DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - In Which Alexander Berzin Calls the Buddha's Liberative Teachings "Dharma Lite"

**nasdfrdg** · 06-21-2010, 12:33 PM

"He who sees Dependent Origination, sees the Dhamma; he who sees the Dhamma, sees Dependent Origination." -MN 28

What part of the Dhamma have we left out, precisely?

It's correct, those who see dependent origination see the dhamma. But do you REALLY SEE it? This reminds is a bit of little children, who have just learned their ABC. You see, all the world's literature can be reproduced from just these 26 letters. But can the child claim that because it has mastered the alphabet, it has also mastered all of the world's literature? Obviously this is not the case. One can read about dependent origination, and gain an intellectual understanding of it, but that's NOT really SEEING dependent origination. The latter involves a lifetime, or more likely, multiple lifetimes of practice during which one's understanding of dependent origination is continuously deepened. In the course of this practice, it is quite likely that one makes discoveries about the mind, about existence, life, death, and rebirth, verifying one or another aspect of the dhamma. Although strictly speaking such discoveries aren't necessary, they are just likely to occur. What is more, although "seeing" rebirth is strictly not necessary, rebirth itself is necessary for you or anyone to be able to walk the path to its end. If you are not reborn, then when you die, that's it. Game over. Mission failed.

But once again, we find ourselves arguing about rebirth, whereas the thread is about something else. I am not really inclined to continue this argument, since it's been done to death.

Stuka, just in case you have misinterpreted my last post as personal attack, please let me mention that it wasn't geared to you. In fact, I wish to avoid engaging you. What I had in mind with quack dhamma was more like certain tendencies in the new age movement that utilise Buddhist terminology and concepts. I (deplorably) came to the conclusion that debating with you is not useful, and therefore I suggest we leave it at that.

Cheers, Thomas

06-21-2010, 12:33 PM	#11
nasdfrdg Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 373 Senior Member	"He who sees Dependent Origination, sees the Dhamma; he who sees the Dhamma, sees Dependent Origination." -MN 28 What part of the Dhamma have we left out, precisely? It's correct, those who see dependent origination see the dhamma. But do you REALLY SEE it? This reminds is a bit of little children, who have just learned their ABC. You see, all the world's literature can be reproduced from just these 26 letters. But can the child claim that because it has mastered the alphabet, it has also mastered all of the world's literature? Obviously this is not the case. One can read about dependent origination, and gain an intellectual understanding of it, but that's NOT really SEEING dependent origination. The latter involves a lifetime, or more likely, multiple lifetimes of practice during which one's understanding of dependent origination is continuously deepened. In the course of this practice, it is quite likely that one makes discoveries about the mind, about existence, life, death, and rebirth, verifying one or another aspect of the dhamma. Although strictly speaking such discoveries aren't necessary, they are just likely to occur. What is more, although "seeing" rebirth is strictly not necessary, rebirth itself is necessary for you or anyone to be able to walk the path to its end. If you are not reborn, then when you die, that's it. Game over. Mission failed. But once again, we find ourselves arguing about rebirth, whereas the thread is about something else. I am not really inclined to continue this argument, since it's been done to death. Stuka, just in case you have misinterpreted my last post as personal attack, please let me mention that it wasn't geared to you. In fact, I wish to avoid engaging you. What I had in mind with quack dhamma was more like certain tendencies in the new age movement that utilise Buddhist terminology and concepts. I (deplorably) came to the conclusion that debating with you is not useful, and therefore I suggest we leave it at that. Cheers, Thomas
	Quote