Path: ultra.sonic.net!news From: i@no.self (!) Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.buddhism,alt.religion.buddhism,alt.philosophy.zen,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.zen Subject: Re: Karma and Zen Date: 15 Mar 1999 13:05:22 -0800 Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net Lines: 142 Message-ID: <7cjsmi$7qr@bolt.sonic.net> References: <7c99ve$6oi@bolt.sonic.net> <19990311171555.09475.00000907@ng-fu1.aol.com> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com NNTP-Posting-Host: bolt.sonic.net X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.1 (NOV) Xref: ultra.sonic.net talk.religion.misc:281017 talk.religion.buddhism:74156 alt.philosophy.zen:21461 alt.magick.tyagi:16276 alt.zen:127906 !: |# yes, the buddha Gautama is well-known to have been completely |# silent regarding rebirth and future lives.... kdorje@aol.com (Kdorje): | I have never heard this before. What is the source of this statement? we were talking about the reality of karma and rebirth. I was thinking (perhaps more expansively than is warranted) of what are called the 'arvyakata' or unanswered questions as have been described in texts like the *Majjhima Vikaya* and in this I may have overgeneralized yet I think there is a point to be made that the buddha Gautama can be said to have been "effectively silent" on the subject of the reality of rebirth by virtue of his supposed contention of the truth of the principle of 'anatman' or 'no Self' and his refusal to take 'sides' between Eternal and Absolute perspectives when asked to confirm or deny the absolute destiny of the Buddhist (for those who contend that one may 'become an arhat' or 'achieve the state of the bodhisattva'), the buddha Gautama replied with effective silence on the matter In one early text {*Majjhima Nikaya* (Th.); (tr. by I.B. Horner), *Middle Length Sayings*, 3 vols., London, PTS, 1954-9; I, 403}, the Buddha says that to believe in [the principles of rebirth and karma], and so live live a moral life, will lead to a good rebirth *if* rebirths exist. If rebirths do not exist, nothing will have been lost, and the person will in any case have been praised by wise people. The 'best bet' is thus to believe in and act on these principles [what has been referred to in an analysis of Christian religion as Pascal's Wager -- !]. ______________________________________________________ _An Introduction to Buddhism: Teachings, History and Practices_, by Peter Harvey, Cambridge University Press, 1990; p. 44. ------------------------------------------------------ the *Majjhima Nikaya* includes a great deal of discussion concerning what are commonly considered these 'unanswered questions' (as they are described as 'not tending to edification'), about which it is said therein that the buddha Gautama did not instruct. these issues were those such as whether an arhat or saint exists or does not exist after death, whether or not the world is eternal, etc. and here is a section from the *Samyutta Nikaya* (ed. L. Feer, 5 vols., PTS., 1884-98; II, 19-21) to illustrate my point about the 'effective silence' on the matter of the identity of the sufferer and the cause of suffering (and thus the reality of rebirth): "Is suffering wrought by oneself, good Gotama?" "No, Kassapa." "Then by another?" "No." "Then by both oneself and another?" "No, Kassapa." "Well then, has the suffering that has been wrought neither by myself nor by another come to me by chance?" "No, Kassapa." "Then, is there not suffering?" "No, Kassapa, it is not that there is not suffering. For there *is* suffering." "It is not that I do not know suffering, do not see it. I know it, I see it." "To all my questions, good Gotama, you have answered 'No', and you have said that you know suffering and see it. Lord, let the Lord explain suffering to me, let him teach me suffering." "Whoso says, 'He who does (a deed) is he who experiences (its result)', is thereby saying that from the being's beginning suffering was wrought by (the being) himself -- this amounts to the Eternity-view. Whoso says, 'One does (a deed), another experiences (the result)', is thereby saying that when a being is smitten by feeling the suffering was wrought by another -- this amounts to Annihilation-view. Avoiding both these dead-ends, Kassapa, the Tathagata teaches Dhamma by the mean: conditioned by ignorance are the karma-formations... *and so on* [reproducing the 12-Link Chain of Causation aka the arising of Suffering from Ignorance of Impermanence -- !]. Thus is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. By the utter stopping of that very ignorance is the stopping of the karma-formations... *and so on* [breaking the links in the Chain]. Thus is the stopping of this whole mass of suffering. ________________________________________________________ quoted in _Buddhist Texts Through the Ages_, ed. by Edward Conze (in collaboration with others), Harper Torchbooks, 1964; 68-9. -------------------------------------------------------- that is, while the process of suffering arising out of ignorance is described, the reality of of karma and quite specifically the IDENTITY of the sufferer is negated as residing on either side of the Middle Way (or "mean"). to me this indicates that the issue of the reality of 'rebirth', given the principle of atman, is being avoided as to assessment in favor of describing two false extremes one of the main founders of the Madyamika school of Mahayana Buddhism elaborates on this further when describing his philosophy of 'sunyata', all suppositions of the continuity of the self from life to life (indeed from moment to moment) having been reduced to absurdity through the rigor of his logic without the foundation of the atman to substantiate the rebirth process, we cannot indeed say that anything real continues beyond bodily death. the notions of karma and rebirth which I am here disputing and claim that Gautama was effectively silent concerning were those which decided BETWEEN these Absolute and Eternal perspectives on the cosmological issue if you can provide some source which DOES decide between them (in whatever direction) I would not be surprised, but I had thought it rather commonly presumed that Gautama didn't resolve the issue via instruction, preferring that the monk examine hirself as a method of coming to the correct conclusion through practice rather than through didactics am I real? do I continue from moment to moment? see yourself -- tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com; http://www.abyss.com/tokus (emailed replies may be posted); cc me your replies see also http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatSPELLS.html