The Danger of Rebirth

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22413
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

No I'm really confused. Clearly in the first quote you are using "death" the same way the rest of us would?

General question to all: As far as I can tell, this "Dhamma Language" idea originates with Buddhadasa. Am I correct? Or confused?

Metta
Mike

As a conventional means, in reality its only the momentary ending of grasping/craving since its from this that self-view or "I" comes from. Which is why in the other post i stated that my understanding is when i speak of death in reality its just means ending of craving/grasping


As far as i can tell its from the suttas

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.

Therein:
The speech wherewith the world converses is true
On account of its being agreed upon by the world.
The speech which describes what is ultimate is also true,
Through characterizing dhammas as they really are.


Therefore, being skilled in common usage,
False speech does not arise in the Teacher,
Who is Lord of the World,
When he speaks according to conventions.
(Mn. i. 95)
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
appicchato
Posts: 1602
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by appicchato »

tiltbillings wrote:Mostly what we have been dealing with here in this thread is a strongly differing of opinion about the use of language...
'Uncooked' was an apt description...if I were asked... :coffee:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19944
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Craig,
clw_uk wrote:
General question to all: As far as I can tell, this "Dhamma Language" idea originates with Buddhadasa.
Mike
As far as i can tell its from the suttas

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.
I'm familiar with conventional and ultimate terms.

That's not what I mean. I'm talking about Buddhadasa's "Dhamma language", where he claims that conventional terms such as "birth" have a different meaning when talking about Dhamma.
E.g. http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Two_ ... uage#Birth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The word "birth" is very common in the Buddha's discourses. When he was speaking of everyday things, he used the word "birth" with its everyday meaning. But when he was expounding Higher Dhamma - for instance, when discussing conditioned arising (paticca-samuppada) - he used the word "birth" (jati) with the meaning it has in Dhamma language. In his description of conditioned arising, he wasn't talking about physical birth. He was talking about the birth of attachment to the ideas of "me" and "mine", "myself" and "my own."
Metta
Mike
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by kc2dpt »

Mike, I have never heard this idea from another teacher. But I only have experience with a few teachers.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

From what I understand "Dhamma language" refers to ultimate terms.

So, jati (birth) might conventionally mean childbirth or conception, but jati in ultimate terms, means something different... namely the birth of a conceptualised "I" resulting from ignorance.

Well that's how I understand what Buddhadasa aimed to communicate.

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
mikenz66
Posts: 19944
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Well that's how I understand what Buddhadasa aimed to communicate.
I think I understand what Ajahn Buddhadasa was saying, but, like Peter, have only heard that idea from Ajahn Buddhadasa and his followers.

My understanding of "conventional" and "ultimate" language in the Suttas is not that terms like "birth" are redefined, but that they are not used at all, the "ultimate" descriptions are in terms of aggregates, elements, etc.

For example, in SN 12.2 (Bhikkhu Bodhi translation) the Buddha says:
The passing away of the various beings from the various orders of beings, their perishing, breakup, disappearance, mortality, death, completion of time, the breakup of the aggregates, the laying down of the carcass: this is called death.
The commentary quoted by Bhikkhu Bodhi states that the red terms are conventional (lokassammutya) and the blue terms are ultimate (paramattha).

Metta
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,

It is the contention of Buddhadasa that each of the twelve nidanas of dependent origination are ultimate paramattha... rather than being a mish-mash of conventional and ultimate.

What I don't understand however is why people then take this so far as to say that this particular way of looking at dependent origination necessitates the denial of conventional rebirth.... I've never understand that leap of thinking, because as you and others point out, there are plenty of instances of rebirth in the suttas which are unambiguously referring to conventional rebirth.... it just happens to be that they're generally about subjects other than dependent origination.

It's worth pointing out that the word 'jati' has been traditionally interpreted as conventional birth when used in the suttas, but its most common usage in the Abhidhamma is a momentary-birth.

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 Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

From what I understand "Dhamma language" refers to ultimate terms.

So, jati (birth) might conventionally mean childbirth or conception, but jati in ultimate terms, means something different... namely the birth of a conceptualised "I" resulting from ignorance.

Well that's how I understand what Buddhadasa aimed to communicate.
And all that does is add a layer of confusion on thing, as we have seen here in this thread. It would seem that Craig has been using Buddhadasa's newfangled Dhamma-language notion, and, until now, insisting that its definitions are what is what, and no one else had a clue that the game had changed.

The idea here is to communicate with each other. While Buddhadada's approach may work within his specfic context, it does not work too well outside of it, as we see here all too graphically illustrated. I don't see much need for what Buddhadasa has done.
>> 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
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,

What venerable Buddhadasa presented with respect to dependent origination was excellent, but the logic he used to explain it has been expanded by many of his followers beyond its intended scope (much like you say) into areas where it is misapplied and used inappropriately (e.g. to deny conventional rebirth, to deny kamma bearing fruit in the future beyond the original action)

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
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by cooran »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

What venerable Buddhadasa presented with respect to dependent origination was excellent, but the logic he used to explain it has been expanded by many of his followers beyond its intended scope (much like you say) into areas where it is misapplied and used inappropriately (e.g. to deny conventional rebirth, to deny kamma bearing fruit in the future beyond the original action)

Metta,
Retro. :)
Hello Retro,

Would you say that this is what clw_uk has been doing? .... misapplying and using the teachings of Buddhadasa inappropriately?

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

Dhamma Language

I can see what he is saying, but this is something that is peculiar to him.
>> 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
appicchato
Posts: 1602
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by appicchato »

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.
In reference to Buddhadasa's 'Dhamma Language'...I, personally, am confident this is where he got it(Dhammapada?...I took a cursory spin through it, but didn't see it)...and the meaning (if I were asked) is analogous...
tiltbillings: Buddhadasa's new fangled Dhamma-language notion...
mmmm...maybe, maybe not... :smile:
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Mawkish1983 »

Right, I'm lost (sorry).... can someone provide a brief summary before we keep going?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Chris,

I think so. Buddhadasa teaches dependent origination as a non-time-delineated model, not too dissimilar from the visual I presented model here (http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=21" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) ... in this model, "birth" doesn't mean "rebirth" like it does in the commentarial 3-lifetime version. Personally, I think he's got this right... but extending it into places of the Dhamma where birth is clearly meant "conventionally", is misleading.

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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22413
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

Greetings Friends

I think what i made the mistake of doing was taking Buddhadasa teaching on the buddhas higher dhamma language and wordly dhamma language withhout explaining the meaning of it and excpecting everyone to be familliar with that teaching style, which lead to confusion



As for dependent origination and rebirth, just because it occurs in moments i dont take it to mean that can be without a doubt no rebirth, or that it has nothing to do with it if it does happen, its just in my understanding it was never taught as an explanation of rebirth by the buddha, even if it does lead to rebirth. I see it as being taught so one can see how dukkha and self view arise in the moment so they can then put an end to it in the moment. If it does cover three lives, its irrelevant. At least thats my understanding on its intended meaning and usage

I think it can be easily taken as meaning there is no dukkha after death because if one is used to the three lives model and its explanation of rebirth and then sees its taught in moments, this can lead to the conclusion that there is no dukkha after death then since there is no model for it. This is what i nearly did but this misses several points

That the buddha wasnt a liar or deceitful so why would he teach something that he had no knowledge of or knew wouldnt happen

At that time in India there were already lots of people who were following teachings that denied rebirth (i.e. the annihilationsist, and the later Cārvākas show how a religion can take off and not include rebirth) so he wouldnt have needed to include it as a teaching tool just to get people to follow his own teachings since others at the time were ready to accept non rebirth

Also the Buddha wasnt concerned with gaining followers, he only taught to those who wanted to hear, so he wasnt in the habbit of changing his Dhamma to suite other people by adding concepts of rebirth, he only taught Dhamma, the only difference is how much of the Dhamma he would reveal to each individual need, so some could only accept rebirth, others could accept the four noble truths and so on.

The Buddha didnt teach rupa death was the end of all dukkha and I-making, he said craving was, otherwise why didnt he just teach suicide


This of course is not to say that i fully accept rebirth, i dont. I have confidence in it because it was taught by the buddha but since i have no direct knowledge, im going to keep some skepticism. This however is just how it works for me, some people may benefit more from accepting rebirth completely and there will be some who benefit more from the Dhamma by having no view of rebirth, everyones practice and needs are different


Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply