BlackBird wrote:I'm one of those non-mahaviharan Theravadans. No Abhidhamma or flux or 3-life-time interpretation of dependent arising for me.
So, you accept the 2-lives interpretation of DA?
David N. Snyder wrote:Hi greenjuice,
I get the impression from your posts that you are having some issues with the Theravada concepts of anatta, nibbana. You also appear to like the Pali Canon and want something close to the original teachings. Nothing wrong with that, I am sure there a number of people with similar issues.
Well, I was a Christian until I started being sceptical and went agnostic on pretty much all questions. After reading a lot of philosophical works, and having contemplated a lot about pretty much everything, based on purely cognitive rational inquiry I came to hold views similar to Hinduism and Buddhism. The important part of those views is of course ethics, and Pali canon is the only teaching that I found that is accordance with what I consider correct ethics, so that's a big part of why I'm into Theravada, even though I am not a Theravadin, and my other views are most likely looked down upon as false by pretty much all Theravadins.
And then when you make more progress along the Path, you will either confirm those pudgalavādin views or accept anatta fully; through experience.
I'm not so much inclined to accept pudgalavadin views, as much a view that is closer to Jainism/ Hinduism, although I could agree with what Buddha says in the suttas, being that he does leave room to also hold such a view.