What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.
zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:41 am

I know it is immediate, with zero room for any intermediate state (see Venerable Narada Thera, The Buddha and His Teachings, 1964, excerpt below)

What suttas support this view?
Rebirth takes place immediately, irrespective of the place of birth, just as an electromagnetic wave, projected into space, is immediately reproduced in a receiving radio set. Rebirth of the mental flux is also instantaneous and leaves no room whatever for any intermediate state [7] (antarabhava). Pure Buddhism does not support the belief that a spirit of the deceased person takes lodgement in some temporary state until it finds a suitable place for its "reincarnation."
-Venerable Narada Thera
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:00 am

Did I word this topic poorly? Or is this just a mystery and no one knows?
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5781
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by DooDoot » Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:45 am

zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:00 am
Or is this just a mystery and no one knows?
There are three or four suttas I found (two days ago) with the same language that say a certain person passes away and is "reborn" but these suttas do not explicitly indicate a time frame.
Anāthapiṇḍika passed away and was reborn in the host of Joyful Gods.

Atha kho anāthapiṇḍiko gahapati kālamakāsi tusitaṃ kāyaṃ upapajji.

https://suttacentral.net/mn143/en/sujato
There is the stock phrase below, however it does not appear to provide an explicit time frame, either, because it seems the only word that may indicate time is "paraṃ":
When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.... When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.’

te kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā apāyaṃ duggatiṃ vinipātaṃ nirayaṃ upapannā.... te kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā sugatiṃ saggaṃ lokaṃ upapannā...

https://suttacentral.net/mn4/en/sujato
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

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:00 am

DooDoot wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:45 am
zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:00 am
Or is this just a mystery and no one knows?
There are three or four suttas I found (two days ago) with the same language that say a certain person passes away and is "reborn" but these suttas do not explicitly indicate a time frame.
Anāthapiṇḍika passed away and was reborn in the host of Joyful Gods.

Atha kho anāthapiṇḍiko gahapati kālamakāsi tusitaṃ kāyaṃ upapajji.

https://suttacentral.net/mn143/en/sujato
You probably need to rely on the stock phrase below:
When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.... When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.’

te kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā apāyaṃ duggatiṃ vinipātaṃ nirayaṃ upapannā.... te kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā sugatiṃ saggaṃ lokaṃ upapannā...

https://suttacentral.net/mn4/en/sujato
Interesting! Thanks. I'm sure there are more, particularly what I would like to see are suttas that imply the view espoused by the Venerable Narada Thera in the op. The commentators ardently notated every line of the suttas and surely used the suttas to explain their views on this topic either in those very commentaries or used sutta quotes to support these views in other works. I only have the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which lists Abhidhamma information beautifully, and covers this topic well to that end, but does not include sutta references. As such, I have only half of the puzzle.
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 21541
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by retrofuturist » Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:56 am

Greetings Zan,
zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:00 am
The commentators ardently notated every line of the suttas and surely used the suttas to explain their views on this topic either in those very commentaries or used sutta quotes to support these views in other works. I only have the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which lists Abhidhamma information beautifully, and covers this topic well to that end, but does not include sutta references. As such, I have only half of the puzzle.
Not to denounce the commentaries, as that would be against the guidelines for this section, but remember that the commentarial era, including late commentaries like Abhidhammattha Sangaha, came after the compilation of the Tipitaka, and that they are regarding the Abhidhamma Pitaka, like the rest of the Tipitaka, as Buddhavacana. As such, they probably found no compulsion to justify their explanations with recourse to citation from multiple Pitakas, since each Pitaka was regarded as an authoritative source of Dhamma-Vinaya in itself.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"It is natural that one who knows and sees things as they really are is disenchanted and dispassionate." (AN 10.2)

“Truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.” (Flannery O'Connor)

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:16 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:56 am
Greetings Zan,
zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:00 am
The commentators ardently notated every line of the suttas and surely used the suttas to explain their views on this topic either in those very commentaries or used sutta quotes to support these views in other works. I only have the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which lists Abhidhamma information beautifully, and covers this topic well to that end, but does not include sutta references. As such, I have only half of the puzzle.
Not to denounce the commentaries, as that would be against the guidelines for this section, but remember that the commentarial era, including late commentaries like Abhidhammattha Sangaha, came after the compilation of the Tipitaka, and that they are regarding the Abhidhamma Pitaka, like the rest of the Tipitaka, as Buddhavacana. As such, they probably found no compulsion to justify their explanations with recourse to citation from multiple Pitakas, since each Pitaka was regarded as an authoritative source of Dhamma-Vinaya in itself.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Excellent points thanks.

I've seen commentarial works that quote suttas to reinforce their teachings. I've also seen comments on suttas where they add info that is largely, or purely commentary tradition, to show what they consider the correct interpretation, we could work backwards from there and maybe see what suttas are interpreted to mean what and might find a sutta or suttas that, to some degree, support this view.

For example, if we could find the commentaries attached to every mention of death and rebirth it's possible that somewhere in there we would find a comment that intends to expand and inform on a sutta but would also implicitly show what sutta the commentators felt supported making such a comment.

If not, surely a Venerable or scholar has written on the subject, aware of possible debate on the topic, and provided sutta quotes to support this view.

If only we had any or all of the above as readily available, and easily searchable as suttacentral or other sites!
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16972
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by mikenz66 » Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:31 pm

zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:16 am
If only we had any or all of the above as readily available, and easily searchable as suttacentral or other sites!
The Commentaries themselves are freely available, e.g. here: https://www.tipitaka.org/ so are already easily searchable, either online, or with downloadable software.

The sticking point is learning enough Pali to read them...

:heart:
Mike

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:02 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:31 pm
zan wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:16 am
If only we had any or all of the above as readily available, and easily searchable as suttacentral or other sites!
The Commentaries themselves are freely available, e.g. here: https://www.tipitaka.org/ so are already easily searchable, either online, or with downloadable software.

The sticking point is learning enough Pali to read them...

:heart:
Mike
Thank you, unfortunately I read zero Pali.
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 974
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by Nicolas » Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:04 pm

These suttas might be relevant:
Saṃyojana Sutta (AN 4.131) wrote: Katamassa, bhikkhave, puggalassa orambhāgiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, upapattipaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, bhavapaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni appahīnāni? Antarāparinibbāyissa. Imassa kho, bhikkhave, puggalassa orambhāgiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, upapattipaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, bhavapaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni appahīnāni.

[Thanissaro:]
And which is the individual in which the lower fetters are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a spontaneous reappearance are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a becoming are unabandoned? One unbound in between [i.e., one who is destined to unbind after leaving the human realm but before reaching a Pure Abode]. In this individual the lower fetters are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a spontaneous reappearance are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a becoming are unabandoned.

[Sujato:]
What person has given up the lower fetters and the fetters for getting reborn, but not the fetters for getting a continued existence?
One extinguished between one life and the next. One extinguished between one life and the next. [...]
Kutūhalasālā Sutta (SN 44.9) wrote: “Yasmiñca pana, bho gotama, samaye imañca kāyaṃ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṃ kāyaṃ anupapanno hoti, imassa pana bhavaṃ gotamo kiṃ upādānasmiṃ paññāpetī”ti?
“Yasmiṃ kho, vaccha, samaye imañca kāyaṃ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṃ kāyaṃ anupapanno hoti, tamahaṃ taṇhūpādānaṃ vadāmi. Taṇhā hissa, vaccha, tasmiṃ samaye upādānaṃ hotī”ti.


[Bodhi:]
“And, Master Gotama, when a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body, what does Master Gotama declare to be its fuel on that occasion?”
“When, Vaccha, a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body, I declare that it is fuelled by craving. For on that occasion craving is its fuel.”

[Thanissaro:]
“And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?”
“Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time.”

[Sujato:]
“But when someone who is attached has laid down this body and has not been reborn in one of the realms, what does Master Gotama say is their fuel then?”
“When someone who is attached has laid down this body, Vaccha, and has not been reborn in one of the realms, I say they’re fueled by craving.
For craving is their fuel then.”

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 974
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by Nicolas » Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:24 pm

Ven. Thanissaro also writes about MN 38:
Usually in the Canon, the term gandhabba means a being on the lowest level of the celestial devas—devas who are often represented as obsessed with lust. However, the Commentary notes that gandhabba in this context means a being whose kamma enables it to take birth on that occasion, an interpretation supported by a discussion in MN 93.

The passage in question:
Assalāyana Sutta (MN 93) wrote: “Then the seven brahman seers approached him to bow down to him, and he said to them, ‘I have heard that this evil viewpoint has arisen in the seven brahman seers as they are consulting together in leaf huts in the wilderness: “Brahmans are the superior caste; any other caste is inferior. Only brahmans are the fair caste; any other caste is dark. Only brahmans are pure, not non-brahmans. Only brahmans are the sons & offspring of Brahmā: born of his mouth, born of Brahmā, created by Brahmā, heirs of Brahmā.”’

“That is so, master.’

“‘But do you know, masters, if the mother who bore you went only with a brahman, and not with a non-brahman?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the mothers of the mother who bore you—back seven generations of mothers—went only with brahmans, and not with non-brahmans?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the father who sired you went only with a brahman woman, and not with a non-brahman woman?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the fathers of the father who bore you—back seven generations of fathers—went only with brahman women, and not with non-brahman women?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘Do you know how there is the descent of an embryo?’

“‘Yes, master, we know how there is the descent of an embryo. There is the case where the mother & father have come together, the mother is fertile, and a gandhabba [the being about to be reborn] is standing present. The coming together of these three is the descent of the embryo.’

“‘But do you know for sure whether the gandhabba is a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘That being the case, do you know who you are?’

“‘That being the case, master, we don’t know who we are.’

“Now, Assalāyana, when those seven brahman seers couldn’t defend their own birth-statement when interrogated, pressed, & rebuked by the seer Devala the Dark, how can you now defend your own birth-statement when interrogated, pressed, & rebuked by me—you, their lineage holder, but not (the equal of) Puṇṇa, their ladle holder?”
(The point Ven. Thanissaro makes is that here there is questioning whether brahmans know or not that they are indeed brahmans by birth--and not knowing the caste of the gandhabba when answering the question implies that one would think the newborn would normally be the same caste as the gandhabba, and that it therefore could be an in-between state.)

Ven. Analayo makes a similar point:
'Rebirth and the Gandhabba' by Analayo wrote: At the end of a discussion in which the Buddha made it clear that the Brahminical belief in caste superiority is groundless, the conditions required for rebirth are listed: "The descent into the womb takes place through the junction of these three [conditions]: there is a union of mother and father, the mother is in season and the gandhabba is present."

The point of bringing up these three conditions in the Assalāyanasutta's discussion is that it cannot be said to which caste the being belongs that is about to be born. This then forms another argument against Brahminical caste presumptions. Thus the discourse continues: "Sirs, do you know for sure if that gandhabba is [a member of the] warrior [caste], or the Brahmin [caste], or the merchant [caste], or the worker [caste]?"

What makes this passage particularly intriguing is its use of the term gandhabba. The Buddhist conception of a gandhabba appears to have its roots in the Vedic gandharva, which had the particular function of transmitting things from one world to another. Should we then understand the gandhabba in the Assalāyana-sutta to be similar to Yama in the Devadūta-sutta, in the sense that while Yama presides over rebirth in hell, the gandhabba presides over human conception?

Yet, according to the commentary to the Assalāyana-sutta, the gandhabba rather stands for the being to be reborn. In fact, the Vedic gandharva as a 'god of transfer' was at times identified with what was under his custody. This sense would seem to be more appropriate to the present context, since the inquiry after the caste of the gandhabba would be meaningful only if it refers to the being to be reborn, not to a god that presides over conception. Thus, though the Vedic concept of a 'god of transfer' helps to explain how the gandhabba would have come to be associated with the transition from one life to another, in its Buddhist usage the term seems to have lost this connotation and appears to stand merely for the being about to be reborn.

An Ekottarika-āgama parallel to the Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya-sutta [MN 38] does not employ the term gandhabba, but instead speaks of the "external consciousness" or of the "aspiring consciousness", in the sense of the consciousness that aspires to be reborn.

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:33 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:04 pm
These suttas might be relevant:
Saṃyojana Sutta (AN 4.131) wrote: Katamassa, bhikkhave, puggalassa orambhāgiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, upapattipaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, bhavapaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni appahīnāni? Antarāparinibbāyissa. Imassa kho, bhikkhave, puggalassa orambhāgiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, upapattipaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni pahīnāni, bhavapaṭilābhiyāni saṃyojanāni appahīnāni.

[Thanissaro:]
And which is the individual in which the lower fetters are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a spontaneous reappearance are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a becoming are unabandoned? One unbound in between [i.e., one who is destined to unbind after leaving the human realm but before reaching a Pure Abode]. In this individual the lower fetters are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a spontaneous reappearance are abandoned, the fetters for gaining a becoming are unabandoned.

[Sujato:]
What person has given up the lower fetters and the fetters for getting reborn, but not the fetters for getting a continued existence?
One extinguished between one life and the next. One extinguished between one life and the next. [...]
Kutūhalasālā Sutta (SN 44.9) wrote: “Yasmiñca pana, bho gotama, samaye imañca kāyaṃ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṃ kāyaṃ anupapanno hoti, imassa pana bhavaṃ gotamo kiṃ upādānasmiṃ paññāpetī”ti?
“Yasmiṃ kho, vaccha, samaye imañca kāyaṃ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṃ kāyaṃ anupapanno hoti, tamahaṃ taṇhūpādānaṃ vadāmi. Taṇhā hissa, vaccha, tasmiṃ samaye upādānaṃ hotī”ti.


[Bodhi:]
“And, Master Gotama, when a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body, what does Master Gotama declare to be its fuel on that occasion?”
“When, Vaccha, a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body, I declare that it is fuelled by craving. For on that occasion craving is its fuel.”

[Thanissaro:]
“And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?”
“Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time.”

[Sujato:]
“But when someone who is attached has laid down this body and has not been reborn in one of the realms, what does Master Gotama say is their fuel then?”
“When someone who is attached has laid down this body, Vaccha, and has not been reborn in one of the realms, I say they’re fueled by craving.
For craving is their fuel then.”
Thanks. Are these suttas meant to show a direct counter to the classical Theravada position as presented in the op?
Last edited by zan on Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:39 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:24 pm
Ven. Thanissaro also writes about MN 38:
Usually in the Canon, the term gandhabba means a being on the lowest level of the celestial devas—devas who are often represented as obsessed with lust. However, the Commentary notes that gandhabba in this context means a being whose kamma enables it to take birth on that occasion, an interpretation supported by a discussion in MN 93.

The passage in question:
Assalāyana Sutta (MN 93) wrote: “Then the seven brahman seers approached him to bow down to him, and he said to them, ‘I have heard that this evil viewpoint has arisen in the seven brahman seers as they are consulting together in leaf huts in the wilderness: “Brahmans are the superior caste; any other caste is inferior. Only brahmans are the fair caste; any other caste is dark. Only brahmans are pure, not non-brahmans. Only brahmans are the sons & offspring of Brahmā: born of his mouth, born of Brahmā, created by Brahmā, heirs of Brahmā.”’

“That is so, master.’

“‘But do you know, masters, if the mother who bore you went only with a brahman, and not with a non-brahman?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the mothers of the mother who bore you—back seven generations of mothers—went only with brahmans, and not with non-brahmans?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the father who sired you went only with a brahman woman, and not with a non-brahman woman?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘And do you know if the fathers of the father who bore you—back seven generations of fathers—went only with brahman women, and not with non-brahman women?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘Do you know how there is the descent of an embryo?’

“‘Yes, master, we know how there is the descent of an embryo. There is the case where the mother & father have come together, the mother is fertile, and a gandhabba [the being about to be reborn] is standing present. The coming together of these three is the descent of the embryo.’

“‘But do you know for sure whether the gandhabba is a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker?’

“‘No, master.’

“‘That being the case, do you know who you are?’

“‘That being the case, master, we don’t know who we are.’

“Now, Assalāyana, when those seven brahman seers couldn’t defend their own birth-statement when interrogated, pressed, & rebuked by the seer Devala the Dark, how can you now defend your own birth-statement when interrogated, pressed, & rebuked by me—you, their lineage holder, but not (the equal of) Puṇṇa, their ladle holder?”
(The point Ven. Thanissaro makes is that here there is questioning whether brahmans know or not that they are indeed brahmans by birth--and not knowing the caste of the gandhabba when answering the question implies that one would think the newborn would normally be the same caste as the gandhabba, and that it therefore could be an in-between state.)

Ven. Analayo makes a similar point:
'Rebirth and the Gandhabba' by Analayo wrote: At the end of a discussion in which the Buddha made it clear that the Brahminical belief in caste superiority is groundless, the conditions required for rebirth are listed: "The descent into the womb takes place through the junction of these three [conditions]: there is a union of mother and father, the mother is in season and the gandhabba is present."

The point of bringing up these three conditions in the Assalāyanasutta's discussion is that it cannot be said to which caste the being belongs that is about to be born. This then forms another argument against Brahminical caste presumptions. Thus the discourse continues: "Sirs, do you know for sure if that gandhabba is [a member of the] warrior [caste], or the Brahmin [caste], or the merchant [caste], or the worker [caste]?"

What makes this passage particularly intriguing is its use of the term gandhabba. The Buddhist conception of a gandhabba appears to have its roots in the Vedic gandharva, which had the particular function of transmitting things from one world to another. Should we then understand the gandhabba in the Assalāyana-sutta to be similar to Yama in the Devadūta-sutta, in the sense that while Yama presides over rebirth in hell, the gandhabba presides over human conception?

Yet, according to the commentary to the Assalāyana-sutta, the gandhabba rather stands for the being to be reborn. In fact, the Vedic gandharva as a 'god of transfer' was at times identified with what was under his custody. This sense would seem to be more appropriate to the present context, since the inquiry after the caste of the gandhabba would be meaningful only if it refers to the being to be reborn, not to a god that presides over conception. Thus, though the Vedic concept of a 'god of transfer' helps to explain how the gandhabba would have come to be associated with the transition from one life to another, in its Buddhist usage the term seems to have lost this connotation and appears to stand merely for the being about to be reborn.

An Ekottarika-āgama parallel to the Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya-sutta [MN 38] does not employ the term gandhabba, but instead speaks of the "external consciousness" or of the "aspiring consciousness", in the sense of the consciousness that aspires to be reborn.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, please correct me if so, this too sounds like you are presenting information to discredit the classical Theravada position.

Thanks for the thought but what I was asking for was suttas that support the classical position, not the exact opposite of that.
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5781
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:15 am

Nicolas wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:04 pm
AN 4.131 One extinguished between one life and the next. One extinguished between one life and the next. [...]

“And, Master Gotama, when a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body

“‘Do you know how there is the descent of an embryo?
These (regardless of the questionable translations) do not appear to explicitly support the view of immediate rebirth; particularly the Brahmin belief in gandhabba spoken by the Brahmins in MN 93.

For example, let us imagine the gandhabba is as you claim or imagine it is. The would mean a soul would have to die and a newish embryo must exist at exactly the same time for that old relinking soul to enter.

For example, World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history. An estimated total of 70–85 million people perished, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). These deaths would have mostly occurred over a period of 4 years. This would mean an estimated total of 50–65 million new embryos would be required for immediate human rebirth; particularly for the homosexual martyrs, Jews, Yanks, Brits, Commies and other "good guys" that would have attained rehuman birth (while those 15,000,000 or so Nazi & other fascist collaborators were reborn in hell and say 5,000,000 starved to death from British famines, such as in Bengal, would be reborn in heaven with Brahma).

It seems it cannot be guaranteed an embyro will be immediately ready for each soul that dies. When the Dhamma says it is "akaliko" or "immediately effective", my impression is this does not apply to reincarnation or to the sexual intercourse between men & women or IVF machines. What I am saying is a soul may have to wait for some time until a new suitable embyro is ready.

Also, we must account for kamma. A gandhabba that did good kamma will seek an embryo from parents who are good people because the good gandhabba (unless it is a Mahayana Bodhisattva wishing to save all sentient beings) generally wants to be reborn into a good family. This also reduces the amount of immediate suitable embryos available.

:smile:
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:11 am, edited 24 times in total.
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

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:24 am

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:15 am
Nicolas wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:04 pm
AN 4.131 One extinguished between one life and the next. One extinguished between one life and the next. [...]

“And, Master Gotama, when a being has laid down this body but has not yet been reborn in another body

“‘Do you know how there is the descent of an embryo?
These (regardless of the questionable translations) do not appear to explicitly support the view of immediate rebirth; particularly the Brahmin belief in gandhabba spoken by the Brahmins in MN 93. For example, let us imagine the gandhabba is as you claim or imagine it is. The would mean a soul would have to die and a newish embryo must exist at exactly the same time.

:candle:
Thanks, I'm lost, though, are you arguing for the classical Theravada position or against?
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

zan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

Re: What suttas support the classical Theravada view of immediate rebirth?

Post by zan » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:36 am

The Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada sub-forums are specialized venues for the discussion of the Abhidhamma and the classical Mahavihara understanding of the Dhamma. Within these forums the Pali Tipitaka and its commentaries are for discussion purposes treated as authoritative. These forums are for the benefit of those members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of these texts and are not for the challenging of the Abhidhamma and/or Theravada commentarial literature.

-Guidelines for the Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada subforums, emphasis mine.
Never read anything I write as an accurate statement about anything whatsoever. First, look to wiser ones than I. Look to wise texts. Unless you can confirm their accuracy from a reliable source, treat my writings like word games, nothing more.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests