the great rebirth debate

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:33 pm

Thanks Drolma,

Drolma wrote:Your explanations of post-mortem continuance have provided me the final pieces of the puzzle, and I've finally been able make sense of "rebirth" without eternalism. You've written it a couple of times times in a couple of places so your view had time to sink into my head. It's been a very big benefit to me, and I want to thank you.


I don't guarantee it to be definitive, but it is how I understand it and it seems consistent with my reading of the suttas.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:56 pm

retrofuturist wrote:I believe the Buddha taught conventional rebirth, but I think it's more important to realise that there's nothing to 're' and nothing to be 'born'. There are the five aggregates, interconnected, and nama-rupa and consciousness have a mutual dependency as explained in suttas such as the wonderful DN 15 - Mahanidana Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html). As I understand it, conventional death is not the end of this process. One moment of consciousness is the condition for the next, and so it is over conventional 'lives'. I also believe that the Buddha was more intent on removing the 'self' or 'atman' from people's perceptions, and thereby removing eternalist and annihilationist views than he was about convincing people about 'rebirth'.

For me, in the suttas, the Buddha did not really teach like this.

Moreover, these matters of eternalism & annihilationism the Buddha taught to monks and not laypeople. To laypeople, the Buddha taught eternalism.

In the suttas, the Buddha generally kept the mundane & supramundane distinct.

In the suttas, we always read about an actual person being reborn.

Your view that 'not-self elements' are reborn is something I used to read on E-Sangha by the Tibetans. This is contrary to the Buddha's teaching on rebirth.
It is contrary to the Buddha because the teaching of rebirth has a moral efficacy and when rebirth is made to be voidness the moral efficacy is diminished.
This is mere Mahayana evangelism, wishing to make people feel good.

In the suttas, an actual person is always reborn.

Then, not long after they left, Anathapindika the householder died and reappeared in the Tusita heaven. Then Anathapindika the deva's son, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down to him and stood to one side and said:

"As for Sariputta:
any monk who has gone beyond,
at best can only equal him
in discernment, virtue, & calm."

When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "Lord, that must have been Anathapindika the deva's son. Anathapindika the householder had supreme confidence in Ven. Sariputta."

"Very good, Ananda. Very good, to the extent that you have deduced what can be arrived at through logic. That was Anathapindika the deva's son and no one else."


MN 143
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:06 pm

Greetings Element,

I believe the final moment of consciousness conditions the first moment of consciousness in a subsequent bundle of aggregates.

As I said, nothing is 're' or 'born'... why? Because there is anatta, anicca and idappaccayata... thus everything is forward-moving, dependent on causes and inconstant (i.e. devoid of permanence, devoid of soul). Thus, the subsequent bundle of aggregates conditioned by consciousness is neither totally different, nor the same.

That's consistent with Theravada, isn't it?

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:22 pm

Greeting Retro,

I believe there is no arising or existing of consciousness independent of a sense base. I further believe there is no mind sense base (mano) independent of a body (nama-rupa). Thus if mind consciousness (mano vinnana) is the thing that moves on then the mind sense base & its objects must move on with it.

My view is your view is not consistent with the suttas. As I previously suggested, I have not sensed the Buddha taught the doctrine of rebirth in association with aniccata, dukkhata & anattata. To me, the Buddha taught mundane right view that sides with merit & supramundane right view that sides with ending the asava.

"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

MN 117


Then the Blessed One spoke to the Venerable Ananda, saying: "Enough, Ananda! Do not grieve, do not lament! For have I not taught from the very beginning that with all that is dear and beloved there must be change, separation and severance? Of that which is born, come into being, compounded and subject to decay, how can one say: 'May it not come to dissolution!'? There can be no such state of things. Now for a long time, Ananda, you have served the Tathagata with loving-kindness in deed, word and thought, graciously, pleasantly, with a whole heart and beyond measure. Great good have you gathered, Ananda! Now you should put forth energy and soon you too will be free from the taints [asava]."

DN 16
Last edited by Element on Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:29 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:27 pm

Greetings Element,

(to cheat slightly and pilfer a post I made elsewhere... bold added for emphasis relevant to this topic)

I would like to open up a discussion on the following sutta...

MN 115 - Bahudhatuka Sutta
http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Majjhima-Nikaya/mn-115.htm

I like it because it:

- Highlights consciousness as an element separate and distinct from the four material elements of earth, water, fire and air. Thereby refuting the materialist position and everything that entails.

- Provides several variations on 'elements' by which the illusion of permanence and self can be shattered

- Has a nice dependent origination section

What do you think about it?

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:30 pm

Greetings Element,

Element wrote:I believe there is no arising or existing of consciousness independent of a sense base. I further believe there is no mind sense base (mano) independent of a body (nama-rupa). Thus if consciousness is the thing that moves on then the mind sense base and its objects must move on with it.


I think of this in terms of the...

DN 15 - Maha-nidana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would name-and-form take shape in the womb?"

"No, lord."

"If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, would name-and-form be produced for this world?"

"No, lord."

"If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?"

"No, lord."

"Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness."

"'From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress in the future be discerned?

"No, lord."

"Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-and-form.

"This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e., name-and-form together with consciousness.


Consciousness needs a sense base... but it needn't be the same one.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:41 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Highlights consciousness as an element separate and distinct from the four material elements of earth, water, fire and air.

What do you think about it?

Dear Retro,

If you want my opinion, I do not see how you have arrived at your view.

Whilst the Buddha has listed many kinds of elements, they are still mutually dependent.

For example, the Buddha lists the sensuality element. It is difficult to imagine a sensuality element independent of physical elements given the natural purpose of the sensuality element is to promote reproduction & the enjoyment of eating.

The Buddha was concerned with the cessation of dukkha. To regard all things as merely elements rather than 'self' ends dukkha.

However, the meta-physics of mental & physical elements, I do not recall the Buddha discussing.

For example, through meditation, I have come to regard defilement, which is a mental element, as something connected to the wind element.

Defilement is like a bad wind or evil spirit.

You are a father. A new born baby has all sorts of wind issues, which cause its mind to become upset. However, one simply burps a baby or using massage unties the knots of wind in its stomach. The baby's mind then becomes happy.

Because a baby has little mental volition, it is easy to manipulate its mind or mood through physical massage that control its wind element.

Similary, when a person reaches puberty, suddenly their mind has different kinds of emotions and defilements.

Thus, in my opinion, to seperate the various elements is difficult.

Kind regards,

Element
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:55 pm

retrofuturist wrote:I think of this in terms of the...DN 15 - Maha-nidana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Dear Retro,

This sutta I do not hold in regard.

First, it is inconsistant with the scores of other suttas on the same subject of dependent origination.

Second, it is from the DN, which many learned Buddhists hold are later additions rather than actual teachings of the Buddha.

Third, it was spoken to Ananda, who was unenlightened and remained unenlightened.

Fourth, it is subject to translation.

Five, it does not accord to the principles of higher dhamma, namely, sandittiko, akaliko, ehipassiko, opanyiko & paccatum veditabo vinnuhi.

Sixth, it espouses a disembodied consciousness, floating in space, without a sense base, which is inconsistant with the scores of other suttas about consciousness.

Thus, we must hold it to be not the actual words of the Buddha or a special teaching given for the unenlightened Ananda who declared he understood dependent origination.

My opinion,

Element
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:03 am

Greetings Element,

Element wrote:Sixth, it espouses a disembodied consciousness, floating in space, without a sense base, which is inconsistant with the scores of other suttas about consciousness.

Does it? Remember that Theravada does not have a concept of bardo, nor must a non-physical element necessarily conform to the laws of the physical universe.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:05 am

retrofuturist wrote:
"'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would name-and-form take shape in the womb?"

"No, lord."

"If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, would name-and-form be produced for this world?"

"No, lord."

"Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness."


Let us examine the unusual words above more closely.

When we look into a mirror and see our body, this is not consciousness or experience of 'the body'. It is merely the seeing of form through the eye sense base using eye consciousness. Similarly, when we get angry at someone and break out in angry speech, this is not the experience of the mind using mind consciousness but rather the experience of manifestations of mental kamma using ear consciousness.

However, when we meditate, namely, practise the satipatthana, the mind begins to experience the body & mind from the inside using body consciousness and mind consciousness. For example, when our mind is aware of the breathing & its affect on the internal flesh body, this awareness or feeling occurs via body consciousness. Similarly, when the mind becomes aware of itself (rather than merely expressing itself outwardly), here the existence of mind arises.

Thus, unless consciousness descends or falls into the body & mind through meditation practise, there is no actual experience of the body & mind itself.

For our consideration.
Last edited by Element on Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:12 am

Greetings Element,

That is a good point, but again, there is the potentiality for it through a logical sequence of causal conditions, such as that which you specified. Note that those conditions you specified fall under the dominion of consciousness and name-and-form.

At a slight tangent, the above quotation seems incompatible with the commentarial 'three lives' dependent origination interpretation, because it refers to consciousness being a condition for name-and-form not just in a "once in a lifetime" sense at the moment of conception, but ongoing throughout life.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Element » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:17 am

retrofuturist wrote:"If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?"

"No, lord."


Now the quote above is also quite vague to me, regarding both its meaning & intent.

For example, say a boy or girl enters into a coma but they are placed on life support for the remainder of their lives.

Whilst, consciousness is cut off, the rupa (but not nama) could reach maturity.

Thus again, this is merely saying if there is no consciousness, there can be no functioning of mind (citta, nama) because without sense objects, the citta could not develop ordinary knowledge let alone enlightenment knowledge.

For our consideration.
Element
 

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:51 am

Greetings Element,

Not that I'm sure it will help by way of clarity, but here's Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation...

"If the consciousness of a young boy or girl were to be cut off, would mentality-materiality grow up, develop and reach maturity?"

To which the ancient commentary elaborates,

The meaning is: "If consciousness were to be cut off, would bare mentality-materiality survive and grow up in the first period of life, develop through the middle period, and reach maturity in the last period? Would it grow up, develop, and reach maturity through ten, twenty, a hundred or a thousand years?"

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby xiaogui17 » Sat Jan 10, 2009 4:50 am

User avatar
xiaogui17
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 4:47 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Prasadachitta » Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:34 pm

Here are some of my thoughts on rebirth. I try to hold to them as lightly as possible. I would not call myself a "Follower of the Theravada" per say partly due to my immense respect for the teachings of Nagarjuna. That being said a great deal of what I have studied and found inspiration from comes from the Pali Cannon and Theravadin teachers more generally. So here goes the thoughts which are not at all original...

The Buddha realized that what his enlightenment consisted of was subtle and went strongly against how people approached existence. He was aware that for people to even begin an effective contemplation which could lead them to this truth, a very rarefied state of peace and contentedness must first be present. For each person taught he upheld those ideas which he discerned would lead to or help to maintain a state conducive to effective contemplation while always being careful to point the pupil beyond these conditions. Karma and Rebirth is one of these ideas. There were also ideas that his pupils tended to which the Buddha discerned was not conducive to effective contemplation. These included the idea that there is something about this process of becoming which comes to an end. The Buddha Held no views.

Once a being has a glimpse of what the Buddha was getting at they also do their best to discern what is most conducive to the effective contemplation of the truth. These beings are what the Pali sources call Noble ones. Although the ability to discern exactly which ideas help and which ones hinder must vary from noble one to noble one, there seems to have been at least one idea which has always been upheld. That is the idea of Karma and Rebirth.

Whether or not a person has a tendency to rest in the idea that the fruit of good or bad actions now will be theirs later on in another life after this body has perished, I would say that there are still some ideas which that person does rest in which are more conducive to effective contemplation than others. What those Ideas might consist of I will not speculate about. I am open to their existence but I dont think they should be distributed under the label of Buddhism. Whether or not we believe in rebirth we are still defining our reality with self referential ideas unless we are Enlightened.

This is why I think the primary act of Buddhism is going for refuge. Going for refuge does not consist of the taking on of views in the ordinary sense. In my opinion going for refuge consists of being willing to let go of all views while trusting in the infinite compassion of awakening to the nature of reality.

May all beings bask in the infinite beauty of awakening

Gabriel
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Prasadachitta
 
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:51 pm

Greetings Gabriel,

Firstly, welcome to Dhamma Wheel.

Secondly, as a Nagarjuna fan, you might be interested to see the role emptiness plays in the teachings of the Pali Canon

From the Empty Universe site...
http://www.empty-universe.com/discernment5.htm

The relevance of this to the thread? If all things are empty of inherent existence, what is there to "re" in the process of "rebirth"?

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Prasadachitta » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:42 am

Hi Retro,

My bringing up of Nagarjuna really has nothing to do with this thread it was just part of a short intro of me. In my opinion and from what I read of the link you just posted there is no dissagreement between What Nagarjuna taught and what is found in the discourses of the Buddha from the Pali Cannon. When this emptiness is taken on intellectually or otherwise the whole question of what is reborn cant really be addressed without missing the mark. I do think that for those who do not understand emptiness it is best to point to rebirth as a rough and ready guide to how reality works. On the one hand because it is relativly coherent and on the other hand because the Buddha discerned that it was conducive to peace of mind and harmony. I would basically say that to whatever extent we buy into our self referential ideas there is a causal relationship with that misunderstanding and further misunderstandings of a similar nature in the future. That includes life beyond this current body. Since this misunderstanding is within our power to overcome it would follow that it is relativly more "ours" then anything else. I am uninterested in the minutia of how exactly there is a causal relationship between my misunderstanding in this life and my misunderstanding in future lives. This is a bit of a matter of confidence in the Buddha and intuitive feeling.

I am not a material reductionist and I just cant imagine how all the biological and cultural diversity of life's experiences arise without a medium which one could only call spiritual. Now It is altogether possible that this medium is material, sort of like how mass communication travels through copper wires. I think there is a subtle but very influential "element" to what we know of as reality and it courses through us in a way that cannot be fully grasped intellectually. Maybe we can call it the collective and individual proclivities of beings that in a way cross pollinates on every level and in every moment.

I dont Know....

Im just happy for the path of practice :clap:


Metta

Gabriel
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Prasadachitta
 
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby stuka » Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:54 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Gabriel,

Firstly, welcome to Dhamma Wheel.

Secondly, as a Nagarjuna fan, you might be interested to see the role emptiness plays in the teachings of the Pali Canon

From the Empty Universe site...
http://www.empty-universe.com/discernment5.htm

The relevance of this to the thread? If all things are empty of inherent existence, what is there to "re" in the process of "rebirth"?

Metta,
Retro. :)


Good site. A couple of good quotes:

emptyuniverse
An Empty World (Sunna-loka)

Look at the world and see its emptiness....
Uproot the view of self and thereby go beyond death. (Sutta Nipata 1119)

Emptiness isn't some sort of dogmatic principle or philosophical ideal. Rather, it's a way of experiencing reality without the filter of 'self' — a self which manifests as the various concepts and other forms of self-seeking that we habitually identify with. And it's this egoistic identity — this self-view (atta-ditthi) — which causes ongoing subtle (and not so subtle) dissatisfaction and emotional conflict in our lives. In fact, our habitual identification with the mind's ongoing inner dialogue is the root cause of the majority of the collective suffering occurring in this world. And while there's only so much that we can do to relieve the collective suffering on this planet, there's a lot that we can do to relieve our own suffering and dissatisfaction. What's more, by relieving our own personal share of the collective suffering we are actually diminishing the suffering of the whole. Not only because there's then one less fearful, angry person in the world, but also because there's then one more calm source of sanity in the world. One more person working with others and not obstructing others. And precisely because working with suffering individually is also working with it collectively, the Buddha taught us to let go of self-identification for the benefit of both oneself and others.

...

The whole point of this analysis is to see the emptiness of all concepts, and thereby stop trying to define ourselves by constructing 'castles in the air' (i.e. futile attempts to create conceptually 'safe' refuges from conditioned phenomena, right within conditioned phenomena). If we can cease the ignorant habit of trying to define ourself, which is actually an attempt to defend our poor insecure fabricated notions of 'me' and 'mine,' we can gain release from all anxiety and existential angst. We can gain release from all ignorant attempts at seeking, craving, grasping, and becoming.... Such release leads directly to what we mentally label 'Nibbana,' because such release eventually leads us to nontemporal discernment wherein all temporal existential angst is radically resolved.


Another good one:

Buddhadasa: Emptiness

http://mail.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha196.htm
User avatar
stuka
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Individual » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:30 pm

To understand rebirth, one first needs to get rid of two wrong views: materialism (all is matter) and idealism (all is mind). Those who oppose "literal rebirth" generally seem to fall into the first category (even while telling themselves they believe in "physicalism" or science), while those who support "literal rebirth" seem to fall into the second category (even while telling themselves they believe in the "original teaching of the Buddha").

Of the first category, they subtly think, "I was born (from matter) and eventually, this matter will dissolve (therefore I will die)", supporting the primacy of material over mental, intellect over faith, the value of science, opposing Abhidhamma, devotional practices, esotericism, mysticism, etc..

Of the second category, they subtly think, "My mind created the foundation for this body (and so I was born), and eventually, this mind will create a foundation for a new body (therefore, I will die and be re-born," supporting the primacy of mental over material, faith over the intellectual, the value of Buddhist mysticism, esotericism, Abhidhamma, devotional practices, etc..

Both views are really equally deluded, but the second one is samma-ditthi with asavas (right view with effluents), since the first category denies the existence of the fruit of karma beyond this life, denying "this world and the next".

In this sense, both views are merely projections of a more deep-seated ignorance, self-view, choosing an arbitrary reference point for self, either the "body" of this life (which lays the basis for this consciousness), or the "luminous mind" which comes and goes, between lives. In accordance with dependent-origination, the mind and body are dependently co-arising, and to choose one reference point over another is irrelevant. So, we might say that those who argue over this aren't really so much in disagreement over realities, they are in disagreement over how to correctly describe what they know, and they are in disagreement over how to correctly describe what they don't know. Letting go of this, the mechanism for rebirth is really a petty issue not worth arguing over. The Buddha's teaching on rebirth was pretty straightforward and only lacks clarity when it isn't examined mindfully -- in this world and the next.
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
Individual
 
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:29 pm

I think rebirth is expounded quite well in the 4 Noble Truths.

In the first truth the buddha says:
Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair are suffering; association with the loathed is suffering, dissociation from the loved is suffering, not to get what one wants is suffering — in short, suffering is the five categories of clinging objects."


The Second Truth states the the origin of dukka is craving

Therefore if birth is dukka then its origin is craving

If Craving Condtions birth then there must have been an existence before where there was craving and that same craving will lead to more dukkha in the future, i.e birth.
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests