[Buddha-l] Re: Multi-cause vs single-cause

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 13:23 +0100, Benito Carral wrote:

>    I  like to read it in a Spanish translation from the Pali and
> it  is  not confusing at all. It is only that is not consistent.
> It's like the liar paradox.

The Kalama Sutta is nothing at all like the liar's paradox. It would be
like the liar's paradox only if the sutta said something like never to
trust suttas. But that is not what it says. It says not to be swayed
only because someone is skilled in quoting suttas. (In other words,
don't trust people like me!) But the advice does not end there, for it
goes on to say that one should judge for oneself AND pay attention to
the council of wise people. 

>    G-d  is  not a distracting thought for me, Richard, maybe you
> are allergic to Him, I can't know.

One cannot be allergic to something that does not exist, so it is not
God I am allergic to. (And why do you think God is a male? But I
digress?) What I may be allergic to is people who talk about God at
every drop of the hat, and this is only because I live in a country that
is being hounded on a daily basis by right-wing extremists, who insist
on cramming God-talk into every conversation. Buddha-l, I think, is a
place where people should be able to spend a few moments without being
reminded of the unpleasantness of those who are forcing the issue of
God.

-- 
Richard Hayes
Department of Philosophy
University of New Mexico