I didn’t quite understand what you were saying here. Are you saying that 1) rebirth is just a view to be let go of because it is a view and views are annica, anatta, dukkha or is it 2) also annica, anatta, dukkha that are just views to be let go of? The second ultimately sounds right to me, but I would add that the Buddhist version of rebirth is so entwined in understanding annica, anatta, dukkha that they might all be let go together at the ending of all views. mmm. Very interesting
An eternalist on the other hand is essentially asserting that both dream & the world are mindmade and that this mind or an aspect of it is eternal, always was and always will be.
An eternal dream. This is like hinduism basically.
Whereas a buddhist eternalist believes that parinibbana makes the dream stable and essentially asymptotical as to discernable change, eternally stable, whereas the hinduism doesn’t have parinibbana and so it never becomes asymptotical in that doctrine afaik.
Note that the buddhist eternalist can not have legitimate ground to proclaim an extinguishment of the constructed just because he makes it to be a certain way eg pleasant & stable.
These ways of thinking are speculative views about the shared human experience and it’s difficult to think oneself out of it even when it is explained. None of these rightly proclaim an ayatana apart from the constructed as extinguishment-cessation-principle of the constructed ayatanas.
Exactly as you’ve already answered, both 1 and 2 are the case. All these views are used as supports to help purify the Citta. As the Citta gets continually purified you can continue to let go of these views as supports.
For a sottapana the view kamma/rebirth goes on attaining sotapatti. It was a helpful view to put effort in obtaining right view. Also the view of precepts being good in and of themselves also goes (silabataparamasa) because it’s replaced with direct knowledge of the outcome of acting out of craving. A sottapana will be able to discern thr displeasure of the aggregates in current experience in a way the unenlightened person won’t be able to pin down (but they will also of course feel the displeasure/regret but will look for further sense pleasures to distract from the pain). But for a sottapana the view of annica dukkha and anatta as still useful views as they haven’t had direct knowledge of it the form of the Citta being dispassionate towards everything therefore not being able to crave anything.
Hope that clarifies
1 Like
The answer is that yes one can, however rebirth as in reincarnation is a tenant of reality, so eventually one will have to learn about it if one hasn’t yet (hopefully).
I don’t think so. Stream entry requires insight into dependent origination, and dependent origination includes rebirth.
Not to reawaken a slumbering dragon, but so far as I can see this point hasn’t been made here.
Before stream entry one is on the path to stream entry, AKA either a Dhamma follower or a faith follower.
A “Dhamma follower” accepts the teachings after reflection, while a “faith follower” accepts them on faith (eg. SN 25.1). Either way, they have accepted the “teachings”, where of course rebirth plays a central role.
This is pretty straightfoward.
At the same time, these people have not yet directly seen the Dhamma: that is stream-entry itself (again SN 25.1). So they have personally accepted the teachings—with presumably a degree of experiential wisdom—but have not yet fully seen them for themselves.
This then comes into the scope of such texts as MN 27, which urge one to not overstate one’s confidence. Thus a Dhamma follower would say that they have a reflective acceptance of rebirth, while a faith follower might say they accept it on faith, but neither would be in a position to say that it is definitely true.
8 Likes
The Stream is your friend, it doesn’t play favorites. It will let an autistic child in.
I’m pretty late to the party, but I thoroughly agree with this point. Until one is genuinely convinced by evidence, reasoning or direct experience that rebirth is a fact, one can only really “pretend” to believe in it. This may work for some, but for others will lead to an uncomfortable amount of cognitive dissonance, which will more likely hinder one’s progress than advance it.
Do you think these require some level of Right Samadhi Bhante or is it more simply really accepting the teachings conceptually?
Why is it pretending? If I believe something it means I don’t know it to be so but I accept it on the basis of trust/confidence.
Perhaps the important point here is that one must be genuinely convinced to avoid hindering oneself with cognitive dissonance. How one becomes genuinely convinced is less important than the conviction itself.
Cognitive dissonance is due to holding two contradictory ideas at the same time. I don’t see how that necessarily applies to someone who believes in rebirth.
Interesting discussion!
When people ask me about “belief” in relation to Buddhist teachings, I ask them a few questions back:
- Do you believe in Gravity?
- Do you believe E = MC squared?
…etc etc
In Medicine we have a concept of “Levels of Evidence” such as Meta-analyses, which are summations of all the trials on a given question (avoids errors from one trial being too small etc), or randomised controlled trials, or cohort studies, or just having an “expert” think its the right thing. Obviously, the higher the level of evidence, the more likely it will make it into a guideline or set of policies and procedures for everyone to follow.
I think that concept applies here, you may not have absolute proof that rebirth and karma are accurate “theories” until you are enlightened and then realise them directly (or find out the Buddha was entirely wrong and some other dhamma is correct of course). However, it is perfectly reasonable to say that based on all the evidence before you, anecdotal, experiential, whether or not the individual mounting the argument is reliable or not (ie a true “expert” or not) are all valid considerations. If someone comes along and actually proves something to be wrong, them you ignore the experts and go with that.
In my personal experience, those not “believing” in rebirth and karma do so because it doesnt fit with their world view, and it doesn’t make sense to them. To them I say “No worries, friends!”. Not sure I would call that belief “xxxxx Buddhism” but would be happy for you to call it whatever other term you like “Vipassana-ist” or “Meditation-ist”, but the only thing I struggle with is calling it “Secular Buddhism”. Those believing in rebirth and karma do so because it seems like the most likely solution, although almost all wouldn’t “directly see it” (ie they didnt discover E = MC squared themselves, wouldn’t have a clue how to replicate that “proof” but are happy, like me, to go along with it as it seems like the most sensible approach. So, my “belief” in E=MC squared, is exactly like my belief in rebirth and karma. Haven’t proven it myself, but happy to go with it till I see a better solution… thats not blind “belief” IMO
1 Like
It is important to understand that the core of the Dhamma (the bits that liberates from dukkha) is Sandiṭṭhiko (verifiable here and now). Everything else is offered by the Buddha so you understand the full context of your situation. Let me offer an analogy:
Say you’re walking by a doctor minding your own business when he happens to casually mention that you’re sick. You reply to the doctor that you actually feel great. You’re young and have your whole life ahead of you. But the doctor mentions actually there are these events your past (say when you were 2 months old and cannot verify for sure) that lead you to your current sickness and this is how you expect the sickness to progress (kamma, heaven and hell, rebirth).
But he offers you this medicine (making sure that you’re current actions are not rooted in craving by as they are the source of your suffering/sickness) that will require you to drive for many days (seeing the 3 characteristics of the 5 aggregates that are presently enduring, seeing the source of your intentions via trial and error and therefore the source of your suffering) and if you choose to take it you should start to become less sick (ownership of the 5 aggregates).
If you’re not atleast open to idea that you’re sick and that it’s could be due to things in the past that you cannot remember and that there are outcomes of the sickness in the future, you’re never making that drive. If you’re open believing the doc on some level. You see that you could be sick by reflecting on some of the details of the ailments the doc has said. Or by seeing that the doc himself seems to be doing much better than you despite not having youth, money, etc then you will make the drive. You can of course doubt any of the things above while you’re making that drive because you cannot for yourself. But you’re not closed off to the idea so you keep driving.
You can also go to the other extreme and focus on just believing the past and future causes are absolutely true and focus your energy in making sure you never doubt it. You think that will cure you. You forget that the you need to drive and take the medicine.
Finally you arrive at the medicine and take it and you do indeed verify that you’re on the mend (stream entry).
Sidenote: One can say a dhammānusārī (Dhamma follower) or saddhānusārī (faith follower) is at the point where they’ve made the many day drive and are standing right there in front of the medicine. It would be impossible that they don’t take it now after all this driving.
All you have to do to fully overcome the sickness (arahantship) is keep taking the medicine (not act out of craving). You can still have some days that you doubt that if it’s the medicine that’s working or something else. But sooner or later you realise it’s indeed the medicine. So you keep taking it (eventual inevitability to full enlightenment (max 7 lives)). You still don’t know if the things about the past reason nor the future consequences are true. So you can still doubt them. But you’re never asserting that they definitely can’t be the case. But al you 100% know is that you’re getting better. So you don’t care if the other stuff is 100% true. It might be if the doc was right about the medicine.
You take the medicine enough to realise that you’re no longer sick and it makes no difference if you take the medicine or not (full enlightenment). You still don’t know if the stuff about the past is true or not nor the future consequences. All you know is that you’re not sick (Sandiṭṭhiko). This doctor is clearly a genius. So the other stuff is probably true and I could still have doubts about it. But if you’re not sick anymore whether you doubt it or not becomes irrelevant. Even the medicine can be chucked out since you dont need it (might be a good idea to keep the map and the empty bottle around in case others have the same sickness and you want to help em out).
No mysticism needed here. The necessary process is entirely verifiable here and now (Sandiṭṭhiko, Ehipassiko). Just don’t let your views get in the way of your driving and taking the medicine.
What qualifies the sammā or right in the noble 8fold path is right view. Right view relating to rebirth includes: there is this world, there is the next world, there are beings spontaneously reborn, there is results of actions (kamma), there are sages who directly know these from their direct knowledges.
View of Rebirth, then is part of the medicine.
Namo Buddhaya
There is an interesting point here Bhante.
In regards to ‘right view siding with acquisition’ as it relates to the nussaripair.
The nussaris have transcended the plane of common people but the teachings are only moderately accepted & understood.
Now what are those teachings exactly because there are two distint categories here
- What is described as the general instruction
“Aggivessana, this is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and his instructions to disciples generally proceed on these topics: ‘Form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are impermanent. The five aggregates are mentioned as if the listener is expected to know them.Form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self. All conditions are impermanent. All things are not-self.’ This is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and how instruction to his disciples generally proceeds.”
This must be included for this is explicit in the series about the nussaris as in
. "Monks, the eye is inconstant, changeable, alterable. The ear… The nose… The tongue… The body… The mind is inconstant, changeable, alterable.
"One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: Cakkhu Sutta: The Eye
The question is then whether they can be backwards in regards to
"And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? ‘There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.’ This is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions. Maha-cattarisaka Sutta: The Great Forty
As it is reasonable to assert that rebirth is spoken of as ‘the next world’ there.
It’s more than that. They’ve taken the medicine (i.e. developed the eightfold path) and are simply waiting for the effects to kick in (seeing the four noble truths).
5 Likes
Actually, yes that would be more accurate.
1 Like
I look forward to the discussion on this point too (i.e. whether or not one needs to have some level of “samadhi” to be a Dhammanusari/Saddhanusari), or if mere conceptual/intellectual acceptance is enough.
On a brief glance otherwise, based on the strength of acceptance and faith of many Buddhists around me (including many of those in Discuss/Discourse in Sutta Central), I believe a lot would qualify as Dhammanusari/Saddhanusari? Or is more needed…?
I don’t think that one can make any sort of case whatsoever for jhana being a requisite.
1 Like