[Buddha-l] Being unable to imagine dying [confused]

Jackhat1 at aol.com Jackhat1 at aol.com
Wed Jun 9 15:01:20 MDT 2010

It would help if you would delineate your response more from the message  
you are responding to. I get confused.  I enjoy your comments and  thinking.
In a message dated 6/9/2010 3:49:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
lemmett at talk21.com writes:

>Dan,>>>You keep devising elaborate ways to reassure  yourself that there 
is some 
sort of continuance after death, as if it were  a matter of outsmarting a 
certain logical puzzle. And then you ask others  (e.g., listmembers) for 
confirmation and reassurance. Logical tricks and  banking on "ineffability" 
or "inconceivability" to act as tacit guarantees  for what you want them to 
signify and provide won't get the job  done
>>>>It's not obvious to me that you are right, just like  Joanna and others 
in saying that I don't understand what I read.>>I have  in deed considered 
whether this alleged inconceivability of death guarantees  continuance but 
that's not my concern now because I can accept that it is  un-Buddhist to 
have views on a person continuing or not. >>What I am  trying to ask is whether 
the belief that annihilation is inconceivable is not  Buddhist<<. Do you 
mean that trying to reconcile inconceivability  with Buddhist doctrine is 
necessarily atma-drsti or if the idea of  inconceivability itself is atma-drsti? 
Or is that question itself  atma-drsti?>Sorry if I've misunderstood what 
you mean but if not I have  nothing else to ask.>Not that I'm about to say 
that death's conceivability  is entirely irrelevant, just I suppose to anything 
Buddhist.>Best  wishes

More information about the buddha-l mailing list