Moment to moment rebirth

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:48 pm

I have heard it before that literal rebirth was an obstacle in believing or accepting the Dhamma, and I understand that. It's ok.

:buddha1:
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Sunrise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:49 pm

THIS SITE IS GREAT :woohoo:
Sunrise
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Sunrise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:52 pm

I think paticcasamuppada is a dhamma to be seen in moment to moment. The Buddha said "sandittika" which means to be seen in the moment. So the moment to moment rebirth is more acceptable in the context of paticcasamuppada. Right?
Sunrise
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:42 pm

Certainly Ajahn Buddhadasa would agree Sunrise, and so would Stephen Batchelor. With the qualification that T Mingyur mentioned that the question of time and its lack of absolute existence needs to be factored in, time also arising Dependently.....
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Elise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:59 pm

PeterB wrote: With the qualification that T Mingyur mentioned that the question of time and its lack of absolute existence needs to be factored in, time also arising Dependently.....


I don't quite understand :thinking:
Elise
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:09 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:04 pm

Sunrise wrote:THIS SITE IS GREAT :woohoo:


What makes you say that? :smile:
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Sunrise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:13 pm

Good discussions :jumping:
Sunrise
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:15 pm

:smile: :hug:
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Sunrise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:20 pm

Aww thanks Anna

:hug: :anjali:
Sunrise
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:17 pm

Elise wrote:
PeterB wrote: With the qualification that T Mingyur mentioned that the question of time and its lack of absolute existence needs to be factored in, time also arising Dependently.....


I don't quite understand :thinking:

from a conventional viewpoint the links in dependent origination happen in sequence...however time also arises as a result of conditions. So rather than being just a backdrop against which dhammas arise, time itself is a condition that arises dependant on other conditions.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Jason » Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:10 pm

Annapurna wrote:Jason, as an agnostic it is only a logical consequense that you arrive at this conclusion. The here and now is perceptible, with the physical senses. It is tangible.

However, it is just one piece of the puzzle.

No doubt you can remember that you once were a little boy. You are not anylonger, and yet your past meets your presense in one point, just like all spokes meet in a hub.


Actually, I wasn't agnostic about rebirth in the beginning. I was skeptical when I first became interested in Buddhism, and then later took it on faith that it was true based upon a literal interpretation of everything I read in the Suttas and the influence of traditionalists. My faith, however, didn't prevent me from also having an open mind and exploring the subject in more detail. My agnosticism actually arose from years of study and contemplation of both the suttas and what modern science has to say about the way the brain appears to work. As I now see no reason to force myself to have faith in the reality of things that I can't possibly know to be true, I find it to be an appropriate position to take.

And yes, I can remember things from when I was around 6 or 7, but I certainly can't remember anything from a 'previous life,' and memories of past events in this life does little prove or even suggest that this is just one of many successive lives. Of course, it's quite possible that I do have such memories and I simply can't access them, but then, that's why I'm agnostic on the subject.

But Jason, then you are not naming the kid by it's real name.

Why should I call Micky mouse Donald Duck?

Buddha spoke of post-mortem rebirth:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html

4. "I do not understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning. It would be good if Master Gotama taught me the Dhamma so that I might understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning."

"Then listen, student, and heed well what I shall say."

"Even so, Master Gotama," Subha the student replied. The Blessed One said this:

5. "Here, student, some woman or man is a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. If, on the dissolution of the body, after death, instead of his reappearing in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, he comes to the human state, he is short-lived wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to short life, that is to say, to be a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings.


After death, after the dissolution of the body, he reappears.

Any more clear, simple and direct it can't be said.

IF there is a difficulty to understand or accept is, faith could come into the picture.

The Buddha said himself, that some people will understand the Dhamma at once, if it is explained to them, some will grasp a lot but not all, and some will not get it, butwill have faith and live according to the teachings.

This, Master Gotama explained, would bring them into a good next rebirth where they will grasp it.

Metta,

Anna


He spoke about punabhava, literally 'again becoming.' The way I understand it, Becoming (bhava) is a mental process, which arises due to the presence of clinging (upadana) in the mind with regard to the five-clinging aggregates, and acts as a condition for the birth (jati) of the conceit 'I am,' the self-identification that designates a being (satta).

There's rarely a moment when the mind isn't clinging to this or that in one or more of the four ways (MN 11). Our identity jumps from one thing to another, wherever the clinging is strongest. Our sense of self is something which is always in flux, ever-changing from moment to moment in response to various internal and external stimuli, and yet at the same time, we tend to see it as a static thing. It's as if our sense of self desires permanence, but its very nature causes it to change every second. As the Buddha warns in SN 12.61:

    "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

Change is, of course, a fact of nature. All things are in a perpetual state of change, but the problem is that our sense of self ignores this reality on a certain level. From birth to death, we have the tendency to think that this 'I' remains the same. Now, we might know that some things have changed (e.g., our likes and dislikes, our age, the amount of wrinkles we have, etc.), but we still feel as if we're still 'us.' We have the illusion (for lack of a better word) that our identity is who we are, a static entity named [fill in the blank], and we tend to perceive this as being the same throughout our lives.

That said, the conventional use of personality is a function of survival, as well as convenience. However, clinging to our personalities as 'me' or 'mine' is seen as giving continued fuel for becoming, i.e., a mental process of taking on a particular kind of identity that arises out of clinging. Our sense of self, the ephemeral 'I,' is merely a mental imputation — the product of what the Buddha called a process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' — and when we cling to our sense of self as being 'me' or 'mine' in some way, we're clinging to an impermanent representation of something that we've deluded ourselves into thinking is fixed and stable. It becomes a sort of false refuge that's none of these things.

So regardless if postmortem rebirth is true, this process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' can be seen here and now, and it's the stilling of this mental process that leads to freedom, liberation, awakening.
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).

leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
User avatar
Jason
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Sunrise » Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:18 pm

Jason wrote:
So regardless if postmortem rebirth is true, this process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' can be seen here and now, and it's the stilling of this mental process that leads to freedom, liberation, awakening.


Makes sense :thanks:
Sunrise
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:21 pm

Sure does, and very well put Jason..Thank you.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:07 pm

PeterB wrote:
Elise wrote:
PeterB wrote: With the qualification that T Mingyur mentioned that the question of time and its lack of absolute existence needs to be factored in, time also arising Dependently.....


I don't quite understand :thinking:

from a conventional viewpoint the links in dependent origination happen in sequence...however time also arises as a result of conditions. So rather than being just a backdrop against which dhammas arise, time itself is a condition that arises dependant on other conditions.


So that time can contract into 'one point'? Do you know what I mean?
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:19 pm

Well said, Jason.

:thumbsup:

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14679
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:17 am

Jason wrote:
Annapurna wrote:Jason, as an agnostic it is only a logical consequense that you arrive at this conclusion. The here and now is perceptible, with the physical senses. It is tangible.

However, it is just one piece of the puzzle.

No doubt you can remember that you once were a little boy. You are not anylonger, and yet your past meets your presense in one point, just like all spokes meet in a hub.


Actually, I wasn't agnostic about rebirth in the beginning. I was skeptical when I first became interested in Buddhism, and then later took it on faith that it was true based upon a literal interpretation of everything I read in the Suttas and the influence of traditionalists. My faith, however, didn't prevent me from also having an open mind and exploring the subject in more detail. My agnosticism actually arose from years of study and contemplation of both the suttas and what modern science has to say about the way the brain appears to work. As I now see no reason to force myself to have faith in the reality of things that I can't possibly know to be true, I find it to be an appropriate position to take.

And yes, I can remember things from when I was around 6 or 7, but I certainly can't remember anything from a 'previous life,' and memories of past events in this life does little prove or even suggest that this is just one of many successive lives. Of course, it's quite possible that I do have such memories and I simply can't access them, but then, that's why I'm agnostic on the subject.

But Jason, then you are not naming the kid by it's real name.

Why should I call Micky mouse Donald Duck?

Buddha spoke of post-mortem rebirth:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html

4. "I do not understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning. It would be good if Master Gotama taught me the Dhamma so that I might understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning."

"Then listen, student, and heed well what I shall say."

"Even so, Master Gotama," Subha the student replied. The Blessed One said this:

5. "Here, student, some woman or man is a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. If, on the dissolution of the body, after death, instead of his reappearing in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, he comes to the human state, he is short-lived wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to short life, that is to say, to be a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings.


After death, after the dissolution of the body, he reappears.

Any more clear, simple and direct it can't be said.

IF there is a difficulty to understand or accept is, faith could come into the picture.

The Buddha said himself, that some people will understand the Dhamma at once, if it is explained to them, some will grasp a lot but not all, and some will not get it, butwill have faith and live according to the teachings.

This, Master Gotama explained, would bring them into a good next rebirth where they will grasp it.

Metta,

Anna


He spoke about punabhava, literally 'again becoming.' The way I understand it, Becoming (bhava) is a mental process, which arises due to the presence of clinging (upadana) in the mind with regard to the five-clinging aggregates, and acts as a condition for the birth (jati) of the conceit 'I am,' the self-identification that designates a being (satta).

There's rarely a moment when the mind isn't clinging to this or that in one or more of the four ways (MN 11). Our identity jumps from one thing to another, wherever the clinging is strongest. Our sense of self is something which is always in flux, ever-changing from moment to moment in response to various internal and external stimuli, and yet at the same time, we tend to see it as a static thing. It's as if our sense of self desires permanence, but its very nature causes it to change every second. As the Buddha warns in SN 12.61:

    "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

Change is, of course, a fact of nature. All things are in a perpetual state of change, but the problem is that our sense of self ignores this reality on a certain level. From birth to death, we have the tendency to think that this 'I' remains the same. Now, we might know that some things have changed (e.g., our likes and dislikes, our age, the amount of wrinkles we have, etc.), but we still feel as if we're still 'us.' We have the illusion (for lack of a better word) that our identity is who we are, a static entity named [fill in the blank], and we tend to perceive this as being the same throughout our lives.

That said, the conventional use of personality is a function of survival, as well as convenience. However, clinging to our personalities as 'me' or 'mine' is seen as giving continued fuel for becoming, i.e., a mental process of taking on a particular kind of identity that arises out of clinging. Our sense of self, the ephemeral 'I,' is merely a mental imputation — the product of what the Buddha called a process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' — and when we cling to our sense of self as being 'me' or 'mine' in some way, we're clinging to an impermanent representation of something that we've deluded ourselves into thinking is fixed and stable. It becomes a sort of false refuge that's none of these things.

So regardless if postmortem rebirth is true, this process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' can be seen here and now, and it's the stilling of this mental process that leads to freedom, liberation, awakening.



What I remember most from your post is, that you were sceptical aboutr rebirth from the start and it doesn't seem to have changed much. You still have the same issues. Correct?

I didn't. It convinced me, it made sense, it was the most logical thing I had ever heard, it explained the whole Dhamma to me, and only with rebirth kamma made sense.

Think about it.

Do you think that Hitler's kamma for killing millions of people is leveled by taking a f### cyankali pill?

I don't.

So, where will all this kamma go?

Where is Hitler's kamma going to get 'burned up' if not in future lives? Obviously, this life is over....! So it can't be done here!!

So where is the rest supposed to take place?

As Buddha described in one of the 6 realms? Or where...?

So, if you don't accept literal rebirth, are you also...sorry.... denying the 6 realms? Since rebirth is so crucial for the rest of the Dhamma, can you leave it out?

Is it not wing-clipping the Dhamma....? I don't mind if people follow the rest of the Dhamma, then it is fine with me. If they argue that they get tangible results this way, fine, I do too.

But: The senses are not all. Or are they?

I'm ok with it when people say: I don't know. There are a lot of things i don't know, but I love it when people make an effort to help me understand it!

We all need first hand experience to know, sure. And we can't always have it....

Denying things only for the reason that we haven't seen or felt them yet would be a fatal mistake though.

I would like to use an example here:

Despite a very high IQ (sorry, no attempt to brag) I am not able to understand calculus. Perhaps it wasn't explained to me properly, but the girl sitting next to me in school grasped it, so I think I am the problem.

However, she didn't understand things that I understood at first sight.

I think it is the same with Buddhism.

You either get something, or you don't.

You can work on it, but if you will ever truly understand it and if you are ever truly able to practice some virtues depends on how hard you work and what you brought into this life .

And from where?

It's your kamma that brought you where you are, or not?

Thank you. :anjali:

Always keep in mind, no personal attack intended, althouhgh I may debate hard. :hug:


PS: I would like to get a reply from Jason.
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:36 am

Anna this is simply a personal attack on one person at random on this forum when there are many who hold similar views, and you are telling him that he does not accept the dhamma because he is not prepared to say that he holds a specific belief in one highly debated and ambiguous aspect of Buddhadhamma.
Jason is quite clearly highly knowledgeable about what the Buddha actually taught rather than adhering to some emotional identification to a doctrine which is virtually indistinguishable from Hindu Reincarnation.
You are making an us and them over this issue and deciding to draw a line and that you are the arbiter of who is one of us and who is one of them.
One problem being that the line you have drawn excludes some of the most committed Buddhists both on this forum and in the non cyber world.
You are perfectly free to make your own decision about what constitutes the minimum of beliefs that in your view constitutes a " real " Buddhist, but that will exclude some major figures in Buddhism including some that have done more for Buddhadhamma than you or I are ever likely to do..like Ajahn Sumedho...who will never ever be drawn on this issue and always refers it back to the questioner.
You are simply being divisive about a matter that you do not have personal knowledge of..and that is a great pity.
Both what could be called the Buddhadasa position and the literalist position exist within Buddhadhamma, sometimes within the same monastery, with no one feeling the need to label anyone a non Buddhist.
And certainly without implying that a person who sees things differently does not understand because of their kamma.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby Annapurna » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:11 am

Peter...wow... wow ...wow.... :weep:

I was nowhere attacking him, I was only asking questions, and he can say 'yes' or 'no'.

There were a lot of questions in my post, -clearly, questions don't constitute attacks, plus I explicitely said this is not my intention.

I am also not picking a person at random[up t/i], but am simply [i]replying to someone who replied to me.

Sad to say, it is you who is ad homineming me.

Image
Last edited by Annapurna on Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Annapurna
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:27 am

Anna you quite clearly say in your post above that anyone who will not endorse a black and white yes position on literal punarbhava is taking that position because of their kamma. That is not an interpretation or an ad hom.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Moment to moment rebirth

Postby PeterB » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:29 am

However, it is just one piece of the puzzle.

No doubt you can remember that you once were a little boy. You are not anylonger, and yet your past meets your presense in one point, just like all spokes meet in a hub.[/quote]

Actually, I wasn't agnostic about rebirth in the beginning. I was skeptical when I first became interested in Buddhism, and then later took it on faith that it was true based upon a literal interpretation of everything I read in the Suttas and the influence of traditionalists. My faith, however, didn't prevent me from also having an open mind and exploring the subject in more detail. My agnosticism actually arose from years of study and contemplation of both the suttas and what modern science has to say about the way the brain appears to work. As I now see no reason to force myself to have faith in the reality of things that I can't possibly know to be true, I find it to be an appropriate position to take.

And yes, I can remember things from when I was around 6 or 7, but I certainly can't remember anything from a 'previous life,' and memories of past events in this life does little prove or even suggest that this is just one of many successive lives. Of course, it's quite possible that I do have such memories and I simply can't access them, but then, that's why I'm agnostic on the subject.

But Jason, then you are not naming the kid by it's real name.

Why should I call Micky mouse Donald Duck?

Buddha spoke of post-mortem rebirth:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html

4. "I do not understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning. It would be good if Master Gotama taught me the Dhamma so that I might understand the detailed meaning of Master Gotama's utterance spoken in brief without expounding the detailed meaning."

"Then listen, student, and heed well what I shall say."

"Even so, Master Gotama," Subha the student replied. The Blessed One said this:

5. "Here, student, some woman or man is a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. If, on the dissolution of the body, after death, instead of his reappearing in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, he comes to the human state, he is short-lived wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to short life, that is to say, to be a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings.


After death, after the dissolution of the body, he reappears.

Any more clear, simple and direct it can't be said.

IF there is a difficulty to understand or accept is, faith could come into the picture.

The Buddha said himself, that some people will understand the Dhamma at once, if it is explained to them, some will grasp a lot but not all, and some will not get it, butwill have faith and live according to the teachings.

This, Master Gotama explained, would bring them into a good next rebirth where they will grasp it.

Metta,

Anna


He spoke about punabhava, literally 'again becoming.' The way I understand it, Becoming (bhava) is a mental process, which arises due to the presence of clinging (upadana) in the mind with regard to the five-clinging aggregates, and acts as a condition for the birth (jati) of the conceit 'I am,' the self-identification that designates a being (satta).

There's rarely a moment when the mind isn't clinging to this or that in one or more of the four ways (MN 11). Our identity jumps from one thing to another, wherever the clinging is strongest. Our sense of self is something which is always in flux, ever-changing from moment to moment in response to various internal and external stimuli, and yet at the same time, we tend to see it as a static thing. It's as if our sense of self desires permanence, but its very nature causes it to change every second. As the Buddha warns in SN 12.61:

    "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

Change is, of course, a fact of nature. All things are in a perpetual state of change, but the problem is that our sense of self ignores this reality on a certain level. From birth to death, we have the tendency to think that this 'I' remains the same. Now, we might know that some things have changed (e.g., our likes and dislikes, our age, the amount of wrinkles we have, etc.), but we still feel as if we're still 'us.' We have the illusion (for lack of a better word) that our identity is who we are, a static entity named [fill in the blank], and we tend to perceive this as being the same throughout our lives.

That said, the conventional use of personality is a function of survival, as well as convenience. However, clinging to our personalities as 'me' or 'mine' is seen as giving continued fuel for becoming, i.e., a mental process of taking on a particular kind of identity that arises out of clinging. Our sense of self, the ephemeral 'I,' is merely a mental imputation — the product of what the Buddha called a process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' — and when we cling to our sense of self as being 'me' or 'mine' in some way, we're clinging to an impermanent representation of something that we've deluded ourselves into thinking is fixed and stable. It becomes a sort of false refuge that's none of these things.

So regardless if postmortem rebirth is true, this process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' can be seen here and now, and it's the stilling of this mental process that leads to freedom, liberation, awakening.[/quote]


What I remember most from your post is, that you were sceptical aboutr rebirth from the start and it doesn't seem to have changed much. You still have the same issues. Correct?

I didn't. It convinced me, it made sense, it was the most logical thing I had ever heard, it explained the whole Dhamma to me, and only with rebirth kamma made sense.

Think about it.

Do you think that Hitler's kamma for killing millions of people is leveled by taking a f### cyankali pill?

I don't.

So, where will all this kamma go?

Where is Hitler's kamma going to get 'burned up' if not in future lives? Obviously, this life is over....! So it can't be done here!!

So where is the rest supposed to take place?

As Buddha described in one of the 6 realms? Or where...?

So, if you don't accept literal rebirth, are you also...sorry.... denying the 6 realms? Since rebirth is so crucial for the rest of the Dhamma, can you leave it out?

Is it not wing-clipping the Dhamma....? I don't mind if people follow the rest of the Dhamma, then it is fine with me. If they argue that they get tangible results this way, fine, I do too.

But: The senses are not all. Or are they?

I'm ok with it when people say: I don't know. There are a lot of things i don't know, but I love it when people make an effort to help me understand it!

We all need first hand experience to know, sure. And we can't always have it....

Denying things only for the reason that we haven't seen or felt them yet would be a fatal mistake though.

I would like to use an example here:

Despite a very high IQ (sorry, no attempt to brag) I am not able to understand calculus. Perhaps it wasn't explained to me properly, but the girl sitting next to me in school grasped it, so I think I am the problem.

However, she didn't understand things that I understood at first sight.

I think it is the same with Buddhism.

You either get something, or you don't.

You can work on it, but if you will ever truly understand it and if you are ever truly able to practice some virtues depends on how hard you work and what you brought into this life .

And from where?

It's your kamma that brought you where you are, or not?

Thank you. :anjali:

Always keep in mind, no personal attack intended, althouhgh I may debate hard. :hug:


PS: I would like to get a reply from Jason.[/quote]
Here is the post reproduced in full to prevent editing.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], chownah, mettafuture and 7 guests