[Buddha-l] The words of the Buddha

[[DPD Web] Shen Shi'an]

Hmmm... If you think of it carefully, rebirth is the only "theory" of
the "origin" and dynamics of life (and death) that has some proof (if it
counts as proof to you). You can research on Dr. Ian Stevenson's (still
at Virginia University I think) work on this. He has done extensive
research into the subject for more than 20 years - with startling
evidence from many real-life cases. Rebirth also explains "unanswered"
issues like how children can be so different from their parents (if they
created them) and how children are born unequal (if there is a fair
creator). There must be a cause, and in science (and spirituality),
absolutely nothing is random. 

Rebirth is of course tied with the dynamics of karma - which is somewhat
natural causality on a moral plane. The funny thing is, most folks do
believe in karma to some extent - because if not, surely, the world
would be in moral chaos. We might think we can easily break all the
precepts (and thus, human law) and all get away with it. Most of us
refrain because we are wary of the consequences. Even if human law does
not nab us, moral laws might - eg. we might be racked with guilt and
fear... that's "bad karma" bearing fruit.

Amituofo, shi'an
www.moonpointer.com 
www.TheDailyEnlightenment.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Zeuschner [mailto:rbzeuschner at adelphia.net] 
Sent: Monday, 14 May, 2007 2:04 PM
To: Buddhist discussion forum
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] The words of the Buddha

Thanks for a very nice reply.
To expand, I do not find any reason whatsoever to accept claims of 
rebirth, and the so-called "law of karma" seems highly doubtful.
How could one empirically test these apparently metaphysical claims?

[DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote:
> It doesn't take faith to be agreeable with what already makes sense.
At
> the end of the day, the Buddha expects us "to empirically test his
> teachings" before blindly abiding by any - this teaching itself is
easy
> to have "faith" in - for its sensibility. 
> 
> The Buddha's teachings are thus doubly "insured" with the Kalama
spirit
> - we can agree to disagree with the Buddha's teachings - including
this
> teaching about agreeing to disagree. Neat! 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Zeuschner [mailto:rbzeuschner at adelphia.net] 
> Sent: Monday, 14 May, 2007 1:49 PM
> To: Buddhist discussion forum
> Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] The words of the Buddha
> 
> It seems to me that if I accept something as true simply because the 
> Buddha is supposed to have said it, then I have faith in the Buddhist 
> religion.
> 
> [DPD Web] Shen Shi'an wrote:
>> Unacademically but spiritually speaking, Buddhists are supposed to
>> believe the Buddha taught that truth should be accepted wherever it
is
>> found. 
> 
> On the other hand, if I accept the claim only after having empirically

> tested it and found it correct (Kalamas), then am I a philosopher?
> In this case I do not have faith in the Buddha's words simply because 
> the Buddha said so.
> 
> It is for this reason that I am not a Buddhist. I do not have blind 
> faith ... in fact I can't abide blind faith.
> I think of myself as a Buddhologist.
> 
> Bob
> Dept. of Philosophy
> 

_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l