the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:28 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 3:56 am
The above appears to assume "birth" & "death" are physical.
It's a valid assumption, given that birth, aging and death are clearly described in physical terms in SN12.2, MN9, etc.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 4:04 am

In the 1st noble truth, the Buddha summarised all dukkha as attaching to the aggregates as 'self'. The Buddha said this suffering is to be comprehended.
Indeed, but one of the aggregates attached to is rupa, which represents the "physical" dimension of our lives, including our bodies and sense-experience.
You could say that suffering arises due to the thought of "my body", "my aging", "my death", and so on, but that doesn't negate the reality of these biological processes. And given that we are physical beings, the idea of samsara as a continuity of "physical" existence seems to make sense. The craving for continued existence can be interpreted across different timescales.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by budo » Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:49 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am
DooDoot wrote:
Sun May 19, 2019 4:04 am

In the 1st noble truth, the Buddha summarised all dukkha as attaching to the aggregates as 'self'. The Buddha said this suffering is to be comprehended.
Indeed, but one of the aggregates attached to is rupa, which represents the "physical" dimension of our lives, including our bodies and sense-experience.
You could say that suffering arises due to the thought of "my body", "my aging", "my death", and so on, but that doesn't negate the reality of these biological processes. And given that we are physical beings, the idea of samsara as a continuity of "physical" existence seems to make sense. The craving for continued existence can be interpreted across different timescales.
Reminds me of a philosopher, maybe it was Diogenes, slapping a student who said he didn't exist.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6422
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DooDoot » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:56 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:22 am
It is consistent with the suttas to say that bhavasavo is "mental" while bhava is "physical".
No evidence for the above unsubstantiated idea. For example, the suttas (SN 12.2; MN 9) refers to 3 types of bhava: (i) sensual; (ii) material; and (iii) immaterial. Since two of the three types of "bhava" are not "material", obviously bhava is not "physical". :?
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:28 am
birth, aging and death are clearly described in physical terms in SN 12.2, MN 9, etc.
Yes. SN 12.2, MN 9 describe birth, aging and death as applying to "beings" (sattānaṃ; sattanikāye). SN 23.2 & SN 5.10 define "beings" as merely "ideas" or "views". In other words, it appears there is no evidence in sutta that birth, aging and death in SN 12.2 & MN 9 are "physical". :idea:
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am
Indeed, but one of the aggregates attached to is rupa, which represents the "physical" dimension of our lives, including our bodies and sense-experience.
Yes. The attaching aggregate is "sankhara". This attachment is the idea of "our" life> :roll:
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am
You could say that suffering arises due to the thought of "my body", "my aging", "my death", and so on, but that doesn't negate the reality of these biological processes.
My impression is the Buddha was not concerned about "biology" as you appear to be :roll: . Sorry but Dhamma appears to teach suffering only arises due to the thought of "my". To quote:
And how is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind?

There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is not seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is not seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, but he does not fall into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its change & alteration.

SN 22.1 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
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

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:04 am

Doo doot, I'm struggling to understand your arguments.

Two of the three bhavas have a "physical" dimension. Sensual becoming is clearly related to the bodily sense organs, and material becoming is obviously related to the elements of form. So it's valid to say that bhava has a "physical" dimension, and is NOT a purely mental process.

The descriptions of birth, aging and death in SN12.2 etc are clearly physical/biological, and clearly NOT psychological.
For example " Growing old, brokenness of teeth, greyness of hair, wrinkling of skin..." is clearly describing a physical/biological process, and not a psychological one.
I honestly don't understand your objection to this simple observation. Why is the physicality of birth, aging and death in these suttas such a problem for you?
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 6291
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:11 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am
You could say that suffering arises due to the thought of "my body", "my aging", "my death", and so on, but that doesn't negate the reality of these biological processes. And given that we are physical beings, the idea of samsara as a continuity of "physical" existence seems to make sense.
It doesn't make any sense to me if we're talking about the continuity of physical existence in a different body after the physical death and dissolution of the previous body.

Also, lets not forget that ideas about Samsara and rebirth already existed in India before the Buddha.


.
Last edited by Aloka on Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6422
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DooDoot » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:16 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:04 am


Two of the three bhavas have a "physical" dimension. Sensual becoming is clearly related to the bodily sense organs, and material becoming is obviously related to the elements of form. So it's valid to say that bhava has a "physical" dimension, and is NOT a purely mental process.

The descriptions of birth, aging and death in SN12.2 etc are clearly physical/biological, and clearly NOT psychological.
For example " Growing old, brokenness of teeth, greyness of hair, wrinkling of skin..." is clearly describing a physical/biological process, and not a psychological one.
The above is a fake or redacted quote. Since you didn’t post the most important words of the quote; you missed the boat. As for sensual, it is related to lust. Lust is mental. For example now I am sitting on a rock but, trust me, there is nothing sensual going on between me & the rock
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

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:33 am

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:16 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:04 am


Two of the three bhavas have a "physical" dimension. Sensual becoming is clearly related to the bodily sense organs, and material becoming is obviously related to the elements of form. So it's valid to say that bhava has a "physical" dimension, and is NOT a purely mental process.

The descriptions of birth, aging and death in SN12.2 etc are clearly physical/biological, and clearly NOT psychological.
For example " Growing old, brokenness of teeth, greyness of hair, wrinkling of skin..." is clearly describing a physical/biological process, and not a psychological one.
The above is a fake or redacted quote. Since you didn’t post the most important words of the quote; you missed the boat. As for sensual, it is related to lust. Lust is mental. For example now I am sitting on a rock but, trust me, there is nothing sensual going on between me & the rock
The quote is directly taken from SN12.2, to demonstrate the physicality of these descriptions. Again I honestly don't understand your objection to the physicality of these Sutta descriptions of birth, aging and death.

Clearly you cannot have sensual lust without sensual input via the bodily senses. So there is a physical dimension. To me this doesn't seem like a controversial observation.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

Aloka wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:11 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:22 am
You could say that suffering arises due to the thought of "my body", "my aging", "my death", and so on, but that doesn't negate the reality of these biological processes. And given that we are physical beings, the idea of samsara as a continuity of "physical" existence seems to make sense.
It doesn't make any sense to me if we're talking about the continuity of physical existence in a different body after the physical death and dissolution of the previous body.

Also, lets not forget that ideas about Samsara and rebirth already existed in India before the Buddha.

.
The Buddha teaching on anatta was a radical departure from existing ideas, and it seems to me unlikely that he would have retained rebirth merely for the sake of convenience, or conformity, or whatever.

In the suttas the Buddha is regularly portrayed challenging the Brahmins, and it doesn't seem like he was afraid to disagree with their beliefs. That is why I don't find Stephen Batchelor "skillful means" argument for the rebirth teachings very convincing.

I'm not arguing in favour of rebirth, and personally I'm agnostic about it. What puzzles me is the degree of aversion that some people have to the idea, and the lengths they go to in their attempts to "prove" that the Buddha didn't teach it, or didn't really believe it, or whatever.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
pitakele
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 11:27 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by pitakele » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:24 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

I'm not arguing in favour of rebirth, and personally I'm agnostic about it. What puzzles me is the degree of aversion that some people have to the idea, and the lengths they go to in their attempts to "prove" that the Buddha didn't teach it, or didn't really believe it, or whatever.
It could be that those who are excessively attached to the idea of 'no rebirth' have held a similar view in past lives 😁
now here = nowhere

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:32 am

pitakele wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:24 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

I'm not arguing in favour of rebirth, and personally I'm agnostic about it. What puzzles me is the degree of aversion that some people have to the idea, and the lengths they go to in their attempts to "prove" that the Buddha didn't teach it, or didn't really believe it, or whatever.
It could be that those who are excessively attached to the idea of 'no rebirth' have held a similar view in past lives 😁
:jumping:
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6422
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by DooDoot » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:49 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:33 am
The quote is directly taken from SN 12.2, to demonstrate the physicality of these descriptions.
Sorry but the proper quote is as follows:
Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.
The quote is not as you edited & posted:
Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty, that is called death.
Therefore aging & death appears not aging & death of mere aggregates. It is aging & death of "beings" that cause sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief & despair, such as "beings" produced by ignorance called "me", "my wife", "my mother", "my father", "my son", "my daughter", "my favourite pop star", etc.

"A being" according to sutta is something "mental" rather than "physical". "A being" appears to be a "self-view". To quote:
Why now do you assume 'a being'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found.

SN 5.10
'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

SN 23.2
Therefore, in MN 87, the man was not suffering over aggregates or over a corpse. The man was suffering over his "son".
the Blessed One said to him, "Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties."

"Lord, how could there not be an aberration in my faculties? My dear & beloved little son, my only child, has died. Because of his death, I have no desire to work or to eat. I keep going to the cemetery and crying out, 'Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone, my only little child?'"

MN 87
Note: the above does not refute "reincarnation". The above only makes dependent origination questionable as an explanation of reincarnation. The Buddha taught many teachings about "upapajjati" in "hell" :P for those who don't attain Nibbana. Refer to MN 130, which describes what happens to those not free from "birth" & "death" via non-clinging.

:smile:
Seeing danger in clinging,
in the coming-into-play
of birth & death,
they are released from lack of clinging,
in the ending
of birth & death.
They, happy, arriving at safety,
fully unbound in the here-&-now :thumbsup:

MN 130
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

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 6291
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:11 am

pitakele wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:24 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

I'm not arguing in favour of rebirth, and personally I'm agnostic about it. What puzzles me is the degree of aversion that some people have to the idea, and the lengths they go to in their attempts to "prove" that the Buddha didn't teach it, or didn't really believe it, or whatever.
It could be that those who are excessively attached to the idea of 'no rebirth' have held a similar view in past lives 😁
It could also be that people like yourself tend to indulge in excessively wild speculations about past and future lives!

:console:

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 21879
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:38 am

Aloka wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:11 am
pitakele wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:24 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

I'm not arguing in favour of rebirth, and personally I'm agnostic about it. What puzzles me is the degree of aversion that some people have to the idea, and the lengths they go to in their attempts to "prove" that the Buddha didn't teach it, or didn't really believe it, or whatever.
It could be that those who are excessively attached to the idea of 'no rebirth' have held a similar view in past lives 😁
It could also be that people like yourself tend to indulge in excessively wild speculations about past and future lives!

:console:
It could also be that some people take particular Pali terms to mean "birth" or "rebirth", and then over-reach by thinking that anyone challenging their dubious interpretation of those Pali terms is actively denying rebirth.

:ugeek:
"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)

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by budo » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:46 am

So if there is no rebirth, did the Buddha enter some kind of universal memory archive database and accessed information about older Buddhas?

Please explain how he attained this knowledge of past Buddhas.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: form, kroyakor, NuanceOfSuchness, SDC and 385 guests