the great rebirth debate

[Cloud]

Basic Buddhism or Buddhism 101 teaches this; it's the very foundation of the Buddha's teachings and why we seek liberation.

The first noble truth teaches that we suffer; this is dukkha.
The second noble truth teaches that the cause is tanha (thirst/craving).
The third noble truth teaches that the cessation of tanha is the cessation of dukkha. This is Nirvana.
The fourth noble truth is the way.

The Arahant has followed the Noble Eightfold Path (the way) to its conclusion, the complete cessation of tanha and thus dukkha.

Try http://www.accesstoinsight.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, it's very helpful to have a good grounding on the basics and then to combine that with dedicated practice to know the truth of things for yourself. Dukkha is not pain; pain is only dukkha when seen with wrong view, by the deluded mind.

[Sanghamitta]

I have studies those teachings for nearly forty years Cloud. With a variety of experienced teachers, and nothing I have heard or read causes me to assume that I have any idea what an Arhant experiences....
I am not indicatiing that your understanding is wrong or faulty. I am saying that you need to provide specific sources when speaking of that which you deduce rather than know. Unless you ARE an Arahant of course.

[mikenz66]

Hi Cloud,

I'd study some more. Try http://www.accesstoinsight.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, it's very helpful to have a good grounding on the basics.

It's certainly not the case that there is a consensus on this issue, as you can see from a number of threads on this board, including this one. Personally I think that is a very difficult and subtle question.

There are quotes above from various suttas and teachers above that are relevant to this issue. Of course, It depends on what you include in dukkha, but it seems clear that an arahant, while still alive, still has painful feelings, which the quotes given above seem to define as dukkha.


Mike

[Cloud]

The dukkha that is human suffering, and this path leads away from, is mind-made. If it were to be said that pain is dukkha, outside of wrong view, then there is no escape from this dukkha. The Buddha taught of escape from a mind-made dukkha, and that is what is at the end of the path. At the end of the path, the Arahant who has been released the same as the Buddha, finds no discomfort in life. No unsatisfactoriness. No suffering. They see that others are suffering, and know that it is only this mind-made suffering which is to blame. No longer separating self from other, they apply discernment and perfect compassion toward the alleviation of this suffering. There is nothing in experience except experience.

[Sanghamitta]

That sounds like a docetic Arahant, Cloud...And you still haven't said whether this is your deduction or personal experience.

[Cloud]

Try not to make it about me, but understanding of what is being said instead. The Buddha taught only of dukkha and the cessation of dukkha; indeed the complete and utter cessation of the very thirst that causes dukkha. If dukkha is used in any other way, it is not the meaning that dukkha is given in the First Noble Truth; is not the problem that humanity suffers from, and not the purpose of the Buddha's teachings to end it.

Pain is only dukkha (unsatisfactory or suffering) when combined with wrong view. The Arahant has no wrong view; has non-dual wisdom of reality, and suffers not. Experiences only, does not suffer. There's a difference, and it's that difference which is being misunderstood or not understood. As this discussion seems to be going in circles, I'll stop posting and hope that one day you might understand when the conditions are right for understanding to arise. Good luck my friend.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Cloud,

In light of the perspective you raise, you may be interested in this earlier discussion...

Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=6382" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro.

[Sanghamitta]

Try not to make it about me, but understanding of what is being said instead. The Buddha taught only of dukkha and the cessation of dukkha; indeed the complete and utter cessation of the very thirst that causes dukkha. If dukkha is used in any other way, it is not the meaning that dukkha is given in the First Noble Truth; is not the problem that humanity suffers from, and not the purpose of the Buddha's teachings to end it.

Pain is only dukkha (unsatisfactory or suffering) when combined with wrong view. The Arahant has no wrong view; has non-dual wisdom of reality, and suffers not. Experiences only, does not suffer. There's a difference, and it's that difference which is being misunderstood or not understood. As this discussion seems to be going in circles, I'll stop posting and hope that one day you might understand when the conditions are right for understanding to arise. Good luck my friend.

NB " Non dual " is not a currency that the Theravada generally deals in.
I note both the assumption of superiority in understanding ( which may or may not correspond to the actuality but proves conclusively that you are not an Arahant and that you are therefore speculating re the experience state of an Arahant ) and the passive aggression of "friend". Which follows your assertion that one day if I am a good girl I may be able to follow your lofty thoughts...
Its actually quite simple. You are speaking as one who knows what an arahant experiences. This is either the case or it isnt. You either know first hand what an arahant experiences or you dont. If it isnt the case and you dont know first hand what an arahant experiences you are bullshitting.

[kirk5a]

Pain is only dukkha (unsatisfactory or suffering) when combined with wrong view.

I keep noticing this idea, here and other places, among Buddhists. It really doesn't add up for me. Clinging to pain is dukkha, for certain, on that everyone agrees. And not clinging to pain does change the whole experience in a non-dukkha direction. But still, the pain is itself - dukkha. And not just pain. Pleasure too. Even when it is not clung to. I see all sorts of support for that in the suttas. One example:

"And what is the noble truth of dukkha? 'The six internal sense media,' should be the reply. Which six? The medium of the eye... the ear... the nose... the tongue... the body... the intellect. This is called the noble truth of dukkha."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I just read Thanissaro Bhikkhu's "The Weight of Mountains" where he brings out the reasons why dukkha is defined in terms of craving, AND where it is defined in terms of ALL ordinary experience. Makes sense to me. Just looking at half and saying - dukkha is only the craving part - I think that's not accurate. It would seem to lead to the conclusion that looking at sense experience AS dukkha, is wrong practice. But just that practice leads to non-clinging to sense experience, so how can it be wrong?
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tains.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Spiny O'Norman]

Just looking at half and saying - dukkha is only the craving part - I think that's not accurate. It would seem to lead to the conclusion that looking at sense experience AS dukkha, is wrong practice.

This is something I've been wondering about. Though this passage from AN 6.63 seems to suggest that the cessation of craving is synonymous with the cessation of dukkha - the next question is of course how we define craving ( tanha )....

"And what is the cessation of dukkha? From the cessation of craving is the cessation of dukkha; and just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha."

Spiny

[kirk5a]

"And what is the cessation of dukkha? From the cessation of craving is the cessation of dukkha; and just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha."

Spiny

That passage does not mean the dukkha of the senses in and of themselves, ceases right then and there with the cessation of craving.

This is found in the "Release" section of MN 121:

"He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the effluent of sensuality... the effluent of becoming... the effluent of ignorance, are not present. And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' '
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mikenz66]

. Though this passage from AN 6.63 seems to suggest that the cessation of craving is synonymous with the cessation of dukkha - the next question is of course how we define craving ( tanha )....

The other important question is when dukkha finally ends. The expressions such as "in this very life" do not necessarily mean immediately.

Does dukkha end at the point of nibbana or at the expiration of the body? One interpretation is that an arahant who has attained "nibbana with fuel remaining" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#iti-044 still experience the dukkha from past kamma (e.g. bodily pains), until the final expiration of the body ("nibbana without fuel remaining").

These issues have been argued about for millennia and in my view it would be silly for anyone to claim that the correct interpretation is obvious. If it was , Ven Nanananda wouldn't need a couple of dozen Nibbana Sermons to discuss such issues! http://lirs.ru/do/sutra/Nibbana_Sermons,Nanananda.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On the other hand, I'm not really sure what difference the interpretations would make to my practise...


Mike

[kirk5a]

If the senses in themselves are not dukkha, only the clinging is dukkha, then why not undergo rebirth another thousand billion times? Just clear up the craving bit, and then, as I have seen it said here - "rebirth is no problem."

I don't see it that way. And I don't see the Buddha saying it that way. At all. Very much not saying that. In very strong graphic language like filling up the graveyards and so on.

As far as practice goes, well, if the dukkha of the senses is not seen, how we gonna let go? Is it realistic to suppose that the senses can be viewed as non-dukkha.. but we'll still let go of all that? I don't think so.

[mikenz66]

Hi Kirk,

If the senses in themselves are not dukkha, only the clinging is dukkha, then why not undergo rebirth another thousand billion times? ...

You've hit on the reason why the question of rebirth and the question of the cessation of dukkha are realated.

If there is only one life then if the complete cessation of dukkha does not happen instantaneously on attaining nibbana then the path would not appear to be particularly useful...


Mike

[Kenshou]

If the senses in themselves are not dukkha, only the clinging is dukkha, then why not undergo rebirth another thousand billion times?

To be the devil's advocate a little bit, if there's no craving for sense experience, what motivation is there for being reborn, either?