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: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

I will say it again: The three lives teaching teaches its happening right now. It also teaches that it happened in the past and will continue to happen in the future. But there is nothing about this teaching which moves one's practice out of the here and now. That would be impossible. Practice can only happen in the here and now.

Ignorance and formations have arisen in the past... and they also arise in the present and will arise in the future.
Feelings and clinging arise in the present... and they also have arisen in the past and will arise in the future.

In fact, these two lines are really just two different ways of saying the same thing.

Why did I only focus on those bits? Because those bits represent causes. They are the bits where our practice must focus. We can't do anything about results (other than understand how they came to arise) but we can do something about causes. Seeing feelings as just feelings, seeing all phenomena as annica/dukkha/anatta, leads to the eradication of ignorance. With no ignorance there can be no craving. With no craving there can be no karmic formations.
Then is seems we disagree on dependent origination perhaps its just best to leave it, both sides have been put forward any more discussion would be circular


No, I do not think so. When one damages something and others have to step in to make repairs... it is good that the repairs were done but it would have been better still if the damage was not done in the first place. When one slanders the Dhamma in a public forum it does much harm to many people. Saying "Buddhists for centuries have gotten the teachings wrong and only I have got it right" is no where near as healthy as saying "I do not understand this teaching which has endured for centuries. Can someone explain it to me?" That is a healthy way to inquire.
You are right, to state "I understand it and you dont" is arogant and i did come accross that way although that wasnt my intention, i probably should have started questions better

Saying there is no rebirth i feel is not slandering the dhamma, this is the basic point that i was trying to express

the buddha stated his dhamma would only last 500 years did he not?

I feel it was good debate since very relevant points were raised on both sides
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:21 am, edited 3 times in total.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

To illustrate my point...

Once I came across a teaching about rain gods. I was totally baffled as to what this teaching had to do with the suffering and the ending of suffering. But instead of saying "This obviously can't be a teaching of the Buddha; it must have been added later" or saying "The Buddha taught this but only to stupid people" I asked a knowledgeable teacher "I do not see how this teaching fits in with the rest of the teachings; can you explain it to me?" And guess what? He explained it to me and now I understand. And I did it without slandering the Buddha (calling him a liar or a trickster), the Dhamma (by saying some bits were worthless) or the Sangha (by saying unscrupulous monks changed the teachings). I did it without causing anyone to doubt or lose faith. I did it without causing arguments or insults or divisions.

I think questions are wonderful, but I think there are better and worse ways to ask questions.

Without challenges to ones view and understanding how does one grow in understanding? To have someone raise a point that is contary to your own and to engage in debate is a good way to test ones understanding of things, how else do you know if they are true or not without testing them? debate is one of these ways

I have no teacher so i can only do it through these means

I never said the buddha was a liar, trickster or anything of the kind, those are your misunderstandings of what i was/am trying to say, maybe from my mistake in how i was putting it forward

Did you just accept what he said because he said it or did you take what he said and challenge it and so investigated it?

Your right, questions are wonderful, which is why i dont blindly accept rebirth i only have confidence with some skepticism. The buddha taught that blind belief wont get you anywhere at all, i feel this also applies to rebirth

I dont see how i have caused anyone to loss faith at all, since both sides have been voiced with evidence on both sides, this allows people to look at different angles and so test their faith/understanding which leads only to a strengthening of that faith and understanding. The main point about this has been interpretations, not the teachings themselves
:namaste:
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by DNS »

clw_uk wrote:
TD = If there is no rebirth, what happens after death for the un-enlightened?
There are two posibilities, either dukkha will be allowed to rise again or its nibbana
This discussion appears to be winding down, but before it closes, I just realized my question wasn't answered.

Where / when / how is dukkha allowed to rise again? (assuming there is no rebirth)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

This discussion appears to be winding down, but before it closes, I just realized my question wasn't answered.

Where / when / how is dukkha allowed to rise again? (assuming there is no rebirth

Well if there is no rebirth at all, no arising of new aggregates then it doesnt rise again and rupa death would be the end of all dukkha forever and so nibbana and the buddha teachings were just concerned with just this life and how to help beings in this existence.

This of course is the main thorn in the side of anyone who argues for complete non-existence of rebirth (something which im not doing) because if this is true then why didnt the buddha

A) Teach suicide since death would be nibbana and so would be freedom from all dukkha forever
B) Just teach basic morality and coping techniques (things that dont require so much time and effort) so something in line with what a Pratyekabuddha might teach others (since if they teach its only morality and not for nibbana)
C) Why did he Teach Rebirth at all

Of course A could be answered by saying that the buddha wasnt concerned with notions of after life and he was just teaching so people end dukkha in this exsistence reguardless of what happens after ***

However as we know the buddha set forth a training based on his insights that was time consuming, most cases needing a dedication of entire life , he didnt teach people that rupa death was nibbana, he said the ending of all craving was the only thing that could stop all dukkha and I-making

As for C one cant say its a cultural addition from the brahmins since there is evidence the brahmin religion wasnt established in kapilvastu during buddhas time and there are enough suttas throughout the cannon to be pretty sure that he did teach it. This then leads one onto the conclusion that the buddha was lying or just pandering to peoples beliefs to get them to believe his own teachings, this i feel falls down since the buddha stressed the need to tell truth at all times and the evil of deceiving people. Also there were already followers of other sects that didnt include rebirth (i.e. the annihilationists etc) so if rebirth wasnt part of his teaching then he wouldnt have needed to teach it since others at the time were already following teachings that didnt have rebirth

(*** i added this just as a note that of course the buddhas teachings are always concerned with the here and now with or withour rebirth because there is dukkha here and now)

Just to state once again since there seems to be a tendency for be to be taken as a rebirth denier, i am not i have confidence but some skepticism which is in line with the buddhas teachings

Does that answer your question?

Metta
:namaste:
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Prasadachitta »

clw_uk wrote: experience? Perception percieves, consciousness cognizes and so is aware, feeling feels, as buddha said, when there is painful feeling, its just painful feeling
Is there an experience of perception perceiving, or consciousness cognizing, or sensation sensing?
clw_uk wrote:This is why there is birth and death constantly and not when refering to the end of the body.....

To dislike red cars is still craving and your right there is succession of events, this is conditionality.....
If birth and death is constant how is there a succession of events?
Coming forth is different from ending because it is the birth of something new, ending is the expiring
It sounds to me like birth and death as you describe them are the same thing. Isnt every instance of coming forth also simultaneous expiring.

If death didnt lead to birth then there would have been nibbana years ago



Nibbana is the end of all I-making and so the end of sense of self. If after the first time my sense of self or view of "I" died and that was the end of conditionality then there would be no more I-making and so it would be nibbana, the first time in this exisistence when my sense of self died for the first time was obviously as a child or younger. However because of dependent origination which is occuring in moments the death of "I" is not the end, since dependent origination has not been stopped a sense of self or "I" will be born again, therefore there can be birth after a death
So if death didnt lead to birth there would be no death?

Metta

Gabriel
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by DNS »

clw_uk wrote: Does that answer your question?
Yes, thank you. You do not deny rebirth, but apparently just don't focus on it, no problem or disagreement there.

Barring nibbana, dukkha arises again . . . in samsara.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

Yes, thank you. You do not deny rebirth, but apparently just don't focus on it, no problem or disagreement there.

Barring nibbana, dukkha arises again . . . in samsara.
Correct, i only focus on samsara in this moment, dependent origination in this momen and dukkha and craving that is here right now in this moment, past or future lives would be just more of the same so i dont see the importance in them anymore

:namaste:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

David:
Barring nibbana, dukkha arises again . . . in samsara.
A rose by any other name....

Mostly what we have been dealing with here in this thread is a strongly differing of opinion about the use of language, one which seems to suggest a highly inflexible insistence that language must be used in one way only versus the other which looks to be far consistent with the Buddha's skillful, adaptive use of language, understanding context and recognizing that mundane expressions of the teachings are not less true for being "mundane."
>> 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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

Is there an experience of perception perceiving, or consciousness cognizing, or sensation sensing?
There is no experiencer of perception, only perception. It only becomes "my" perception when its grasped at.


If birth and death is constant how is there a succession of events?
Because of dependent origination there is continuous birth and death in moments, its because of birth via of dependent origination and death because of dependent origination there is succession because if there was no death there would be no new birth of "I" and so no succession and so eternalsim, this is an error since conditionality cant have eternalism

It sounds to me like birth and death as you describe them are the same thing. Isnt every instance of coming forth also simultaneous expiring.
Coming forth of something new, expiring of something gone. In one moment there is clinging to feeling as "I", this is birth. When that feeling ceases so does the "I" so it has died, that sense of "I" that came from clinging to it. In the next moment there is clinging to perception as "I" so this is the new birth.

So if death didnt lead to birth there would be no death?
Death allows for birth because dependent origination is there. If death was the end of conditionality, there would be the end of all I-making since a new "I" wont arise and so there would be freedom of dukkha, the deathless

There is clinging to feelings and the sense of "I" is then born. That sense of "I" then dies when that clinging to feeling ends. If death was the end of conditionality, so the end of all I-making, then this would be the deathless as it would be the end of all I-making. However this is not tenable because of the exsistence of dependent origination. Only ending craving can end birth and death, not death itself and not any kind of birth


Whenever we speak of birth and death, in reality we are just talking about the birth and death of clinging/craving
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

Craig:
Whenever we speak of birth and death, in reality we are just talking about the birth and death of clinging/craving
That is not an accurate statement, at all. When you talk about birth and death, you may mean that, but when I speak about birth and death, I very likely, consistent with the Buddha's teachings, may have far broader context in mind. You will get into far less trouble here if you try not to generalize to everyone from your very particular point view, which, with good reason, is clearly not shared by most here. Basically, do NOT tell us what we think or mean when we say something, especially when we have been telling you we do not necessarily accept your very particular meaning of things and that we are not saying what you are saying we are saying. Do you understand this?
>> 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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

That is not an accurate statement, at all. When you talk about birth and death, you may mean that, but when I speak about birth and death, I very likely, consistent with the Buddha's teachings, may have far broader context in mind. You will get into far less trouble here if you try not to generalize to everyone from your very particular point view, which, with good reason, is clearly not shared by most here. Basically, do NOT tell us what we think or mean when wee say something, especially when we have been telling you we do not necessarily accept your very particular meaning of things and that we are not saying what you are saying we are saying. Do you understand this?

Very well if you feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread


For future reference when i speak of birth and death im speaking in terms of birth and death of the illusion of self, not physical death



:namaste:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

Craig:
Very well if you feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread
I feel that way? Having read through this thread, I suspect most who have posted here feel that way, which is why you gotten so much resistance to your postings here.
>> 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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

Very well if you feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread

I feel that way? Having read through this thread, I suspect most who have posted here feel that way, which is why you gotten so much resistance to your postings here.

Very well, i will amend it


if you all feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread


:namaste:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by tiltbillings »

Craig:
if you all feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread
It is not a matter of withdrawing the statement; it is a matter of understanding the complaint about it.
>> 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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The Danger of Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

if you all feel that way i will withdraw that statement but shall leave it in for consistency in reading the thread

It is not a matter of withdrawing the statement; it is a matter of understanding the complaint about it.
Well i feel it would need withdrawing since it is an error to say all here have this view and yes i will be more mindful of this in the future


:focus:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Post Reply