[opdirorg]

Hello Stuka

I read it a while back. I struggled to fathom Mr Davy's goal. For me, the essay did not have the taste of freedom. For me, the essay sounded like some kind of recruitment drive.

As for appealling to the "modern skeptic", I found it inadequate because Mr Davy himself did not portray himself as a skeptic.

To me, Mr Davy sounded similar to a Christian who studies other religions in order to convert those of other religions to Christianity. Mr Davy appeared to begin with skeptic jardon to lure (I am not sure exactly who?) into a religion comprising of unquestionable faith doctrine..

For example, I recall Mr Davy making a very emphatic, almost dogmatic statement, that the Buddha believed in [literal] rebirth.

Instead of informing skeptics the Buddha believed in cause & effect and the efficacy of karma, Mr Davy appeared to emphatically assert the Buddha believed in [literal] rebirth.

Instead of informing skeptics of "the two truths" or "worldly & ultimate language", Mr Davy appeared to emphatically assert the Buddha believed in [literal] rebirth, as though Mr Davy himself actually knew the mind of the Buddha.

Instead of informing skeptics how the doctrine of karma and the realms can be understood literally or psychology, according to the temperament of the student (which does not alter the doctrine of karma in any way), Mr Davy appeared to emphatically assert the Buddha believed in [literal] rebirth.

Instead of discussing the two types of Right View found in MN 117, Mr Davy appeared to emphatically assert the Buddha believed in [literal] rebirth.

The unique interpretaton aspects of the essay that I recall include:

(1) the 4th precept as "incorrect speech", as in "politically incorrect speech", rather than dishonest & untruthful speech, which includes refraining from speaking about what one has not experienced for oneself.

(2) the attempt to explain the 1st Noble Truth to skeptics by including a larger than life quote from Thanissaro, which mentioned "The Five Clinging Aggregates". I thought to myself: "Imagine being a skeptic and reading the words The Five Clinging Aggregates". I found it more alientating for the skeptic when it was said one meditates to observe the Five Clinging Aggregates.

A skeptic that has an awareness of dukkha in their life & is looking for solutions, will seek peace & clear understanding rather than more confusion and conformity to the doctrines of a worldly religion.

The purpose of meditation is to develop inner peace & freedom of mind. My personal view is essays on Buddhism for skeptics best appeal to those who experience dukkha & aspire to end it.

Yet Mr Davy seems to target those interested in branches of philosophy rather than those experiencing dukkha.

My Davy mentions emptiness, not-self & the aggregates alot but rarely links these subjects to suffering. My current brouse finds two paragraphs on how upadana is dukkha but these two paragraphs are mostly concerned with worldly morality rather than spiritual freedom.

If all things were not-self (anatta) but self-view did not result in dukkha, the Buddha would not have bothered teaching not-self.

For much of the essay, Mr Davy seems to lose touch with the crucial relationship between anatta, vimutti (freedom) & Nibbana (peace).

My reading found the essay mostly relegated to philosophy & moralising rather than about "Liberation-Dhamma".

Kind regards



The challenge the Buddha sets us, is to try to find a substantial, separate
and distinct Self or ego, apart from these five aggregates. Should we wish to
take up this challenge in earnest and test this hypothesis for ourselves....

By Paul Davy This talk of aggregates and negation of the ego-concept may seem rather
abstract, but it does play several important roles in the reduction of
Craving. Firstly, by dissolving the ego, we also dissolve the polar dichotomy
between ‘me’ and ‘everything else’ and can start acting from a base of
egolessness and equanimity. Without an ego to reinforce, Craving finds no
root to take hold of and Suffering is not given the chance to arise. Rather,
actions and speech become focused on activities which reduce suffering not
just for the individual, but for friends, family and other members of society
as well.

If we stop to think about this point, we really start to see clearly that it is
selfishness alone making us think that our wants and needs are more
important and significant than those of others. Contrast this ideology with
the individualism promoted in modern society, which leads people to
reinforce their ego and provide a firm foundation for Greed and Aversion,
whilst having with little or no regard for the desires and welfare of others.

By Paul Davy
In short, Mr Davy sums up my impression well, in the bold. Mr Davy seems to have put the cart before the horse; climbing the tree from the top rather than from the bottom.