[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.
jack
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