I can only go back to my original point which is that the ultimate reality of the universe is infinitely unknowable, not just a little bit unknowable, but INFINITELY unknowable.

I've seen four basic responses to this challenge:

1) The Buddha's way was to avoid all metaphysical speculation as a waste of time and just focus on what it takes to live a good life. The majority of Buddhism that has come since pretty much ignores the Buddha's advice. ( I'm pretty sure we're grossly violating it with this very discussion!)

2) The "let's figure it all out and explain it in greater and greater detail" school. This includes much of post-Buddha Buddhism, some forms of Yoga, and most systems of metaphysical philosophy. This is what I think many of the sources you quote are trying to do. Interesting enough, it does not include science, which tries to figure things out but rigorously admits the limitations of its knowledge.

3) The religion approach, which believes that some blessed one among us has seen the ultimate reality directly and has conveyed it to the rest of us, be it Jesus or Mohammed or Moses, etc. These systems have no need for logic or proof because they are considered direct revelations from the ultimate reality itself. Many forms of Buddhism have adopted this model in effect, with the Buddha as the blessed one.

4) The ancient Yoga approach, mirrored somewhat by small mystical minorities in each religion and philosophy, which accepts the utter unknowability of ultimate reality and builds a spirituality around the wonder and awe of what we don't know. It also embraces the ideals for good living like those espoused by the Buddha.

These are all valid approaches to the ultimate reality of the universe. It's just a matter of personal preference, I guess.

Thanks again for this most interesting discussion.

Bob Weisenberg http://YogaDemystified.com

Sarnath (also Mrigadava, Migadaya, Rishipattana, Isipatana) is the deer park where Gautama Buddha first taught the Dharma, and where the Buddhist Sangha came into existence through the enlightenment of Kondanna. Sarnath is located 13 kilometres north-east of Varanasi, in Uttar Pradesh, India.

The deer park where the Buddha preached his first sermon is now called Sarnath. It lay forgotten … until a British amateur archaeologist excavated the site in the nineteenth century. He found stupas and a pillar originally erected by emperor Ashoka in the third century BC. The biggest stupa, called Dhamekh, was on the site where the Buddha supposedly gave his first sermon, sitting with the Brahmins from Kapilavastu. Later archaeologists discovered the shrine where the Buddha apparently had sheltered from the rains; they also found monasteries, which seemed to have been destroyed by a great fire. A temple built by the Sri Lankan Buddhist Anagarika Dharmapala now stands in place of the shrine. The ruins of the monasteries lie amid vast green lawns. The grounds also include a deer park and a zoo.
http://www.tanuscraft.com/homecraft/index.php?mai…

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I will add a few comments about my concerns with the Batchelor approach.

Yes, Batchelor references the edict of the Buddha that says one does not speculate but rather one engages the practice and arrives at enlightenment through direct observation.

However, he then immediately violates that edict by avoiding the practice and offering an opinion (speculation) on the very things the Buddha taught such as karma, reincarnation, bardo stages, post-mortem realms, transcendence, etc.

Rather than engaging the practice to discover whether or not these referenced phenomena can be verified and observed, he places the bias of materialism over the teachings and relegates the observations of the Buddha to the status of myth, delusion, or outright deception. He basically argues the Buddha lied when he said he had observed such phenomena and found them to be true. He argues the Buddha could not possibly have made such observations, as we now know they are not possible.

The problem with assigning the teachings, the observations of the Buddha, the label or status of myth is that one then risks inserting bias into the practice. This bias will then operate as an obfuscation that prohibits one from actually observing things as they are. One has inadvertently set up an automatic barrier to enlightenment. When one practices, one is stopped at the point where a bias or speculation has been inserted.

In essence, by assuming the Buddha's observations were myth or delusion, one inserts a lie with regard to the true nature of things that one hopes to discover through the practice. This is particularly diabolical as the lie or bias that one has inserted aligns directly with attachment and clinging. That which one intends to overcome through the practice (attachment) is strengthened by the a priori bias. Essentially, one begins the practice by agreeing to the very dynamics of attachment that keep illusion (samsara) firmly in place.

Anyway, that's my brief soapbox presentation for the day.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Duis rhoncus elit eu ante tristique non consectetur neque aliquam. Quisque vulputate, odio eu dignissim molestie, elit sem placerat massa, ac mattis lorem erat in dolor. Ut tincidunt accumsan quam, ut ultricies justo porttitor accumsan. Maecenas pellentesque auctor ante non faucibus. Phasellus augue dui, vulputate ac suscipit vel, sollicitudin at elit. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Morbi quis lectus sit amet lacus malesuada scelerisque. Nam congue aliquet sagittis. In felis erat, vehicula at faucibus eu, scelerisque a sapien. Morbi viverra condimentum ante ut porta. Nunc ultrices porttitor erat vitae facilisis. Suspendisse sagittis consectetur ante placerat auctor. Donec faucibus interdum mi, in ullamcorper nunc molestie a. Donec nulla enim, sodales non placerat et, tempor quis sem. Praesent ultrices massa in diam posuere ut lacinia est rutrum.

In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Morbi semper pharetra enim, ac lobortis turpis pharetra non. Quisque vel quam dolor, vel rutrum lacus. Phasellus quis molestie enim. Duis lectus risus, placerat id ornare quis, elementum sit amet tortor. Nam interdum ornare sem, vitae dapibus turpis sollicitudin et. Nam aliquet feugiat risus, eget cursus mauris gravida ut. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Sed et leo tellus. Integer mattis condimentum tellus, sit amet feugiat risus iaculis in. Sed a nunc id tellus pellentesque varius nec non metus. Nullam laoreet laoreet interdum. Praesent nisi diam, ultrices eget malesuada quis, commodo sed ipsum. Nullam volutpat vehicula fermentum. Cras purus mi, euismod vel convallis vel, cursus id elit. In eleifend egestas eleifend.

Cras sed libero at mi posuere laoreet. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Suspendisse posuere diam vitae tellus egestas lacinia. Cras sed elementum ipsum. Duis euismod quam diam, quis feugiat neque. Phasellus nisl lectus, lacinia at tempus a, ultricies et nibh. Nullam ac tellus erat. Integer in magna quam, non porta leo. Aliquam tempor nunc eget nulla sollicitudin vel dignissim orci varius. Cras vehicula feugiat felis nec viverra. Cras condimentum tempor massa sit amet feugiat. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Nunc in ante vel dolor venenatis mollis ut vitae lectus. Pellentesque imperdiet turpis tristique lectus viverra eu vehicula ipsum ullamcorper. Duis adipiscing pharetra bibendum. Quisque nisl eros, pharetra in iaculis id, pretium et odio.

Curabitur quis neque nec turpis accumsan adipiscing id at ligula. Cras mi magna, mollis sed lobortis quis, aliquam non ligula. Vivamus venenatis imperdiet malesuada. Ut vel mauris urna. Praesent fermentum velit vitae arcu eleifend scelerisque. Quisque quis augue a mi consectetur sollicitudin. Morbi ullamcorper rutrum nibh, id rutrum ligula molestie feugiat. Nam sodales malesuada lacus, eu aliquam elit viverra fermentum. Aenean varius consequat tellus, id pellentesque nunc fermentum eu. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Curabitur tincidunt dictum felis, id malesuada libero lacinia et. Nam dignissim luctus nunc, sit amet fringilla massa euismod eleifend. Curabitur nec eros lectus. Suspendisse vel quam ut felis feugiat ultricies et non risus. Suspendisse massa nulla, tempus id pulvinar a, adipiscing ac metus. Sed mollis lacinia orci id varius. Integer aliquam malesuada lectus. Cras elementum, felis a porta varius, sapien metus pellentesque erat, eget adipiscing mi odio volutpat felis.

Morbi quis purus felis, luctus convallis eros. Aliquam commodo aliquam lorem, ac rutrum magna ullamcorper in. Fusce bibendum ante vitae tortor cursus hendrerit. Suspendisse venenatis varius malesuada. Pellentesque imperdiet metus et mi bibendum et consectetur tellus semper. Sed sed augue tellus, non porta sem. Maecenas et aliquet libero. Fusce sem mauris, ultricies et mollis non, faucibus vitae massa. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. In fermentum nisi sit amet risus scelerisque condimentum. In lectus elit, blandit ac porta in, euismod vitae tortor. Phasellus sed diam massa. Donec egestas porttitor eleifend. Praesent placerat tristique eleifend. Nulla fringilla arcu non tellus cursus iaculis. Aliquam ultricies consectetur erat, quis tristique nunc cursus malesuada. Etiam eget nisl eros.

Where will you publish your article? Are you talking about Elephant? I think that would be a valuable contribution. There have been so many important ideas expressed in these comments. I would be could to digest them into an article which would both preserve the ideas and draw others into the discussion.

Bob Weisenberg
http://YogaDemystified.com

This used to feel like a stretch, but it no longer does because my definition is the same as that of many of the ancient Yoga sages. That's why I feel I've found my spiritual home in the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita.

Bob Weisenberg
http://YogaDemystified.com

It's interesting to me that Batchelor, in many respects, is in the "conventional" camp of Buddhism, but in narrowing it down more, his version of Buddhism is probably in the "mulitplistic" worldview of Spiral Dynamics (http://16p.utnij.net). The Dalai Lama, who also falls into the conventional zone, is probably teaching a more "relativistic" version of the dharma, being inclusive of Christianity and other faiths in his teachings (which is not to say that he holds this worldview, only that he is teaching from/to that worldview, which is why so many "absolutist" worldview folks think his teachings on peace and compassion are simply too weak).

On the other hand, His Holiness also teaches some very absolutist stuff when it comes to the cultural values of Buddhism, especially on gay marriage (he suggests bad karma accrues for gay sex). Again, I'm not sure if this is the teachings or his values.

These types of things are why people like me, and maybe this is true for Batchelor too, seek to separate the cultural "baggage" from the timeless dharma.

Thoughts?

Peace,
Bill