Play the ball, not the man. I will continue to disregard your repeated ad hominems.
I call hypocrisy. Your response to Ted Meissner’s extended, thoughtful and courteous comments were derisive and disrespectful. You characterized his views as brazen, lacking in humility and a symptom of cultural bias.
Your interjections into other people’s conversations just to throw psychoanalyzing ad hominems is derisive and disrespectful. Please stop butting in.
Hello everyone
Perhaps a good option might be to ignore anyone that seems to want to enter into the “yes it is,”, “no, it isn’t”, “yes! it is!” “NO! it isn’t”, style of debate. Sometimes the best option is to let something be; readers will decide for themselves anyway.
With metta
6 Likes
The call is not for inquisitorial purification but for intellectual rigor. I believe that ‘more than a few’ Secular Buddhists have adopted ‘scientistic’ attitudes and convictions without being fully aware of what they are thinking and doing.
The problem is that Scientism - as a belief system - is diametrically opposed to what Buddhism ‘requires’ to make it work.
Buddhism ‘requires’ an understanding of methodologies, practices and ‘findings’ that are not the province of empiricism - as understood in Scientism. Therefore, Secular Buddhists who are aware of this issue need to educate those members in their Sangha - perhaps new-comers - about the issue!
I believe that Secularists have a responsibility to go further and distance themselves ‘unambiguously’ from proponents of Scientism. As I said earlier: the devotees of Scientism are notorious for their intolerant attitude towards open-minded inquiry that goes beyond empiricism.
This is a science issue and a Buddhist issue. Those who love Science and Buddhism who are Secular Buddhists need to confront this problem head-on! Instead of doing this there seems to be mass-complacency and indifference. And now - it would appear - antagonism. I hope you now understand the point? ‘Ted Meissner’ acknowledged what I was getting at and agreed. 
Looks like all this selective picking of the Dhamma is happening because answering the Buddha’s call for asceticism and total renunciation is too hard these days.
Best of luck with the total renunciation and asceticism - how are you going on that front? 
With lots of ups and downs. 
Ted, I look forward to the day we can do this.
I hear you. There’s a part of me that feels that what Bhante was intending with his spirited advocacy essay he has accomplished, in spades. I’m just one of many here, I think, that appreciate his advocacy and spirited writing.
I know you well enough via your SBA website/vlogs that you have some spirit in you, as well, in terms of your thoughtful positions on issues that you care about. Good g-d, there are plenty of boring monks; in Bhante Sujato we have an energetic EBT scholar non pareil ( I include Vens. Brahm and Brahmali in this club), a skilled author, and the architect of this game changing Sutta Central, and the teacher of some Dhamma talks on youtube that, with a combination of intellect, humor, and sophistication have elevated Dhamma teaching to a new level, and brought more than a few of us under the EBT Buddhist tent. So, with Bhante’s essay, nearly 450 freakin’ posts later, here we are, all of us interacting, discussing, and with invitations among us kalyana mittas to Skype, to talk, to dialogue, or to just sit together and talk over a frosty Kaliber non-alcoholic beer (0.05 % alcohol…hmmm, precept breaker? ) It’s a good thing.
I’ll repeat what I said before, which is that there is so much that unites all of us, and small bits that perhaps, divide us, or at least create energetic conversation. So, glad you’re visiting with us. Pull up a chair, my friend. and stay a while.
3 Likes
Frankly, I have seen sparse evidence of intellectual rigor or any true spirit of honest intellectual inquiry in this debate. Of course, the traditionally-minded are free to present at any time the proposals or specific claims or results of the open-minded inquiry you have in mind, so that they can then be debated. But really, there hasn’t been much.
And it appears to me that the opportunity for productive debate is severely limited, since the matters about which there is disagreement belong to the realm of faith. Traditionalists will sometimes get bummed out about the very existence of skeptical Buddhist critics of their views, since awareness of that skepticism makes it harder for them to enjoy the peace of mind that comes with adopting a comprehensive faith-based world view that comforts them, and puts the world in the kind of order they would like it to be in. I think many of them would prefer just to be left in peace to practice as they see fit.
The same is mostly true of the secularists. Secularists have no responsibility to distance themselves from anything. What they believe is their own business. Their way of following the Buddha and deriving meaning and a way of practice from the Buddhist texts is their own business. And they are going to keep calling themselves “Buddhists”, whether you like it or not - just like the many hosts of other sects and tendencies in global Buddhism, some of which are quite bizarre.
But, you know, perhaps you can anoint Bhante Sujato the Pontiff of Buddhism, and he can then issue a Bull or something, proscribing the secular Buddhists from the Buddhist world unless they straighten out their act
By your name, I gather you are a westerner by birth, as am I, as is Mr. Koll, as is Bhante Sujato. I sincerely hope westerners like us are not going to be responsible for introducing the classic western spirit of doctrinal obsession and intolerance into Buddhism. The west and its intellectual and religious traditions have been obsessively focused for a few thousand years on doxa - beliefs - and on whether those beliefs are ortho-dox or hetero-dox, or whether they are heresies, or ideologically deviant, or incorrect or what have you.
But the Buddha explicitly said that, as far as the spiritual path goes, beliefs are only for crossing over, an he warned numerous times about debates about views.
Because entrenchments
in views
aren’t easily overcome
when considering what’s grasped
among doctrines,
that’s why
a person embraces or rejects a doctrine—
in light of these very
entrenchments.
Now, one who is cleansed
has no theorized view
about states of becoming
or notanywhere
in the world.
Having abandoned conceit
& illusion,
by what means would he go?
He isn’t involved,
for one who’s involved
enters into disputes
over doctrines.
2 Likes
Don’t try to hard just let go - its the middle way. The Buddha told us to ask questions and seek answers. He did not practice an unskilful form of renunciation. He did not turn his back on the world and take a vow of silence. He spent 45 years teaching and sharing his insights.
2 Likes
It is possible that you are not fully understanding some aspects of the discussion. I have been in this situation before with you - it takes a lot of time and patience to clarify issues and by then you are probably busy with other things. You are welcome to draw your own conclusions but not everyone needs to agree. I guess this is one of those occasions?
My comments are relevant to the opening piece: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True. I cannot make it true - nobody can turn the teachings into the liberating Dhamma. I believe Secular Buddhism can be improved? So it is not a source of erroneous views for those seeking refuge! Secular Buddhism has enormous potential - many have benefitted from its teachings. I am a supporter of Secular Buddhism therefore I do what I can to help it on its way.
There is nothing wrong with ‘constructive’ criticism. No harmful intention has been in play during this discussion. Only honesty and frank discussion between good friends in the Dhamma. May all beings be liberated!
The Buddha woke up under the Bodhi tree after recalling a Jhanic happening in his childhood. From this ‘rediscovery’ his awakening unfolded through the night and was completed when he saw the morning-star.
We can learn the Dhamma from everything we experience. We have many Dhamma teachers in the course of our lives. It is not only the Buddha that can show us the way home.
The Buddha did not wake up as a consequence of his prior asceticism as a renunciate in search of the truth which liberates. The asceticism he practiced before his awakening he rejected completely as wrong-view and wrong-practice. The only thing he learned from this process is how (not) to practice Dhamma.
We all need to know the Buddha’s story of awakening in his own words. There is no need to reinvent the Buddha and his teachings to fit into a Secular mind-set - plain and simple! 
3 Likes
Yes, but he achieved awakening in the years before that, when he was wandering alone, practicing severe asceticism and meditation, and working things out for himself.
2 Likes
The debate is tiresome. It has gone on for 425 comments and no real progress has been made. I doubt significant progress can be made in this area. I’m going to go meditate.
2 Likes
I for one would love that! I joined sutta central to learn more about the Dhamma, not to get insulted for having faith. But hey - you can’t always get what you want.
10 Likes
Yes, agreed.
But some initiative is required to embrace a life of asceticism.
…and uproot wrong views along the way.
But after becoming the sammasambuddha.
1 Like
I think any negative emotion regarding these types of conversations goes against the teaching of the Buddha.
"Now if other people insult, malign, exasperate, & harass a monk [who has discerned this], he discerns that ‘A painful feeling, born of ear-contact, has arisen within me. And that is dependent, not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on contact.’ And he sees that contact is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, consciousness is inconstant. His mind, with the [earth] property as its object/support, leaps up, grows confident, steadfast, & released.
"And if other people attack the monk in ways that are undesirable, displeasing, & disagreeable — through contact with fists, contact with stones, contact with sticks, or contact with knives — the monk discerns that ‘This body is of such a nature that contacts with fists come, contacts with stones come, contacts with sticks come, & contacts with knives come. Now the Blessed One has said, in his exhortation of the simile of the saw [MN 21], “Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding.” So my persistence will be aroused & untiring, my mindfulness established & unconfused, my body calm & unaroused, my mind centered & unified. And now let contact with fists come to this body, let contact with stones, with sticks, with knives come to this body, for this is how the Buddha’s bidding is done.’
"And if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established, he feels apprehensive at that and gives rise to a sense of urgency: ‘It is a loss for me, not a gain; ill-gotten for me, not well-gotten, that when I recollect the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established within me.’ Just as when a daughter-in-law, on seeing her father-in-law, feels apprehensive and gives rise to a sense of urgency [to please him], in the same way, if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established, he feels apprehensive at that and gives rise to a sense of urgency: ‘It is a loss for me, not a gain; ill-gotten for me, not well-gotten, that when I recollect the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is not established within me.’
"But if, in the monk recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha in this way, equanimity based on what is skillful is established, then he is gratified at that. And even to this extent, friends, the monk has accomplished a great deal. MN28
It’s all just words and views, it’s not like anybody is getting stabbed.
For rebirth believers, cultivate the 8-fold path.
For non-rebirth believers, cultivate the 8-fold path, and if you have wrong-view according to some believers, nonetheless establish euthymia:
What you need to develop is the quiet confidence that Seneca called euthymia—”the belief that you’re on the right path and not led astray by the many tracks which cross yours of people who are hopelessly lost.” You’re after something elusive and rare and critical: to not be shaken. If you can accept that your strategy will almost certainly “feel wrong” at some point, you’ll be less likely to ditch it at the critical moment. In fact, you’ll come to know this test as a positive experience that exercises your tolerance for dissonance. link
That’s my 2 cents.
14 Likes
It’s time to close this thread, which has been a demonstration of our collective, and very human, commitment to the Dhamma; whatever we think that is.
@Polarbear, thanks for reminding us of what the Buddha said. This now makes the perfect place for all of this to cease. Thank you everyone.
12 Likes