A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Exploring the Dhamma, as understood from the perspective of the ancient Pali commentaries.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by Buddha Vacana »

Bakmoon wrote:
Buddha Vacana wrote:
Bakmoon wrote:when does the gandhabba descend into the developing embryo or fetus. Do the texts give an answer to this question?
Yes right from the beginning, although the exact moment is not described with hairsplitting precision. Don't hesitate to read the O.P.
I find that understanding to be very unlikely because if you look in the Vinaya under the definitions under Parajika 3, it defines a human being as:
from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness, until the time of death: in between these— this is called “a human being.”
https://suttacentral.net/en/pi-tv-bu-vb-pj3
and if consciousness arises at the moment of conception, that would mean that the wording of the definition is redundant and superfluous. Why would the text specify that if it were unnecessary? The only way for the text to make sense is if consciousness arises some time after the meeting of the sperm and egg.
Could you clarify your argument? I am having a hard time trying to make sense of it. Is it this that you find redundant: "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness"? If that is the case, there is a pretty simple explanation for such redundancy: explaining things in various ways makes them clearer, and this technique is used pretty often in the suttas.
Also, how does your argument even relate to your conclusion?
And even if your point is correct, it still doesn't invalidate the conclusion that is supported by "hard" textual evidence in the O.P. If fecundation and "conception" do not happen at the same time, the position that accords with the texts would be to consider that they are not very far apart in time.
Bakmoon
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by Bakmoon »

Buddha Vacana wrote:Could you clarify your argument? I am having a hard time trying to make sense of it. Is it this that you find redundant: "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness"? If that is the case, there is a pretty simple explanation for such redundancy: explaining things in various ways makes them clearer, and this technique is used pretty often in the suttas.
Also, how does your argument even relate to your conclusion?
And even if your point is correct, it still doesn't invalidate the conclusion that is supported by "hard" textual evidence in the O.P. If fecundation and "conception" do not happen at the same time, the position that accords with the texts would be to consider that they are not very far apart in time.
If the Vibhanga intended to convey that a human is a human from the moment of conception, adding the passage about the arising of mind doesn't make it clearer but makes it more confusing, because the passage in question tells us nothing about when that takes place. If the author wanted to say that it is defined as a human from conception, the clear way of saying that would be to say something like "A human being: from the coming together of father and mother until the time of death" or something like that.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by Buddha Vacana »

Bakmoon wrote:
Buddha Vacana wrote:Could you clarify your argument? I am having a hard time trying to make sense of it. Is it this that you find redundant: "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness"? If that is the case, there is a pretty simple explanation for such redundancy: explaining things in various ways makes them clearer, and this technique is used pretty often in the suttas.
Also, how does your argument even relate to your conclusion?
And even if your point is correct, it still doesn't invalidate the conclusion that is supported by "hard" textual evidence in the O.P. If fecundation and "conception" do not happen at the same time, the position that accords with the texts would be to consider that they are not very far apart in time.
If the Vibhanga intended to convey that a human is a human from the moment of conception, adding the passage about the arising of mind doesn't make it clearer but makes it more confusing, because the passage in question tells us nothing about when that takes place. If the author wanted to say that it is defined as a human from conception, the clear way of saying that would be to say something like "A human being: from the coming together of father and mother until the time of death" or something like that.
So in the sentence "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness, until the time of death: in between these— this is called “a human being.”" it makes more sense to consider that "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb" and "from the first manifestation of consciousness" refer to two different things rather than one and the same. And this argument is strong enough to reject MN 38 and the kind of statement we see in the Khandhakas.
:rolleye:
atipattoh
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by atipattoh »

Buddha Vacana wrote: So in the sentence "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness, until the time of death: in between these— this is called “a human being.”" it makes more sense to consider that "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb" and "from the first manifestation of consciousness" refer to two different things rather than one and the same. And this argument is strong enough to reject MN 38 and the kind of statement we see in the Khandhakas.
:rolleye:
Are you serious in taking this
when there is the union of the mother and father, and the mother is in season, and the gandhabba is present, through the union of these three things the descent of the embryo takes place
to support you view against Brahm's?
If there is a perspective that gandhabba is no different from the view of Sati, please enlighten me BuddhaVacana, in a way that many laymans like me can understand.
I would appreaciate if you could teach me a way to interpret this gandhabba that it is not a seed for eternal self/citta view, and how does it supports the rest of the whole chunk of text in MN 38; and what is your understanding on "union of these three THINGs"
Bare in mind that this
when there is the union of the mother and father, and the mother is in season, and the gandhabba is present
Literally as it is (regards interpretation without taking knowledge that is already available), if not as union of eggs and sperm, is already a mistake in timing as in:
The fastest swimming sperm can reach a female’s eggs in about half an hour (some says 45 minutes) while others could take a couple of days to get there.
Is this low level 'deva' being, going to wait for a few days if all swimmers are slow swimmer?
Afaisi, that word is a rotten apple in the basket.
Another question is how would you see, other than the quote above especially 'gandhabba'; that
Depending on this [heart-base]matter, mind-element and mind-consciousness-element arise. That matter is related to mind-element, mind-consciousness-element and their associated phenomena by presence condition.
contradict the rest of the content in MN38
Last edited by atipattoh on Sun Dec 11, 2016 4:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by robertk »

The whole of the Abhidhamma (for instance) can be evidence that there is no lasting being. There is only a never ceasing stream of arising and ceasing moments, each conditioned by the last.
Upon cuti citta (death moment), without any pause the patisandhi citta arises : and this is the beginning of the new 'being' - whether human, animal, or peta etc.

In the human and animal realms there usually must be a material basis where the patisandhi citta arises.


A while back I cited the Visuddhimagga :
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... us#p354199 and here we see the materila basis in humans is quite tiny -
visuddhimgga VIII
30. Herein, firstly the span has no sign because there is no definition such as:
Just so much must be lived, no more than that. For beings [die in the various
stages of the embryo, namely], at the time of the kalala, of the abbuda, of the pesi, of
the ghana, at one month gone, two months gone, three months gone, four months
gone, five months gone … ten months gone, and on the occasion of coming out
of the womb. And after that they die this side or the other of the century.



XVII
1
52. But when that minimal amount arises in the two kinds of generation
termed egg-born and womb-born, it amounts to no more than a drop of cream of
ghee on a single fibre of new-born [kid’s] wool, and it is known as the “embryo
in the first stage”
(S I 206).


But as Buddha vacana said the texts don't specify that there is an exact time when the patisandhi arises : it could be immediately upon the fertilisation of the egg or hours after- but , as I read it, before the embryo is implanted in the womb.

This extract from Abhidhamma in Daily life explains in an easy to understand way:
http://www.viet.net/anson/ebud/nina-abh ... bhi-10.htm
User avatar
pilgrim
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by pilgrim »

From my literal reading of the parajika rule as quoted earlier, parajika is committed when murder occurs as a result of a monk procuring an assassin or arranging for an abortion. Or a person commits suicide as a consequence of a monk speaking in praise of it. Neither of this 2 conditions apply for a monk who speaks in favour of abortion. It becomes applicable only when one extends the rule beyond its literal description.
atipattoh
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by atipattoh »

Thanks Robertk!
that why i stated
but not s.o.c transmigration into this zygot/embryo, transmigration occurs only s.o.c is viewed as a whole/stream, assuming that it is not an arising of consciousness)
Lets see BuddhaVacana's view of how that contradict the rest of MN 38.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by Buddha Vacana »

atipattoh wrote:Are you serious in taking this
when there is the union of the mother and father, and the mother is in season, and the gandhabba is present, through the union of these three things the descent of the embryo takes place
to support you view against Brahm's?
Why not? The suttas are more authoritative than anyone's opinion, unless there is a solidly substantiated way involving comparative studies and philology to prove otherwise.
If there is a perspective that gandhabba is no different from the view of Sati, please enlighten me BuddhaVacana, in a way that many laymans like me can understand.
I provide available material, and I do not draw far-fetched conclusions. If you are not convinced, that is up to you. Using logic to try to understand anatta at the average person"s general level (something to be understood at a very deep level) is something that will surely confuse you. Why did the Buddha use the words "I" and "you" if there is no self? and so on.
I would appreaciate if you could teach me a way to interpret this gandhabba that it is not a seed for eternal self/citta view, and how does it supports the rest of the whole chunk of text in MN 38; and what is your understanding on "union of these three THINGs"
I suggest you ponder over the whole matter quietly without being upset.
Bare in mind that this
when there is the union of the mother and father, and the mother is in season, and the gandhabba is present
Literally as it is (regards interpretation without taking knowledge that is already available), if not as union of eggs and sperm, is already a mistake in timing as in:
The fastest swimming sperm can reach a female’s eggs in about half an hour (some says 45 minutes) while others could take a couple of days to get there.
I take the suttas as authoritative unless there is a strong case to dismiss them. Your own logic is not enough to that effect.
Is this low level 'deva' being, going to wait for a few days if all swimmers are slow swimmer?
Nothing indicates that gandhabba as a "deva" or whatever supernatural being living in trees etc. is the same thing as the gandhabba mentioned in MN 38.
If fecundation and "conception" are not the same, it still does not contradict MN 38. It says that if that is so, they are not too far apart in time.
Afaisi, that word is a rotten apple in the basket.
Another question is how would you see, other than the quote above especially 'gandhabba'; that
Depending on this [heart-base]matter, mind-element and mind-consciousness-element arise. That matter is related to mind-element, mind-consciousness-element and their associated phenomena by presence condition.
contradict the rest of the content in MN38
Debunking an older text with a newer one is something that can only be done by a specialist, with convincing reasons to take the former over the latter.
atipattoh
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by atipattoh »

Thanks but no thanks for your arguments, not helping at all!

This is not ending well, it seems.
I have this wild thinking and this question is to those that has authority in interpretation of pali.
what if the translation is taken as
zygot for gandhabba, established (現起) for paccupaṭṭhita

This discussion that involved me shall ends here!
Bakmoon
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by Bakmoon »

Buddha Vacana wrote:So in the sentence "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb, from the first manifestation of consciousness, until the time of death: in between these— this is called “a human being.”" it makes more sense to consider that "from the mind’s first appearance in a mother’s womb" and "from the first manifestation of consciousness" refer to two different things rather than one and the same. And this argument is strong enough to reject MN 38 and the kind of statement we see in the Khandhakas.
:rolleye:
That's not what I'm saying at all. They are of course, synonyms. What I am saying is that if "the minds' first appearance in a mother's womb,...the first manifestation of consciousness" were to happen at the moment of conception, then why would the Sutta Vibhanga mention the starting point as being "the minds' first appearance in a mother's womb,...the first manifestation of consciousness" instead of just mentioning the coming together of father and mother? If they are simultaneous, then why does the Sutta Vibhanga go out of its way to use a verbose technical term that doesn't indicate a precise time rather than just using an easy to understand term (i.e. the coming together of father and mother) that is already found in the suttas?

And I'm not rejecting the statement from MN 38 at all. That sutta just says that the descent of the embryo occurs based on the fertility of the mother, the coming together of mother and father, and the presence of the gandhabba. But the text says nothing as to whether or not the gandhabba's presence is simultaneous with fertilization or not.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.
ieee23
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:40 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by ieee23 »

santa100 wrote:Not sure if Ven. Brahm's seen some staggering figures here.
You might want to make your point with a link that everyone can read.
Whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. - MN 19
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by santa100 »

ieee23 wrote:
santa100 wrote:Not sure if Ven. Brahm's seen some staggering figures here.
You might want to make your point with a link that everyone can read.
Not sure why you still don't see the obvious point. Regardless of all the armchair philosophical debate about what/when human life begins, the ongoing brutal fact is that every year, there're ~800,000 potential human lives being terminated, far more than the number of firearms-related deaths, deaths from the ongoing Syrian civil war, and on par with the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Frankly speaking, it's sheer hypocrisy for any venerable, especially world renowned senior ones, to approve or endorse abortion, particularly up to 16-week abortion, while at the same time preaching about compassion and respect for the life of all sentient beings from tadpoles to elephants!
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by robertk »

dear All
Someone sent me some privately some excellent questions and comments about this topic..

Conception is no more than just carry on the nature of endosymbiosis of bacteria. Sperms can swim, react to environment, they are obviously more alive than newly conceived egg, why aren't we consider them as beings? If we do, then man can not have sex anymore

It is because according to Theravada sperm are not alive, they are merely rupa..The visuddimagga makes it clear that there is no chance of citta arising until after fetilization..

On the issue of intermediate beings please read over this topic at
http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index. ... wtopic=148
User avatar
ryanM
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:13 pm

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by ryanM »

A Buddhist Guide To Making Difficult Ethical Decisions, a recent talk given by AB. It centers a lot around abortion. I think it's a good watch for anyone who enjoys AB's talks.
sabbe dhammā nālaṃ abhinivesāya

"nothing whatsoever should be clung to"
atipattoh
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: A. Brahm's When Does Human Life Begin..?

Post by atipattoh »

:oops: double post
Last edited by atipattoh on Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply