Why we argue (Parable of the Blind Men)

John D. Ireland (translator), Wisdom Quarterly edit, Inspired Utterances (Ud. 6.4)

Buddhist novice meditating above the tangled canopy (Mattravel/Flickr.com)

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at the multi-millionaire's monastery.

At that time there were a number of recluses and brahmins, wanderers of various sects, living around Savatthi. They were of various views, of various beliefs, of various opinions. And they relied for their support [by reasoning] based on their various views.

• There were some recluses and brahmins who asserted and held this view: "The world is eternal; only this is true, any other (view) is false."
• There were some recluses and brahmins who asserted: "The world is not eternal; only this is true, any other (view) is false."
• There were some who asserted: "The world is finite...
• The world is infinite...
• The life-principle and the body are the same...
• The life-principle and the body are different...
• The Tathagata [person who has attained liberation from samsara, such as the Buddha] exists beyond death [of the body]...
• The Tathagata does not exist beyond death...
• The Tathagata both exists and does not exist beyond death...
• The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist beyond death; only this is true, any other (view) is false."

And they lived quarrelsome, disputing, and wrangling, wounding one another with verbal darts, saying:

• "Dharma [liberating truth] is like this
• Dharma is not like that!
• Dharma is not like this
• Dharma is like that!"

Then a number of Buddhist monastics, having put on their robes in the forenoon and taken their bowls and outer cloaks, entered Savatthi for almsfood. Having walked in Savatthi for almsfood and returned after the meal, they approached the Buddha, prostrated themselves, sat down to one side, and said:

"At present, venerable sir, there are a number of recluses and brahmins, wanderers of various sects, living around Savatthi. They are of various views... saying: 'Dharma is like this!... Dharma is like that!'"

[The Buddha replied:] "The wanderers of other sects, disciples, are blind, not seeing. They do not know what is [karmically] beneficial [in terms of practice now and future results from profitable and unprofitable actions willed, performed, and accumulated]; they do not know what is harmful. They do not know what is Dharma; they do not know what is non-Dharma.

"Not knowing what is beneficial and what is harmful, not knowing what is Dharma and what is non-Dharma, they are quarrelsome... saying: 'Dharma is like this!... Dharma is like that!'

"Formerly, disciples, there was a certain king in this very city of Savatthi. And that king addressed a man: 'Come now, my good man, bring together all those persons in Savatthi who have been blind from birth.'

"'Yes, your majesty,' that man replied, and after detaining all the blind people in Savatthi, he approached the king and said, 'All the blind people in Savatthi have been brought together, your majesty.'

"'Now, my good man, show the blind people an elephant.'

"'Very well, your majesty,' the man replied to the king, and he presented an elephant to the blind people, saying, 'This, blind people, is an elephant.'

The blind men examine an elephant (jainworld.com)

"To some of the blind people he presented the head of the elephant, saying, 'This is an elephant.' To some he presented an ear of the elephant, saying, 'This is an elephant.' To some he presented a tusk... the trunk... the body... the foot... the hindquarters... the tail... the tuft at the end of the tail, saying, 'This is an elephant.'

"Then, disciples, the man, having shown the elephant to the blind people, went to the king and said, 'The blind people have been shown the elephant, your majesty. Now do as you see fit.' Then the king approached those blind people and said, 'Have you been shown the elephant?'

"'Yes, your majesty, we have been shown the elephant.'

"'Tell me, blind people, what is an elephant like?'

"Those blind people who had been shown the head of the elephant replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a water jar.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the ear of the elephant replied. 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a winnowing basket.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the tusk of the elephant replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a ploughshare.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the trunk replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a plough pole.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the body replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a storeroom.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the foot replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a post.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the hindquarters replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a mortar.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the tail replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a pestle.'

"Those blind people who had been shown the tuft at the end of the tail replied, 'An elephant, your majesty, is just like a broom.'

"Saying 'An elephant is like this, an elephant is not like that! An elephant is not like this, an elephant is like that!' they fought each other with their fists. And the king was delighted (with the spectacle).

"Even so, disciples, are those wanderers of various sects blind, not seeing... saying, "Dharma is like this!... Dharma is like that!'"

Then, on realizing the significance, the Buddha made this inspired utterance on this occasion:

Some recluses and brahmins, so called,
Are deeply attached to their own views;
People who only see one side of things
Engage in quarrels and disputes.

Source: ATI - For free distribution only, as a gift of Dharma (dhamma-dana).

God Doesn't Believe in Atheists

Winston Smith (Amazon reviewer, London)

Is New Atheism a religion?

In I Don't Believe in Atheists, Chris Hedges claims that the New Atheists are mistaken in thinking that human nature is perfectible and that a Utopian future is possible in which rationality and science can replace religious thought.

He says that we should acknowledge that human nature is intrinsically flawed and can never be perfected. He claims that the New Atheists are blaming religion for the problems in the world and that this can lead to a belief that to rid the world of its problems and achieve a Utopian future, we must rid the world of religion.

This way of thinking, he says, has dangerous precedents. Hedges believes that there is place for religious thought in helping us understand the non-rational aspects of existence: Not everything can be explained by science; the meaning of human existence is ambiguous and ultimately unknowable. [This is the sort of agnosticism Vincent Bugliosi champions in The Divinity of Doubt.]

I'm an atheist, and I agree with him. Unfortunately, to make this important point, I think he's attributed opinions to people -- [famous atheists] Dawkins, Harris, Dennet, Hitchens -- that they don't necessarily hold.

There are parts of the book that appear to be non-sequitur arguments [which Bugliosi says is the biggest flaw in the New Atheism]. However, this book is still well worth reading. It's the third five star book of his I've read (the other two being Empire of Illusion and American Fascists). Source

Devin's advocate (chud.com)

Divinity of Doubt: The God Question

The author has been making the rounds on L.A. radio. Today he visited Vromans (independent) Bookstore in Pasadena, the city he did his research in. He was cogent, hilarious, and drew the largest crowd we at Wisdom Quarterly have ever seen for an author signing.

In his most controversial book yet, famed prosecutor of murderers Charles Manson, O.J. Simpson, George W. Bush, and Lee Harvey Oswald, attorney Vincent Bugliosi turns his critical eye on both religious believers and the atheists who reflexively oppose them.

The fearless attorney who most memorably prosecuted Manson indicts both camps, calling them out for the intellectual shortcuts each takes to arrive at their convenient conclusions.

In the process, he argues lucidly and persuasively why agnosticism (not knowing or asserting that some things are not knowable) -- and a healthy skepticism toward certainty of all kinds -- is the most responsible position to take with regard to such eternal questions as the existence of God.

With his trademark wit and humor, Bugliosi sets a new path that urges us to recognize the limits of what we know and what we cannot know about the ineffable mysteries of existence.