I don’t understand why arguments against rebirth from people who are clearly fixated in these views are not considered Wrong Speech and censored.
Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, ‘There is no next world’ is his wrong view. Because there actually is the next world, when he is resolved that ‘There is no next world,’ that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is the next world, when he speaks the statement, ‘There is no next world,’ that is his wrong speech.
I think it’s very inappropriate in light of the ToS here.
This forum is called Discuss and Discover, not Believe or Be Silent. Until and unless someone has a direct experience of rebirth, it is a provisional opinion, for whatever reason, faith, logic, evidence, belief etc. Stating that you have direct experience of rebirth would be a violation of ToS because it amounts to proclaiming attainments. So it would be best to figure out a way to peacefully discuss these issues and then let it go, whichever direction you maybe leaning towards.
On this forum we try to adhere to right speech, which means something specific: abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, and from idle chatter (off-topic conversation). We also don’t allow interpretations of the dhamma which are widely established to be wrong, i.e. claims that the EBTs actually say or mean something different.
This leaves plenty of room for discussing aspects of the dhamma that people don’t agree with or see differently, while acknowledging that in this they are departing from the EBTs. A lot of mutual understanding and learning grows in this area, and as long as it’s done in a civil way such discussion is very welcome.
As long as we are allowed to reply to the wrong views with right views, I think it would benefit more people.
As it is, I tried and it got separated out as off topic. So I am hesitant to do it again on that topic. I am not sure if putting in the rebirth evidences topic would make sense when the proponents of wrong views is at the other topic.
The no rebirth view thread is for people to explain how they came to hold and live with that view. It is expressly not for going into discussion about whether that view is right or wrong. Wanting to argue with someone who has indicated they don’t want to have that argument makes it untimely and unpleasing speech.
As people still want to have that discussion, another thread has been created. This way we can respect the users who don’t wish to get into the discussion, while also giving space to those who want to offer (and read) counterarguments.
It’s one thing to personally say that one doesn’t believe in rebirth and acknowledge that Buddhism does have rebirth as right view. That is perfectly fine as it is just facts statement.
Then due to the protection given to them, I shouldn’t just mention that person in the rebirth evidences topic? Or reply further to his claim of wrong view as right view? Intention is to clarify wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view.
Not everyone can clearly differentiate between the two instances of personal belief vs what the texts says.
I appreciate your compassionate intention to correct wrong view, but given that this thread is indeed a ‘safe space’ for wrong views we just ask you to put it somewhere else. The posters already know that what they’re saying is considered wrong view, and ask others to respect that they can’t see it any other way right now. So you may still clarify, but in the thread created for that purpose. The people who are open to it and want to read it can find it there.
I don’t like this. This is basically giving them a secular Buddhism corner. In r/Buddhism, secular Buddhism are regularly taken down and we are clear that the ideas are wrong, not the person.
I would think the view of no rebirth is much worse than Buddha was born in Sri Lanka (from the community guidelines of this site), the latter having no impact on the path even if true or not.
I can understand why it bothers you and it is commendable that you are so concerned about others’ progress on the path. In the case of this thread we are being asked to tolerate our own discomfort and take the discussion about it elsewhere. Still on this site and transparent for all to see, who wish to see. The intention of the no rebirth thread is to develop understanding for people who hold that view, a useful practice. There are plenty of other threads to explain and discuss what the right view is - just not this one.
People are capable of reading more than one thread on a forum. Last I checked, it was the non-Buddhists who were getting censored with multiple flags, not yourself, yet you seem to think you are the one being shortchanged. I’m not myself aware of early Buddhist sources believing that ordinary people randomly remember past lives; that was a supermundane knowledge. But you got a thread so you could promote such beliefs, which are generally in the same category as paranormal “research” into ghosts and telekinesis. Shall we watch videos of kids bending spoons to prove the supernormal powers exist next?
But this is not good enough. And we have another person who wants people outright censored for saying x, y, or z.
I think I’ll be taking a break from this forum for a long time. I’ve tried to engage with Buddhists here because as a translator and writer, it’s good to have contact with my readers and hear their thoughts. There have been times when it has really helped me improve my translations and reconsider my thinking. But these days their thoughts are becoming a serious impediment to doing my work. I guess it’ll be best I stop interacting with the public beyond publishing my work like others do. It’s unfortunate to me, but I guess that’s the reality these days.
Fortunately, the moderation is not in favor of this so please be heartened.
I really hope you reconsider as I think your participation is beneficial for many.
I wonder if a solution that could appease everyone is the ability to mark individual threads to ignore as one can currently do for users? That way people who have aversion to hearing secular buddhists discussing their views in a safe thread without being argued with could ignore the thread? It also might help you to ignore certain threads so they don’t cause an impediment to your work?
Is that you, RV? Are you also posting as Suddh on DW? It is relevant to this topic if this is the case, as you have an extensive history of attacking various forums that don’t suit your personal preferences.
This thread seems motivated as a response to the thread where a user (@Alex70) - who seemingly accepts rebirth - asked a question of those on this forum who do not accept rebirth. Namely, he wanted to inquire into their thinking and understand their views, but expressly wished for the thread to not involve discussion of whether rebirth was “right” or “wrong.” As such, any discussion or debate about whether rebirth is “right” or “wrong” is off-topic to the thread.
I think we all should simply acknowledge the point of the thread and adhere to the OP’s stated motivation. That might be difficult for some of us with deep and entrenched views, but we should practice (I certainly need the practice!) to develop the skill of patience and putting others before ourselves.
It seems a valuable and well motivated thread to understand the viewpoint of our fellow dharma friends. Why can’t we just listen to the viewpoints of others without interjecting with debate and argument?
It is a fact that many on the path do not accept rebirth. Whether you view this as problematic or not it seems like a good idea to develop the skill of listening to understand what motivates another friends understanding. As someone who does accept rebirth I find it valuable to understand in good faith what my fellow path travelers - who I try not to view as beneath me - think and believe.
I’m very sorry to hear this as you are a valuable presence and source of knowledge on this forum.
As moderators we do our best to keep censorship to a minimum and to be a welcoming place for discussion and a variety of views. If you feel that we are falling short here or there is more we can do to facilitate it, I hope you can let us know via PM (to @ moderators) if not this thread
To be clear, I meant, people can freely reply there why rebirth is true, whenever a secular Buddhist post rebirth is not true. Not that the secular Buddhists are censored completely. I am not the mod there, so I dunno how many things they removed.
It is hard to continue a discussion on another thread when the momentum is on one. So indeed, it is a shortchange on both sides and also a compromise. I can dislike it, but also respect the mods enough to follow as they decide as I am not part of the mods or owner of this forum.
I have not compiled properly on supernormal powers research, I just know about Dean Radin who had. If anything helps to promote faith, I don’t see the harm in it. Also we are heavily text based (EBT has text in it), some external evidences independent of Buddhism is useful for those who doesn’t have so strong a faith in the texts.
I also have some concerns about how this forum and EBT in general is seen from the general Buddhism viewpoint. How close or far away we are to secular Buddhism. Anyway, I accept the decision, it’s already 3 times I asked and got negative. We can see the 3 times asking in real life.
To speculate ad infinitum, and fractiously* on the nature of anatta and nibbana is also clearly dismissed as unwholesome by the Peaceful One. But here, delight in the thicket of views is allowed and even encouraged by “seniors.”
Facts… treat them as you will, draw your own conclusions, practice the path.
Or not.
Edit @ +4hrs…
I used the wrong word. “Fractious” does not reflect my intention. It implies “unruly troublemaking” and would be the mundane (worldly, not unimportant) sphere of moderation which should properly concern itself with civility, TOS, etc.
I meant to use “Factious” without the “r.”
This word means “inclined to the formation of factions.” The Buddha, as I understand it, was not a fan.
This is an issue of Dhamma… not the purview of moderators, but “management.”
My apologies for any confusion or perceived ingratitude.
On a general note i can say that id rather see an update to the ToS saying that this wrong speech is tolerated or otherwise disconnect the ToS from the term Right Speech, rather this than there not being a discussion about these things.
