"The Deathless" (amata)

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by kirk5a »

tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote: I am curious to know whether a poster who proclaims views about "the Deathless" actually knows and sees the Deathless for him/herself or whether it's rooted in mere reading, thinking, and reasoning.
Not to worry. There is no "the Deathless" to know or see.
Another proclaimer. What is this, Karaoke for the unawakened? But ok, in the interest of safeguarding the truth, since I don't know anything about you, tell us, proclaimer, based on what, do you say that? Your pet translation of Iti 43? You better be relying on something other than that, if you're going to be so bold. Like say - your actual awakening. Otherwise - pshaw with your statement.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

kirk5a wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote: I am curious to know whether a poster who proclaims views about "the Deathless" actually knows and sees the Deathless for him/herself or whether it's rooted in mere reading, thinking, and reasoning.
Not to worry. There is no "the Deathless" to know or see.
Another proclaimer.
Not at all. "The Deathless" is just bad translation of the Pali.
>> 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
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by kirk5a »

tiltbillings wrote:Not at all. "The Deathless" is just bad translation of the Pali.
Bah.
Open are the doors to the Deathless
to those with ears.
Let them show their conviction.
Perceiving trouble, O Brahma,
I did not tell people the refined,
sublime Dhamma.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

kirk5a wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Not at all. "The Deathless" is just bad translation of the Pali.
Bah.
That is one of the less articulate responses I have seen in a while.
Open are the doors to the Deathless
to those with ears.
Let them show their conviction.
Perceiving trouble, O Brahma,
I did not tell people the refined,
sublime Dhamma.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A bad translation from the Pali
>> 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 »

kirk5a wrote:
nowheat wrote: I am not talking about having achieved some ... Release From Death.
Well then you can't say you know what the Buddha meant by "Released" then, can you.
Well, I suppose since one is no longer reborn, one no longer dies. No point in making this complicated.
>> 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
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by kirk5a »

tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote: Bah.
That is one of the less articulate responses I have seen in a while.
It is perfectly articulate, actually, for it conveys exactly what I think of your response. It's just as I expected - something rooted in mere "translation of Pali."
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

kirk5a wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote: Bah.
That is one of the less articulate responses I have seen in a while.
It is perfectly articulate, actually, for it conveys exactly what I think of your response. It's just as I expected - something rooted in mere "translation of Pali."
Which only goes to show how totally inarticulate your response is.

The Dhamma is about letting go, being free from. It is not about trying to get to some state called "the Deathless." Sounds like Hinduism.
  • ”Then the group of five monks, being thus exhorted, thus instructed by me [the Buddha], being liable to birth because of self, having known the perils in what is liable to birth, seeking freedom from birth, the uttermost security from the bonds -- nibbana -- won freedom from birth, the uttermost security from the bonds -- nibbana...." -MN I 173
You can strive for "the Deathless" -- whatever that might be -- if you wish. Being free from birth and death by letting go seems to be more in line with the Buddha's teachings.
  • Gone to the beyond of becoming,
    you let go of in front,
    let go of behind,
    let go of between.
    With a heart everywhere let-go,
    you don't come again to birth
    & aging.
    Dhp 348
>> 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
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by nowheat »

tiltbillings wrote:
nowheat wrote: I am not talking about having achieved some ... Release From Death.
Well, I suppose since one is no longer reborn, one no longer dies. No point in making this complicated.
Oh but there is a point, though it's not "making" it complicated, it's in recognizing that it *is* complicated. The Buddha put so many layers into "The Deathless" that if we just latch onto one, all we see is the finger pointing at the moon, and miss the moon by an AU.

kirk5a wrote: Well then you can't say you know what the Buddha meant by "Released" then, can you.
Yes, I can, and do. The confusion here is my fault, for which I apologize. I realize now that when discussing the different universes these terms reside in, I should be careful to be specific about which death I am talking about. I should have said, "Release From Literal Death".

The perception that The Deathless is some mystical state is caused by falling for the romance of the language the Buddha was using as he subverted others' terms for their doctrines and practices to his own. The Deathless is what they sought in the Upanishads -- it's the equivalent of liberation -- and the Buddha uses the same term for the liberation he describes, but obviously he doesn't mean the same thing -- kind of strange if he was saying "after you die something wonderful will happen" just like everyone else was saying.

What I love about his definition, though, is the way his compares to everyone else's Deathless -- which were all about reaching some high state of meditation or practices in this life that would set one up for a blissful, deathless state *after death* (so much for Deathless!) -- whereas the Buddha's Deathless was all about *in this very life* and he offered up an elegantly constructed argument (DA) that not only explained what was going on, and pointed to what could be done about it (and why) but allowed him to use terms like The Deathless in a way that was consistent with his suggestion that we not concern ourselves with lasting selves and where they go at death. The man was brilliant (maybe a little too clever with these sorts of subtleties, which then get too easily misunderstood).

I am saying The Deathless isn't a great mystical state or Release From (literal) Death. I am saying it is a state of being liberated from the specific circumstances of DA, and that it is release from the Death he defined there, which is, really, just dukkha.


:namaste:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

nowheat wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
nowheat wrote: I am not talking about having achieved some ... Release From Death.
Well, I suppose since one is no longer reborn, one no longer dies. No point in making this complicated.
Oh but there is a point, though it's not "making" it complicated, it's in recognizing that it *is* complicated. The Buddha put so many layers into "The Deathless" that if we just latch onto one, all we see is the finger pointing at the moon, and miss the moon by an AU.
If you want it to be complicated and that works for you, fine, but I see no point in it, either from a standpoint of practice or from a standpoint of the texts. Why shackle oneself with a confusing and unnecessary locution -- "the Deathless" -- that suggests some sort of thingie?
>> 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
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by nowheat »

tiltbillings wrote:If you want it to be complicated and that works for you, fine, but I see no point in it, either from a standpoint of practice or from a standpoint of the texts. Why shackle oneself with a confusing and unnecessary locution -- "the Deathless" -- that suggests some sort of thingie?
I definitely agree with you about not shackling oneself, and rue that The Deathless comes with a suggestion of some sort of "thingie" but I am trying to explain that it is, at least, not a mystical thingie.

If the Buddha had been able to put the concept out there in a straightforward manner, with no unnecessary locutions (and still make converts and get his dhamma to survive) then I would not need to try to explain the complications. But we are talking about how rebirth fits in the dhamma, here in this thread, and The Deathless is a part of that.

I don't "want" it to be complicated. What I want is not relevant. I'm talking about *what is* and that is that there are many layers to the meaning the Buddha had for The Deathless.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a simple view, as long as it is accurate. If what you mean by "since one is no longer reborn, one no longer dies" matches what I mean by it, then I have nothing further to show you; but if what you mean by it differs from what I am trying to explain, then making that difference clear will necessarily require "complication". Where there was one definition (yours) there will now be at least two (yours and mine).

But in trying to show others that the dhamma I see is the dhamma in the Pali canon, I need to show the layering of what seems to us now like very complex language -- seems so because we don't have the context people had for the words and ideas when the man was actually living and talking to them -- but will have been much clearer to folks then. This is actually the heart of the argument I am making, that our "keep it simple, take the texts literally as if they were spoken to us here in this age" approach denies the Buddha his complex use of language.

:namaste:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by retrofuturist »

:goodpost:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

nowheat wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:If you want it to be complicated and that works for you, fine, but I see no point in it, either from a standpoint of practice or from a standpoint of the texts. Why shackle oneself with a confusing and unnecessary locution -- "the Deathless" -- that suggests some sort of thingie?
I definitely agree with you about not shackling oneself, and rue that The Deathless comes with a suggestion of some sort of "thingie" but I am trying to explain that it is, at least, not a mystical thingie.
The problem, which I think you are missing, is that the point I am making is that "the Deathless" is a bad translation.
>> 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
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by nowheat »

tiltbillings wrote:The problem, which I think you are missing, is that the point I am making is that "the Deathless" is a bad translation.
I've seen you saying that, but I haven't seen you give convincing evidence that this is so. I don't have anything to say about the supposition without anything to back it up. You cited a sutta, but didn't give any detail.

:namaste:
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka »

tiltbillings wrote:. Why shackle oneself with a confusing and unnecessary locution -- "the Deathless" -- that suggests some sort of thingie?
Hi Tilt,

At Dharma Seed, there's a 25 minute talk from Ajahn Sucitto called 'Openness Merging into the Deathless'.

He says: " 'Deathless' is the mind's liberation from all clinging. "

http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/9/

kind regards,

Aloka
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by tiltbillings »

nowheat wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:The problem, which I think you are missing, is that the point I am making is that "the Deathless" is a bad translation.
I've seen you saying that, but I haven't seen you give convincing evidence that this is so. I don't have anything to say about the supposition without anything to back it up. You cited a sutta, but didn't give any detail.

:namaste:
Okay. We can start with this: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 72#p159172" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
>> 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