No confirmation of previous cosmological ideology has taken place - but thanks for the valid concern. Previous cosmological models - of a religious nature - were torn to shreds. Cosmological models are ‘just that’ - models - there is a difference between reading a guide-book and seeing the sights.
My brother use to make models when he was a kid and hang them from strings on the ceiling and display them on shelves. Children can tell the difference between a model and the real thing - the truth that liberates is not rocket science. The liberating Dhamma is a living truth! It pertains to our lived reality - the one we don’t inhabit when we are making other plans! Zeug was getting at the same thing with his discussion of phenomenology. The finger is pointing at the moon - do not mistake the finger for the moon. - Zen Wisdom
The good news is, it is impossible to confuse a working model with a lived reality. We already know the difference. At least, I hope so? I don’t expect - for a moment - that you should believe me. I certainly hope you never do! My purpose has never been to persuade anyone of anything. That would be a foolish endeavour of no ‘vital’ importance! Persuasion is the preoccupation of ideologues - religious and secular - and I am not an ideologue or one of their followers. The realisation of the teachings is like seeing something clearly - it is a complete surprise - a beautiful surprise.
“We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.” - T. S. Eliot
The Buddha simply shared his discoveries with all of us - of course we are going to question and come to our own conclusions. Our assessments will be influenced by our background and our cherished beliefs - our preset conclusions. Its a different ball-game when we ‘see’ the Dhamma - to varying degrees - this does not mean we will fall inline and lose our capacity for critical thought. We do need to question everything down to the root of our ‘own’ phenomenal reality - in real time - or give up: read spy novels etc.
"Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos.” - Rohitassa Sutta
Nibbana is not a phenomenal reality and it is not something else - either. This is why the Buddha’s liberating insight cannot be explained by physicalism or metaphysics. This is why he taught that the middle-way lies between annihilationism and eternalism. Much of this discussion is already present in the EBT’s the only difference is the context created by time, place and circumstance.
"It’s not to be reached by traveling,
the end of the cosmos —
regardless.
And it’s not without reaching
the end of the cosmos
that there is release
from suffering & stress …
So, truly, the wise one,
an expert with regard to the cosmos,
a knower of the end of the cosmos,
having fulfilled the holy life,
calmed,
knowing the cosmos’ end,
doesn’t long for this cosmos
or for any other." - Rohitassa Sutta
A knower of the end of the cosmos must mean the end of the phenomenal - how can physicalism survive the ending of the phenomenal, how can phenomena survive the ending of the cosmos?? With the ending of the known there is also the ending of the knower. That which knows this ending is a mortally wounded chitta. The stream of consciousness loses momentum and ceases - PEACE AT LAST.
The Buddha’s teachings are not like those dusty old faith traditions we have rejected in order to arrive right here - right now - the Buddha was just telling it as he saw it. Just as the dusty old faith traditions tell us to believe things they do not know - like the blind leading the blind - for the very same reason many of us reject modern secular ideologies.
To believe in the existence of devas or to believe in the non-existence of devas are two sides of the same coin - they are articles of faith. The only thing that could break this impasse would be direct knowledge and vision i.e. actually seeing and/or interacting with devas - this seems obvious. If this has not happened I see no harm in keeping an open mind - maintaining a rational objectivity with regards to the unknown.
As in science, the Buddha encouraged open-minded inquiry. He cautioned us to not accept anything blindly. Blind-faith of any kind - secular or religious - is incompatible with the Buddha’s teachings. We can have provisional acceptance of things we don’t understand in the Dhamma but never blind acceptance. As in science, Buddhism has an underlying paradigm. Our practice is informed by direct insight as we proceed. The Buddha insisted on this approach in the middle-way.
“Suppose there were a row of blind men, each holding on to the one in front of him: the first one doesn’t see, the middle one doesn’t see, the last one doesn’t see. In the same way, the statement of the Brahmans turns out to be a row of blind men, as it were: the first one doesn’t see, the middle one doesn’t see, the last one doesn’t see.” — Canki Sutta (MN 95)
Some of us are looking for more in the Dhamma than a belief-system - ancient or modern. When somebody makes a truth-claim the first thing I try to establish is whether they actually know - through direct experience - what they profess to be true. If it turns out they have no experience of what they take to be true, I understand, how this has come to pass and, why. I understand what it is that drives people into an ideological fixation - secular or religious - through direct experience. It is not difficult to understand? We may ask: what is the importance of this kind of understanding? Answer: how are we going to realise the truth which liberates if we don’t understand ourselves?
We can start an argument with the Buddha if we feel the need - he would not have objected. He did not teach: take me at my word, for you cannot see for yourself. The Dhamma is an open-invitation requiring an open heart and an inquiring mind. May you be well and happy, may you realise the truth which liberates - thats what we are here for!
The teachings are for stubborn stains - it all comes out in the wash.
“As he observes him, he comes to know, 'There are in this venerable one no such qualities based on aversion… His bodily behavior & verbal behavior are those of one not aversive. And the Dhamma he teaches is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise.” - Canki Sutta