Sure. Quite often absence of proof doesn’t mean anything. A favourite example of the neo-Atheists would be the “flying spaghetti monster”. I guess we don’t have to treat all unfalsifiable theories seriously. It seems for every aphorism there is an equal and opposite one, e.g., against “absence of proof is not the same as proof of absence” we have “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. I suppose it depends on one’s “Bayesian prior”! 
For most, the prior likelihood of the “flying spaghetti monster” would be very very small and require a lot of evidence to overturn! 
However, for most claims in the spiritual world, e.g., rebirth or souls/atta, IMO things are not so clear-cut.
1 Like
Thank you Gabriel for bring this up! I’ll address this in a later post . . . Hopefully it will really open some eyes, but before that . . .
Seems like you and probably many others aren’t aware the significant of this passage . . . Which is okay . . . maybe I’ll explain the significant of this passage later on . . . .
Can you please clarify what you mean by that there’s only one version of it? Is there any problems or issues with only one version of it or it being in the vinaya?
with Metta,
“And what, Ānanda, is the path and the practice for giving up the five lower fetters? It’s when a mendicant—due to the seclusion from attachments, the giving up of unskillful qualities, and the complete settling of physical discomfort—quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption”
Is it this verse that makes you think that 1st jhana is needed for ending the 5 lower fetters? If not, can you please show which verse from MN64 that makes you think this way?
The word “Samadhi” (absorption) from AN9.12, is this what makes you think that one needs jhana’s to attain non-returner and arahantship?
with Metta,
Yes.
Yes, it seems likely to me. I guess while samma samadhi might not necessarily always be jhana, I’d imagine that fulfilling or completing the training in samadhi would include jhana. It’s not the only sutta with this ethics, concentration, wisdom structure linked to path stages, e.g., see AN3.86 for something similar.
Yes please, we should branch off and discuss it in a separate topic.
1 Like
And, coming back to the point of the OP and summarizing (hopefully)…
Things don’t have to necessarily be real for us to experience them. One cannot definitively and truthfully make any absolute statement about the True Nature of Reality due to the burden of proof. However, one can make a truthful statement about the nature of one’s own experience.
Observing, analyzing and understanding the nature of one’s own experience is important because it is the key to ending our Dukkha. However, most Religions focus on the observation, analysis and ultimate understanding of the Reality we experience rather than the experience itself… which then bogs us down in the problem of proof for metaphysical statements.
The problem we face in observing and analyzing our own experience is that much of it is itself conceptual in nature. The task of stripping away our own conceptual constructions to seek the bare bones of Experience is made all the more difficult by the easily distracted nature of our Mind.
To calm down the excitable and distractable nature of our Mind, the Buddha prescribes the gradual training of the 8 fold path, encompassing Virtue(Morals), Mindfulness and Samadhi (Concentration/ Focus). Jhana is an invaluable training tool for achieving that razor sharp laser focussed Mind which is in the zone, malleable and ready for use to analyze our experience.
What do we find when we are able to finally analyze our experience? We find that the ultimate nature of our experience of Reality is simply Impermanent Process. No part of our experience of Reality exists permanently in and of itself, without any dependence on something else … all is co-dependently originated, constantly in change. By the time we put a Name to it… it has already become something else.
Seeking to pin down and grasp our Experience, hoping to make it permanently as we would like it to be is Suffering. Does it matter if what is experienced is absolutely Real or the product of some Cosmic Computer or is being dreamed into existence aka Brain in a Vat? It is still Suffering and that matters, because it involves Us … our Self.
Why take what is Impermanent and Suffering to be Mine? Letting go of the experience, not seeking to hold on to it or change it… just accepting it for what it is, we can achieve freedom from Suffering.
This can start as simply as for example, accepting that our partner the one we love - Mine!- has moved on, and we cannot force them to stay and love us. We might be feeling really bad, but we know from past experience that that is temporary, it will change … we will heal, and we will find love again. Now, everyone (except teenagers) know this to be true. It is trivial indeed. But are we able to put it into practice? How quickly do we let go?
The process soon gathers momentum. We let go more and more… of our Body, of our Feelings, our Perceptions, our Conceptual Thought Formations… until we approach the Core of what makes Us … Us. Finally, we see through the process of Consciousness and the conceptual process by which we give Name to Form, including to our own sense of Self. At this stage, Experience is understood for what is actually is … Process without any substantial Core.
There is ultimately nothing stationary in our experience which we could possibly hold onto as being permanent, an eternal unchanging essence - No Self can be found.
That does not mean that there is no experience of Self! On the other hand there is a definite sense of Self, of an observer … but it is relative to the Objects being experienced.
If I am, it is only to the extent that there are things that I experience and hold onto. If there is nothing to be experienced or held onto, there is no I.
Now which viewpoint to adopt? “I am” or “I am not”? Ultimately IMO,this depends upon which is more skillful.
By completely subscribing to the notion “I am”, I fall into the trap of Eternalism, of pining for life in Heaven while ignoring my life here and now, sanctimoniously clinging to rites and rituals, giving grief to myself and others … Mr Osama-bin- Laden?
By completely subscribing to the notion “I am not”, I fall into the trap of Nihilism, of unreservedly immersing myself in sensual pleasure, disregarding the harm I cause to myself and others… Mr Epstein, I presume?
Instead, the Buddha suggests I adopt the Middle Path. With this as condition, that comes to be. With the cessation of this, comes the cessation of that.
This is Ultimate Truth.The True Nature of Everything. Observable everywhere, in everything, in all time frames. It explains All - from the Universe to our Selves, Why we are and What we do. The Ultimate Answer. Forty - Two. 
4 Likes
I responded here
[ One of the most important post one can come across on the Buddha Dhamma . . . Or not .
I highly recommend you read that post as well. It’s “kinda” related to what I’ll be responding to you in the next few days in regards to what we were discussing here. I really have to thank you. I was able to discovered / learned something very interesting for myself.
with metta,