the great rebirth debate

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation
User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:46 pm

Alex123 wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Mara was definiately just a personfication of unwholesome states and temptation etc


Does this mean that the Buddha could have had unwholesome mental states that could tempt him (but he didn't follow them)? I don't deny this possibility, but it doesn't seem to fit the "orthodoxy" .



Possibly, Mara is defined in the Suttas as just being unwholesome states or stomach pains, that sort of thing

The nun Soma has entered Andhavana (Blind Man's Grove) near Savatthi to practice meditation. Mara, the embodiment of delusion, sees her there and desires to make her waver and abandon her concentration. He addresses her with a verse:

That which can be attained by seers
— The place so hard to arrive at —
Women are not able to reach,
Since they lack sufficient wisdom.



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

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3336
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Alex123 » Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:49 pm

clw_uk wrote:
The nun Soma has entered Andhavana (Blind Man's Grove) near Savatthi to practice meditation. Mara, the embodiment of delusion, sees her there and desires to make her waver and abandon her concentration. He addresses her with a verse:


The "embodiment of delusion" is idea of the translator. I am not saying that it is wrong, but I don't remember the suttas ever say that Mara, Devas, Realms, are simply mental states that one can live in while being alive for this one life only.
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

culaavuso
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby culaavuso » Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:50 pm

clw_uk wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:
clw_uk wrote:There are suttas that state that when there is ignorance based contact, the following links come to be.
SN, page 922 Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation.
Its a concept that is repeated a lot in the SN


Could you provide some links to the relevant sutta(s)?



The sutta isn't on access to insight so the only reference i can give is the page number in the physical copy that aj. Bodhi translated, I assumed you would have this? If not I will try and track it down online.


Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation on page 922 mentions a "feeling born of ignorance-contact" in SN 22.81, which is available on ATI but translated as "what is felt born of contact with ignorance" by Ven. Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu.

SN 22.81: Pārileyyaka Sutta wrote:What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:57 pm


Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation on page 922 mentions a "feeling born of ignorance-contact" in SN 22.81, which is available on ATI but translated as "what is felt born of contact with ignorance" by Ven. Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu.

SN 22.81: Pārileyyaka Sutta wrote:What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.


Thanks! I didn't realise it was online



"Well then — knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents? 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 to be the self [Identity or "I am"]. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? [what causes the birth of "I am"]


To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. [When there is ignorant based contact then craving leads to "I am", so "I am" is "born" which is the Jati of D.O.]

And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents." ["I am" is anicca, so its constantly born and dies accordingly, as the links that lead to it are anicca]

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 11992
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby mikenz66 » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:20 pm

Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation is on Sutta Central, the first "en" button here:
http://suttacentral.net/search?query=sn+22.81
Specifically: http://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.81

Craig: Rather than giving the page number, the sutta number (SN 22.81) would have made it much easier for people to locate on line.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:45 pm

mikenz66 wrote:Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation is on Sutta Central, the first "en" button here:
http://suttacentral.net/search?query=sn+22.81
Specifically: http://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.81

Craig: Rather than giving the page number, the sutta number (SN 22.81) would have made it much easier for people to locate on line.

:anjali:
Mike



Will do

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:47 pm

Also


"It is by clinging Ananda that "I am" occurs, not without clinging"


SN III, Sutta 83

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 4811
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Mkoll » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:48 pm

clw_uk wrote:Mara was definiately just a personfication of unwholesome states and temptation etc

How can you say this for sure?
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 2429
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Bhikkhu Pesala » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:01 pm

Mkoll wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Mara was definitely just a personification of unwholesome states and temptation etc

How can you say this for sure?

Perhaps because Māra said it was? :stirthepot:
AIM WebsitePāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 4811
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Mkoll » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:06 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Mkoll wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Mara was definitely just a personification of unwholesome states and temptation etc

How can you say this for sure?

Perhaps because Māra said it was? :stirthepot:

:rofl:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:12 pm

Mkoll wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Mara was definiately just a personfication of unwholesome states and temptation etc

How can you say this for sure?




Definitely was to strong a word, however the overall impression that I get is that Mara is a teaching device as just another word for the aggregates when we cling to them


"Ven. Sir, it is said, "Mara, Mara." In what way, ven. sir, might there be Mara?


When there is form Radha there might be Mara, or the Killer, or the one who is killed. Therefore Radha see form as Mara, see it as the Killer, see it as the one who is killed. See it as a disease, a dart, a tumour, as misery, as real misery. Those who see it thus see rightly."


SN III Chapter 2, Sutta 1

And so on for the other aggregates

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 2429
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Bhikkhu Pesala » Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:09 pm

AIM WebsitePāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3714
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Spiny Norman » Tue Aug 05, 2014 8:26 am

culaavuso wrote:Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation on page 922 mentions a "feeling born of ignorance-contact" in SN 22.81, which is available on ATI but translated as "what is felt born of contact with ignorance" by Ven. Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu.

SN 22.81: Pārileyyaka Sutta wrote:What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.


I'm still not clear as to the meaning here. Does "what is felt" refer to vedana, and if so, is it saying that vedana can be ignorant or not ignorant?
What exactly is meant by "contact with ignorance"? Does it just mean "while ignorance persists"?
Last edited by Spiny Norman on Tue Aug 05, 2014 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."
Peter Gabriel lyric

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3714
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Spiny Norman » Tue Aug 05, 2014 8:34 am

clw_uk wrote:The point I was trying to make though is that D.O. is multifaceted in the Suttas, being taught operating over mind moments and also over lifetimes depending on which sutta we look at.


But I'm still not clear how you're interpreting DO to support the idea of moment-to-moment rebirth. Could you describe the model you're using?
You've referred to ignorant contact, but which factor of contact are you assigning the ignorance to - is it sense organ, sense object or sense-consciousness?
I'd have thought that ignorant feeling would make more sense, since craving arises in dependence on feeling and craving is the problem.
"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."
Peter Gabriel lyric

chownah
Posts: 3633
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby chownah » Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:12 am

[quote
SN 22.81: Pārileyyaka Sutta wrote:What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.][/quote]
culaavuso,
Thanks for bringing this reference here. For those looking for support for the idea of momentary rebirth, I think this is a good one. Notice in the portion presented here it talks about feelings being born and I'm pretty sure most people are familiar with feelings and how they arise and pass away many times even in a few moments......so you could say that feelings get reborn on a momentary basis. Also in the same sutta there is a talk about various views of self and how these are all fabrications born of feelings born of ignorance and the craving that arises from it. So, feelings are born and fabrications are born.......seems clear that rebirth happens for feelings and fabrications...if not for what we identify as the feeling or the fabrication then surely for the process of feeling and fabrication......and notice how the discussion of self doctrines is said to be born suggesting the rebirth of self doctrine on a moment to moment basis. That is to say that our sense of self as a fabrication is in a constant state of rebirth from moment to moment. Seems like we are getting pretty close to a complete expication of a doctrine of rebirth and all based in the moment to moment time frame......I guesss......don't know for sure......
chownah

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3714
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Spiny Norman » Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:17 am

chownah wrote:Notice in the portion presented here it talks about feelings being born and I'm pretty sure most people are familiar with feelings and how they arise and pass away many times even in a few moments......so you could say that feelings get reborn on a momentary basis.


All the aggregates are continually rising and falling. But I don't see how that gets us any closer to a coherent moment-to-moment interpretation of DO.
"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."
Peter Gabriel lyric

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 4408
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Aloka » Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:53 am

clw_uk wrote:
Mara was definiately just a personfication of unwholesome states and temptation etc



Yes I agree, I don't believe there was an actual 'Devil' wandering around! I think its pretty clear that in SN 5.2 Soma sutta, Mara represents the doubts the nun has been having about being a woman - and In this translation Mara is called " the embodiment of delusion".

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn05/sn05.002.olen.html

:anjali:

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:33 am

Spiny Norman wrote:
clw_uk wrote:The point I was trying to make though is that D.O. is multifaceted in the Suttas, being taught operating over mind moments and also over lifetimes depending on which sutta we look at.


But I'm still not clear how you're interpreting DO to support the idea of moment-to-moment rebirth. Could you describe the model you're using?
You've referred to ignorant contact, but which factor of contact are you assigning the ignorance to - is it sense organ, sense object or sense-consciousness?
I'd have thought that ignorant feeling would make more sense, since craving arises in dependence on feeling and craving is the problem.




The way I "work" it is that ignorance is one thing, contact another, sense object a third and feeling being fourth as their meeting place.


Feeling isn't ignorant, feeling is feeling. However Ignorance transforms feelings into craving through pursuing.


An example I can give is when I'm in meditation and my legs hurt. When there is ignorance, then there is aversion to the feeling and the birth in the mind of "I am in pain etc" and the dukkha that is bound with that. However when there is no ignorance, then painful feeling is just a sensation. There is no "me" created and its as if the painful feeling isn't there, feeling has ceased. This I feel is the cessation of the mind and body.


An analogy I could give would be full awareness as an island and feelings as an ocean. When there is ignorance, then feelings flood the Island (mind) and the mind is overcome and concocts craving which leads to Self and dukkha etc. However when there is full awareness and knowledge, then feelings break upon the shore and do not flood the mind. In essence they are not allowed into the mind to remain and be pursued. This then cuts off the concocting of craving, ends any self or identity. It ends me and mine and leaves us with emptiness and peace. This I feel Is the island that you cannot go beyond.


So going back the the example of painful legs in meditation, when there is knowledge through awareness (of the thee marks) then the painful feelings just breaks upon the shore, they arent pursued and allowed to flood the island of conciousness.
Last edited by clw_uk on Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:55 am, edited 4 times in total.

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:37 am

I'd have thought that ignorant feeling would make more sense, since craving arises in dependence on feeling and craving is the problem.



Feeling is always there, its the reaction to it based on our ignorance that is the problem.

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4240
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby clw_uk » Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:33 am

"There is Bhikkhus the mind, there are mental phenomena, there is the element of ignorance. When the uninstructed ... is contacted by a feeling born of ignorance-contact, "I am" occurs to him. [So when there is Ignorance and contact, feeling is pursued which gives "birth" to "I am" in a certain mental sphere, depending on intentional actions]


"I am this" occurs to him; "I will be" [Reborn?] and "I will not be" [Reborn?]


"I will consist of of form" and "I will be formless" [I will be a formless deva seems to be a false notion born from ignorance]


"I will be percipient; and "I will be non-percipient" ....


"The five faculties remain right there, bhikkhus, but in regard to them the instructed .... abandons ignorance and the arising of knowledge. With the fading of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge;

"I am" does not occur; "I am this does not occur to him


"I will be" does not occur to him [I will be reborn doest enter his head?] "I will not be" does not occur to him [So metahysical views dont arise?]


SN III 47.5




That quite clearly shows D.O. happening in the moment and being psychological in nature.


If I am correct in relation to the non thought of "Will I be alive or not after death" when enlightened, then it would tie in with this sutta which describes an Arahants take on views and metaphysical questions.


""A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another.


Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

"They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.""


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html
Last edited by clw_uk on Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

He who binds to himself a joy
Does the wingèd life destroy;
But he who kisses the joy as it flies
Lives in eternity's sunrise.

William Blake


Return to “Open Dhamma”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acinteyyo, Baidu [Spider] and 6 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine