POSTS:
truth
Is your experience true?
Linda Modaro and Nelly Kaufer discuss how reflective meditation encourages the capacities of being truthful, genuine, and honest about our experiences, and highlight an upcoming retreat after the November election.
Self-Sayings of a (Sometimes) Secular Monk: Part III – Dharma Principles for Approaching the Dharma
In the last of a series of three articles, Bhikkhu Santi offers a set of ‘self-sayings’ or principles for approaching Buddhist texts, teachings, and practices in contemporary contexts of study and practice.
Self-Sayings of a (Sometimes) Secular Monk: Part II – Dharma-Specific General Principles
In the second of a series of three articles, Bhikkhu Santi offers a set of ‘self-sayings’ or principles for understanding Buddhist texts, teachings, and practices.
Self-Sayings of a (Sometimes) Secular Monk: Part 1 – General Dharma Principles
In the first of a series of articles, Bhikkhu Santi offers a set of ‘self-sayings’ or principles for approaching the dharma in the sense of ‘all phenomena’ or ‘nature’.
Relatively speaking – truth, diversity & wellbeing
In this article John Danvers clarifies some of the thinking around notions of truth to help secular Buddhists to develop their own ideas of what is true and beneficial.
Secular Buddhism as a ‘paradigm shift’
Jonathan Golden uses Kuhn's notion of a 'paradigm shift' to discuss the issue of 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism. He argues that Kuhn's perspective is consistent with Mike Slott's view of truths and tasks; while there are no absolute truths, our beliefs (provisional truth claims) are a necessary precondition for our practice, and practitioners should not be required to make a binary choice between truths and tasks.
Reexamining ‘truths’ and ‘tasks’ in secular Buddhism: a dialogue
Mike Slott, Winton Higgins, Stephen Batchelor, and Jonathan Golden discuss the relationship of truths and tasks in a secular approach to the dharma.
Dharma in the shadow of Buddhism: a response to Mike Slott and Winton Higgins
Stephen Batchelor continues the dialogue on 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism by framing the discussion from a broader, historical perspective. Stephen argues that the Buddha's radical move was to depart from the truth-based perspective of Brahmanic, Indian culture to teach a fully committed ethical life that is not underwritten by any ultimate truth.
Rejoinder to Winton Higgins on ‘Reexamining “truths” and “tasks” in secular Buddhism’
Responding to Winton Higgins' criticism of his view of the relationship of tasks and truths in secular Buddhism, Mike Slott argues that in rejecting metaphysical truths as the basis of Buddhism, we don’t need to reject entirely the notion of truth as correspondence. The beliefs of secular Buddhists are provisional and conditional truth claims about our lived experience and the universe in which we are inextricably embedded.
Response to Mike Slott’s ‘Reexamining “truths” and “tasks” in secular Buddhism’
In response to Mike Slott's article on truths and tasks in secular Buddhism Winton Higgins argues that Mike's critique of Stephen Batchelor's formulation is misconceived; the issue is not the epistemological status of truth but about how we should live and practise. Dharma practitioners do have to choose: they can’t wish-wash over the truths/tasks distinction.
Reexamining ‘truths’ and ‘tasks’ in secular Buddhism
While Stephen Batchelor's emphasis on the pragmatic and ethical meaning of the Buddha’s teachings has been crucial in the development of a secular approach to the dharma, Mike Slott argues that Stephen has not adequately addressed a legitimate concern about the role and meaning of truth in his approach. The secular dharmic path challenges us to assess constantly both our ‘tasks’ and the ‘truths’ on which they are based.
EXPLORE BY SECTION
SEARCH THE SITE
RECENT POSTS
