the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Bonjour

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Sun May 06, 2018 11:26 pm

And another said: 'One's six sense-organs are the first end, the other six outer objects are the second, consciousness is in the middle, and craving is the seamstress. ... '
http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts ... re.pts.htm

“Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as condition there is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions [born of] mental proliferation beset a man with respect to past, future, and present forms cognizable through the eye.
https://www.wisdompubs.org/landing/madhupindika-sutta

“I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos.”
https://suttacentral.net/an4.45/en/thanissaro
It’s not to be reached by traveling,
the end of the cosmos—
regardless.
And it’s not without reaching
the end of the cosmos
that there is release
from suffering & stress.

So, truly, the wise one,
an expert with regard to the cosmos,
a knower of the end of the cosmos,
having fulfilled the holy life,
calmed,
knowing the cosmos’ end,
doesn’t long for this cosmos
or for any other.


Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.

Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow.
https://suttacentral.net/dhp/en/buddharakkhita
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

the great rebirth debate

Post by rightviewftw » Mon May 07, 2018 12:25 am

i suspect L. being a naive/direct realist because
1. has not said anything that would make me think otherwise
2. claims to have an infallable scientific understanding of reality
3. Does not believe in god-creator
4. Claiming existence of a thing if existence of properties can be established
I am curious if true, more or less like this definition

Layt
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 12:58 pm

Re: Bonjour

Post by Layt » Mon May 07, 2018 2:48 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:31 pm
Layt wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:29 pm
I don't deal with that kind of crappy metaphysical questions, they're stupid and useless.
Let's talk science then ;
Do you accept the copenhagen interpretation of the double slit experiment?

Because it is still very much unclear what you mean by reality, existence and consciousness. Saying "reality is all that exists" does not really answer what exists or provide a referent for what is reality without defining existence. A non-answer. If you were to define all that exists by reality, that would be rhetoric of tautology a self-reinforcing pretense.

So a fair question would be what is it that exists? And on what ground do you assume it's existence? Therefore i asked about the hallucination.

If "reality is all that exists", then the word craving exists and is ie a means of describing the activation of the dopamine network, when the craving for X is conditioned it can be said to arise in as far as the electrochemical reactions occur, due to the electrochemical reactions the behavior is determined, therefore craving affects reality in a cause and effect manner. In other words craving for X leads to seeking out and obtaining X, craving is a condition for seeking out, without craving reality would be altered.

If you want to keep talking about how craving does or does not condition/alter reality post-mortem we have to determine the exact nature of existence and consciousness in particular.
Like I said, existence is qualities, qualities is interdependence, interdependence is multiplicity... and the sum of these multiplicity is reality/the universe. Consciousness is just the act of integrating a cognition into the flow of perceptions. The flow of perceptions is just a bunch of chemicals exchanged between synapses, hallucinations etc are caused by substances that attach themselves to the synapses' receptors.

You talk about reality as if it were your own perceptions, that's not what reality is. A tree exists even if you're not looking at it. You seriously gotta stop with the Matrix dude, like for real. Get out of your house, there're people outside, and they don't need you to look at them in order to exist.

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Bonjour

Post by rightviewftw » Mon May 07, 2018 3:12 pm

Layt wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 2:48 pm
are you still in high school? I ask because neither your science nor behavior seems to transcend what one would expect of a high school student.
"a high and mighty disdain for all discussion of abstract ideas is simply another form of mental confusion"

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2238
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by cappuccino » Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:19 am

high school is a good time to start

continuing from a previous life?
www.FineArtLibrary.com

Laurens
Posts: 566
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Laurens » Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:18 pm

I have changed my views somewhat with regards to rebirth over time. Whilst I am still uncertain, I am much further away from the doubtful end of the spectrum.

Ultimately it is a mystery why you are uniquely aware of being inside your particular body. Why aren't you aware of being in my body? What is that quality of awareness and why is it seemingly only in you right now? Consciousness is a huge mystery. To say that we know with any degree of certainty what happens to it after death is nonsense.

It's weird enough as it is that you are even aware and that you are you and not me. The idea that it might somehow continue in some form beyond death, though unfounded currently, is not beyond question.
"If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

LittleAl2019
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:53 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by LittleAl2019 » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:25 am

Laurens wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:18 pm
I have changed my views somewhat with regards to rebirth over time. Whilst I am still uncertain, I am much further away from the doubtful end of the spectrum.

Ultimately it is a mystery why you are uniquely aware of being inside your particular body. Why aren't you aware of being in my body? What is that quality of awareness and why is it seemingly only in you right now? Consciousness is a huge mystery. To say that we know with any degree of certainty what happens to it after death is nonsense.

It's weird enough as it is that you are even aware and that you are you and not me. The idea that it might somehow continue in some form beyond death, though unfounded currently, is not beyond question.
Are you able to briefly outline what it was that inched you further away from the "doubtful end of the spectrum"? I find myself right up to the bumpers at the doubtful end, but half-wishing I wasn't. For various reasons I'm "trapped" in the need for scientific proof for everything before I'll accept it. Of course, you're right, we can only know "what happens after death" from an outsider's point of view - we can see what happens biologically to the cells of somebody else's body, but to consciousness as experienced from inside that body/mind? Definite mystery. However taking that extra step and backing the "continuity of consciousness/rebirth" horse is just a jump too far for me currently....so I'd be interested to hear if there was a specific teaching or experience that quietened your doubts, or if you just gradually warmed to it over time.

Laurens
Posts: 566
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Laurens » Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:26 am

LittleAl2019 wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:25 am
Are you able to briefly outline what it was that inched you further away from the "doubtful end of the spectrum"? I find myself right up to the bumpers at the doubtful end, but half-wishing I wasn't. For various reasons I'm "trapped" in the need for scientific proof for everything before I'll accept it. Of course, you're right, we can only know "what happens after death" from an outsider's point of view - we can see what happens biologically to the cells of somebody else's body, but to consciousness as experienced from inside that body/mind? Definite mystery. However taking that extra step and backing the "continuity of consciousness/rebirth" horse is just a jump too far for me currently....so I'd be interested to hear if there was a specific teaching or experience that quietened your doubts, or if you just gradually warmed to it over time.
The thing that got me started was thinking about how taken for granted it is in Buddhist texts as well as in places like the Bhagavad-Gita.

It's never argued just presented as something that is matter of fact. I wondered what would make people so sure that this could be the case. So much so that it's not even argued. It couldn't be science based so it must be based on direct experience.

This led me to thinking about consciousness, and the things I mentioned about awareness and how my awareness is the only window to the entire universe. Everything I know about it comes through that window.

If you think of your awareness as the screen onto which your perception of the universe is projected. Who's to say the screen goes away when the movie ends? Maybe another movie gets played afterwards? Awareness is weird enough in and of itself, when you think about it enough rebirth doesn't seem that far of a stretch.
"If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

manas
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by manas » Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:59 pm

I never bothered to post in this topic, because I always accepted the doctrine of literal rebirth. However, I have recently realized that, despite all the amazing and truthful things in the Pali suttas as they have come down to us, this is one which can't be directly, objectively known (along with devas who come down and talk to humans) - like it or not, no-one who has TRULY died, has ever come back to tell us about what really happens after death. Yes, I need EVIDENCE. Faith just isn't enough anymore. I will not base my life upon faith, but upon reason and verifiable facts. It's directly verifiable that form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are inconstant, unsatisfactory and not-self. However, that we will reappear after death, in another mode of existence, according to our kamma - that requires belief, which is unacceptable to me. Of all the religions, Buddhism is the only one I truly respect and find much truth in, it's just that, I'm over all superstition, all unverifiable belief, all dogma, no matter where i find it (thanks to Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins, primarily). Simply fed up, I'm afraid. We must at least admit the possibility, that Buddhism was influenced by prevailing Hindu / Vedic beliefs about rebirth. It's not out of the question. I admit some distress about 'losing' an important aspect of my world-view, but upon waking up, it can take some time for one's eyes to adjust to the light. It's uncomfortable at first, but I have this inner urge to divest myself of religion in general, it's simply caused too much trouble in the world, and could even be the cause of us all killing each other. Belief is dangerous because people will do things based on belief, that they would not if they simply relied on reason. After 50 years, I've had a gutful of anyone telling me what reality is, without being able to PROVE IT. Thanks for reading.

Ok, off to meditate now. :meditate:

manas
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by manas » Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:25 pm

manas wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:59 pm
I never bothered to post in this topic, because I always accepted the doctrine of literal rebirth. However, I have recently realized that, despite all the amazing and truthful things in the Pali suttas as they have come down to us, this is one which can't be directly, objectively known (along with devas who come down and talk to humans) - like it or not, no-one who has TRULY died, has ever come back to tell us about what really happens after death. Yes, I need EVIDENCE. Faith just isn't enough anymore. I will not base my life upon faith, but upon reason and verifiable facts. It's directly verifiable that form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are inconstant, unsatisfactory and not-self. However, that we will reappear after death, in another mode of existence, according to our kamma - that requires belief, which is unacceptable to me. Of all the religions, Buddhism is the only one I truly respect and find much truth in, it's just that, I'm over all superstition, all unverifiable belief, all dogma, no matter where i find it (thanks to Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins, primarily). Simply fed up, I'm afraid. We must at least admit the possibility, that Buddhism was influenced by prevailing Hindu / Vedic beliefs about rebirth. It's not out of the question. I admit some distress about 'losing' an important aspect of my world-view, but upon waking up, it can take some time for one's eyes to adjust to the light. It's uncomfortable at first, but I have this inner urge to divest myself of religion in general, it's simply caused too much trouble in the world, and could even be the cause of us all killing each other. Belief is dangerous because people will do things based on belief, that they would not if they simply relied on reason. After 50 years, I've had a gutful of anyone telling me what reality is, without being able to PROVE IT. Thanks for reading.

Ok, off to meditate now. :meditate:
A bit too much anger in my post the other day. Rage against my own naivete, that i was once so fooled by Theistic conceptions. My mind has been running too much with that anger, reading too much on the deceptiveness of religions in general, which is understandable, but the medicine i need right now, I've found here. Not to flow with that understandable 'rage against my own previous stupidity' but to observe the mind, in the present moment. What is it doing? How is craving causing distress right in the here-and-now? I don't know if there is rebirth according to kamma or not, but at least I can see how running after the extremes of sensual indulgence or the anger of negation of one's experience - wanting to just wipe it all away - makes me miserable right now. No need to wait for some future state, to notice that. I will leave off here now, I am off-topic i guess, just wanted to clarify that the essence of the teachings, I do not deny. I noticed yesterday how over-thinking was causing my own sorrow and thus anger at past stupidity. Just wanted to make that clear. The medicine:

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by salayatananirodha » Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:56 am

manas wrote:
Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:25 pm
manas wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:59 pm
I never bothered to post in this topic, because I always accepted the doctrine of literal rebirth. However, I have recently realized that, despite all the amazing and truthful things in the Pali suttas as they have come down to us, this is one which can't be directly, objectively known (along with devas who come down and talk to humans) - like it or not, no-one who has TRULY died, has ever come back to tell us about what really happens after death. Yes, I need EVIDENCE. Faith just isn't enough anymore. I will not base my life upon faith, but upon reason and verifiable facts. It's directly verifiable that form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are inconstant, unsatisfactory and not-self. However, that we will reappear after death, in another mode of existence, according to our kamma - that requires belief, which is unacceptable to me. Of all the religions, Buddhism is the only one I truly respect and find much truth in, it's just that, I'm over all superstition, all unverifiable belief, all dogma, no matter where i find it (thanks to Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins, primarily). Simply fed up, I'm afraid. We must at least admit the possibility, that Buddhism was influenced by prevailing Hindu / Vedic beliefs about rebirth. It's not out of the question. I admit some distress about 'losing' an important aspect of my world-view, but upon waking up, it can take some time for one's eyes to adjust to the light. It's uncomfortable at first, but I have this inner urge to divest myself of religion in general, it's simply caused too much trouble in the world, and could even be the cause of us all killing each other. Belief is dangerous because people will do things based on belief, that they would not if they simply relied on reason. After 50 years, I've had a gutful of anyone telling me what reality is, without being able to PROVE IT. Thanks for reading.

Ok, off to meditate now. :meditate:
A bit too much anger in my post the other day. Rage against my own naivete, that i was once so fooled by Theistic conceptions. My mind has been running too much with that anger, reading too much on the deceptiveness of religions in general, which is understandable, but the medicine i need right now, I've found here. Not to flow with that understandable 'rage against my own previous stupidity' but to observe the mind, in the present moment. What is it doing? How is craving causing distress right in the here-and-now? I don't know if there is rebirth according to kamma or not, but at least I can see how running after the extremes of sensual indulgence or the anger of negation of one's experience - wanting to just wipe it all away - makes me miserable right now. No need to wait for some future state, to notice that. I will leave off here now, I am off-topic i guess, just wanted to clarify that the essence of the teachings, I do not deny. I noticed yesterday how over-thinking was causing my own sorrow and thus anger at past stupidity. Just wanted to make that clear. The medicine:
The buddha spoke with anāthapiṇḍika after he died and was born as a deva. No one can experience the fruit and result of another's kamma, so it's evident this is literal and not figurative. Consciousness depends on name-and-form. Faith was good enough for venerable sāriputta because he had already verified dependent arising. Doubt is a hindrance; if you keep paying attention to secular materialists that doubt will grow and so will your other defilements, likely. There were also people in the pali canon who didn't believe in rebirth, but it was still taught to them. It's only so farfetched if you are grasping onto a view. And the buddha taught 'safe-bet' teaching because the person who believes rebirth behaves skillfully. Let's think about it: who would do all the work that is prescribed in buddhism if they believed they would eventually die and all suffering cease? This particular person doesn't see the noble truth of suffering. Birth is suffering
This is what I've been using in this kind of discussion https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
And the dhammacakkappavattana sutta, the buddha's first sermon. The Buddha spoke literally, he was incapable of 'skillful means', because he had eradicated the tendency to cause harm. Skepticism is a view; you have to have faith that no one in the world could ever speak 100% truth unambiguously
If you have doubt about rebirth better to clear it up with followers of the dhamma, not dogmatists who offer speculations about the world dependently on sense contact
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5999
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka » Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:34 am

I think that this quote from Ajahn Dune Atulo is helpful:

ONLY PRACTICE CAN RESOLVE DOUBT

When people asked Luang Pu about death and rebirth, or about past and future lives, he was never interested in answering. Or if some people argued that they didn't believe that heaven or hell really existed, he never tried to reason with them or to cite evidence to defeat their arguments. Instead, he'd give them this piece of advice:

"People who practice the Dhamma don't have to give any thought to past or future lives, or to heaven or hell. All they have to do is be firm and intent on practicing correctly in line with the principles of virtue, concentration, and discernment. If there really are 16 levels of heaven as they say in the texts, people who practice well are sure to rise to those levels. Or if heaven and nibbana don't exist, people who practice well don't lack for benefits here and now. They're sure to be happy, as human beings on a high level.

"Listening to what other people say, looking things up in the texts, can't resolve your doubts. You have to put effort into the practice to give rise to clear insight knowledge. That's when doubt will be totally resolved on its own."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/tha ... eleft.html

:anjali:

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4940
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by clw_uk » Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:36 pm

Nice to see the eternal thread carrying on lol
Bhikkhus, all is burning.



User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 4516
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Bonjour

Post by DooDoot » Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:03 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:31 pm
Because it is still very much unclear what you mean by reality, existence and consciousness.
The suttas say consciousness is "cognition" that "cognizes" (MN 43; SN 22.79). Therefore, how could, according to later-day Buddhists, "cognition" be something that leaps from one body to another body; from life to life? :shrug:
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:31 pm
If you want to keep talking about how craving does or does not condition/alter reality post-mortem we have to determine the exact nature of existence...
In Pali, two words that are often translated as "existence" are "atthi" and "bhava". "Atthi" is not so important but is a difficult word to translate due to myriad philosophical connections (such as "I exist"). But "bhava" is a defilement or mental state. When "bhava" produces the sense of "being" or "a being" ("satta"), the suttas appear to say this "satta" is only clinging (SN 23.2) and only an idea or view (SN 5.10).
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 10:31 pm
and consciousness in particular.
The suttas describe six types of consciousness that are said (MN 38) to not exist or arise independent of sense organs & sense objects. Therefore, the only type of consciousness the later-day Buddhists can hypothesis takes part in reincarnation is mind consciousness; that can only exist dependent on a mind object, such as craving or thinking. Now, it is difficult to imagine craving arising without a physical body because most craving is for food, sex, shelter, money to acquire physical luxuries, fame to acquire physical luxuries, craving for rupa jhana, which is "rupa" or based on the physical body. The Pali says there are five chords of sensual pleasure thus they all physical. It is difficult to imagine cravings that have absolutely no relationship to physical things; apart from craving for arupa jhana. So without a physical body, it is difficult to imagine how most cravings can exist. Further, in meditation, when the physical phenomena (such as breathing, craving for sex & food, etc) are calmed, when consciousness becomes very luminous & pure, whatever mental phenomena that comes into contact with consciousness quickly dissolves. That is why the perfectly non-attached consciousness mind will enter a stream of purification towards the cessation of perception & feeling and towards the cessation of greed, hatred & delusion. What I am saying is when mind consciousness is all by itself, without any influence from the five chords of physically dependent sensuality, mind consciousness cannot maintain mental objects, such a craving. To the contrary, mind consciousness seems to dissolve mental objects until, ultimately, both consciousness & mental objects cease in the cessation of perception & feeling (nirodha-samāpatti). Therefore, that mind consciousness can leap from life to life, disembodied from the physical body, seems impossible. As soon as mind consciousness becomes detached from the physical body, surely it would enter into an arupa jhana and that arupa jhana would feel so much happier than physical sensuality. Thus the (hypothetical) disembodied mind in arupa jhana would crave for arupa jhana rather than crave to return to the sensual world.
Layt wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 2:48 pm
Like I said, existence is qualities, qualities is interdependence, interdependence is multiplicity... and the sum of these multiplicity is reality/the universe. Consciousness is just the act of integrating a cognition into the flow of perceptions. The flow of perceptions is just a bunch of chemicals exchanged between synapses, hallucinations etc are caused by substances that attach themselves to the synapses' receptors.
The suttas appears to teach in a number of places (MN 38; SN 22.53; SN 12.67; SN 22.56; SN 22.82; etc) that consciousness is dependently arisen or interdependent. It appears your ideas have more support from the Pali suttas that the ideas of the other guy wearing the Adidas tracksuit.
Layt wrote:
Mon May 07, 2018 2:48 pm
You seriously gotta stop with the Matrix dude[/color], like for real. Get out of your house, there're people outside, and they don't need you to look at them in order to exist.
Are you saying the other ex-Matrix guy now in the Adidas tracksuit is preaching "solipsism" and that, somehow, such solipsism, supports the idea of reincarnation; as though the solipsist mind with craving is like a omnipotent God that can will new life? :shrug:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2238
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by cappuccino » Mon Apr 01, 2019 6:27 am

DooDoot wrote:The suttas appears to teach in a number of places that consciousness is dependently arisen or interdependent.
because presently it is

consciousness can also be unconditioned
www.FineArtLibrary.com

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Viachh and 36 guests