its' anatma... no self/soul...

what is this self/soul?

not all buddhists think that nothing remains... some buddhists think that there is something which again experiences, and to them karma becomes like a trap, something which if bad, will see u experience pain and misery all over again, next lieftime, but if Buddha taught all products (including humans) are impermanent, then this contradicts the doctrine...

that u experience the results of karma in successive lifetimes, I feel, is a way to fool peasants into thinking they must behave in a certain way and reassure them that if they do not receive merit now they will get it next time round...

maybe enlightenment is not a "state of bliss", although "nirvanam" is translated as "bliss", maybe "nirvana" is a bad translation of nir- varna, "without colour", or "na-ravana", "not of the demon Ravana", or maybe- nir vana, "not of the forest", or of delusion...

nothing cannot experience bliss...for there to be bliss, there has to be a feeling, and for that feeling to occur there needs to be a body and a mind, etc, etc... without the potter, the clay is not a pot...

sunyata, translated as emptiness, or empty-ness, is inadequate..

instead, try su, (own, ones own), anya, (without), ta... his..

so, sunyata, is to- be without self... and to be truely without self, while still breathing, and alive, is not as easy as it seems... perfectly empty... devoid of cognizing, devoid of physical sensation, devoid of the laws of physics, suspended in the void, which, far from empty is actually full, full of something so right it needs no comprehension, as there is literally no-thing to experience, and no experiencer to experience...

or so I have heard...

[Tariki]

To get back to my Buddhist roots and away from ecumenical dialogue, just to address the original question...(and my apologies if some of this ground has been covered by previous posts, I must admit I have only skimmed through many of them.................maybe others can get their "own back" by skimming thorugh this one ..............though I must say that getting one's own back is not considered very "Buddhist" )

Anyway, Majjhima Nikaya sutta 2, regarding wise and unwise attention according to the Buddha....

This is how he attends unwisely:"Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what did I become in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I become in the future?" Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the present thus:"Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where will it go?"

When he attends unwsiely in this way, one of six views arises in him. The view 'self exists for me' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'no self exists for me' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive self with self' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive not-self with self' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive self with not-self' arises in him as true and established; or else he has some such view as this: 'It is this self of mine that speaks and feels and experiences here and there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine is permanent, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and it will endure as long as eternity.' This speculative view.......is called the thicket of views, the wilderness of views, the contortion of views, the vacillation of views, the fetter of views. Fettered by the fetter of views, the untaught ordinary person is not freed from birth, ageing, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; he is not freed from suffering, I say.

My understanding is that any attempt to uncover the mechanics of "rebirth" will involve us in some sort of allegiance and "understanding" of a false view of "self", and therefore into such a "fetter of views". Instead of such a search, it seems better to watch the "mechanics" within the present life. Samsara - birth and death - can be seen now. In Buddhist symbolism, in a moment of anger we are a"titan", in a moment of foolishness an "animal", in a moment of greed and grasping a "hungry ghost"..............within moments of peace we are in "heaven", and in moments of suffering in "hell" - with the intent to be aware of such changing states, with mindfulness and with non-discrimination, not identifying with them as being the possessions of "self".

To a certain extent, "reality" will look after itself when our "views" concerning it evaporate!

Udana 8:3..............For one who clings, motion exists; but for one who clings not, there is no motion. Where no motion is, there is stillness. Where stillness is, there is no craving. Where no craving is, there is neither coming nor going. Where no coming nor going is, there is neither arising nor passing away. Where neither arising nor passing away is, there is neither this world nor a world beyond, nor a state between. This, verily, is the end of suffering.

To my mind, all this remains a "template", to be converted by upaya - skilfull means adapted by Reality-as-is to the capacity of each unique individual - into a path that we can actually follow.

[Snoopy]

Hi,

I think this is broadly how I "view" (sorry!) rebirth; as a moment to moment re-becoming; whilst being open minded "agnostic?" about the more literal understanding of the term.

s.

[Tariki]

P.S. Ref should be Udana 8:4, not 8:3.

Snoopy,

Glad to find a fellow "agnostic"! Are you familiar with the writings of Stephen Batchelor?

Derek

[Vajradhara]

Namatse all,

perhaps this will be of some interest.

Visuddhimagga (Chap. XIX):

Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the result.

No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits;
Empty phenomena roll on:
This only is the correct view.

And while the deeds and their results
Roll on and on, conditioned all,
There is no first beginning found,
Just as it is with seed and tree...

No god, no Brahma, can be called
The maker of this wheel of life:
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all.

metta,
~v

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Tariki

Snoopy,

Glad to find a fellow "agnostic"! Are you familiar with the writings of Stephen Batchelor?

Derek

Hi Derek,

I read Buddhism Without Beliefs a long time ago, leant it to someone and never got it back (as you do). I can’t say it had a great impact on me, but maybe a more in depth book would have been interesting (or maybe I should re-read it, it was a long time ago). However, I have considered going to the Sharpham Centre but thought it was a little pricey.

As an “agnostic” Buddhist do you think Stephen Batchelor represents the Navayana (the New Vehicle) for the West? After all, the dharma has always adapted as it has travelled around the globe and interacted with new cultures…literal translations of other religious tenets are not always the most…er…helpful, are they?

s.