DooDoot wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:46 am
Wow! By sheer coincidence, I opened the Rig Veda for the 1st time ever to research...
Doodoot is just getting into Veda.
I must say that I come from the Vedic world, before I became a Buddhist.
The Rg was my Veda of predilection.
And I left the Vedic world, because of the mess it engendered.
You know - the Greeks killed the sphinx, because of the mess that the profoundly bottomless (yet very profound/intense) Egyptian philosophy engendered, (and where the spirit couldn't find its substance, therefore its essence ).
The early Buddhists got rid of the late Vedism philosophy, because no one could make sense of this absolute profound mess of the Vedas.
Another Doodoot's brick, for the "house of mess" of Master Doodoot.
Now Doodoot, if you want to escape your poorly formulated ideas on existence & non-existence on the micro level, by getting into the (messy) macro level, then read this:
The 10th mandala (and the first) are indeed late mandalas and MIGHT have been one of the preoccupation at the time of the Buddha.
However, it seems that in DN1, the "existence" issue appears only:
- In wrong view #5:
"‘Oh, if only some other beings would come here!’ That was my wish, and then these beings came into this existence!”, says Brahma.
- In Wrong view #16, with the eel-wrigglers:
"Does the Tathāgata exist after death? Does he not exist after death? Does he both exist and not exist after death? ", etc.
- In Wrong view #17, with the devas called Unconscious:
"The self and the world have arisen by chance. How so? Before this I did not exist. Now from not-being I have been brought to being".
- In the wrong views of the annihilationists:
There are, monks, some ascetics and Brahmins who are Annihilationists, who proclaim the annihilation, destruction and non-existence of beings, and they do so in seven ways. On what basis?
There are some recluses and Brahmāns who are annihilationists, who hold settled views about the future, and who on seven grounds proclaim the annihilation of a living being.
View #51 to 57
Note: as far as a real physical body made of the four great elements (not an "idea") is concerned (as in early Buddhism, where it happens in the saḷāyatana nidāna), all the annihilationists agree that the real physical body breaks up at death time.
Only the self that remains, differs in their different views (52 to 57) - and in wrong view #57, it ends up with a self that has realized the sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception, and is annihilated.
Here, we see that beings encompasses the real body and the self that accompnies it.
Note: Read also DA 21, the parallel. There are some interesting discrepancies.
However, the micro level in SN 12.15 is concerned with the "All" and the "world".
But about that, you have a very hard time to admit that the ONLY simple definitions with PERFECT parallels, are SN 35.23/SA 319 (the All), and SN 35.82/SA 231 (the World).
Strangely, it sounds like you'd rather come up with your own definition?!?!
And now, Doodoot goes for references in the "Wiki" !?!?
Why don't you just go for the Monnier-Williams dictionary, so as to b
make sure that the meaning existed at the time of Buddha.
I doubt that the Wiki embarasses itself with historical semantics.
जातिJāti (vr. jan-ti - √ जन् jan var. jā + ॰ति -ti)
- birth , production AitBr. Mn. MBh.
- the form of existence (as man , animal , ) fixed by birth Mn.
- position assigned by birth , rank , caste , family , race , lineage Mn. KātyŚr. (probably post-Buddhist - 300 BCE).
I am not sure that jati in our case, has to do with "position assigned by rank"; or as you presumed, deducted, and added on your own behalf: "identity".
Let's not get into post- Buddhist meanings, without some pre-buddhist occurence,will you.
And please, let's not infer some new meanings.
As far as jati is concerned, I had come with that summary of the process on May 20 2018:
Once the body made out of form has come to be in the saḷāyatana nidāna, then a whole process develops.
(just see this https://justpaste.it/1695d)
That is to say, you tranfer the properties of the external khandhas (external namarupa) and their sensory (external) ayatanani, to the internal ayatanani, through sense-consciousness. This is phassa (namely the result of the combination of the last three).
Then you experience that, with a wish to inquire further (vedana) - you inquire and make assumptions (sanna) - you make up your mind (manasi kr) - You intent (cetana) - (and that leads to your "personal" knowledge).
You crave for that (tanha), you appropriate that as yours (upadana) - and, for that reason (mostly craving), you wish for more existence (bhava) and birth (jati) ensues.
So here, we are talking about a birth, that is the result of nāma (as defined by the nikayas) (as seen on this visual aid https://justpaste.it/1695d
), that is also mentioned in the Arv5; namely, "the accomplishment (अभिनिर्हृ abhinirvṛtti) of the nāma-aggregates".
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=35685&sid=7278027c ... 45#p534493
Birth is more concerned with the production (jati) of the cetana in nama, than by somekind of "identity" of a being/self. As you see on the visual aid, it is manosancetana that imports; not the "identity" of the being.
Waiting for another excited elucubration from you.