the great rebirth debate

[unspoken]

I'm just afraid that, if I am not dying consciously. Because what if I'm in a nightmare when I die suddenly, I'm in a state of fright. And if rebirth in a realm where I am ruled by feelings of fright and emotionally unstable, my practice will be hindered.

[acinteyyo]

I'm just afraid that, if I am not dying consciously. Because what if I'm in a nightmare when I die suddenly, I'm in a state of fright. And if rebirth in a realm where I am ruled by feelings of fright and emotionally unstable, my practice will be hindered.

Greetings unspoken,

I understand your concerns, but wasting your time pondering about what might happen in the future definitely hinders your practice now. Better use the time for practice here and now!

MN 2 Sabbasava Sutta: All the Fermentations

"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?' [...] "He attends appropriately, This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices.

SN12.20Paccaya Sutta: Requisite Conditions

"When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, '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?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, '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 that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be."

best wishes, acinteyyo

[unspoken]

But is there anyway? To be mindful during sleep?

[plwk]

But is there anyway? To be mindful during sleep?

Hatthaka Sutta Sudatta Sutta Maha-Assapura Sutta

[beeblebrox]

But is there anyway? To be mindful during sleep?

It's possible - an article on lucid dreaming. I used to lucid dream all the time when I was a kid, but unfortunately I didn't think it was that special, and eventually fell out of practice.

I still get a fully lucid dream maybe every few months or so, and always find some interesting differences between dreaming and the waking. The rest of time, I'm still vaguely aware, but I do nothing about it. Right after I awake, I just bring back my mindfulness... after some practice, you can do this within few seconds, or even immediately.

I haven't really found any motivation to bring my lucid dreaming into a full practice, though... I'd rather just drop into sleeping, and then just awake. If you do decide to practice this, just don't forget your Dhamma practice.

[dharmaamrita]

the concept of rebirth only applies to one who holds the self-view. Realize annata and such questions like will 'i' be reborn, how will 'my' karma affect me wont apply instead you will only see cause and effect one thing arising dependent on another and another arising conditioned by another. This existence is a web of cause and effect (paticca samupada). Understand that 1st hand and annata will be the view held. Then the irrelevance of the question of rebirth will be clear. Who is there to be reborn when all there is, is the 5 khandas brought about by paticca samupada, impermanent and changing from this to that.

[nowheat]

SN 44.9 "The Debating Hall
"But, Master Gotama, at the moment a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, what do you designate as its sustenance then?"

"Vaccha, when a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, I designate it as wind-sustained, for the wind is its sustenance at that time."

"And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?"

"Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time."

[source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html]

Doesn't this answer the question? If we are to take the suttas literally and not prejudice the readings with our own interpretations as metaphors, then the Buddha says right here that it is a being that gets reborn, and that the vehicle that carries it from one body to the next (so it is "reincarnation" isn't it?) is craving.

[daverupa]

Re: SN 44.9:

Doesn't this answer the question? If we are to take the suttas literally and not prejudice the readings with our own interpretations as metaphors, then the Buddha says right here that it is a being that gets reborn, and that the vehicle that carries it from one body to the next (so it is "reincarnation" isn't it?) is craving.

SN 23.2:
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then Ven. Radha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications...

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

"Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles: as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.

"In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form.

"You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.

"You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.

"You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.

"You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness — for the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding."

---

Practice for the ending of craving, rather than studying for the understanding of rebirth - which makes sense anyway (and which is not transmigration or reincarnation at all) once one is an ariyasavaka.

[pulga]

It doesn't necessarily "prove" rebirth, but here's an interesting video I just came across:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn0gXME8GeE

[icyteru]

Proof of rebirth / some people call it reincarnation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF3KqGpxXvo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-KUwz0vodQ

[Platypus]

:namaste: More than two thousand years have gone by and there is still no consensus about (post-mortem) rebirth. Will there be consensus about this in our relatively short lifespan? I don't think so! Then, are we wasting our time here? Maybe not; because "the great rebirth debate" may actually be a positive thing, in that, it could point to the futility of seeking answers about rebirth based on intellectual arguments.

Some claim the Buddha taught about rebirth, while others have a different slant on this. Then, again, some claim they acquired experiential knowledge that rebirth actually happens. But, others reject this. There's so much reference to the different suttas and commentaries on both sides, but still no consensus. There's also no guarantee that everything in the suttas is exactly how the Buddha explained it. Some people simply choose to be angostic about it. And, being agnostic about rebirth may not be a problem because the driving force of the Dhamma is simply to know dukkha, its causes, its cessation, and the Way (8FP) to its cessation. Perhaps, knowledge about whether or not there is (post-mortem) rebirth is not essential to the practice of the Buddha-Dhamma. I am not too sure about this, but if it is the case, then beginners who field questions about (post-mortem) rebirth should be advised accordingly. Then, at least, they will put aside this "distraction" and continue with the practice... leaving this debate to more "experienced" practitioners.

I think this is important, and I don't think at least initially that a belief in rebirth is needed to practice the 8fp the Buddha taught it in the four solaces.

17. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now.
"'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him.
"'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him.
"The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found."

[Alex123]

Was the Buddha telling untruth or misleading us when he talked about Hell in many suttas such as MN129/130?

Then the warders of hell give him the fivefold binding. That is two hot iron spikes are sent through his two palms, and two other hot spikes are sent through his two feet and the fifth hot iron spike is sent through his chest. On account of this he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell conduct him and hammer himOn account of this he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell take him upside down and cut him with a knifeOn account of this too he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell yoke him to a cart and make him go to and fro on a ground that is flaming and ablaze On account of this too he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell make him ascend and descend a rock of burning ambers On account of this he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell throw him upside down into a boiling, blazingpot of molten. Therehe is cooked in the molten scum, and he on his own accord dives in comes up and goes across in the molten pot. On account of this too he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings. Yet he does not die, until his demerit finishes. Next the warders of hell throw him to the Great Hell.

The square Great Hell has four gates and is divided in two,

Enclosed by iron walls, is closed with an iron lid.

The floor spreads for seven hundred miles,

And it stands there every day.

A fire springs from the eastern wall of the Great Hell to scorch the western wall. A fire springs from the western wall to scorch the eastern wallA fire springs from the northern wall to scorch the southern wall. A fire springs from the southern wall to scorch the northern wall. A fire springs from the bottom to scorch the top and a fire springs from the top to scorch the bottom. There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Bhikkhus, after the lapse of a very long time, it happens that the eastern door of the Great Hell opens. Then he runs with great speed, in doing so he burns his outer skin, inner skin, flesh, nerves, andeven the bones smoke, even if he pulls himself out, it happens. When he had, had enough of it the door closesThere he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Bhikkhus, after the lapse of a very long time, it happens that the western door of the Great Hell opens. Then he runs with great speed, in doing so he burns his outer skin, inner skin, flesh, nerves, andeven the bones smoke, even if he pulls himself out, it happens. When he had, had enough of it the door closesThere he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Bhikkhus, after the lapse of a very long time, it happens that the eastern door of the Great Hell opens. Then he runs with great speed, in doing so he burns his outer skin, inner skin, flesh, nerves, andeven the bones smoke, even if he pulls himself out, it happens. He escapes through that door.

Parallel and together with the Great Hell is the Hell of Excreta he falls into that. In it there are needle mouthed living things, that pierce the outer skin, ñhen the inner skin, after that the flesh, the nerves and even the bones and they eat the bone marrowThere he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Parallel and together with the Hell of Excretais the Hell where hot ashes rain, he falls into that. There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Parallel and together with the Hell where hot ashes rain, is the Simbali forest, more than seven miles tall, it has thorns sixteen inches long, aflame and blazing, he climbes on them and goes to and fro on them. There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Parallel and together with the Simbali forest, is a forest of swords. He enters that. The leaves that fall with the wind, cut his feet, hands, feet and hands, ears, nose, ears and nose. There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Parallel and together with the forest of swords is a huge salt water riverHe falls into that. In it he is carried up stream and down stream. There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die until his demerit comes to an end.

Then the warders of hell pull him out with a hook and ask him. `Good man, what do you desire?' He says, `Sir, I'm hungry,' The warders of hell open his mouth with hot iron spikes and pour into his mouth burning, flaming iron balls. They burn his lips, mouth, throat, chest, the intestines, the lower intestines and they come out with the insides There he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die, until his demerit comes to an end.

Then the warders ask him. `Good man, what do you desire?' He says, `Sir, I'm thirsty,' The warders of hell open his mouth with hot iron spikes and pour into his mouth burning, flaming copper molten They burn his lips, mouth, throat, chest, the intestines, the lower intestines and they come out with the insidesThere he experiences sharp piercing unpleasant feelings, yet he does not die, until his demerit comes to an end.

Then the warders of Hell put him back to the Great Hell.

In the past to the king of the Under World it occurred thus. To those who do evil in the world, these various punishments are given. O! IfI gain humanity. O! If the Thus Gone One, perfect and rightfully enlightened is born in the world. O! I should associate that Blessed One. O! the Blessed One should teach me and I should know that Teaching.

``Bhikkhus, I say this not hearing from another recluse or brahmin, this is what I have myself known and seen and so I say it.û
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... uta-e.html

Are there any indication that Buddha borrowed this doctrine from someone else?
Does the Buddha say that he is only being metaphorical talking about momentary mind states?

Considering how precise the Buddha was making sure that He would not be misinterpreted, is there any clear statement that He was merely talking about momentary mind states?

[maitreya31]

To claim that the Buddha never teach literal karma and rebirth based in the Nikayas is very dishonest . In many sutras of the 4 nikayas he talk about literal karma and rebirth many times . I don't think that he used both concepts to trick people to behave good . I don't think that the Buddha was a liar . He wasn't agnostic about the issue . I understand that in America and Europe in our modern times both concepts can seem to be speculations and superstitions . Maybe the Buddha was a superstitious dude . Maybe he was wrong and materialists are right . I choose to think that the Buddha was right and that simply his doctrine of rebirth and karma without agent or soul is very difficult to understand.

[ground]

To claim that the Buddha never teach literal karma and rebirth based in the Nikayas is very dishonest . In many sutras of the 4 nikayas he talk about literal karma and rebirth many times . I don't think that he used both concepts to trick people to behave good . I don't think that the Buddha was a liar . He wasn't agnostic about the issue . I understand that in America and Europe in our modern times both concepts can seem to be speculations and superstitions . Maybe the Buddha was a superstitious dude . Maybe he was wrong and materialists are right . I choose to think that the Buddha was right and that simply his doctrine of rebirth and karma without agent or soul is very difficult to understand.

As to "literal":

Putting aside only some part of the Buddha's teachings as "non-literal" in meaning raises the following questions:
What is the basis for determining one part to be understood "literally" in meaning and another part not to be understood "literally" in meaning?
Investigating into this question will show that the basis is arbitrariness caused by liking and disliking and/or a complete unawareness of the "can of worms" a differentiation between "literal" and "non-literal" leads to.

So if argueing "pro literal" or "contra literal" you should define what "literal meaning" stands for in a certain case. Otherwise it is simply taken as a "given" like some metaphysical entity: The one who believes in it does not see any necessity to bother if it exists.
Investigating into linguistic practices one can easily find out that 1) the meaning of words changes depending on contexts and that 2) many words and expressions are applied with a metaphorical intent. To talk about a "literal meaning" of words [a "literal meaning" = "one", 'singular'] without further definition actually presumes a "meaning" autonomously inhering in a symbol when it is actually the one who contacts (sees, reads) this symbol who fabricates the meaning of it.


Kind regards

[Spiny O'Norman]

Investigating into linguistic practices one can easily find out that 1) the meaning of words changes depending on contexts and that 2) many words and expressions are applied with a metaphorical intent.

I agree, in particular that the meaning of language is always specific to context. So it isn't enough to say that a particular Pali word can have several meanings, you need to look very carefully at the context too.

Spiny

[bodom]

I came across an interesting sutta today that seems to strongly support to the 3 life model:

Bala-pandita Sutta: The Fool & the Wise Person

Dwelling at Savatthi. "When a fool is obstructed by ignorance and conjoined with craving, this body thus results. Now there is both this body and external name-&-form. Here, in dependence on this duality, there is contact at the six senses. Touched by these, or one or another of them, the fool is sensitive to pleasure & pain.

"When a wise person is obstructed by ignorance and conjoined with craving, this body thus results. Now there is both this body and external name-&-form. Here, in dependence on this duality, there is contact at the six senses. Touched by these, or one or another of them, the wise person is sensitive to pleasure & pain.

"So what difference, what distinction, what distinguishing factor is there between the wise person & the fool?"

"For us, lord, the teachings have the Blessed One as their root, their guide, & their arbitrator. It would be good if the Blessed One himself would explicate the meaning of this statement. Having heard it from the Blessed One, the monks will remember it."

"In that case, monks, listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "The ignorance with which the fool is obstructed, the craving with which he is conjoined, through which this body results: that ignorance has not been abandoned by the fool; that craving has not been destroyed. Why is that? The fool has not practiced the holy life for the right ending of stress. Therefore, at the break-up of the body, he is headed for a [new] body. Headed for a body, he is not entirely freed from birth, aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. I tell you, he is not entirely freed from stress & suffering.

"The ignorance with which the wise person is obstructed, the craving with which he is conjoined, through which this body results: that ignorance has been abandoned by the wise person; that craving has been destroyed. Why is that? The wise person has practiced the holy life for the right ending of stress. Therefore, at the break-up of the body, he is not headed for a [new] body. Not headed for a body, he is entirely freed from birth, aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is, I tell you, entirely freed from stress & suffering."

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

Now, not that I care at all for argument or debate concerning rebirth, I just thought it was an interesting sutta to share.

[Ben]

Now, not that I care at all for argument or debate concerning...

Not even a little one?

Thanks for sharing that Sutta, Bodom.
As for support for the 3-lifetime support, I guess it all depends on how one interprets the sutta. For me, its less clear than clear either way. It would be interesting to read the commentarial gloss on the Bala-pandita Sutta.
kind regards

Ben

[bodom]

Now, not that I care at all for argument or debate concerning...

Not even a little one?

Thanks for sharing that Sutta, Bodom.
As for support for the 3-lifetime support, I guess it all depends on how one interprets the sutta. For me, its less clear than clear either way. It would be interesting to read the commentarial gloss on the Bala-pandita Sutta.
kind regards

Ben

Hi Ben

Do you own Bodhi's Samyutta translation? All the commentarial notes are included for this sutta.

Bodhi say's something along the lines that "this sutta should establish validity for the 3 life model and show that it is not a strictly commentarial idea."

However one chooses to interpret this sutta is entirely up to them. I didn't post it to try change anyone's opinions this way or that. Just thought it was interesting.

[Ben]

Hi Bodom
Yes, I do own Bodhi's translation of SN, but it is 100km away as I didn't bring it home with me.
I'll check it out when I go back Sunday evening. Its interesting that Ven Bodhi says that as I recall he says elsewhere that the 3-lifetime model (paticca-samupada) is an expository tool. I'm even more intrigued now!

I didn't post it to try change anyone's opinions this way or that. Just thought it was interesting.

It is, indeed!
kind regards

Ben

[Spiny O'Norman]

Considering how precise the Buddha was making sure that He would not be misinterpreted, is there any clear statement that He was merely talking about momentary mind states?

And are there any suttas which comprehensively support the notion of "moment-to-moment rebirth"?

Spiny