Are you saying that I’m doing that there? In that case, I may have to reword it. Because it’s not me who’s including in “dhammas” what is extra-phenomenal, to use that fancy term. I’m pointing out interpretations I disagree with that do.
Thank you Venerable for clarifying. Here is my paraphrase of what I understood from your reply:
- You don’t want to speak too much about practice on an internet board.
- I’m possibly summarizing your interpretation too narrowly.
- You disagree with interpretations which include in “dhammas” those which can never be known through ‘direct, empirical insight.’
- Still, you’re more focused on challenging interpretations which exclude rebirth or make it a side-issue/non-issue.
- One effect on practice is misjudging or over-estimation as Venerable Vaddha pointed out.
- Venerable Vaddha had it right in elucidating that this is your main concern.
If I have that right, then I’ll reply:
- I understand that this internet board is not the right place for discussion of personal practice.
- Surely we can discuss theoretical consequences of different interpretations of doctrine though?
- I agree that overestimation is a concern and that someone who believes they have right view but dismiss rebirth would be in big danger of just that.
- For me, I hypothesize that it is precisely through understanding how all dhammas cannot have substance or essence that rebirth can be known.
- I hypothesize that without understanding or knowing that all dhammas cannot have substance or essence that rebirth can’t be known.
- Hence, I hypothesize that overestimation can also possibly occur in someone believing they have right view and understanding of rebirth but who don’t understand how all dhammas cannot have substance or essence.
1 Like
OK 
1 Like
Ok, with that pithy response I guess the thread isn’t conducive to learning anything more. Hope you stay well Venerable.
Sorry for that! But I mean, I don’t know what you’re expecting? I already indicated at length that I don’t have much problems with interpretations that see rebirth as a major aspect of right view in the Kaccanagotta Sutta, even if they add some things which I don’t think are necessary. Nor do I feel this is my place to give too much practical advice. Do you want to engage in some sort of debate about this? Because I don’t. 
As I said, I’m here (on this board) to discuss what the texts say. You’re specifically wanting to put that aside here. So then there’s not much to discuss.
Maybe others will engage you further, though, so don’t give up yet.
No, not looking for debate. I wanted to learn what practical detrimental consequences you saw from interpreting the sutta how I do. I now know you worry that those who do might overestimate understanding whilst dismissing or not appreciating rebirth. I don’t think I so dismiss nor claim any big understanding so I guess as you imply maybe not much more to discuss.
2 Likes
I actually think there is a meaningful effect on practice. When I see an object either I apprehend it as ‘it exists’ or ‘it doesn’t exist’. I find it difficult to not fall into either extremes.
Most of the time I steer too much towards “It doesn’t exist” which leads to nihilism. Or on the other hand towards eternal-ism(or materialism). Nihilism tends to sap energy & determination towards practice.