Critique of "jhana among Western converts"

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
Post Reply
KevinSolway
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:10 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by KevinSolway »

polarbuddha101 wrote:analytic philosophy
The rebirth doctrine is a long way from being analytic philosophy.
sometimes certain interpretations are indeed vastly more likely to be referring to the meaning intended by the author of the sentence
In religion and philosophy it is very common for interpretations to have no connection to the meaning intended by the author.

saying that what matters is whether Buddhadasas interpretation is correct . . .
Actually, I said that what was important was that Buddhadasas understanding of rebirth was correct, and not that his interpretation was correct. As I understand it, Buddhadasas understanding of rebirth came from direct personal knowledge, and wasn't interpreted from books.
the argument is that if you read the suttas at face value . . .
What is face value to you is not face value to me. And that which is face value to me is not face value to you. This is because we interpret things differently. We see things in a different light.
the conclusion that they are talking about literal rebirth is so much more rational
Only in your opinion, but not in the opinion of those who have a different face value interpretation.
you have to be a contortionist . . .
You have to be a contortionist to attempt to get around the fact that the Buddha experienced ageing and death, or that Buddhism, as a philosophy, shouldn't be speculating about physical matters.
. . . cause and effect are too complex to allow such a thing to occur.
I didn't say that cause and effect are too complex to allow such a thing to occur - while that may be true. I said that each and every action has countless simultaneous effects. So it cannot be the case that one life creates only one life. One candle can light many others. And once it is extinguished it can light none.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

daverupa wrote:
porpoise wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Do the suttas teach a literal rebirth, or not? Interestingly, the arguments for the "not" position tends to be, as we can see in this thread over and over, a lot more convoluted than the literal arguments...
I've noticed that too.
And of course, to split the false dichotomy here, the arguments which suggest that the whole thing can be set aside are direct quotes, which is quite simple.
I am going to edit this msg. My intitial response, written in haste, makes no sense, and as I reread your msg, I am not sure as to your actual point.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DAWN »

KevinSolway wrote:
DAWN wrote: There is no "i" rebirth, there is kamma rebirth.
The point is that kamma has nothing to do with physical life and death. Physical life and death is a non-issue so far as kamma is concerned.
When we die, we die, but our kamma keep moving.
Yes, but kamma isn't tied to specific physical bodies. It runs its own course, making its own complex web.

When firewood is burned, its chemicals are released into the atmosphere and into the soil, and heat and light from the firewood also goes in all directions, having countless effects. Even before the firewood was burned, the same sort of thing was happening. The actual coming into existence of the firewood, or the burning of the firewood - its physical birth and death - is not relevant to anything.
Kamma is action.
Action can be of 3 types.
Body, speach, toughts.

You preach that kamma is only thoghts, and you say that kamma have nothing to do with the body, you reject kamma.
Why?
Because you have some STEREO-TYPE about word "kamma".

When it's said "kamma", it's said "action".
Perharps, when you hear "kamma", you understands somethink another then "action", somethink metaphysical, mistic and para-normal. But it's just conditioned by memory perception of (this) form (word).
Metaphysic, mistic and paranormal "quality" are not present in conseptions of kamma and rebirth, but it's present in your mind.

But if we watch not your stereotypes, but your reflection, you accept "action" (kamma).

Here you describe action rebirth mouvement:
"When firewood is burned, its chemicals are released into the atmosphere and into the soil, and heat and light from the firewood also goes in all directions, having countless effects."
PS: I dot know if you investigate science, but law of Termodinamic = law of Kamma

Sorry to teach you, i dont have legitimity to do this, but there is some misunderstanding of very subject of this conversation. So my intention is clarifiyng what is not clair.
Friendly :namaste:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by daverupa »

tiltbillings wrote:And the which point to it not being set aside are [also] direct quotes.
Indeed! A much more fruitful interface to explore than these modernist trends, it seems to me.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DAWN »

KevinSolway wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:that is the extent of your argumentation here.
I have also explained that cause and effect doesn't work in a way that would make literal rebirth possible, since all actions have countless simultaneous effects.
Procreation is possible.
And many peoples use this possibility.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

KevinSolway wrote:In the language of rebirth "Ageing and death" refers to the dissolution of happiness. First there comes the birth of the false "I", and with it, attachment. When you are attached to something, then at first you experience pleasure, but with time you will experience pain, and loss. That is what is meant by "ageing and death".
What is this based on? Certainly not on how ageing and death is actually described in the suttas, ie in a straightforward physical way. I can't see the rationale for imposing a meaning which isn't present, and wasn't intended. It would be like ignoring the way dukkha is actually described in the suttas, making up a completely new meaning and then rewriting the Four Noble Truths.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

KevinSolway wrote:In religion and philosophy it is very common for interpretations to have no connection to the meaning intended by the author.
So we ignore what the suttas say, and just make up our own meanings based on our personal likes and dislikes and / or what this or that monk said?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
KevinSolway
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:10 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by KevinSolway »

DAWN wrote:Procreation is possible.
Yes, but we don't have exactly one child, at the exact moment of our death.
KevinSolway
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:10 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by KevinSolway »

porpoise wrote:making up a completely new meaning . . .
The fact that the Buddha experienced ageing and death means that it is those who cling to the literal rebirth interpretation who are making things up.
KevinSolway
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:10 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by KevinSolway »

porpoise wrote:So we ignore what the suttas say, and just make up our own meanings based on our personal likes and dislikes and / or what this or that monk said?
No, you should discover the truth for yourself. Until you discover the truth for yourself, then you are only speculating, and you should be mindful of that fact.
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DAWN »

KevinSolway wrote:
DAWN wrote:Procreation is possible.
Yes, but we don't have exactly one child, at the exact moment of our death.
It's true.
If it was by this way, logicaly, samsara was inhabited by the same number of beings. (if we dont count those who a fully liberated in this kapa)

But actualy we know nothink about this.
We can discuss about it for fun, but nobody are reason.

This information have no importance in Buddha Dhamma way to liberation. It's impermanent. It's a burden.

If we have a good action each moment, perfect morality, without regrets, we have no care about future, we dont care if there is rebirth or not. Have no matter.
The one who calculate his rebirth - have no pure morality, he is afraid of himself.

The Nobles Ones are don't afread of themselves neither of others.
Why?
Because they have the perfect morality, deep, authentic, open, unconditioned, true, without corruptions.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
KevinSolway
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:10 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by KevinSolway »

DAWN wrote:You preach that kamma is only thoughts, and you say that kamma have nothing to do with the body, you reject kamma.
No, I don't say that kamma is only thoughts. I am speaking of kamma in the sense of cause and effect - specifically in relation to the rebirth of ignorance. The issue of physical life and death, and whether a human being can be reborn as a frog, or a thousand frogs all at once, is irrelevant when discussing the rebirth of ignorance, and how to get out of the cycle of samsara.
When it's said "kamma", it's said "action".
It's not quite that simple. The word is often used to mean "cause and effect".

I agree with you that it's not mystical or magical in any way.
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DAWN »

KevinSolway wrote:
DAWN wrote:You preach that kamma is only thoughts, and you say that kamma have nothing to do with the body, you reject kamma.
No, I don't say that kamma is only thoughts. I am speaking of kamma in the sense of cause and effect - specifically in relation to the rebirth of ignorance. The issue of physical life and death, and whether a human being can be reborn as a frog, or a thousand frogs all at once, is irrelevant when discussing the rebirth of ignorance, and how to get out of the cycle of samsara.
Buddha said, in SN, that depending co-origination can be understood by bouth sides.

By birth as first condition to all this mass of suffering
Birth , becoming, cligning, craving, feeling, contact, six senses, name-and-form, consciosness, fabrication, ignorance;

By ignorance as first condition to all this mass of suffering.
Ignorance, fabrication, consciosness, name-and-form, six sens base, contact, feeling, craving, cligning, becoming, birth.

I have tendency to take the first side, with birth as condition to suffering.
Why?
Because if beings are not ignorant about anicca, dukkha and anatta of existance, they will not procreate it, by self-duplication (child borning). But, there is ignorance, so beings are born, they suffer, and create suffering to others.

PS added after: actualy we can not separete them. In general, when there is birth, there is ignorance, when there is ignorance there is birth.
KevinSolway wrote:
When it's said "kamma", it's said "action".
It's not quite that simple. The word is often used to mean "cause and effect".

I agree with you that it's not mystical or magical in any way.
Yes it's true.
For me to, kamma is the same that "cause and effect" mouvement. Actualy all mouvement (action) is cause and effect manifestation, kamma manifestation.

There is no magic, just physical laws.
Last edited by DAWN on Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

daverupa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:And the which point to it not being set aside are [also] direct quotes.
Indeed! A much more fruitful interface to explore than these modernist trends, it seems to me.
Modernist tends? That would be, of course, trying to read rebirth in a non-literalist way.

The bottom line here is, however, that you are arguing here for your belief.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

porpoise wrote:
KevinSolway wrote:In religion and philosophy it is very common for interpretations to have no connection to the meaning intended by the author.
So we ignore what the suttas say, and just make up our own meanings based on our personal likes and dislikes and / or what this or that monk said?
That neatly sums it.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply