Yes, possibly, though your analysis assumes that being (satta) has the same meaning in both SN12.2 and SN5.10, and I don't think that's necessarily the case.DooDoot wrote: ↑Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:49 amSorry but the proper quote is as follows:The quote is not as you edited & posted:Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.Therefore aging & death appears not aging & death of mere aggregates. It is aging & death of "beings" that cause sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief & despair, such as "beings" produced by ignorance called "me", "my wife", "my mother", "my father", "my son", "my daughter", "my favourite pop star", etc.Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty, that is called death.
"A being" according to sutta is something "mental" rather than "physical". "A being" appears to be a "self-view". To quote: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.
SN 5.10Therefore, in MN 87, the man was not suffering over aggregates or over a corpse. The man was suffering over his "son".'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'
Note: the above does not refute "reincarnation". The above only makes dependent origination questionable as an explanation of reincarnation. The Buddha taught many teachings about "upapajjati" in "hell" for those who don't attain Nibbana. Refer to MN 130, which describes what happens to those not free from "birth" & "death" via non-clinging.the Blessed One said to him, "Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties."
"Lord, how could there not be an aberration in my faculties? My dear & beloved little son, my only child, has died. Because of his death, I have no desire to work or to eat. I keep going to the cemetery and crying out, 'Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone, my only little child?'"
Seeing danger in clinging,
in the coming-into-play
of birth & death,
they are released from lack of clinging,
in the ending
of birth & death.
They, happy, arriving at safety,
fully unbound in the here-&-now
In SN5.10 "being" refer to a convention or attachment, whereas in SN12.2 "beings" refers to living organisms (animals) which experience birth, ageing and death.
See the second and third definitions of satta here: