the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:04 pm

To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:23 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:36 pm
Ceisiwr wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:34 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:27 pm


My answer is that the result of my thought occurs immediately in my mind. Also delight is dukkha.

The result of that kamma hasn’t had the chance to ripen as you have been instantly killed. Not all kamma that you do in this life ripens. This is quite obvious.
Not all kamma, of course, but in this case we are talking about a thought. And the result of a thought is instantaneous (the delight).

Delight isn’t the result of unwholesome kamma, and in this scenario you have been instantly killed after having the thought and delighting in it. It’s result hasn’t born fruit. As you rightly said, not all kamma performed in this life has its result in this life. The answer, in terms of Dhamma, is right in front of your face but alas you refuse to accept it.
No, no, no... I only quoted a sutta, in which thinking materialistically (considering the body as self) is said to be better than taking the mind as self.
I'm not a materialist, since I think that Nibbana is possible even before the death of the body.
That isn’t what I was referring to.

To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
:strawman:
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:31 pm

Ceisiwr wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:23 pm
Delight isn’t the result of unwholesome kamma
Yes, it is. It brings with it agitation of the mind, it is a form of dukkha.
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

auto
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by auto » Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:48 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:04 pm
To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
besides semen and ovum there also has to be present the spirit what is about to reborn. You don't accept the spiritual aspect or you are trying to think it is metaphor or phenomena.

User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:54 pm

auto wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:48 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:04 pm
To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
besides semen and ovum there also has to be present the spirit what is about to reborn. You don't accept the spiritual aspect or you are trying to think it is metaphor or phenomena.
We already discussed about this some days ago. No spirit or rebirth-linking-consciousness are mentioned or even supported in the suttas.
Besides sexual intercourse and ovulation there is "gandhabba", which by exclusion is necessarily sperm.
"the descent into the womb takes place through the junction of these three: there is a union of mother and father, the mother is in season and the gandhabba is present" (MN 93)
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:08 pm

Our actions always have instantly mental consequences.
In addition to this, some of our actions have consequences also on other people.
This is an evidence and doesn't deny individual responsibility for one's deeds.
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

auto
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by auto » Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:19 pm

SteRo wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:39 pm
.
Why now do you assume 'a being'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found.

Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word 'chariot' is used,
So, when the aggregates are present,
There's the convention 'a being.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .bodh.html
[/quote]
.
https://suttacentral.net/sn22.89/en/sujato wrote:“Reverend, I’m not keeping well, I’m not alright. My pain is terrible and growing, not fading; its growing is evident, not its fading.”“Na me, āvuso, khamanīyaṃ na yāpanīyaṃ … pe … abhikkamosānaṃ paññāyati no paṭikkamo”ti.
..
When you say ‘I am’, what is it that you’re talking about?”Yametaṃ, āvuso khemaka, ‘asmī’ti vadesi, kimetaṃ ‘asmī’ti vadesī”ti?

“Reverends, I don’t say ‘I am’ with reference to form, or apart from form.“Na khvāhaṃ, āvuso, rūpaṃ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi; napi aññatra rūpā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi.I don’t say ‘I am’ with reference to feeling …Na vedanaṃ …perception …na saññaṃ …choices …na saṅkhāre
…consciousness, or apart from consciousness.na viññāṇaṃ ‘asmī’ti vadāmi; napi aññatra viññāṇā ‘asmī’ti vadāmi.

For when it comes to the five grasping aggregates I’m not rid of the conceit ‘I am’. But I don’t regard anything as ‘I am this’.Api ca me, āvuso, pañcasu upādānakkhandhesu ‘asmī’ti adhigataṃ ‘ayamahamasmī’ti na ca samanupassāmi.
My view on the issue.

if the pain is growing without evidence of its fading(there is only the rising) there will be grasping and desire to oppose it, hence the desire for non-existence. It makes sense that the person doesn't consider anything as his self when in pain hence the absence of self view.
Similarly with the sn5.10,
When in samadhi you don't consider your body as your self, because of observing both the rise and fall of the aggregates. Mara wanted to break that immersion with his question.

auto
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by auto » Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:39 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:54 pm
auto wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:48 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:04 pm
To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
besides semen and ovum there also has to be present the spirit what is about to reborn. You don't accept the spiritual aspect or you are trying to think it is metaphor or phenomena.
We already discussed about this some days ago. No spirit or rebirth-linking-consciousness are mentioned or even supported in the suttas.
Besides sexual intercourse and ovulation there is "gandhabba", which by exclusion is necessarily sperm.
"the descent into the womb takes place through the junction of these three: there is a union of mother and father, the mother is in season and the gandhabba is present" (MN 93)
it could be sperm tho but not literally, there is alchemical processes how the spirit degrades into this liquid. It is important to protect that the lifeforce won't degrade that far but will be sublimated back to spirit instead.
Even if i use words wrongly, i get the big picture, meanwhile you may just spill this substance into floor since you don't do anything with it anyway.
Or be like DD who just does celibacy, and expect results come..

User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:05 pm

We must also consider that the Buddha didn't encourage people to have as many children as possible, but rather he promoted celibacy.
This would make no sense if there really were "aspiring consciousnesses" that need to be reborn as human beings to follow the path.
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:28 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:05 pm
We must also consider that the Buddha didn't encourage people to have as many children as possible, but rather he promoted celibacy.
This would make no sense if there really were "aspiring consciousnesses" that need to be reborn as human beings to follow the path.

Why doesn’t that make sense?
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:29 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:08 pm
Our actions always have instantly mental consequences.
In addition to this, some of our actions have consequences also on other people.
This is an evidence and doesn't deny individual responsibility for one's deeds.

Once again, this is your own view. Kamma as taught by the Buddha is quite different. It’s not instant, and indeed he taught that those who believe that all kamma is experienced within this life have a wrong view.
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:30 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:54 pm
auto wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:48 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:04 pm
To deny that someone's birth is the result of others' sexual intercourse is to deny the evidence.
besides semen and ovum there also has to be present the spirit what is about to reborn. You don't accept the spiritual aspect or you are trying to think it is metaphor or phenomena.
We already discussed about this some days ago. No spirit or rebirth-linking-consciousness are mentioned or even supported in the suttas.
Besides sexual intercourse and ovulation there is "gandhabba", which by exclusion is necessarily sperm.
"the descent into the womb takes place through the junction of these three: there is a union of mother and father, the mother is in season and the gandhabba is present" (MN 93)

Not that you have shown.
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:31 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:31 pm
Ceisiwr wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:23 pm
Delight isn’t the result of unwholesome kamma
Yes, it is. It brings with it agitation of the mind, it is a form of dukkha.

Once again, this is your own fabricated view and not kamma as taught by the Buddha.
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by AlexBrains92 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:27 pm

Ceisiwr

If you accept Nyanananda's phenomenological and timeless model of dependent arising, you must also accept that every your intentional activity simultaneously produces its effect in your mind, otherwise you are inconsistent.
The kind of effects that ripen beyond this life, on the contrary, can't affect who acts but only other people. If it could, then you should necessarily be reborn at least once more, even if you stop creating new kamma and become Arahant right now. You should be reborn as Arahant to serve that unripe kamma, which is obviously ridiculous.
Kamma simultaneously produces its effect, and its effect ceases with the cessation of kamma: that's why Nibbana is possible here and now.
Furthermore, to claim that suffering doesn't cease simultaneously with the cessation of craving, but only with death (as you do), is ironically much more materialistic than phenomenological. So before posting continuous quotes, make sure you understand what you read.
"If appeasement of desires is what is really blissful, 'desirelessness' as the appeasement of all desires would be the Supreme Bliss, and this in fact is what Nibbāna is." (Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5901
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:46 pm

AlexBrains92 wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:27 pm
Ceisiwr

If you accept Nyanananda's phenomenological and timeless model of dependent arising, you must also accept that every your intentional activity simultaneously produces its effect in your mind, otherwise you are inconsistent.
The kind of effects that ripen beyond this life, on the contrary, can't affect who acts but only other people. If it could, then you should necessarily be reborn at least once more, even if you stop creating new kamma and become Arahant right now. You should be reborn as Arahant to serve that unripe kamma, which is obviously ridiculous.
Kamma simultaneously produces its effect, and its effect ceases with the cessation of kamma: that's why Nibbana is possible here and now.
Furthermore, to claim that suffering doesn't cease simultaneously with the cessation of craving, but only with death (as you do), is ironically much more materialistic than phenomenological. So before posting continuous quotes, make sure you understand what you read.

No, I don’t need to accept any of that. Ven. Nanananda’s conception of dependent origination isn’t one where all effects happen within one mind moment. He quite clearly discuses latent tendencies and kammic actions ripening in the future. Kamma only ripens when there is a “self”. With the cessation of self then kamma ceases. What remains is the result of past kamma.

“ What is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma.
SN 35:145

Upon Nibbana-with-remainder the result of old kamma remains.

"And what is the result of kamma? The result of kamma is of three sorts, I tell you: that which arises right here & now, that which arises later [in this lifetime], and that which arises following that”
AN 6.63

Not all results of kamma are instant, within one mind moment.

"There are, headman, some brahmans & contemplatives who hold a doctrine & view like this: 'All those who kill living beings experience pain & distress in the here & now. All those who take what is not given... who engage in illicit sex... who tell lies experience pain & distress in the here & now.'

...

So, headman, when those brahmans & contemplatives who hold a doctrine and view like this say: 'All those who kill living beings experience pain & distress in the here & now,' do they speak truthfully or falsely?" — "Falsely, lord."

"And those who babble empty falsehood: are they moral or immoral?"

"Immoral, lord."

"And those who are immoral and of evil character: are they practicing wrongly or rightly?" — "Wrongly, lord."

"And those who are practicing wrongly: do they hold wrong view or right view?" — "Wrong view, lord."

"And is it proper to place confidence in those who hold wrong view?"

"No, lord."
SN 42.13

The sutta goes on for other types of immoral behaviour. So we can see, the Buddha didn’t agree that all kammic results bear fruit within one life, let alone one mind moment.


"In the case of the person who takes life...[yet] on the break-up of the body, after death, reappears in the good destinations, in the heavenly world: either earlier he performed fine kamma that is to be felt as pleasant, or later he performed fine kamma that is to be felt as pleasant, or at the time of death he adopted & carried out right views. Because of that, on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the good destinations, in the heavenly world. But as for the results of taking life... holding wrong views, he will feel them either right here & now, or later [in this lifetime], or following that...

"In the case of the person who abstains from taking life... but on the break-up of the body, after death, reappears in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell: either earlier he performed evil kamma that is to be felt as painful, or later he performed evil kamma that is to be felt as painful, or at the time of death he adopted & carried out wrong views. Because of that, on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But as for the results of abstaining from taking life... holding right views, he will feel them either right here & now, or later [in this lifetime], or following that...
MN 136


Not all kamma-vipaka ripens within one life or mind moment.


Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life, there is no opportunity for the right ending of stress. But for anyone who says, 'When a person makes kamma to be felt in such & such a way, that is how its result is experienced,' there is the living of the holy life, there is the opportunity for the right ending of stress.

"There is the case where a trifling evil deed done by a certain individual takes him to hell. There is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by another individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.

"Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual takes him to hell.

"Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in [contemplating] the body, developed in virtue, developed in mind, developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the unlimited. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.
AN 3.99


Not all kamma done in this life ripens in this life, and those who hold such a view aren’t living the holy life.

"Just as when seeds are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & heat, capable of sprouting, well-buried, planted in well-prepared soil, and the rain-god would offer good streams of rain. Those seeds would thus come to growth, increase, & abundance. In the same way, any action performed with greed ... performed with aversion ... performed with delusion — born of delusion, caused by delusion, originating from delusion: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen. Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence.
AN 3.33


Not all kamma ripens in this life or mind moment, but form kammic “seeds” which ripen when the conditions are right, either in this life or the one after (since dependent origination and the birth of “I am” doesn’t not stop at physical death).

"The taking of life — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, to rebirth as a common animal, to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from the taking of life is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to a short life span.

AN 8.40

A murder will go to hell, shades or an animal. Or, if human again, will have a short life span. If this is referring to mind moments it makes little sense, since it means the person is in the mental state of being a human for a short time then nothing. It does make sense if this refers to having the human aggregates.





When a house is on fire,
the vessel salvaged
is the one that will be of use,
not the one left there to burn.

So when the world is on fire
with aging & death,
you should salvage [your wealth] by giving:
what's given is well salvaged.

What's given bears fruit as pleasure.
What isn't given does not:
thieves take it away, or kings;
it gets burnt by fire or lost.

Then in the end
you leave the body
along with your possessions.
Knowing this, the intelligent man
enjoys possessions & gives.
Having enjoyed & given
in line with his means,
uncensured he goes
to the heavenly state.
— SN 1.41
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AlexBrains92, Dan74, denise, Laurens, NuanceOfSuchness and 341 guests