[isopsmypovA]

Hello friends

I just read this article on wikipedia


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parayanavagga


I found it particularly interesting here



According to some scholars (but not all, see below), they also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues.


I agree that the suttas in question do teach the non-adherence to views and stay away from metaphysics. If these are the earliest suttas then its interesting to see how in other suttas metaphysics starts to be embraced and then, when we get to the Digha Nikaya, taught outright




An example of one of these suttas



"A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

"They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...4.05.irel.html


Contrast this with the now entrenched Reincarnation view

any comments?

[GroosteFoessy]

Contrast this with the now entrenched Reincarnation view

My view is the rebirth teachings promote morality, as suggested in MN 117, and are spoken for a certain audience (which excludes 'the brahmana').

My view it is incorrect of us to diminish the Buddha's compassion and think he did not offer teachings for ordinary people.

The rebirth teachings are spoken in a language by which the meaning is created by the listener or the reader.

The Dhamma states:

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.

Therein:
The speech wherewith the world converses is true
On account of its being agreed upon by the world.
The speech which describes what is ultimate is also true,
Through characterizing dhammas as they really are.

Therefore, being skilled in common usage,
False speech does not arise in the Teacher,
Who is Lord of the World,
When he speaks according to conventions.

(Mn. i. 95) Kind regards

[PrareeLor]

My view is the rebirth teachings promote morality, as suggested in MN 117, and are spoken for a certain audience (which excludes 'the brahmana').

My view it is incorrect of us to diminish the Buddha's compassion and think he did not offer teachings for ordinary people.

The rebirth teachings are spoken in a language by which the meaning is created by the listener or the reader.

But are such teachings relevant anymore? In particular the West in the 21st century? In the Buddhas time people readily accepted such notions, hence why he sometimes taught in line with it. However in the West today more and more people wont take to such notions but the Buddhas own teachings are hidden behind the Rebirth/Reincarnation morality teaching

[jesyflowers]

Hi Craig

Sure. Your point may be valid that such teachings may possibly be related to culture.

As for the core teachings being hidden...mmm...there is an arguement this has become rather "priestly".

Some open handedly share the core teachings. He/she who seeks will find.

Kind regards