the great rebirth debate

[santa100]

Daverupa wrote:
To insist that it is essential is unfounded, and to argue that something inessential is, in fact, essential to Dhamma practice is incorrect, unproductive, and alienating

It then depends on how the individual sees what is essential and what is not, for it is just as incorrect, unproductive, and alienating to insist that something essential as inessential..

[rowyourboat]

My stance to any belief is - if it helps you and motivates you to practice the noble eightfold path- then go ahead and believe it! if it hinders you in the path to 1) becoming a better person 2) developing mindfulness, concentration and insight- then please let go..

I agree as to belief or (rejecting) non-belief or agnosticism in objects, things and phenomena that are not accessible to direct experience/perception and I would like to add that - whatever you believe in this context - if a belief or (rejecting) non-belief or agnosticism of others that does not comply with your own belief disturbs you then there may be something wrong with your own.


Kind regards

Agreed. I think what you mean (correct me if I am wrong..) is that if you are ATTACHED to your belief then other's beliefs may disturb you - this is how I see it.

With metta

Matheesha

[rowyourboat]

Hi Bhikkhu Pesala

I think that trying to become a better person might hinder the removal of personality view.

I'm not sure that is correct - cultivating what is wholesome (best articulated IMHO as 'becoming a better person') IS '..the teaching of the Buddhas - just look at the Karaniyamatta sutta and many other suttas like Mahamangla sutta- while these may seem unrelated to the 'important' work of developing concentration, insight etc I do not believe they are not - intact to get to the non-returner stage we must remove any and all manner of defilements .. and 'become a better person'. Also, Samma vayama is nothing BUT 'becoming a better person'. Even stream entry has elements of being faithful, virtuous and generous.. to a fault. I don't think just because modern dhamma teachers don't quite put it in those terms, or does not articulate Samma vayama as a distinct practice, that means that it doesn't exist within the holistic teaching, the 'well-said' teachings of the Thatagata. It would be a poor teaching indeed, if it's wasn't the case! Threadbare insight is highly unsatisfactory without a sprinkling of what comes under the broader definition of adhi-citta (heightened mind) or 'Samadhi'.

With much metta



Matheesha

[chownah]

Rowyourboat,
My view is that the try to be a "better person" is contrary to the "have no doctrine of self" teaching which as you know is a very important concept in fulfilling the path. Maybe the idea of becoming a "better person" would be helpful for someone who has not bought into the "have no doctrine of self" teaching but it seems that the Buddha was pretty good at not portraying his teachings as self improvement even for the novice. If I explain some teaching to a beginner or to someone making idle conversation and just wondering about Buddhism (for example) I might talk about self improvement but I would also at the same time mention something at least tangentially about anatta....but that's just me....
chownah

[PeterB]

What the individual sees as essential is not the issue.
The question becomes what does the Buddha see as essential, and he answers that with the 4NT, and 8FP, not by recourse to punabhava... a concept which is capable of diverse interpretations...a diversity which has led to this thread of inordinate length.

[Alex123]

'The world, the world'[1] it is said. In what respect does the word 'world' apply?
Find the answer here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
chownah

And? What meaning do you draw from that sutta, as it relates to the topic?

I think lt helps to understand the "next world"....as is found in the post I was replying to....
chownah

Hell realm involves āyatanas too. Same with heaven in kāma-loka, rūpa-loka and arūpa-loka. The difference is in amount of āyatana and specific objects that is encountered.

[Alex123]

What the individual sees as essential is not the issue.
The question becomes what does the Buddha see as essential, and he answers that with the 4NT, and 8FP, not by recourse to punabhava... a concept which is capable of diverse interpretations...a diversity which has led to this thread of inordinate length.

4NT contain ponobhavikā.


"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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

""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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
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 meantions rebirth, its perils and stopping of it.

[PeterB]

There is at least one model of the 4NT's and punabhava including that whole description of death and the passing away of the body with each breath which would sit comfortably within a one lifetime schemata...( actually there are many )
See Ajahn Buddhadasa...

Anyone is of course free to reject( after due consideration ) that model. Just as anyone is free to reject ( after due consideration ) the Three Lifetimes model.

Its no skin off my nose. I really have no preference which model anyone else chooses.
Both can be argued from the Suttas. Take your pick.

[santa100]

Rebirth is so important that if removed, other core dhamma concepts will not hold:
Imagine if rebirth was removed from the Dhamma grand equation:
1. No Samsara: no need to break this wheel, it never exists!!
2. No 4 Fruits: ex: no Stream-Enterer (defined as: rebirth up to seven more times as a human or in a heaven); no Arhant (everyone would automatically become an "arhant" at the end of their life)
3. No 12 links of DO: Becoming (Bhava) was gone; Vinnana wouldn't give rise to Namarupa.
4. Severely "waterdowned" Kamma: it couldn't be applied to the case of child prodigies or extreme mishaps to newborns; with past life and future life gone, Kamma's scope is down to 1/3: the present life only;You're born rich or poor, smart or dumb, beautiful or ugly, prestigious or low, ...all due to chance, not Kamma.
5. No 4 NT: see Alex's detail description above.

Not much of an equation left, is it!!

[Lazy_eye]

4. Severely "waterdowned" Kamma: it couldn't be applied to the case of child prodigies or extreme mishaps to newborns...You're born rich or poor, smart or dumb, beautiful or ugly, prestigious or low, ...all due to chance, not Kamma.

And this is a bad thing?

[santa100]

Lazy_eye wrote:
And this is a bad thing?

The Dhamma with 1,2,3,4,5 gone, is it a good thing?

[Alex123]

There is at least one model of the 4NT's and punabhava including that whole description of death and the passing away of the body with each breath which would sit comfortably within a one lifetime schemata...( actually there are many )
See Ajahn Buddhadasa...

Anyone is of course free to reject( after due consideration ) that model. Just as anyone is free to reject ( after due consideration ) the Three Lifetimes model.

I do accept momentary arising and ceasing of consciousness. But this is not the only kind of arising/passing away that the Buddha has taught. Momentariness and longer term impermanence do not need to exclude each other.

The Buddha often has said about death and rebirth "with the break-up of the body, after death...". This was one of His super knowledges, seeing his own rebirth and rebirth of other beings.

Lets see how the Buddha defined 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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"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"
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


There is absolutely no hint that what He mean was other than this gross body that is born, ages and will eventually die.

[Lazy_eye]

Lazy_eye wrote:
And this is a bad thing?

The Dhamma with 1,2,3,4,5 gone, is it a good thing?

I asked a specific question, which you seem to be evading.

[santa100]

I gave you an answer. You did not listen.

[Lazy_eye]

LOL. Nice try.