Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
I think that everyone who studies Dhamma alters it to fit what they are comfortable with. Oddly, I believe that rebirth demonstrates anatta.
I don't think Buddha was pandering to metaphysical theories. I'm sure he merely reported what he experienced. What anyone else does with that, is another matter ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
Was a belief in rebirth ever essential to gaining understanding of the integral principles taught by the Buddha? Any other principles? I guess it depends how each individual plays it out for themselves. Based on the belief, some may gain a particular understanding of karma, suffering or impermanence. |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
Dhamma/Dharma has and will continue to alter in its form in response to changing social and cultural conditions Dhamma or natural truth will always be what it is. But individual humans beings will make whatever they want from it. Dhamma as the law of nature is not necessarily the same as Dhamma as religion. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
The Buddha taught about the end of suffering & rebirth view is the manifestion of suffering. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
if one dismisses the idea of rebirth, the Four Noble Truths lose much of their depth and scope |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
Ooops ! Must be the "Hell Realms "ahead for me then ! Apart from doing a month's intensive Bardo retreat about 25 years ago, the subject of rebirth has been less and less in my thoughts (well actually not in my thoughts at all) as I deal with what's occuring in the present. I feel rebirth is not just a metaphorical issue. From Tibetan buddhism this is a real fact. But as I left Tibetan and embraced Zen, as Aloka has told, being rebirthfor me a litteral aspect of Buddhist doctrine, I think that the core aspect of Dharma is the present and the here and now doctrine, but this do not mean that rebirth is just a fairy tale even when it has been less an less in my thought too. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
from post #1 I have ever felt, as an anthropologist, that being Tibetans a very religuous culture do to the previously Bö religion, buddhism adapted in such a way that Buddhism there has a very intense flavour of religiousity. The same for japan... sometimes during the seshin I took I felt I was surrounded by a kind of martial art doctrine... ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
My question and thoughts, influenced by others like yourself, is concerning how much we can expect articulation and expression of the essential principles taught by the Buddha need to change to be appropriate to the new situations as they emerge due to social and cultural change. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
I know that I can question any of the Buddha's teaching, but does this mean that I can dispense with his teaching of rebirth? Attainment follows from practice. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
I know that I can question any of the Buddha's teaching, but does this mean that I can dispense with his teaching of rebirth? |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
Imo, the concept of "rebirth" was merely skillful means and a conceptual tool that was employed in order to help people see the agitating/combusting nature of existence...becoming/ unbecoming...generation/degeneration - that is, the patterns, cycles, the physics of the phenomenal world - and to paint a vivid picture of cause and effect within this physic and ultimately empty environment. This conceptual tool has taken on a purely materialistic literal meaning in this materialistic literalistic time.
A surface reading of the teachings gave a much needed moral/social structure to average people, and a glimmer of reality...mostly it kept them from creating hells on Earth and in their own mind/body. A deep reading of the teachings preserved a far reaching complex understanding of the phenomenal world (physics, astronomy, ecosystems management, social management, physical and mental health, protection of the genome, etc...) and our relationship with it for those that had the mental capacity and training to understand at this level. The confusion about this conceptual tool in our own time exists because the deeper reading and understanding of the teachings has become lost - the teachings have become decontextualized and without the broad deep context, the surface has deteriorated into a narcissistic bandaid of self focused so-called "spiritual" masturbation techniques. The decontextualized, literalized surface reading doesn't ring true to a population that is fairly well educated but who haven't woken up fully from the unconscious mind-numbing cloud of religiosity that pervades all of modern thought (the lingering effects of institutionalized and deeply internalized Christian theology)...this state of limbo creates much confusion on the one hand, and entrenched belief on the other - both states of mind that the Dharma was originally intended to dissolve. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|