the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19945
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote: What is being argued is that

A) Its not part of the Buddhas own teachings
Well, I'm really unclear what this means. I took you to be saying that whenever the Buddha mentioned rebirth it was always moment-to-moment rebirth. Are you now saying that the Sutta's do have references to post-mortem rebirth?

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

When this had been said, the wanderers said to Anathapindika the householder, "We have each & every one expounded to you in line with our own positions. Now tell us what views you have."

"Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. This is the sort of view I have."

Now notice here that they ask Anathapindika what his view is. His answer is that basically their views have been "brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated" and its dukkha. This falls in line with the process of the Honey ball sutta


They then try to trap him by saying
"So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. You thus adhere to that very stress, submit yourself to that very stress."

To which he answers

"Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present."

He sees the escape from all views via non-clinging, which means he doesn't give birth to any view. He directly knows the process by which "I" and views come into being. With Right discernment he understands the four noble truths and so abandons all clinging, this is the higher escape from all views and "I" making and dukkha



An important point is that noble right view arises via non clinging and wisdom.


This then funells into the other parts of the NEFP down into noble concentration which leads to vision, which then leads to greater understanding of the Four Noble Truths (like a feedback loop). This is done via non clinging because craving to get or get rid of leads to dukkha (and so isnt NEFP)


Tainted right view is tainted with grasping and so is tied with dukkha. So "there is rebirth as a deva" ties into dukkha. Noble Right view leads to the cessation of dukkha and the ending of views. The idea that the Buddha taught Right view with taints, which leads to dukkha, is ridiculous since he claimed to teach the way out of dukkha, not the way further into it



"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.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Tainted Right View

There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.


which funnels into


"And what is the right resolve that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness. This is the right resolve that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.


into


"And what is the right speech that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? Abstaining from lying, from divisive tale-bearing, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter. This is the right speech that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.


into


"And what is the right action that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? Abstaining from killing, from taking what is not given, & from illicit sex. This is the right action that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.


into


"And what is the right livelihood that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones abandons wrong livelihood and maintains his life with right livelihood. This is the right livelihood that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.



So notice that Tainted Right view leads into morality, ideas of merit making for future lives and grasping.


Now for Noble Right View


"And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.


which leads into


And what is the right resolve that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The thinking, directed thinking, resolve, (mental) fixity, transfixion, focused awareness, & verbal fabrications of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right resolve that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.


into



"And what is the right speech that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The abstaining, desisting, abstinence, avoidance of the four forms of verbal misconduct of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right speech that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.



into



And what is the right action that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The abstaining, desisting, abstinence, avoidance of the three forms of bodily misconduct of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right action that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.


into


"And what is the right livelihood that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The abstaining, desisting, abstinence, avoidance of wrong livelihood of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right livelihood that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.



So Noble Right View is the understanding of dukkha and non-clinging, or not adverting or wanting

This then funnels into the other factors and down into right mindfulness and concentration which leads to insight. This is why in the Anapanasati sutta, for example, the Buddha advises to bring "mindfulness to the forefront".

On the night of his enlightenment, the Buddha practiced mindfulness with breathing. He did this via bringing mindfulness to the forefront. This then lead to the establishment of Noble Right view, via non clinging. This was something he had come to understand at a basic level before hand because of the understanding that sensual pleasure and wanting to get (his life at the palace) lead to dukkha. However wanting to get rid off also did (his life as an ascetic), so he needed a middle way. This middle way way was not wanting to get or get rid off. This was Noble Right view, which then progressed into vision. After progression through a few feedback loops of this, all clinging was abandoned and there was nibbana


Tainted Right View is about not doing bad because of being born after physical death in hell. This leads to wholesome intention, speech etc. This then helps develop good mental states, which is beneficial if one is to move into the Buddha Noble Right view

Noble Right View is about dukkha and its cessation. Therefore one does not act unwholesomely for a different reason, a different route, a different understanding


No the Buddha held no views. He just directly knew how views come into being, how "I" comes into being and the escape from it
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mike -That's a good point, but I was explaining how I read it. If he was denying any possible kind of rebirth why didn't he just say:
"Look, face it folks, death is the end of everything, let's prepare for it properly so you don't have to suffer through it."?
Because such language wouldn't be in line with out Ajahn wrote
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Mike - Well, I'm really unclear what this means. I took you to be saying that whenever the Buddha mentioned rebirth it was always moment-to-moment rebirth. Are you now saying that the Sutta's do have references to post-mortem rebirth?

The Buddha set out to understand dukkha and how to cease it. When this was completed he was enlightened. During his time in India the Buddha was surrounded by a whole bunch of speculative views. The Buddha, as part of understanding the Four Noble Truths, understood how such views come to be (via clinging and birth of "I"). However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death. He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people. Hence he encouraged such a view to some. However it was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of


N.B. He didnt always make use of this view. Some people could directly understand the Four Noble Truths without it. Others he could teach just the golden rule
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ben »

Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote: However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death. He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people. Hence he encouraged such a view to some. However it was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of
Could you please indicate how you came to this conclusion? Could you please provide textual evidence that supports your conjecture?
thanks

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

I agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi and the respected teachers of all traditions on this.
’’………….Newcomers to Buddhism are usually impressed by the clarity, directness, and earthy practicality of the Dhamma as embodied in such basic teachings as the Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, and the threefold training. These teachings, as clear as day-light, are accessible to any serious seeker looking for a way beyond suffering. When, however, these seekers encounter the doctrine of rebirth, they often balk, convinced it just doesn't make sense. At this point, they suspect that the teaching has swerved off course, tumbling from the grand highway of reason into wistfulness and speculation. Even modernist interpreters of Buddhism seem to have trouble taking the rebirth teaching seriously. Some dismiss it as just a piece of cultural baggage, "ancient Indian metaphysics," that the Buddha retained in deference to the world view of his age. Others interpret it as a metaphor for the change of mental states, with the realms of rebirth seen as symbols for psychological archetypes. A few critics even question the authenticity of the texts on rebirth, arguing that they must be interpolations.
A quick glance at the Pali suttas would show that none of these claims has much substance. The teaching of rebirth crops up almost everywhere in the Canon, and is so closely bound to a host of other doctrines that to remove it would virtually reduce the Dhamma to tatters. ’’
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ay_46.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Ben wrote:Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote: However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death. He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people. Hence he encouraged such a view to some. However it was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of
Could you please indicate how you came to this conclusion? Could you please provide textual evidence that supports your conjecture?
thanks

Ben

All done in the last twenty posts Ben, take a look back
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

A quick glance at the Pali suttas


Im sorry but a quick glance at the Pali Suttas wont win the argument. A quick glance would have us believing that the Buddha could lick his whole body :jumping:
The teaching of rebirth crops up almost everywhere in the Canon, and is so closely bound to a host of other doctrines that to remove it would virtually reduce the Dhamma to tatters. ’’
The teaching of "I" being born when there is ignorant contact is yes. Tainted Right view, i.e. view that leads to grasping and dukkha and is not the Buddhas own teaching of the four noble truths, does come up now and again. However this is because of the reason I posted above


metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ben »

clw_uk wrote:
Ben wrote:Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote: However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death. He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people. Hence he encouraged such a view to some. However it was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of
Could you please indicate how you came to this conclusion? Could you please provide textual evidence that supports your conjecture?
thanks

Ben

All done in the last twenty posts Ben, take a look back
What I see is selective quoting. Is there anything that unequivocally supports your point? And if you are going to quote the Buddha, it needs to be seen that he says basically what you are saying and not a quote taken out of its particular context. Can you please provide the smoking gun that definitively affirms your point?
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

tiltbillings wrote:
clw_uk wrote:]



The Buddha-way means having no views,
And this statement is a view.
Keep in mind, Craig, the "Buddha-way" is not a view for the Buddha, but for those unawakened, it is a view. The Buddha taught rebirth as part of his understanding of how the world works.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

clw_uk wrote:. However it [rebirth] was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of
That is a claim you continually make, but as of yet, for all the quoting of suttas, you have yet to demonstrate. There is no inherent need for the idea of rebirth to be bound to the notion of "I-making," though like anything, it can be. It is, however, not a necessity, and as we have seen, rebirth is associated with the Four Noble Truths and it is associated directly with paticcasamuppada.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
isle21self
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:23 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by isle21self »

There are 4 clingings.

kama upadana, ditti upadana(clinging to views), silabbatha upadana and attavada upadana. These 4 keep us in sansara. If any body can remove upadana to all ditti (views), what would happen to the person at death if he has not removed the other 3.

Thanks in advance
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

clw_uk wrote:5heaps
completely ridiculous
.

Not ridiculous. The idea of "rebirth-linking consciousness" to which your refering to did come later. Like I said, I may be wrong on exactly who, but If my memory serves me well I think it was Vasubandhu
"paṭisandhi" is mentioned in such books of Sutta-Pitaka, in KN (culaniddesa, patisambhidamagga, nettipakkarana, milindapanha, petakopadesa).

In MN106 there is the teaching evolving consciousness that can be reborn in certain state depending (in this sutta) on meditative achievement.
With the break-up of the body, after death, it's possible that this leading-on consciousness (saṃvattanikaṃ viññāṇaṃ) of his will go to the imperturbable. Kāyassa bhedā parammaraṇā ṭhānametaṃ vijjati: yaṃ taṃ saṃvattanikaṃ viññāṇaṃ assa āneñjupagaṃ

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please explain that sentence. Especially the part about
1) With the break-up of the body, after death,
2) saṃvattanikaṃ viññāṇaṃ relinking to a new existence.

It is interesting that the sutta says that when doing such and such a practice to reach such and such a meditative state there are 3 outcomes:
a) One resolves (understands it?) with wisdom
b) one achieves that meditative state (4th Jhana or higher, which was the topic of that sutta)
c) After death, one is reborn there.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Ben
clw_uk wrote:
However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death. He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people. Hence he encouraged such a view to some. However it was/is a tainted view. That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha. It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of

Could you please indicate how you came to this conclusion? Could you please provide textual evidence that supports your conjecture?
thanks

Ben
Sure
However he did see merits in one particular view. This was the view of being reborn after death
.

This is self evident from the fact that he taught in this way to some. It it didn't have some merits then he wouldn't make use of it. It should be noted however that he also made use of the golden rule, without any such mention of devas and hell realms. He also made use of the annhiliationist view point (a view that he actually seen as having quite a few merits in) as well.

He saw that such a view could lead to development of morality in people
This is shown here


MN 68
"So, Anuruddha, it is not for the purpose of scheming to deceive people or for the purpose of flattering people or for the purpose of gain, honour, and renown, or with the thought " let people know me to be thus", that when a disciple has died, the Tathagata declares his reappearance thus "so-and-so has reappeared in such-and-such a place" Rather, it is because there are faithful clansmen inspired and gladdened by what is lofty, who when they hear that, direct their minds to such a state, and that leads to their welfare and happiness for a long time"

lofty
Adjective
[loftier, loftiest]
1. of majestic or imposing height
2. morally admirable: lofty ideals
3. unpleasantly superior: a lofty contempt

However it was/is a tainted view.

There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.


MN 117


That is to say it is bound up with grasping, I-making and dukkha.

MN 117 states that Rebirth as a deva view is

"the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions."


Now I think we both know that grasping leads to dukkha. However grasping also leads to birth of "I"

"Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worlding ... Reguards form as Self. That regarding, bhikkhus, is a formation. That formation - what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it BORN and produced? When ther uninstructed wordling .. is contacted by feeling born of ignorance contact, craving arises. Thence that formation is born.
"


Bodhi translation page 922



It is therefore not part of his own teachings but rather something he made use of
The Buddhas own teachings, the four noble truths, dont lead to grasping but non-clinging. Right view with taints leads to grasping and dukkha. It is not part of the Four Noble Truths but something that he made use of. The fact that he made use of it and the reason why is laid out in the above quote from MN 68


metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22441
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

"Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worlding ... Reguards form as Self. That regarding, bhikkhus, is a formation. That formation - what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it BORN and produced? When ther uninstructed wordling .. is contacted by feeling born of ignorance contact, craving arises. Thence that formation is born.
"


Bodhi translation page 922


On a side note Ben, this quite clearly shows that Jati in the scheme of D.O. refers to birth of "I" and NOT the birth of the aggregates


This falls in line with the definition of the first noble truth
"Now this, monks, is the Noble Truth of dukkha: Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five aggregates subject to clinging are dukkha.

Notice it states that

In short, the five aggregates subject to clinging are dukkha.

In other words

Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha,

all come to be when there is clinging to the aggregates.

There is clinging to the aggregates all the time, so there is constant birth (and dukkha)

So when there is clinging, there is birth of "I am". This then is bound with ageing-death and stress

Cling to the body and there is "I am" the body. The body ages and falters and there is dukkha


metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply