the great rebirth debate

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
Posts: 16348
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1001
Location: Land of the sleeping gods
Contact:

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Ben » Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:58 am

Hi Aloka,
Aloka wrote:Unless you can show them to me Zom, then in my own view its all purely speculative and has no connection to my practice here and now.

How can you possibly know that? How do you know that your view does not condition your practice negatively? And wrong view generated by one's practice or one's experiences or interpretations of them, then just creates a self-validating circle of delusion. Most people who follow a wrong path are completely convinced that they are following the right path.
kind regards

Ben
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.

Taṃ nadīhi vijānātha:
sobbhesu padaresu ca,
saṇantā yanti kusobbhā,
tuṇhīyanti mahodadhī.

Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR
Buddhist Life Stories of Australia
e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com

Jhana4
Posts: 1309
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1006
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Jhana4 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:09 am

Ervin wrote:My understaning is that Budhists believe in hell realms. Once a Budhist reverend told me that one day in hell is 50 thousand years. If that is really the case than that is horific and extremley cruel and disproportionate punishment. Honestly I hope there a is no hell or at least if Budha was right than I hope they are to be taken metaphorically.

Anyway, I am interested in your/theravada take on it!

Thanks


I don't believe it. I don't see those kind of things as being any different than the superstitions/myths Christians on our side of the world believe because that is what they were brought up with those stories. I understand that the Bible has some good advice about life too, admits the myths in its pages. That good advice doesn't make the myths anymore plausible. Same with Buddhism.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.

plwk
Posts: 1170
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:14 am
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6
Contact:

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby plwk » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:41 am

I sometimes wonder if the burger I eat is 'real'.... :thinking: :tongue:
Bhikkhus, if you develop and make much this one thing,
it invariably leads to weariness, cessation, appeasement, realization and extinction.
What is it? It is recollecting the Enlightened One.
If this single thing is recollected and made much,
it invariably leads to weariness, cessation, appeasement, realization and extinction.

Anguttara-Nikaya: Ekanipata: Ekadhammapali: Pañhamavagga
VSM VMM WBB TBHT WTBT My Page

FlowerPotMen

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby FlowerPotMen » Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:48 am

[Mod note: This is a post by the banned and frequent violator of the TOS aka Element, who is a global moderator on Buddhism Without Borders]

Ben wrote:How can you possibly know that? How do you know that your view does not condition your practice negatively? And wrong view generated by one's practice or one's experiences or interpretations of them, then just creates a self-validating circle of delusion. Most people who follow a wrong path are completely convinced that they are following the right path.

Just self-righteous speculation :soap:

The heavens & hells of the six sense bases the Buddha taught is known. However, the heaven & hell of the Flower Pot Men is just imagined :strawman:

It is right view to believe there are other worlds (para loka). The Incontrovertible Discourse from the Majjhimanikāya instructs this mundane right view for the householder promotes the three kinds of skilful action. :reading:

But it cannot lead to enlightenment & the end of suffering. The Incontrovertible Discourse calls it a "lucky throw" or "gamble". :toast:

So the way the mind holds such a view certainly affects one's practise. :sage:

To hold the view as 'literal' is just a self-validating circle of delusion. :spy:

The stream enterer is so because it knows without doubt it is on the right path. The stream enterer has dropped 'self-validating beliefs', doubt and superstition. :meditate:

With metta :heart:

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:46 pm

chownah wrote:Alex123,
SOMETIMES the Buddha indicated that something he said was a simile....this does not mean that every other time he spoke he meant it to be literal....




But the Buddha NEVER (or please tell where) said that rebirth is a simile and that there is "one life only". Same with the Theravada commentaries and some mahayana commentary that I've read.

I find it preposterous to imply that Buddha was such an incapable teacher who couldn't express His thought clearly, which has led to thousands of years of misinterpreting His Teachings. I really do not know how He could have been even more clear when He frequently said "with the break-up of the body, after death" and defined the body as "this body — endowed with form, composed of the four primary elements, born from mother & father, nourished with rice & porridge, subject to inconstancy, rubbing, pressing, dissolution, and dispersion " . If there was one life only, then it would be stupid for Gotama to look for a way to end birth, aging and death (MN26), since birth would never be repeated if there was one life only, and nothing could prevent the aging and death of this body (please see again what the body means). Furthermore, if rebirth is supposed to mean arising of mental states in this single life, then why would one need to enter 4th Jhāna to see that? Can't one be aware of ones mind state without having to go as deep?


"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of recollecting my past lives. I recollected my manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two...five, ten...fifty, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion: 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus I remembered my manifold past lives in their modes & details.
...
"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, & mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech & mind, who did not revile the noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Last edited by Alex123 on Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:50 pm

Hi Aloka,

Aloka wrote:
Zom wrote:Thinking that heavens and hells should not be taken "literally" - is the Wrong View.

Unless you can show them to me Zom, then in my own view its all purely speculative and has no connection to my practice here and now.


And who can show you Nibbāna? Have you personally and directly seen it? So how isn't that speculative to you?
Have you personally seen an Arahant, for example? Are you sure you weren't mistaken? So do we reject Arhatship then as mere speculation? (same with other stages).

Is what is said in the Suttas speculative unless it was verified by you? Do we consider our own beliefs to be preferable to suttas?
"dust to dust...."

chownah
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby chownah » Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:01 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Please see The Incontrovertible Discourse from the Majjhimanikāya.

Bhikkhu Pesala,
In this story the "wise man" does not take the view that "another world" exists nor does he take the view that "another world" does not exist. It seems that if the "wise man" has had some experience suggesting that "another world" exists then he is not formulating views based on that experience...and if the "wise man" has not had some experience of "another world" then he is not formulationg views based on that lack of experience....it seems that the "wise man" is not indulging in views....is this how you see the "wise man"?
chownah

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:14 pm

Chownah,

chownah wrote:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Please see The Incontrovertible Discourse from the Majjhimanikāya.

Bhikkhu Pesala,
In this story the "wise man" does not take the view that "another world" exists nor does he take the view that "another world" does not exist. It seems that if the "wise man" has had some experience suggesting that "another world" exists then he is not formulating views based on that experience...and if the "wise man" has not had some experience of "another world" then he is not formulationg views based on that lack of experience....it seems that the "wise man" is not indulging in views....is this how you see the "wise man"?
chownah


So, before directly seeing Nibbāna, is it a view because that person hasn't yet had the experience suggesting that Nibbāna exists?
So do we reject it then because it is "a view" of which a person had no experience?

If one hasn't personally seen an Arhat, does that mean that it is a view that Arhats exist - and we need to reject it?
etc, etc.

Reading the complete Sutta-Pitaka, is there any reasonable basis to conclude that Buddha taught "one life only", and "rebirth as mental states in this life only"? Was Buddha such an incapable teacher who couldn't clearly say that after one-life it is over?
"dust to dust...."

santa100
Posts: 1603
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1006

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby santa100 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:45 pm

From Apannaka Sutta:
“Since there is another world, one who holds the view that there is not holds a wrong view. Since there is another world, one who thinks that there is not has wrong thoughts. Since there is another world, one who says there is not uses wrong speech and is opposed to those Arahants who know there is another world. One who convinces another to accept this untrue Dhamma praises himself and disparages others, thus any former morality he had is abandoned and replaced with bad conduct. All of these various unwholesome things — wrong thought, wrong speech and so forth — have wrong view as their origin.”


Well, for the no-rebirth/no-other-world/all-a-myth/all-speculative camp, if you're confident that you can continue your training without the risk of falling into wrong thought, wrong speech, wrong action, etc. then carry on, wishing you all the best. Just be aware that the odds are stacking up against you. The words above were from the Great Teacher. You heard Him...

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Bhikkhu Pesala » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:16 pm

chownah wrote:It seems that the "wise man" is not indulging in views....is this how you see the "wise man"?
The way that I see it is that the wise man knows that he does not know, so he steers a safe and pragmatic course. The Sutta makes it clear what the Buddha's view was:
“Since there is another world, one who holds the view that there is not holds a wrong view. Since there is another world, one who thinks that there is not has wrong thoughts. Since there is another world, one who says there is not uses wrong speech and is opposed to those Arahants who know there is another world. One who convinces another to accept this untrue Dhamma praises himself and disparages others, thus any former morality he had is abandoned and replaced with bad conduct. All of these various unwholesome things — wrong thought, wrong speech and so forth — have wrong view as their origin.”
AIM WebsitePāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1006
Location: Cyberia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby ancientbuddhism » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:30 pm

Hi kirk5a, Alex123 et al,

I really don’t know what to say at this point to you or others who choose to respond with specious arguments with the agnostic premise to what is a direct question of what are practicable essentials?.These responses are so disconnected from the question in its context that a this/that reply is not possible without further digression. As unfortunate as this seems, it really does not matter; such are the conditions which give rise to self and views.

For those who can understand, I have no quarrel with what is in the early texts, or anyone else, which give voice to the life-to-life rebirth myth. I am fortunate, quite by accident perhaps, that my Ajahns gave me rather simple contemplative instruction ‘kesā lomā nakhā dantā taco…’ which are easy enough to understand and put into practice, and otherwise I am simply content to also practice any tenets of Dhamma which endow the results of contemplative endeavor, readily evident; just as others may choose contemplative ‘Traditions’ – whether they be LP Teean, Mahāsi, Goenka, khun Sujin, Wat Phra Dhammakāya or the TFT – teachers who can be just as radical if not more so with their arbitrary selection what part of the 8-fold Path is practicable – as any natural agnostic.
Anuvicca papañca nāmarūpaṃ
ajjhattaṃ bahiddhā ca rogamūlaṃ,
sabbarogamūlabandhanā pamutto
anuvidito tādi pavuccate tathattā
.

“Having known the naming of objects,
With its proliferation, its root in illness – within and without;
One is released from bondage to the root of all illness.
And thus is called the Knowing One – the Such.

– Sn. 3.6 (Sabhiyasuttaṃ)

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)

A Handful of Leaves

chownah
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby chownah » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:36 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
chownah wrote:It seems that the "wise man" is not indulging in views....is this how you see the "wise man"?
The way that I see it is that the wise man knows that he does not know, so he steers a safe and pragmatic course. The Sutta makes it clear what the Buddha's view was:
“Since there is another world, one who holds the view that there is not holds a wrong view. Since there is another world, one who thinks that there is not has wrong thoughts. Since there is another world, one who says there is not uses wrong speech and is opposed to those Arahants who know there is another world. One who convinces another to accept this untrue Dhamma praises himself and disparages others, thus any former morality he had is abandoned and replaced with bad conduct. All of these various unwholesome things — wrong thought, wrong speech and so forth — have wrong view as their origin.”

Bhikkhu Pesala,
Do you think that "another world" as the Buddha is using it fits into the guidelines of "the world" as the Buddha explains in the Loca Sutta?...it seems to me that "another world" seems to be a very generic concept and does not seem to point in any particular direction...if the Buddha had meant hell I guess he would have said so but maybe not....
chownah

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: the great rebirth debate

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:42 pm

Hello Ancientbuddhism,

Of course one may believe what one wants. What I don't approve of is the projecting of one's beliefs onto the Suttas.
One of the ways that one projects one's beliefs or doubts is to interpret clear message in such a way to mean what one wants it to mean that it affirms one's beliefs.


"Myth of rebirth in the early texts notwithstanding – do the teachings of the Buddha stand or fail based on whether one believes in what cannot be reached by living experience? With the myth of rebirth aside I do not see a mere system of ethics, mere petty morality, but a way of living with an analysis of experience which can be put into practice with evident progression." viewtopic.php?p=142808&sid=66c5e31c757463aa7bc369629d3540fc#p142808

How do you know that rebirth is a myth? Why not Nibbāna being a myth? Have you personally seen it? Have you seen an Arahant?
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 3821
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Aloka » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:43 pm

Alex123 wrote:Hi Aloka,

Aloka wrote:
Zom wrote:Thinking that heavens and hells should not be taken "literally" - is the Wrong View.

Unless you can show them to me Zom, then in my own view its all purely speculative and has no connection to my practice here and now.


And who can show you Nibbāna? Have you personally and directly seen it? So how isn't that speculative to you?
Have you personally seen an Arahant, for example? Are you sure you weren't mistaken? So do we reject Arhatship then as mere speculation? (same with other stages).

Is what is said in the Suttas speculative unless it was verified by you? Do we consider our own beliefs to be preferable to suttas?


Alex123

What are you talking about? Did I mention Nibbana or Arahants?

Also, no offence meant, but I'd prefer not to engage with your extremist attack style.

Relax... breathe .... be happy ! The sun is shining here -does it shine for you?

.

User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 4518
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1001

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby daverupa » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:45 pm

santa100 wrote:
From Apannaka Sutta:
“Since there is another world, one who holds the view that there is not holds a wrong view. Since there is another world, one who thinks that there is not has wrong thoughts. Since there is another world, one who says there is not uses wrong speech and is opposed to those Arahants who know there is another world. One who convinces another to accept this untrue Dhamma praises himself and disparages others, thus any former morality he had is abandoned and replaced with bad conduct. All of these various unwholesome things — wrong thought, wrong speech and so forth — have wrong view as their origin.”


Well, for the no-rebirth/no-other-world/all-a-myth/all-speculative camp, if you're confident that you can continue your training without the risk of falling into wrong thought, wrong speech, wrong action, etc. then carry on, wishing you all the best. Just be aware that the odds are stacking up against you. The words above were from the Great Teacher. You heard Him...


MN 117 wrote:"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

"And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions."


This is the right view of the Apannaka Sutta which was preached to a brahmin village.

MN 117 wrote:"And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.


This is the right view preached to the monastic sangha.

Why this difference? Is it a matter of the audience? It certainly seems important. After all, "the words above were from the Great Teacher. You heard Him."

It seems certain brahmins were taught a morality argued for with a version of Pascal's Wager, while the monastic sangha was taught to nevermind all that effluent, acquisitive merit in favor of the noble path - and nowhere therein is 'the next world' an essential teaching.

Cling to views of this world and the next like a brahmin, or set it aside in favor of Dhamma practice.

:meditate:
Last edited by daverupa on Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:50 pm

chownah wrote:Do you think that "another world" as the Buddha is using it fits into the guidelines of "the world" as the Buddha explains in the Loca Sutta?...it seems to me that "another world" seems to be a very generic concept and does not seem to point in any particular direction...if the Buddha had meant hell I guess he would have said so but maybe not....
chownah


Both hell and heaven are made of sense-spheres, khandhas and elements.
Another world does point to where one goes AFTER death described as with the break-up of the body, after death.

The Buddha has clearly said this about the body:

"These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, & mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell."
=======
""Furthermore, the monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'
...
"Furthermore, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.'

"Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'..." - MN119
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:57 pm

Aloka wrote: Alex123
What are you talking about? Did I mention Nibbana or Arahants?


What I mean is that if one is to doubt rebirth merely because one has not seen it and Science cannot prove it, then why not deny other things that one has not seen and Science cannot prove such as: Nibbāna, Arhatship, etc?

Why be selective in what aspects of the suttas one accepts and what denies?
"dust to dust...."

chownah
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby chownah » Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:05 pm

Alex123 wrote:Chownah,

chownah wrote:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Please see The Incontrovertible Discourse from the Majjhimanikāya.

Bhikkhu Pesala,
In this story the "wise man" does not take the view that "another world" exists nor does he take the view that "another world" does not exist. It seems that if the "wise man" has had some experience suggesting that "another world" exists then he is not formulating views based on that experience...and if the "wise man" has not had some experience of "another world" then he is not formulationg views based on that lack of experience....it seems that the "wise man" is not indulging in views....is this how you see the "wise man"?
chownah


So, before directly seeing Nibbāna, is it a view because that person hasn't yet had the experience suggesting that Nibbāna exists?
So do we reject it then because it is "a view" of which a person had no experience?

Yes, every thought we have about Nibbana is a view so in that respect if the word "nibbana" arises it does so as a view in that it has not been experienced...in fact can not be experienced...Nibbana is not an experience....anything we say is conjecture...just views.

Since Nibbana is not a thing I don't think it is appropriate to think in terms of rejecting it...if you are talking about rejecting our views surrounding the word "nibbana" then I think it is better to think in terms of refining our views surroundig that word....I guess that in a certain way views get refined from having residue toward having no residue....and the ultimately perhaps the residue disappears completely and this is nibbana although this is just my view and so is assuredly incorrect....and should be dropped...or refined....
Alex123 wrote:If one hasn't personally seen an Arhat, does that mean that it is a view that Arhats exist - and we need to reject it?
etc, etc.

Yes, if one has not experienced an arhat then all that one can have in relationship to the word "arhat" is views...again, perhaps thinking in terms of refining is better than rejecting...it is best to see that the ideas are views...I think this is part of "seeing things as they are"....but I'm not sure if my interpretation of this is kosher Theravadan or not....
Alex123 wrote:Reading the complete Sutta-Pitaka, is there any reasonable basis to conclude that Buddha taught "one life only", and "rebirth as mental states in this life only"? Was Buddha such an incapable teacher who couldn't clearly say that after one-life it is over?

Unless you want to label anyone who disagrees with you on this as being "unreasonable" then I guess there obviously is a reasonable basis for the conclusion......I think that the most reasonable thing is for those who have had experience and thus belief to declare that they have had this or that experience and as a result they have belief...or for someone who has had no experience but believes it for some other reason to declare that they have not had experience but do believe based on these other factors (faith, logic, following a leader, etc....or even a "don't know why")...or for someone who has had no experience and who does not believe to declare that they have had no experience and have no active belief but that it is possible that in the future they will have an experience or some other factor may arise which will give rise to a belief. I think this is called "guarding the truth"........we all have beliefs based on experience (or lack thereof)....if you don't try to invalidate my experience I won't try to invalidate yours...
chownah

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2960
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby Alex123 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:09 pm

daverupa wrote: and nowhere therein is 'the next world' an essential teaching.


And to hold that "there is no next world" is wrong view. Furthermore, the 4NT do include rebirth.


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

Please guess what "not getting what is wanted is stressful" means?

""And what is the stress of not getting what is wanted? In beings subject to birth, the wish arises, 'O, may we not be subject to birth, and may birth not come to us.' But this is not to be achieved by wanting. ..."

If there was one-life, it would be pointless trying to stop birth and all the dukkha that it will bring again, so this question would not even make sense. How can you stop what will not occur (if there is only one life)? Also if death will happen only once, then why such a big deal about stopping it which is impossible, if there was one life only?

"And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] spheres of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth."

[Mara:]
Why don't you approve of birth? Once born, one enjoys sensual pleasures. Who now has persuaded you of this: 'Bhikkhuni, don't approve of birth'?

[Cala:]
For one who is born there is death; Once born, one encounters sufferings — Bondage, murder, affliction — Hence one shouldn't approve of birth. The Buddha has taught the Dhamma, The transcendence of birth; For the abandoning of all suffering He has settled me in the truth.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bodh.html


""And what is death? Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death."

""And what, friends, is the noble truth of the origination of stress? The craving that makes for further becoming (ponobhavikā) ..."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
ponobhavikā= leading to rebirth.

Please note that 2nd NT is about craving that leads to rebirth! Not some psychological "I wanted this car, but the stock market crashed and now I am poor" sort of thing.

So even within 4NT, it is heavy about rebirth, its perils and stopping it.

chownah wrote:
Unless you want to label anyone who disagrees with you on this as being "unreasonable" then I guess there obviously is a reasonable basis for the conclusion.


It is unreasonable to insist that He in that context meant something different so that the entire message would be changed.
The Buddha was clear about what He meant by the body.


""Furthermore, the monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'
...
"Furthermore, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.'

"Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'...
" - MN119
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"And how is a monk content? Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.
...
"'This body of mine is endowed with form, composed of the four primary elements, born from mother and father, nourished with rice and porridge, subject to inconstancy, rubbing, pressing, dissolution, and dispersion.

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


So whenever the Buddha has said: "with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in" why is the meaning of the body is suddenly something other than the way the Buddha has defined the body? He certainly didn't give a new interpretation of "the body" in passages about death and rebirth.
"dust to dust...."

santa100
Posts: 1603
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1006

Re: Is hell and hungry ghost realm to be taken literally?

Postby santa100 » Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:18 pm

Daverupa wrote:
MN 117 wrote:
"And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path"

Thank you for the ref. for it definitely clarifies the huge contrast between a noble mind, one that "is free from effluents and fully possessed of the noble path" versus one that flatly rejects rebirth and other world.


Return to “Open Dhamma”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: LastLegend, palchi, Yahoo [Bot] and 8 guests