What is the cause for biological birth in Nanavira view ?SDC wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:14 pmHow did I "avoid to answer"? For the last few of your posts you couldn't decide whether you were talking about 'birth' or 'rebirth' and now your defaulting to Ven. Bodhi to do the talking.Circle5 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:42 am And you've again avoided to answer the question. As both me and B.Bodhi have shown, Nanavira considers that the proximate cause for biological birth is the puthujjana notions "I was born; I will age and die," or "My self was born; my self ages and dies." This is simply false and not supported by the suttas. Again, to quote B.Bodhi:
...
And if you read carefully, Ven. Nv never says that appropriation is the cause for biological birth. He says that appropriating it as "mine" is a cause of suffering. Big difference.
Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Why are you avoiding the question and playing silly games like this ? What's the point ? But ok, then I shall reformulate the question:
What is the cause for consciousness to descend into the womb in Nanavira view ?
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Same answer. You're still asking the wrong question. You're trying to apply linear causality to a model of structural dependency, and if you can't see that, it isn't my job to talk through it. But because I like you I'll tell you how to phrase the question: on what does birth depend in the arising of this mass of suffering? Is that what you want to know?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
You said Nanavira does not reject rebirth like secular buddhist do, despite the 1 life interpretation of DO that he likes. I am asking you how does rebirth happen in his view ?SDC wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:16 amSame answer. You're still asking the wrong question. You're trying to apply linear causality to a model of structural dependency, and if you can't see that, it isn't my job to talk through it. But because I like you I'll tell you how to phrase the question: on what does birth depend in the arising of this mass of suffering? Is that what you want to know?
And please no BS
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Does this sound like someone who rejects rebirth?
Ven. Nv wrote:To be a follower of the Buddha it is certainly necessary to accept on trust that for one who is not rid of avijjā at his death there is re-birth, but it is by no means sufficient. What is sufficient is to see paticcasamuppāda—Yo paticcasamuppādam passati so dhammam passati ('He who sees dependent arising sees the Teaching') (Majjhima iii,8 <M.i,191>). For those who cannot now see the re-birth that is at every moment awaiting beings with avijjā, the dependence of re-birth on avijjā must be accepted on trust. They cannot get beyond temporal succession in this matter and must take it on trust that it is a question of dependence (and not of cause-and-effect)—i.e. that it is not a hypothesis at all, but (for the Buddha) a matter of certainty. But accepting this on trust is not the same as seeing paticcasamuppāda. (Past and future only make their appearance with anvaye ñānam [see NA CA SO [a]), not with dhamme ñānam. 'As it is, so it was, so it will be.' Paticcasamuppāda is just 'As it is'—i.e. the present structure of dependence.) - Shorter Note on Paticcasamuppāda, footnote a
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
-
- Posts: 10165
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
So there is arising, alteration and ceasing of the aggregates, and these can be viewed as aspects of our personal experience. I think the point though is that this all happens dependent upon conditions, so our experience is both transient and conditional. So for example vedana arises in dependence upon phassa.
In any case arising, alteration and ceasing are clearly describing a sequence in time, and I don't see how "timeless" applies here. DO isn't exempt from anicca, and clearly anicca implies change over time. Also transience and conditionality are two sides of the same coin.
From SN 22:38:
‘Friends, with form that has passed, ceased, changed, an arising was discerned, a vanishing was discerned, an alteration of that which stands was discerned. With feeling … perception … volitional formations … consciousness that has passed, ceased, changed, an arising was discerned, a vanishing was discerned, an alteration of that which stands was discerned. It is of these things, friends, that an arising was discerned, that a vanishing was discerned, that an alteration of that which stands was discerned."
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Why are you refusing to answer this question ? Ok, ok, he believes in rebirth, but why does it happen in his view ? What explanation does he give for consciousness to descend into the womb ? If someone asks him "what makes you believe that after death, there will be rebirth instead of eternal heaven(as christians say) or nothing (as atheist say) etc ?SDC wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:55 amDoes this sound like someone who rejects rebirth?
Ven. Nv wrote:To be a follower of the Buddha it is certainly necessary to accept on trust that for one who is not rid of avijjā at his death there is re-birth, but it is by no means sufficient. What is sufficient is to see paticcasamuppāda—Yo paticcasamuppādam passati so dhammam passati ('He who sees dependent arising sees the Teaching') (Majjhima iii,8 <M.i,191>). For those who cannot now see the re-birth that is at every moment awaiting beings with avijjā, the dependence of re-birth on avijjā must be accepted on trust. They cannot get beyond temporal succession in this matter and must take it on trust that it is a question of dependence (and not of cause-and-effect)—i.e. that it is not a hypothesis at all, but (for the Buddha) a matter of certainty. But accepting this on trust is not the same as seeing paticcasamuppāda. (Past and future only make their appearance with anvaye ñānam [see NA CA SO [a]), not with dhamme ñānam. 'As it is, so it was, so it will be.' Paticcasamuppāda is just 'As it is'—i.e. the present structure of dependence.) - Shorter Note on Paticcasamuppāda, footnote a
My point is that Nanavira does not have an explanation for rebirth. He just says "yes, I believe in it" and that's it. This possition is different than that of the historical Buddha who did have a technical explanation for why rebirth happens.
-
- Posts: 10165
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Can anyone explain simply and clearly what "timeless" means when applied to DO, and give a practical example?
In your own words, please.
I'm afraid this "timeless" idea makes no sense to me at all, given the centrality of anicca in the teachings, and given that DO is all about arising and ceasing in dependence on conditions - both of these involve change over time, states changing, events occuring.
In your own words, please.
I'm afraid this "timeless" idea makes no sense to me at all, given the centrality of anicca in the teachings, and given that DO is all about arising and ceasing in dependence on conditions - both of these involve change over time, states changing, events occuring.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
-
- Posts: 10165
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
An important point, though I think the relationship between transience and conditionality is chicken-and-egg - or two sides of the same coin?
"Sabbe sankhara anicca" = all conditions are transient.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
-
- Posts: 10165
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
This is just a bad translation, and also a It doesn't make sense because the suttas describe one nidana arising in dependence upon another, different nidana. "This and that" makes sense, "this and this" doesn't.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
“Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.Dinsdale wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:21 am Can anyone explain simply and clearly what "timeless" means when applied to DO, and give a practical example?
In your own words, please.
I'm afraid this "timeless" idea makes no sense to me at all, given the centrality of anicca in the teachings, and given that DO is all about arising and ceasing in dependence on conditions - both of these involve change over time, states changing, events occuring.
https://suttacentral.net/an3.136/en/thanissaro
similarly...
dependent origination is the principle of idapaccayatā
dependent origination is not the same as things-dependently-arisen
Born, become, arisen – made, prepared, short-lived
Bonded by decay and death – a nest for sickness, perishable
Produced by seeking nutriment – not fit to take delight in
Departure from this is peaceful – beyond reasoning and enduring
Unborn, unarisen – free from sorrow and stain
Ceasing of all factors of suffering – stilling of all preparations is bliss
Bonded by decay and death – a nest for sickness, perishable
Produced by seeking nutriment – not fit to take delight in
Departure from this is peaceful – beyond reasoning and enduring
Unborn, unarisen – free from sorrow and stain
Ceasing of all factors of suffering – stilling of all preparations is bliss
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
You keep accusing me of avoiding answering, but again, it seems like you want me to talk about bhavapaccayā jāti, how 'birth' depends on 'being', but you aren't asking correctly. You're under the impression that Ven. Nv thinks that 'being' is the cause for 'birth' and that is simply not correct. You are misunderstanding the writing. In terms of suffering, 'birth' depends on 'being' and 'being' depends on 'birth'. But dependency does not imply causality, but because you insist that is what he thinks, all you see in his writing is that 'birth' comes from the notion 'I am'. It does not "come from" that notion, it depends on it in the arising of the mass of suffering. That is a significant difference that you are not acknowledging.Circle5 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:05 am Why are you refusing to answer this question ? Ok, ok, he believes in rebirth, but why does it happen in his view ? What explanation does he give for consciousness to descend into the womb ? If someone asks him "what makes you believe that after death, there will be rebirth instead of eternal heaven(as christians say) or nothing (as atheist say) etc ?
My point is that Nanavira does not have an explanation for rebirth. He just says "yes, I believe in it" and that's it. This possition is different than that of the historical Buddha who did have a technical explanation for why rebirth happens.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
DO as observed in the present moment:
“In the same way, Māgaṇḍiya, if I were to teach you the Dhamma—‘This is that freedom from Disease; this is that unbinding’—and you on your part were to know that freedom from Disease and see that unbinding, then together with the arising of your eyesight you would abandon whatever passion & delight you felt with regard for the five clinging-aggregates. And it would occur to you, ‘My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by this mind! For in clinging, it was just form that I was clinging to… it was just feeling… just perception… just fabrications… just consciousness that I was clinging to. With my clinging as a requisite condition, there arises becoming… birth… aging & death… sorrow, lamentation, pains, distresses, & despairs. And thus is the origin of this entire mass of stress.’”
- MN 75
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.
- BB
- BB
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17187
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Which view on DO resonates with you the most?
Good find.
The Buddha said "my gosh"?