Ontology vs Soteriology

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
alfa
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:43 pm
Location: India

Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by alfa »

Friends :smile:

When I was young, ontology mattered a lot more.

Now that I am getting older, soteriology has taken prime importance.

All the details give me a headache, and the only question I keep asking myself is: what is the way out?

Have you had a similar experience?

At some point, you stop worrying about the ontological status of self etc. and instead think only of liberation.

Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Alfa,
alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am At some point, you stop worrying about the ontological status of self etc. and instead think only of liberation.
Good for you. :thumbsup:
alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
What "practice"?

The Noble Eightfold Path is what is important.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by Srilankaputra »

yes. I used to think science might hold all the answers. Then i realised or may be i read it some where, science is a process of ever refining saññas or mental models of the world. Scientists still don't know how far down or up the rabbit hole goes.

'Ontology vs Soteriology' ; I would say whats peaceful is going beyond both. Whatever saññas are simply saññas. They arise and cease with contact.

Wish you all success in all your endeavours. Goodbye!
paul
Posts: 1512
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by paul »

alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
Practice is the most important, but to do that the practitioner has to understand the noble eightfold path, so knowledge contributes. I recommend "The Noble Eightfold Path" by Bikkhu Bodhi.
budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by budo »

Practice and Knowledge are one in the same.
"And how is one the type of person who both thunders and rains? There is the case where a person has mastered the Dhamma: dialogues... question & answer sessions. He discerns, as it actually is present, that 'This is stress.' ... 'This is the origination of stress.' ... 'This is the cessation of stress.' ... 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' This is the type of person who both thunders and rains. This type of person, I tell you, is like the thunderhead that both thunders and rains.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Practice is like throwing a dart, Theory is like knowing where to throw the dart. You need both.

The only person who can have practice without a prior theory is the Buddha or Pacceka Buddha, but note even he attains his theory from a prior Buddha by recollecting his past lives with previous Buddhas and hearing the Dhamma that way.
User avatar
JamesTheGiant
Posts: 2147
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:41 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by JamesTheGiant »

James starts by looking up the meaning of Ontology and Soteriology...
I used to know what those words meant, back when I got a degree in philosophy.
Not any more, now I just follow the path.
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by SamKR »

alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am
Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
Knowledge (knowledge that is relevant to awakening) is an aspect of practice, and practice may lead to more clear knowledge. Practice is not some mechanical activity - it starts and ends with knowledge.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by Mkoll »

alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Friends :smile:

When I was young, ontology mattered a lot more.

Now that I am getting older, soteriology has taken prime importance.

All the details give me a headache, and the only question I keep asking myself is: what is the way out?

Have you had a similar experience?

At some point, you stop worrying about the ontological status of self etc. and instead think only of liberation.

Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
Yes. Renowned teachers teach this, not to mention the Buddha himself. He repeatedly says "Meditate, do not be negligent, lest you regret it later." Of course, a baseline intellectual understanding of what to practice and how to approach it is needed. But beyond that, the work itself is the only thing that generates real results.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Circle5
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by Circle5 »

Buddha said there are 2 types of disciples: those that are dragged forward by wisdom and those that are dragged by tranquility. A person doing good with wisdom will then start doing better in other areas too. On the other hand, a person doing good with his overall traits will slowly start gaining more wisdom over time.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by Pulsar »

Whenever I bump into the word ontology discussed on a buddhist forum it bugs me. My own annoyance is based on my lack of grasp on how it relates to Buddha's doctrine.
One definition of ontology on the WWW is as given below. For Buddha there was neither being nor non-being, SN 12.15, Kaccanagotta. Did Buddha ever consider Ontology relevant? Is there a sutta that says so?
Ontology:
1.
the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
2.
a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations between them.
"what's new about our ontology is that it is created automatically from large datasets"
Regards :candle:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Pulsar,
Pulsar wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:48 pm Whenever I bump into the word ontology discussed on a buddhist forum it bugs me. My own annoyance is based on my lack of grasp on how it relates to Buddha's doctrine.
One definition of ontology on the WWW is as given below. For Buddha there was neither being nor non-being, SN 12.15, Kaccanagotta. Did Buddha ever consider Ontology relevant? Is there a sutta that says so?
Ontology:
1.
the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
2.
a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations between them.
"what's new about our ontology is that it is created automatically from large datasets"
Regards :candle:
It's often mentioned in the context of pointing out that ontology is not what the Buddha taught.

It's a way to characterise the views of those who (despite SN 12.15 etc.) are committed to views about existence and non-existence, and retrofit their beliefs about existence and non-existence into their presentations of Dhamma.

So, no, he never spoke of it as being relevant, but you could argue that he explicitly called it out as being irrelevant. See: The offense of lokāyata (metaphysics/cosmology).

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by Pulsar »

Retro wrote
It's often mentioned in the context of pointing out that ontology is not what the Buddha taught.
Brilliant, it sank in.
With love :candle:
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by SteRo »

alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
No. One should not assent to the non-evident.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by mjaviem »

SteRo wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 6:13 pm
alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
No. One should not assent to the non-evident.
MN 117 (B. Bodhi) wrote:...
“And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions? ‘There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions.
...
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Ontology vs Soteriology

Post by SteRo »

mjaviem wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 6:38 pm
SteRo wrote: Thu Mar 03, 2022 6:13 pm
alfa wrote: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:39 am Therefore, the question is: is practice more important than knowledge?
No. One should not assent to the non-evident.
MN 117 (B. Bodhi) wrote:...
“And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions? ‘There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions.
...
:?:
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
Post Reply