the great rebirth debate

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Jechbi » Sat Apr 25, 2009 1:49 pm

Howdy clw,
clw_uk wrote:Through practice i have seen how clinging to khandas brings "I am" and how that "I am" through clinging to the khandas brings sorrow, anger etc via anicca. I have understood how, through ignorance, the taints and a lack of wisdom, that very clinging comes to be via craving and how that craving will lead onto more clinging (and so I am) and so more dukkha (via anicca). What i havent been able to do is watch the whole process from start to finish and my understanding of it is not in full and for the moment its just be in relation to clinging to rupa
Interesting. These strike me as wonderful things to see and understand through practice. I don't know that I could make such a bold statement.
:anjali:

Have you likewise through practice been able to understand how craving is conditioned by sensation? And so on? There are a few other thingies going on "in relation to clinging to rupa," as you put it.
clw_uk wrote:I have also understood, via this and also sutta study, how any view or opinion in reguards to future or past is just coming to be via clinging to a khanda (or all of them), how any view of past or future is coloured by "I am", and how rebirth view falls into this category of looking to future or past
For you.

What you have understood for yourself might not be applicable for others.

Metta
:smile:
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
User avatar
Jechbi
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Sat Apr 25, 2009 4:03 pm

Greetings


Have you likewise through practice been able to understand how craving is conditioned by sensation? And so on? There are a few other thingies going on "in relation to clinging to rupa," as you put it.


Only on a very basic level, im aware more is going on :smile: i dont claim to be a stream-winner or an arahant or anything


Metta
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Sat Apr 25, 2009 4:57 pm

In Craig's defense, (though I'm not a big fan of this particular teaching) Craig's assertion that the six realms are visible right here in front of us is fairly common. Personally I don't think the Buddha would have gone to such lengths to describe the realms if he was only speaking metaphorically, but if it's useful to someone to look at it that way, I say go for it. If it's helpful.

:anjali:
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby pink_trike » Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:14 pm

Ngawang Drolma wrote: Personally I don't think the Buddha would have gone to such lengths to describe the realms if he was only speaking metaphorically, but if it's useful to someone to look at it that way, I say go for it. If it's helpful.

:anjali:


Some folks don't think that "The Buddha" actually did go to such lengths as to describe the realms. :anjali:
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:00 pm

pink_trike wrote:
Ngawang Drolma wrote: Personally I don't think the Buddha would have gone to such lengths to describe the realms if he was only speaking metaphorically, but if it's useful to someone to look at it that way, I say go for it. If it's helpful.

:anjali:


Some folks don't think that "The Buddha" actually did go to such lengths as to describe the realms. :anjali:


Oh no, please don't make me do homework! :P

I know there's a lot of suttas discussing the realms.

:anjali:
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby pink_trike » Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:02 pm

Ngawang Drolma wrote:
pink_trike wrote:
Ngawang Drolma wrote: Personally I don't think the Buddha would have gone to such lengths to describe the realms if he was only speaking metaphorically, but if it's useful to someone to look at it that way, I say go for it. If it's helpful.

:anjali:


Some folks don't think that "The Buddha" actually did go to such lengths as to describe the realms. :anjali:


Oh no, please don't make me do homework! :P

I know there's a lot of suttas discussing the realms.

:anjali:

Yes, the suttas do discusss the realms, and that discussion is valuable to a lot of people.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:45 pm

pink_trike wrote:Some folks don't think that "The Buddha" actually did go to such lengths as to describe the realms. :anjali:


Oh no, please don't make me do homework! :P

I know there's a lot of suttas discussing the realms.

:anjali:

Yes, the suttas do discusss the realms, and that discussion is valuable to a lot of people.


:anjali:
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby mikenz66 » Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:51 pm

Craig:This is what i mean by specualtive view, by attending unwisely the views come to be and via attending unwisely they continue to remain
"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

The highlighted section suggests that attending unwisely on the present moment is just as bad as attending unwisely on the past and the future...

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10383
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:06 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Craig:This is what i mean by specualtive view, by attending unwisely the views come to be and via attending unwisely they continue to remain
"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'


The highlighted section suggests that attending unwisely on the present moment is just as bad as attending unwisely on the past and the future...

Metta
Mike



Hey mike

True those questions are about now and not past or future (for the most part) but I take it as meaning that asking those questions are unwise since they reinforce ego, they are searching for a self. They are from craving and clinging and so are from ignorance, craving and clinging to that which is unsatisfactory (and so there is ignorance of 4NT). One who is unskilled in Dhamma and has no knowledge of Buddhadhamma would ask such questions, but the Buddha taught the wisdom of not attending to such inappropriate questions and instead focus on what is and investigate that (right view/understanding)

So instead of speculative, ponderous questions (that only reinforces delusion) one should focus on what is, there is dukkha, there is origin on dukkha, there is quenching of dukkha and there is way to quench all dukkha

Metta
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby pink_trike » Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:14 pm

clw_uk wrote:So instead of speculative, ponderous questions (that only reinforces delusion) one should focus on what is, there is dukkha, there is origin on dukkha, there is quenching of dukkha and there is way to quench all dukkha


Agreed.

"Know this, O monks, now, as formerly, I teach of only Dukkha, and Nirodha.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby mikenz66 » Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:27 pm

clw_uk wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:The highlighted section suggests that attending unwisely on the present moment is just as bad as attending unwisely on the past and the future...

True those questions are about now and not past or future (for the most part) but I take it as meaning that asking those questions are unwise since they reinforce ego, they are searching for a self. They are from craving and clinging and so are from ignorance, craving and clinging to that which is unsatisfactory (and so there is ignorance of 4NT). One who is unskilled in Dhamma and has no knowledge of Buddhadhamma would ask such questions, but the Buddha taught the wisdom of not attending to such inappropriate questions and instead focus on what is and investigate that (right view/understanding)

Yes, but you seem to be applying quite a lot of attention to worrying about this issue. That's why these threads kept being reborn...
clw_uk wrote:So instead of speculative, ponderous questions (that only reinforces delusion) one should focus on what is, there is dukkha, there is origin on dukkha, there is quenching of dukkha and there is way to quench all dukkha

Again, you seem to have an extremely fixed view on how everyone else should be approaching this. And, as has been pointed out repeatedly, I don't believe that anyone here really understands how to quench all dukkha (I certainly don't), all we've done is read/heard the instruction manual...

As the Sutta states, unwise attention in the present moment is very effective at feeding the sense of self.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10383
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:09 pm

Hey

Yes, but you seem to be applying quite a lot of attention to worrying about this issue. That's why these threads kept being reborn...


I dont worry about it :smile: , im just saying what the suttas states is wise and unwise attention and the views that come from that, the only reason i keep stating it is because they are important to a persons practice



Again, you seem to have an extremely fixed view on how everyone else should be approaching this. And, as has been pointed out repeatedly, I don't believe that anyone here really understands how to quench all dukkha (I certainly don't), all we've done is read/heard the instruction manual...

As the Sutta states, unwise attention in the present moment is very effective at feeding the sense of self.


I Agree, there is an instruction manual which does state what is wise and what is unwise attention as part of that instruction, right attention is to what is and investigation into that, unwise attention such as rebirth view involves the questions that are unwise

This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?'


As the Sutta states, unwise attention in the present moment is very effective at feeding the sense of self


i agree anyone who asks those questions (any of them in fact) is only feeing a sense of self

Metta
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:30 pm

Doesn't 'wise attention in the present moment' just mean be mindful?

:smile:
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby retrofuturist » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:38 pm

Greetings Drolma,

Ngawang Drolma wrote:Doesn't 'wise attention in the present moment' just mean be mindful?

:smile:


Not necessarily... think of a sniper for a moment.

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: 14674
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:43 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Drolma,

Ngawang Drolma wrote:Doesn't 'wise attention in the present moment' just mean be mindful?

:smile:


Not necessarily... think of a sniper for a moment.

Metta,
Retro. :)


Nice! Very true :anjali:
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Individual » Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:47 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Drolma,

Ngawang Drolma wrote:Doesn't 'wise attention in the present moment' just mean be mindful?

:smile:


Not necessarily... think of a sniper for a moment.

Metta,
Retro. :)

A sniper's attention is narrowly focused. I would call that concentration, but not mindfulness.
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
Individual
 
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Apr 26, 2009 4:26 am

Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote:I Agree, there is an instruction manual which does state what is wise and what is unwise attention as part of that instruction, right attention is to what is and investigation into that, unwise attention such as rebirth view involves the questions that are unwise

I believe that you are seriously over interpreting there. The suttas talk about not having self view in the past, present or future, not that you can't think about the past, present, or future. Where does it say: "keep all thoughts of birth out of your mind"?

You say it's wise to consider the cause of Dukkha. You have dukkha because you were born. But since your view is that the only definition of "birth" that can be admitted into Dependent Origination is the "moment-to-moment interpretation" you want to redefine things so that "physical birth" is something "speculative".

You are welcome to your view. It doesn't affect me (or my view :thinking: ). However it is a little tiresome that it is wheeled out whenever anyone wants to discuss something that isn't "in the present moment".

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10383
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Apr 26, 2009 4:30 am

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote:I Agree, there is an instruction manual which does state what is wise and what is unwise attention as part of that instruction, right attention is to what is and investigation into that, unwise attention such as rebirth view involves the questions that are unwise

I believe that you are seriously over interpreting there. The suttas talk about not having self view in the past, present or future, not that you can't think about the past, present, or future. Where does it say: "keep all thoughts of birth out of your mind"?

You say it's wise to consider the cause of Dukkha. You have dukkha because you were born. But since your view is that the only definition of "birth" that can be admitted into Dependent Origination is the "moment-to-moment interpretation" you want to redefine things so that "physical birth" is something "speculative".

You are welcome to your view. It doesn't affect me (or my view :thinking: ). However it is a little tiresome that it is wheeled out whenever anyone wants to discuss something that isn't "in the present moment".

Metta
Mike


Your point about "over interpreting" is spot on, and thanks for making it, and the rest of the points in your msg, so clearly and concisely.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19559
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:43 pm

Greetings

I believe that you are seriously over interpreting there. The suttas talk about not having self view in the past, present or future, not that you can't think about the past, present, or future. Where does it say: "keep all thoughts of birth out of your mind"?


We are not stream-winners or arahants (sorry if anyone is) so any view/question about past or future is going to be coloured by self view or conciet and so such views and questions will just increase ignorance and the taints (also they are asking the wrong questions anyway). One cant help but put "me" or "I" in the future when ignorance hasnt been removed.

So the Buddha advised not to have or ask such speculative views/questions since they reinforce delsuions (they all come to be via having self-view anyway) instead he taught to focus on what is (4nt) to remove all delsuions and dukkha. When this is done such speculative questions/views wont arise in anymore anyway since one has seen

As i have said, the Buddha taught that such questions are unwise and only focusing on what is, is wise. Rebirth view/speculation naturaly involves such questions as

This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?'


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

You say it's wise to consider the cause of Dukkha. You have dukkha because you were born. But since your view is that the only definition of "birth" that can be admitted into Dependent Origination is the "moment-to-moment interpretation" you want to redefine things so that "physical birth" is something "speculative".


The Khandas are void of a self, the only "birth" of a "being" is that perception which arises in the mind due to ignorance and clinging. The physical birth of the Khandas is not "my" birth, the birth of "me" came during the first time there was clinging to the khandas (and so birth of identity, identification through "I am).

The Khandas arent dukkha, clinging to them is

"Now what, friends, is the noble truth of dukkha? Birth is dukkha aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are dukkha; not getting what is wanted is stressful.2 In short, the five aggregates subject to clinging are Dukkha


To say "my" birth is clinging, when there is no clinging there is no identification and so there is no birth, ageing, sickness or death since this comes to be via clinging and identification "I was born, i am ageing, i will/am dying" and all the dukkha that comes with that as well

"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.


Metta
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Jechbi » Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:33 pm

Hi clw,

clw_uk wrote:... the Buddha advised not to have or ask such speculative views/questions ...

My reading is that the Buddha did not advise either one of these things.

First thing to understand is this: holding views and asking questions are two separate things.

With regard to views, I think it's a big mistake to regard them as fully "mine" or think of them as something fully under one's own control. We have all kinds of views built into our present makeup based on past kamma. Probably you can't help whether you "believe in" rebirth at this moment. You can't force yourself to adopt a view. But over time, we all know that our views change and develop, as we create new kamma. Views are caused and conditioned by kamma.

That is why the Buddha often would describe the views of an ordinary, run-of-the-mill person. My reading is that these were descriptions. I don't think the Buddha advised: Okay, now immediately change your mind and hold a different view instead! Rather, I believe the Buddha advised following the full 8fold path, thus perfecting right view as a consequence. Obviously, if we're ordinary run-of-the-mill people, we're going to have some of the not-right views that the Buddha described.

With regard to asking questions, I don't think there's any time when the Buddha advised: Don't ask that question. Seems to me that the Buddha encouraged inquiry. BUT the Buddha seemed to caution against dwelling on certain questions or getting stuck on them, because dwelling on those questions is counterproductive.

So there are times when a person asks the Buddha something, and the Buddha remains silent. Yet I don't think the Buddha ever tells a person: Don't even ask me that question.

A more accurate way to rephrase your post might be:
... clw_uk advised not to have or ask such speculative views/questions ...


Metta
:smile:
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
User avatar
Jechbi
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests