Page 2 of 3

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:52 pm
by Alex123
Sunrise wrote: Life is not inherently miserable. It is the mental clinging to natural impermanent phenomena that is causing life miserable.

If by "Life is not inherently miserable." you mean only emotional suffering, then I agree. But there is pain and dukkha regardless of clinging. Clinging is one type of suffering

All feelings (including “pleasant” ones) are ultimately just greater or lesser dukkha. SN36.2, SN36.5, SN36.11.

"Whatever is felt is included in suffering." yaṃ kiñci vedayitaṃ taṃ dukkhasmi’nti
SN 36.11(1)

All formations are stressful. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti , Dhp 278

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:04 pm
by mikenz66
lojong1 wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:this thread is not just about DO, but about rebirth in general
Wow do I ever feel dopey...I have no idea what's happening here...18 replies and only the first one seemed to even come close to answering the OP.
No worries, I'll keep listening.
:popcorn:
Well, did you want to just talk about DO, or about statements about rebirth in the canon in general? It seems to me that discussion of whether or not DO refers to one or multiple lifetimes is a somewhat separate issue from rebirth in general.

Mike

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 3:22 am
by lojong1
mikenz66 wrote:Well, did you want to just talk about DO, or about statements about rebirth in the canon in general? It seems to me that discussion of whether or not DO refers to one or multiple lifetimes is a somewhat separate issue from rebirth in general.
Stop it y'all that tickles! :clap:
I'm blown away by how lost I am here. I don't see the connection between the OP and Alex123's DN15 womb quotes, or anything afterward, except this one:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Why get reborn into endless nit-picking discussions about the meaning of words? Those from the Tibetan tradition often call it "Reincarnation," those from the Theravāda tradition usually called it "Rebirth." Whatever you call it, its still just more suffering.Image
Yes, dukkha. Why the nit-picking? Because I see more dukkha in rebirth threads than in nit-picking threads, and I'm spending a few [unskillful?]] moments looking at why the rebirth threads are so painful.
Is it because the "it" that they call "reincarnation" and the "it" that they call "rebirth" is sometimes 'rice-pudding' in the Pali? There are what, seventy odd words and phrases that are commonly translated as "rebirth," forty of those from Pali alone?...I don't know, I'm just not convinced it's a good idea to consider them all synonymous.

I'm afraid to enter the evil rebirth threads to find specific examples right now of all the Paali words 'rebirth' is smudging, but puna-bbhava sticks well out...
The English speaking theravadin community is pretty consistent in that: Bhaava = being; becoming; [3 specific] states of being; dependent on clinging, and the chief condition for birth/jaati; etc... Birth would be a fine word to use, except for the fact that we use birth for 'jaati.' Bhaava is not jaati. How can we not expect confusion when we use the same word for two distinct referents--used in close contextual proximity--intentionally and repeatedly differentiated by Buddha?

Alex123 seems to prefer "re-birth" when discussing puna-bbhava. I'm cool with that. If he wants to try and explain the preference again, I'd like to hear it, and about all the other words crammed into re-birth, and that whole womb thing I didn't get.
In Sobeh's Poll--"Which word is the Pali word for re-birth?"--58% said punabbhava. http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5309" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why do you say "re-birth [re-jaati]" when you are talking about re-becoming [re-bhaava]? Simply because it's been going on a long spacetime?

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:31 am
by Sunrise
mikenz66 wrote: Yes, I understood that. But this thread is not just about DO, but about rebirth in general, and the womb is mentioned in many sutta discussions of kamma and rebirth.
I am not talking about "many suttas where womb is mentioned". I am talking about DN 15. Please read my initial comment and comment accordingly. I was replying the poster who took DN15 (Mahanidhana sutta) as an example and I was implying that DN15 is a possible later addition. The comment is about DN 15 and may not be specifically relevant to the thread.

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:49 am
by Sunrise
Alex123 wrote: If by "Life is not inherently miserable." you mean only emotional suffering, then I agree. But there is pain and dukkha regardless of clinging. Clinging is one type of suffering

Physical pain is just that: physical pain. It doesn't make life miserable in itself. Taking pain as "miserable" is a mental process; an implication of mental clinging IMO.

:anjali:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:58 pm
by Alex123
Sunrise wrote:
Alex123 wrote: If by "Life is not inherently miserable." you mean only emotional suffering, then I agree. But there is pain and dukkha regardless of clinging. Clinging is one type of suffering

Physical pain is just that: physical pain. It doesn't make life miserable in itself. Taking pain as "miserable" is a mental process; an implication of mental clinging IMO.

:anjali:
But pain is pain. Pain is dukkha and it is out of total control.


Sariputta: "There are these three forms of stressfulness, my friend: the stressfulness of pain, the stressfulness of fabrication, the stressfulness of change. These are the three forms of stressfulness."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Now what, friends, is the noble truth of stress? Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful.

"And what is pain? Whatever is experienced as bodily pain, bodily discomfort, pain or discomfort born of bodily contact, that is called pain.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With metta,

Alex

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 6:32 pm
by Sunrise
Alex123 wrote:
But pain is pain. Pain is dukkha and it is out of total control.
Pain is only physical if you remove the mental suffering associated with it. That will not make life suffering in itself. Did the Buddha lead a miserable life after enlightenment or did he dwell in peace born from relinquishment?

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:28 pm
by lojong1
Alex123 wrote:
Sunrise wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Sunrise wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Sunrise wrote:
...etc...
:heart: :popcorn:
You could PM each other?

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:05 am
by lojong1
Alex123 wrote: What else do you propose?
Like I said, I prefer punabbhava or re-becoming. If you don't like those, how about Arthur Schopenhauer's palingenesia?

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:08 pm
by Alex123
Sunrise wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
But pain is pain. Pain is dukkha and it is out of total control.
Pain is only physical if you remove the mental suffering associated with it. That will not make life suffering in itself. Did the Buddha lead a miserable life after enlightenment or did he dwell in peace born from relinquishment?
Pain is pain. While the Buddha was in peace inside, He did experience LOTS of pain. Ex in DN16.

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:34 pm
by Fede
Oh good grief, semantics!
Pain is pain - yes.
pain is suffering - not necessarily.

Pain is PainFUL, but it doesn't necessarily equate with suffering.

Pain happens,
Pain is felt, pain has a physical manifestation,and sure, it hurts.
Got it.
However, suffering because of pain, is optional.
really, there is a differentiation, and you need to see that.

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:49 am
by lojong1
Mmmkay, if we either use more Pali and cut down on these shifty loaded English words with definitions y'all still haven't agreed on yet; or agree on the English definitions BEFORE continuing discussion in the dark; or help me understand how mutual semantic understanding isn't necessary to get our points across, then we'll be on-topic and easy to follow. So far this looks exactly like the "re-birth" communication breakdown.

Dukkha includes: Jaati, jaraa, byaadhi, maranam, soko, paridevo, dukkham, domanassam, upaayaaso, appiyehi sampayogo, piyehi vippayogo, yampiccham na labhati, and 5-aggregate-clinging.
Why not use the Pali term whose meaning you want to convey? That's what this thread was for. :alien:

Fede says? There can be dukkha without domanassa?
Alex says? There can be dukkha without domanassa?
Sunrise says? There can be dukkha without domanassa?
Aloka says? There can be dukkha without domanassa?

I'm not sure anything else was said, but it sure looked different. Can it really be this simple? :popcorn:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:51 am
by octathlon
Fede wrote: Pain happens,
Pain is felt, pain has a physical manifestation,and sure, it hurts.
Got it.
However, suffering because of pain, is optional.
really, there is a differentiation, and you need to see that.
So, out of 6.9 billion people on the planet, for how many is suffering due to physical pain optional? Just wondering.

:anjali:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:10 am
by lojong1
octathlon wrote:So, out of 6.9 billion people on the planet, for how many is suffering due to physical pain optional? Just wondering.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MY thread wrong dirty verboten nix nix quit it use the Pali and there's no argument :ban: :ban: :ban: :focus: :offtopic: :goodpost: :oops: :rules:
BIG HISSY-FIT DUKKHANATION AND MILD CURSES
How many experience bodily-dukkha-dukkha without domanassa? Then we can all understand what's being said without waiting 3 weeks for clarification to stay hidden.
:popcorn:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:37 am
by octathlon
I'm sorry, lojong, I haven't learned enough Pali :embarassed: --yet!
I just felt the sentiment of that post lacked anukampā.

:anjali:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:25 am
by lojong1
:heart: Anukampaa made Buddha teach about dukkha--in all it's forms--and the path to it's elimination? He said we cantake out that second dart--mental pain/domanassa. It is optional, although we still have to live with the consequences of our previous dependently originated decisions, which will likely include more domanassa for a spell.
I don't mind disagreements--even in English--between posters. I just find it unnecessarily messy when there is no effort to ensure that one's "suffering" (dukkha) means the same as another's "suffering" (domanassa) before making weird conclusions about another person's view. Being a Theravada forum, with the new thread already jumbled with "if you mean this, then he could mean this or that, which I might totally disagree with if she implied so-and-so," I figured the Pali would keep things simple, understood or not. At least when someone doesn't understand Pali, they know "I don't understand this" and the confusion doesn't escalate by assuming someone elses definitions at every turn.

If I don't get my way soon I'm gonna pull some freaky smilie voodoo and giggle some more :cookoo:
:popcorn:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:02 pm
by Alex123
lojong1 wrote:Mmmkay, if we either use more Pali and cut down on these shifty loaded English words with definitions y'all still haven't agreed on yet; or agree on the English definitions BEFORE continuing discussion in the dark; or help me understand how mutual semantic understanding isn't necessary to get our points across, then we'll be on-topic and easy to follow. So far this looks exactly like the "re-birth" communication breakdown.

Dukkha includes: Jaati, jaraa, byaadhi, maranam, soko, paridevo, dukkham, domanassam, upaayaaso, appiyehi sampayogo, piyehi vippayogo, yampiccham na labhati, and 5-aggregate-clinging.
Why not use the Pali term whose meaning you want to convey? That's what this thread was for. :alien:

I'm not sure anything else was said, but it sure looked different. Can it really be this simple? :popcorn:

Part of dukkha, for example, is old age (jarā), illness and death (maraṇa). Even the Buddha couldn't eliminate dukkha (dukkha as dukkha-vedanā) connected with the Body in his last life. Sure temporary escape into signless concentration may be an option for some, but not for all. In any case, even Awakened ones do feel dukkha-vedanā.

Only when there is no more re-becoming (punabbhava) after literal death (maraṇa), does ALL dukkha cease.

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:20 pm
by octathlon
lojong1 wrote: Anukampaa made Buddha teach about dukkha--in all it's forms--and the path to it's elimination? He said we cantake out that second dart--mental pain/domanassa. It is optional, although we still have to live with the consequences of our previous dependently originated decisions, which will likely include more domanassa for a spell.
What I was getting at earlier, was that the level of advancement required to "remove that dart" is huge- reaching nibbana perhaps. So it just struck me as callous to say it with those particular words--or with Pali words "domanassa arising from bodily dukkha is optional" ("so get over it", I mentally added when I read it). Note: I don't assume or imply that it was intended that way! It's just my reaction. I would prefer wording like "the Buddha said that it is possible to reach a state where domanassa no longer arises from bodily dukkha." :tongue: I do realize of course that progress can be made before total dart removal, where the domanassa triggered by various things can be lessened more and more as we become more skillful.
lojong1 wrote:I don't mind disagreements--even in English--between posters. I just find it unnecessarily messy when there is no effort to ensure that one's "suffering" (dukkha) means the same as another's "suffering" (domanassa) before making weird conclusions about another person's view. Being a Theravada forum, with the new thread already jumbled with "if you mean this, then he could mean this or that, which I might totally disagree with if she implied so-and-so," I figured the Pali would keep things simple, understood or not. At least when someone doesn't understand Pali, they know "I don't understand this" and the confusion doesn't escalate by assuming someone elses definitions at every turn.
Yes, I've noticed several misunderstandings that seemed to be at least partially based on differing interpretations of terminology. Using Pali could help a lot in some cases, but even then I bet there would sometimes be differing interpretations of the Pali terms. :smile:

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:13 pm
by Fede
octathlon wrote:
Fede wrote: Pain happens,
Pain is felt, pain has a physical manifestation,and sure, it hurts.
Got it.
However, suffering because of pain, is optional.
really, there is a differentiation, and you need to see that.
So, out of 6.9 billion people on the planet, for how many is suffering due to physical pain optional? Just wondering.
First of all, I know no adequate amount of Pali. Having three languages under my belt , I find I am experiencing some difficulty in absorbing any more, so I know NO PALI.
I'm going by what I know in English, and what I perceive to be true, for myself, through my own perception and experience.

I'm either extremely inadequate at explaining myself, or whomever is reading, is not getting it.
I'm not talking about the 'get over it' factor.
I'm talking more in context of the 'twin arrow' factor.

Everybody who experiences pain, suffers pain, in the physically sensitive way. I cut myself, it hurts, you cut yourself - it still hurts.
But I don't dwell, lament, complain, bemoan, throw a hissy fit, that I cut myself. I simply think, "That was careless" and move on.
I suffer pain, but I do not suffer the mental lamentation of having suffered physical pain.

if however, this entire discussion relates purely and simply to the right, correct, acceptable and accurate interpretation of Pali terminology, then I apologise for throwing a spanner in the works and will duly bow out, with thanks.

Re: Big square of rebirth in small round Xs

Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:23 pm
by bodom
octathlon wrote:So, out of 6.9 billion people on the planet, for how many is suffering due to physical pain optional? Just wondering.


Only the well-taught noble disciple's have the option of not suffering over physical pain.
"But in the case of a well-taught noble disciple, O monks, when he is touched by a painful feeling, he will not worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. It is onekind of feeling he experiences, a bodily one, but not a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart, but was not hit by a second dart following the first one. So this person experiences feelings caused by a single dart only. It is similar with a well-taught noble disciple: when touched by a painful feeling, he will no worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. He experiences one single feeling, a bodily one.


:anjali: