[Buddha-l] Re: Where does authority for "true" Buddhism come from?

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Benito Carral schreef:

>On Monday, January 30, 2006, Erik Hoogcarspel wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>>Moreover       the      theory      sucks,      the
>>>>rebirth-concsiousness   is   a  conundrum  and  not
>>>>consistent with the anaatmavaada.
>>>>        
>>>>
>
>  
>
>>>It's  obvious  that  you  have  not  understood what
>>>rebirth-consciousnesses are or what anatmavada is.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>Excellent argument, Benito, you made my day!
>>    
>>
>
>   Come   on,   Erik.   Numberless  teachers  over  the
>centuries  (including  the  Buddha)  have not found any
>problem  with  rebirth  and  anatmavada. I myself can't
>find  any problem at all. So if you think that they are
>not    consistent,   it's   obvious   that   you   have
>misunderstood  something. If you are interested, we can
>discuss why you think they are inconsistent.
>
>  
>
This is the fallacy of anonymous authority. I'm afraid that we cannot 
settel the matter by an appeal to authority or democracy. The more 
because in general teachers and guru's are allegic to thinking and 
discussion. There has been some discussion in Buddhist circles as well 
(I'm sorry I cannot produce references at the moment), because the 
rebirth-consciousness looks very much like the aatman of non-buddhist 
schools. It's clear (to me anyway) that the only reason for assuming a 
rebirth-consciousness is to save the theory of rebirth and this is a 
very weak basis for existence.

-- 


Erik


www.xs4all.nl/~jehms