[Buddha-l] Re: Core teachings

[Jamie Hubbard]

Franz Metcalf wrote:

> Jamie et al.,
> You wrote, rather scandalously,
>
>> without rebirth . . .(and therefore the cessation of rebirth) the 
>> goal becomes "merely" the cessation of suffering.
>>
>> It leads, I think,... to lots of other interesting questions, the 
>> answers to most of which will make any reasonable person leave the 
>> cushion, the cave, and the temple alone, except for the pleasure it 
>> brings one.
>
> I agree, and would reply, "and about time, too!" Let meditation remain 
> important and remain pleasurable--and also remain just the last of 
> eight factors on the path. Perhaps, as you go on to suggest, after 
> getting up off the cushion, Buddhists will use all that extra time in 
> "ethical action and compassionate efforts to help others."
>
> Where is the loss, except for those who need a holistic and insulated 
> belief system in which to practice? They may be afraid, very afraid, 
> but they still have their faith; *they* don't have to reject rebirth. 
> The mere fact of *my* rejecting rebirth, however, does not mean my own 
> path is worthless or even non-soteriological in its way (as they 
> would, no doubt, assert). Nor does it mean it's not "Buddhism," 
> whatever that might be or become. And though this sort of Buddhism may 
> bleed out into the larger world, potentially weakening the tradition, 
> yet it gives to the world that vital substance. I think that's a fair 
> exchange.

Well, of course this sort of changing the meaning of the terms and 
thereby changing Buddhisms has always been the historical fact, no? And 
so I find the lack of interest in rebirth among western Buddhists very 
interesting. . . my only point is that without rebirth, the idea of the 
goal changes as well (if nirvana = elimination of suffering, then a 
Buddha is somebody who doesn't suffer), and once the goal changes then 
the practice changes too (stress reduction, Prozac, bourbon and a nap, a 
good novel, whatever). When I put the scare quotes around "merely" I 
meant to suggest that, as w/ Richard, I don't really find the cessation 
of suffering to be trivial in any sense--indeed, the massive suffering 
of our world and all the worlds around us and before us is real, real,  
real and truly heart-rending. And so I don't at all mind a critical look 
at the what in the world in might mean to be a Buddha. As you noted, it 
might lead to more ethical action and less concern about transcendence, 
the EEEE's (remember that one???), and other such distractions. 
Actually, that is what most of my experience in Buddhist Asia teaches 
me--its more the Western practitioners that are working so really hard 
at Enlightenment. But hey--different folks reduce stress (suffering) in 
different ways, and if working really hard to become a Buddha works for 
somebody, well, it ain't me gonna gainsay it.

Jamie