Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
SarathW
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by SarathW » Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:17 am

This appears to be the position of many "secular Buddhists" such as Stephen Batchelor.
How does a secular Buddhist understand Anatta without realising Kamma (vipaka) and rebirth?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by salayatananirodha » Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:28 am

SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:17 am
This appears to be the position of many "secular Buddhists" such as Stephen Batchelor.
How does a secular Buddhist understand Anatta without realising Kamma (vipaka) and rebirth?
Quite poorly. If at all
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6266
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:04 am

SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:17 am
This appears to be the position of many "secular Buddhists" such as Stephen Batchelor.
How does a secular Buddhist understand Anatta without realising Kamma (vipaka) and rebirth?
Quite easily. There is no discernible permanent or enduring self; and there are no results of human action other than those which are known to empirical science. Many materialists who think about the nature of "self" and personhood would have such a perspective.

SarathW
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by SarathW » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:16 am

There is no discernible permanent or enduring self
What secular Buddhist believe in after death?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6266
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:25 am

SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:16 am
There is no discernible permanent or enduring self
What secular Buddhist believe in after death?
It varies; secular Buddhists would be keen to point out that they don't all believe the same things. But many would say that the question of post mortem experience or existence should be simply set aside, as unknowable or even nonsensical. The point is that it is perfectly possible to maintain that there is no self or atta in most of the accepted senses of the term, and also to not believe in rebirth or kamma-vipaka extending beyond one life.

SarathW
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by SarathW » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:51 am

also to not believe in rebirth or kamma-vipaka extending beyond one life.
That is Nihilism.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

sentinel
Posts: 2691
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by sentinel » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:59 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:25 am
SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:16 am
There is no discernible permanent or enduring self
What secular Buddhist believe in after death?
It varies; secular Buddhists would be keen to point out that they don't all believe the same things. But many would say that the question of post mortem experience or existence should be simply set aside, as unknowable or even nonsensical. The point is that it is perfectly possible to maintain that there is no self or atta in most of the accepted senses of the term, and also to not believe in rebirth or kamma-vipaka extending beyond one life.
If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ? What is the difference ? Whether self or no self for 1 life model , no rebirth , we can just forget about cultivations !
Not making sense , at least to me .
No way is the way

SarathW
Posts: 13536
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by SarathW » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:42 am

If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ?
You can have a happy and stress-free life.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6266
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:14 am

James Tan wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:59 am

If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ? What is the difference ? Whether self or no self for 1 life model , no rebirth , we can just forget about cultivations !
Not making sense , at least to me .
Well, to the extent that secular Buddhists "train", the answer is presumably as SarathW says: to gain relief from suffering in this life. Stephen Batchelor expresses this in terms of human "flourishing"; we follow the Buddha's teachings in order that we may live better and more fully. The same applies to any endeavour undertaken by Humanists. They don't neglect the alleviation of suffering and the cultivation of goodness just because they think that individuals are terminated by physical death. They continue with medicine and art and morality, notwithstanding.

sentinel
Posts: 2691
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by sentinel » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:33 am

SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:42 am
If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ?
You can have a happy and stress-free life.
I can have a happy and stress free life without training also .
No way is the way

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6266
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:05 pm

James Tan wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:33 am
SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:42 am
If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ?
You can have a happy and stress-free life.
I can have a happy and stress free life without training also .
Then maybe secular Buddhism is not for you. It's for people who wish to benefit from certain parts of the teaching which they consider relevant, without buying into the whole supernatural package.

User avatar
_anicca_
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:44 pm

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by _anicca_ » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:45 pm

You could, but it wouldn't have it's full depth or impact. It's the same with most other things in Buddhism, once you remove rebirth and kamma.

It then becomes a secular therapy.
"A virtuous monk, Kotthita my friend, should attend in an appropriate way to the five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self."

:buddha1:

http://vipassanameditation.asia

justindesilva
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by justindesilva » Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:54 pm

James Tan wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:33 am
SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:42 am
If there is only 1 life , why want to Invest so much in trainings ?
You can have a happy and stress-free life.
I can have a happy and stress free life without training also .
Recently an incident of a cruel killing of a leopard shown on TV showed the killer taking the dead carcus on his shoulders beaming with joy. Next poya day a monk reminded this incident in his sermon and explained that his rejoice of this kill is an example of his ignorance. Had he been knowledgeable of a next life and the effect of kamma ( better said as kamma vipaka) he, the killer, would not be rejoicing . If not anicca , he was not even aware of dukka. He was not aware that he was illusioned. Had he been aware of rebirth and kamma , let alone , anicca dukka anatma, he wouldnt harm even an insect.
The budda damma cannot be understood or followed , without understanding , Dependant origination( paticca samuppada) which emphasises on rebirth ( bhava) and kamma ( sankara).
Paticca samuppada vibhanga sutta explains cessation of suffering by cessation of kamma vipaka ( sankara) and following ten conditions which runs along samsara , that is rebirth.

sentinel
Posts: 2691
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by sentinel » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:11 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:05 pm
James Tan wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:33 am
SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:42 am

You can have a happy and stress-free life.
I can have a happy and stress free life without training also .
Then maybe secular Buddhism is not for you. It's for people who wish to benefit from certain parts of the teaching which they consider relevant, without buying into the whole supernatural package.
Well , the secularist could have look at it this way , human being already is a supernatural being . Why ? Comparing to the ants for example we are Super being .
No way is the way

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 649
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Can we teach Anicca, Dukkha , Anatta without the teaching of rebirth and Kamma?

Post by salayatananirodha » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:49 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:04 am
SarathW wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:17 am
This appears to be the position of many "secular Buddhists" such as Stephen Batchelor.
How does a secular Buddhist understand Anatta without realising Kamma (vipaka) and rebirth?
Quite easily. There is no discernible permanent or enduring self; and there are no results of human action other than those which are known to empirical science. Many materialists who think about the nature of "self" and personhood would have such a perspective.
"Ananda, if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of eternalism [the view that there is an eternal, unchanging soul]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of annihilationism [the view that death is the annihilation of consciousness]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?"

"No, lord."

"And if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self I used to have now not exist?'"

- SN 44.10

As you see, neither the existence of self nor the non-existence of self are declared by the tathāgata.

"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness....
- SN 12.15

"There are some contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view: 'In acting or getting others to act, in mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in torturing or getting others to torture, in inflicting sorrow or in getting others to inflict sorrow, in tormenting or getting others to torment, in intimidating or getting others to intimidate, in taking life, taking what is not given, breaking into houses, plundering wealth, committing burglary, ambushing highways, committing adultery, speaking falsehood — one does no evil. If with a razor-edged disk one were to turn all the living beings on this earth to a single heap of flesh, a single pile of flesh, there would be no evil from that cause, no coming of evil. Even if one were to go along the right bank of the Ganges, killing and getting others to kill, mutilating and getting others to mutilate, torturing and getting others to torture, there would be no evil from that cause, no coming of evil. Even if one were to go along the left bank of the Ganges, giving and getting others to give, making sacrifices and getting others to make sacrifices, there would be no merit from that cause, no coming of merit. Through generosity, self-control, restraint, and truthful speech there is no merit from that cause, no coming of merit.'
- MN 60

I would like to let the suttas speak for themselves. If I need to, I can try further argumentation. The implications of certain wrong views is incorrect understanding of not-self, impermanence and suffering. Death is impermanent, and so there is not the complete cessation of suffering; death arises from a cause, so does suffering. Everything that arises from causes is suffering, everything that is suffering is not fit to regard as oneself. Are there other secularists who don't adhere to such materialist doctrine I refute? I assume the default position to be standard.
Btw, assuming there is not by what is not observed is not science; it's dogma.
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], mikenz66, SarathW and 135 guests