the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

It is you Alex that insist on a demarcation between truth and poetic expression.

Each of us must decide what is true and what is not useful to us.

I have no interest ( really and truly ) in influencing you or anyone else in any way in these matters.
Neither after much reflection on these matters during which I have moved along a spectrum of views over many years likely to be swayed by any form of words or protestations of direct insight denied to those who think differently.
The only reason I have joined this ultimately futile debate at all is to demonstrate to anyone still wavering that there are alternatives to a wholesale swallowing of a kind of fundamentalist view.

Buddha Dhamma is what you do. Not what belief structure you cultivate.
User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by ancientbuddhism »

PeterB wrote: Au contraire..
As Ajahn Buddhadasa has pointed out clearly and repeatedly , if we put the Three Lives Model to one side a whole series of meanings start to leap out of the Suttas that are obscured by a semi Hindu model. A model necessitated by the culture which the Buddha commenced his teaching ministry.
In a very real sense the dissolution of the body and its rebirth happen with every breath.
There need not be a next-worldly interpretation of punabhava or saṃsāra for the essentials of contemplative work to progress. The 4-NT gives the function of DO in the present: there is dukkha because of preferential craving for the impermanence of things. Ignorant and unaware of this habit one foolishly repeats, follows after, and ruminates about (anuparivatti) these conditions over and again; thus one revisits these habits again (punabbhava). Saṃsāra can easily be recognized as mental recidivism as the examples of moment to moment birth through ignorant contact (avijjasamphassajena) can be read in the Nikāyas and paraphrased in ones daily life. The examples below gives also the positive result of the 3rd-NT by the shift of the perspective of the contemplative, turning away from taṇhā, to remain in the real.
SN. 3.1.5.5 Samanupassanā suttaṃ

Discourse on Viewpoints

Sāvatthiyaṃ:
Ye hi keci bhikkhave, samaṇāvā brahmaṇā vā anekavihitaṃ attānaṃ samanupassamānā samanupassanti, sabbe te pañcupādānakkhandhe samanupassanti, etesaṃ vā aññataraṃ.

Katame pañca?

Idha bhikkhave, assutavā puthujjano ariyānaṃ adassāvī ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme avinīto, sappurisānaṃ adassāvī sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme avinīto, rūpaṃ attato samanupassati rūpavantaṃ vā attānaṃ attati vā rūpaṃ, rūpasmiṃ vā attānaṃ, …vedanaṃ attato samanupassati vedanāvantaṃ vā attānaṃ attati vā vedanaṃ,vedanasmiṃ vā attānaṃ, … saññaṃ attato samanupassati saññāvantaṃ vā attānaṃ attani vā saññaṃ saññasmiṃ vā attānaṃ, … saṅkhāre attato samanupassati saṅkharāvantaṃ vā attānaṃ attati vā saṅkhāraṃ,saṅkhārasmiṃ vā attānaṃ, … viññāṇaṃ attato samanupassati viññāṇavantaṃ vā attānaṃ attati vā viññāṇaṃ viññāṇasmiṃ vā attānaṃ.

At Sāvatthi. “Bhikkhus, there are ascetics and Brahmins who hold to the conceited viewpoint of a ‘Self’, in various and particular ways, all of which pertain to the five-bases of conditionality subject to be identified with. Which five?”

“Bhikkhus, there is an untaught-commoner who does not take notice of the Wise Ones, who is not trained in the Doctrines of the Wise Ones nor is he possessed of the wisdom of the Doctrines of the Wise Ones - who does not take notice of Refined Persons, who is not trained in the Doctrines of the Refined Persons nor is he possessed of the wisdom of the Doctrines of the Refined Persons, He is of the viewpoint that materiality is ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ possesses materiality, or materiality is in ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ is in materiality. He is of the viewpoint that sensations of feeling are ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ possesses sensations of feeling, or sensations of feeling are in ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ is in sensations of feeling. He is of the viewpoint that sense-awareness is ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ possesses sense-awareness, or sense-awareness is in ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ is in sense-awareness. He is of the viewpoint that volitional-cognition is ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ possesses volitional-cognition, or volitional-cognition is in ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ is in volitional-cognition. He is of the viewpoint that consciousness is ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ possesses consciousness, or consciousness is in ‘Self’, or ‘Self’ is in consciousness.

[The Buddha’s classic refutation of the Brahman Absolute Self]

Iti ayañceva samanupassanā asmīti cassa avigataṃ hoti. Asmīti kho pana bhikkhave avigate, pañcannaṃ indriyānaṃ avakkanti hoti: cakkhunadriyassa sotindriyassa ghānindriyassa jivhindriyassa kāyindriyassa. Atthi bhikkhave mano atthi dhammā, atthi avijjādhātu avijjāsamphassajena bhikkhave, vedayitena phuṭṭhassa assutavato puthujjanassa asmīti'pissa hoti, ayamahamasmīti'pissa hoti bhavissanti pi'ssa hoti, rūpī bhavissanti'pissa hoti, arūpī bhavissanti'pissa hoti. Saññī bhavissanti'pissa hoti, asañañī bhavissanti'pissa hoti. Nevasaññīnāsañañī bhavissanti'pissa hoti.

Therefore because of these viewpoints this ‘I am’ has not vanished. Therefore, bhikkhus, because this ‘I am’ has not vanished, he is beset[1] with these five characteristics; the eye characteristic, the ear characteristic, the nose characteristic, the tongue characteristic and the body characteristic. There exists, bhikkhus, the mind; there exists its phenomena and there exists the factor of ignorance. Born of ignorant contact, bhikkhus, the untaught-commoner is influenced by sensations[2]; thus it occurs to him ‘I am’, thus it occurs to him ‘I am this’, thus it occurs to him ‘I exist’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall not exist’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall be composed of materiality’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall not be composed of materiality’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall not be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it occurs to him ‘I shall consist of neither sense-awareness nor not of sense-awareness’.

[1. avakkanti – he ‘falls into…’ the senses]
[2. vedayitena phuṭṭhassa – he is affected by the experience of them and thus assumes “‘I am’…” ]

Tiṭṭhanti kho pana bhikkhave, tattheva pañcindriyāni, athettha sutavato ariyasāvakassa avijjā pahīyati, vijjā uppajjati, tassa avijjāvirāgā vijjuppādā asmīti'pissa na hoti. Ayamahamasmiti'pissa na hoti, bhavissanti'pissa na hoti, na bhavissanti'pissa na hoti, saññī bhavissanti'pissa na hoti, asaññī bhavissanti'pissa na hoti, nevasaññīnāsaññi bhavissanti'pissa na hotīti.

Bhikkhus, the five characteristics exist right there, although for the learned noble disciple; ignorance has been abandoned and knowledge has arisen. Therefore with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of knowledge; thus it does not occur to him ‘I am’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I am this’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I exist’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not exist’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall be composed of materiality’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not be composed of materiality’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall consist of neither sense-awareness nor not of sense-awareness’.

[the same faculties exist for the ariya, although “ignorance has been abandoned and knowledge has arisen…” minus the taking up of ‘self’ (and all of the above which would result in the angst of saṃsāra). All in a present context.]
---
SN. 2.1.5.4 Lokasuttaṃ

Discourse on The World

Sāvatthiyaṃ- Lokassa bhikkhave samudayaṃ ca atthaṅgamaṃ ca desissāmi taṃ suṇātha. Sādhukaṃ manasikarotha bhāsissāmī'ti. Evaṃ bhante'ti kho te bhikkhū bhagavato paccassosuṃ. Bhagavā etadavoca:

Katamo ca bhikkhave, lokassa samudayo? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ. Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso. Phassapaccayā vedanā vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṃ. Upādānapaccayā bhavo. Bhavapaccayā jāti. Jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Ayaṃ kho bhikkhave lokassa samudayo.

At Sāvatthi: “Bhikkhus, I will teach you the arising and extinction of conditions. Listen well and pay close attention, I will speak.”

“Yes, venerable sir” The bhikkhus replied.

Then the Sublime One said:

“And what, bhikkhus, is the arising of conditions? Dependant on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. With the union of these three is contact. Contact is the supportive condition for the sensation of feeling, the sensation of feeling is the supportive condition for craving, craving is the supportive condition for grasping, grasping is the supportive condition for becoming, becoming is the supportive condition for birth and birth is the supportive condition for aging and death, sorrow, grief, weeping, pain and mental distress. This, bhikkhus, is the arising of conditions.”

Sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati sotaviññāṇaṃ … pe … ghāṇañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati ghāṇaviññāṇaṃ … pe … jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati jivhāviññāṇaṃ … pe … kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati kāyaviññāṇaṃ … pe … manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati manoviññāṇaṃ. Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso. Phassapaccayā vedanā. Vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṃ. Upādānapaccayā bhavo. Bhavapaccayā jāti. Jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṃ, sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Ayaṃ kho bhikkhave lokassa samudayo.

“Dependant on the ear and sound, ear-consciousness arises; … dependant on the nose and odors, nose-consciousness arises; … dependant on the tongue and tastes, tongue-consciousness arises; … dependant on the body and sensations, body-consciousness arises; … dependant on the mind and phenomena, mind-consciousness arises. With the union of these three is contact. Contact is the supportive condition for the sensation of feeling, the sensation of feeling is the supportive condition for craving, craving is the supportive condition for grasping, grasping is the supportive condition for becoming, becoming is the supportive condition for birth and birth is the supportive condition for aging and death, sorrow, grief, weeping, pain and mental distress. This, bhikkhus, is the arising of conditions.”

[note that this analysis of DO is in present experience]

Katamo ca bhikkhave, lokassa atthaṅgamo? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ. Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso. Phassapaccayā vedanā. Vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Tassāyeva taṇhāya asesavirāganirodhā upādānanirodho. Upādānanirodhā bhavanirodho. Bhavanirodhā jātinirodho. Jātinirodhā jarāmaraṇaṃ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti. Ayaṃ kho bhikkhave lokassa atthaṅgamo.

“And what, bhikkhus, is the extinction of conditions? Dependant on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. With the union of these three is contact. Contact is the supportive condition for the sensation of feeling, the sensation of feeling is the supportive condition for craving. But with the cessation and fading without remainder of that craving is the extinction of grasping, with the extinction of grasping is the extinction of becoming, with the extinction of becoming is the extinction of birth and with the extinction of birth is the extinction of aging and death, sorrow, grief, weeping, pain and mental distress. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering. This, bhikkhus, is the extinction of conditions.”

Sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati sotaviññāṇaṃ … pe … ghāṇañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati ghāṇaviññāṇaṃ … pe … jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati jivhāviññāṇaṃ … pe … kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati kāyaviññāṇaṃ … pe … manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati manoviññāṇaṃ. Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso. Phassapaccayā vedanā. Vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Tassāyeva taṇhāya asesavirāganirodhā upādānanirodho. Upādānanirodhā bhavanirodho. Bhavanirodhā jātinirodho. Jātinirodhā jarāmaraṇaṃ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti. Ayaṃ kho bhikkhave lokassa atthaṅgamo.

“Dependant on the ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises; … dependant on the nose and odors, nose-consciousness arises; … dependant on the tongue and tastes, tongue-consciousness arises; … dependant on the body and sensations, body-consciousness arises; … dependant on the mind and phenomena, mind-consciousness arises. With the union of these three is contact. Contact is the supportive condition for the sensation of feeling, the sensation of feeling is the supportive condition for craving. But with the cessation and fading without remainder of that craving is the extinction of grasping, with the extinction of grasping is the extinction of becoming, with the extinction of becoming is the extinction of birth and with the extinction of birth is the extinction of aging and death, sorrow, grief, weeping, pain and mental distress. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering. This, bhikkhus, is the extinction of conditions.”

[note that in this analysis of DO avijja is replaced by taṇhā, where the ‘cessation and fading without remainder…’ of taṇhā simply means that one with insight or knowledge turns away at taṇhā, the natural function (dhammatā) of contemplative endeavor ]
These are two examples of many which provide the actual function of DO analysis to be used in contemplative work. All in the present. No purchase of a rebirth retirement plan necessary.

---

“The Caterpillar and Alice looked at each other in
silence for some time; at last the Caterpillar took
the hookah out of its mouth, and addressed her in
a languid, sleepy voice.

‘Who are you?’ said the Caterpillar.

Alice replied rather shyly, ‘I—I hardly know, sir,
just at present—at least I knew who I was when I
got up this morning, but I think I must have been
changed several times since then.’”

—Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland
I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854

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

A Handful of Leaves
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

What HE said... :smile:
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

kirk5a wrote:
PeterB wrote:Perhaps you would care to show the reference for the Buddha saying that teachers will be poets ?

It would instantly become my favourite quotation of his.
"This, monks, is the third future danger, unarisen at present, that will arise in the future. Be alert to it and, being alert, work to get rid of it.

"And again, there will be in the course of the future monks undeveloped in body... virtue... mind... discernment. They — being undeveloped in body... virtue... mind... discernment — will not listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, profound, transcendent, connected with the Void — are being recited. They will not lend ear, will not set their hearts on knowing them, will not regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping and mastering. Thus from corrupt Dhamma comes corrupt discipline; from corrupt discipline, corrupt Dhamma.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That carries NO suggestion that teaching will diminished by a poetic interpretation.
Rather it talks about a arising of works of mere literary merit and a concomitant diminishing of interest in the teachings of the Buddha , None of which advocates a particular interpretation of those teachings which are of the Buddha.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

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

Post by daverupa »

As for becoming a better person, as long as this is understood correctly it's actually found throughout the Suttas. I'll mention chapter three of The Selfless Mind in this connection, and simply mention that arahants are described as "bhavit-atto" in the Cullaniddesa.

:focus: :shrug:
Last edited by daverupa on Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:28 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
Lazy_eye
Posts: 996
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: Laurel, MD
Contact:

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

Post by Lazy_eye »

PeterB wrote:In the absence of an argument they occasionally argue against themselves, taking the opposite view to the view they espoused three weeks before.
Hi Peter,

I'm probably guilty as charged, so let me say a few words in defense of this practice.

Sometimes, in the course of trying to gain a better understanding of an issue, it can be helpful to explore each side of a position, testing its strengths and drawbacks. Having someone at hand who can argue a contrasting position and point out the problems with one's own can also be very beneficial -- again, if the goal is to try and improve one's understanding. Not so much if the desire is to find an echo chamber for one's preconceptions.

Not being enlightened Buddhas, each of us really can only claim to have a partial view. As long as that is the case, dialectic is necessary and even healthy. An outside reader who comes to these threads on hells and rebirth and vegetarianism and what not will be able to survey the various positions offered and perhaps draw his or her own conclusions.

There is also the question of whether a position that has been proposed is logically sound, or has sufficient supporting evidence. That's not really a matter of "vehemence" or "argumentativeness" or other emotional disposition, but rather of objectively identifiable fallacies. In the same way, one is not being vehement or argumentative by pointing out, for instance, that the Tower of Pisa is at an angle.

If someone puts forward a claim such as "belief in literal hells makes people more inclined to be wholesome" or "literal rebirth must be true because it is needed in order to explain child prodigies and disabilties at birth", then it's a natural part of the critical thinking process to ask the person to support those claims. Buddhist forums are indeed places to learn -- but critical thinking and discussion are not in conflict with the learning process; rather they go hand in hand. Actually it is when we resort to declarations by fiat that the learning process is halted.

Off soapbox now...sorry...
Last edited by Lazy_eye on Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

Alex123 wrote:
PeterB wrote:Au contraire..
As Ajahn Buddhadasa has pointed out clearly and repeatedly , if we put the Three Lives Model to one side a whole series of meanings start to leap out of the Suttas that are obscured by a semi Hindu model. In a very real sense the dissolution of the body and its rebirth happen with every breath.

Maybe it is the Hindu model that took Buddha's teaching and made their own teaching?

Why limit D.O. only to one model such as momentary? I believe it can be used for 3-1 lifetimes, momentary,, and structural.

It doesn't refute Rebirth. It depends on it. For why end suffering if we are going to be done with it even if we don't do anything and die? Hitler and Mother Theresa would equally achieve parinibbana... With one life 99.999% of dukkha is already gone...


The Buddha clearly explained what He meant by Body:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p143597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is denial to assume that He meant something else by the word body, unless he redefined the term.




"[9] "He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns 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 — he sees beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please note how the Body is defined in that sutta. There is absolutely no hint that it was any other body than the one that can walk, stand, sit, lie, decompose in the cemetery, is made of bodyparts (31 are listed for contemplation), and is made of 4 elements (earth, water, fire, air).
A very good example of the poetic in action.
The body is of course NOT made of 4 elements ( earth, water, fire and air ).
The Buddha may or may not ( probably not ) have known the reality, but he was communicating with those who certainly did not know the reality of our physiology, and did have a modifiable belief in Reincarnation.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

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

Post by PeterB »

I dont know if this helps or hinders Lazy eye, but i didnt have you in mind.
I find you very undogmatic..
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

ancientbuddhism wrote: Discourse on Viewpoints
Discourse on The World
What these suttas deny is the false idea of metaphysical Atta that transmigrates. Buddha has not taught this, and so He denies it. The selfless process of 5 aggregates that continues after death for non-Arahants does exist. It just should not be mistaken for Atta that transmigrates. It is just the selfless process that flows. But it doesn't abruptly change at death.

"Bhikkhus, the five characteristics exist right there, although for the learned noble disciple; ignorance has been abandoned and knowledge has arisen. Therefore with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of knowledge; thus it does not occur to him ‘I am’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I am this’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I exist’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not exist’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall be composed of materiality’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not be composed of materiality’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall not be composed of sense-awareness’, thus it does not occur to him ‘I shall consist of neither sense-awareness nor not of sense-awareness’. "

it doesn't deny rebirth. It denies the idea of metaphysical Atta that transmigrates.

So all these quotes deny the metaphysical Atta that transmigrate, not rebirth of impersonal process.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

PeterB wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
PeterB wrote:Au contraire..
As Ajahn Buddhadasa has pointed out clearly and repeatedly , if we put the Three Lives Model to one side a whole series of meanings start to leap out of the Suttas that are obscured by a semi Hindu model. In a very real sense the dissolution of the body and its rebirth happen with every breath.

Maybe it is the Hindu model that took Buddha's teaching and made their own teaching?

Why limit D.O. only to one model such as momentary? I believe it can be used for 3-1 lifetimes, momentary,, and structural.

It doesn't refute Rebirth. It depends on it. For why end suffering if we are going to be done with it even if we don't do anything and die? Hitler and Mother Theresa would equally achieve parinibbana... With one life 99.999% of dukkha is already gone...


The Buddha clearly explained what He meant by Body:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p143597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is denial to assume that He meant something else by the word body, unless he redefined the term.




"[9] "He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns 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 — he sees beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please note how the Body is defined in that sutta. There is absolutely no hint that it was any other body than the one that can walk, stand, sit, lie, decompose in the cemetery, is made of bodyparts (31 are listed for contemplation), and is made of 4 elements (earth, water, fire, air).
A very good example of the poetic in action.
The body is of course NOT made of 4 elements ( earth, water, fire and air ).
The Buddha may or may not ( probably not ) have known the reality, but he was communicating with those who certainly did not know the reality of our physiology, and did have a modifiable belief in Reincarnation.

The Body is made of 4 elements. All solid (flesh, bones, etc) parts are earth, all liquid parts (blood, urine) are water, all heat is fire and internal air (oxygen, CO2, etc) is air element.

Furthermore, as I've said, the Buddha has stated that this body can walk, stand, sit, lie, decompose in the cemetery, is made of bodyparts (31 are listed for contemplation) and can live up to 100 years or more:

"Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So much for the body being a momentary mental state that can arise many times in a day.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

It is a momentary structure that arises and passes away from moment to moment and in the case of any given individual this process can occur from moment to moment for a hundred years. :smile:
This is true both at the atomic level, and at the psychological level.

As I said I have no wish to convert anyone to my view.
I think its worth putting on record the fact that there are a number of interpretations..
And to once more direct those interested to the work of Ajahn Buddhadasa, To my mind the greatest Theravadin thinker of our age.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

PeterB wrote:It is a momentary structure that arises and passes away from moment to moment and in the case of any given individual this process can occur from moment to moment for a hundred years. :smile:
This is true both at the atomic level, and at the psychological level.

"Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more."

The Buddha talked about on body that can last for hundred years or more. And where does anyone can get Buddha's definition of body being something other than literal body, that dies? And then there is rebirth.

""[9] "He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns 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 — he sees beings passing away & re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please explain how the above passage can be taken in any other way than Buddha talking about rebirth?


One can doubt rebirth, sure. I just do not agree with projecting this doubt onto Buddha's teaching and changing it so that the Buddha would appear to say something other than what He has said.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

Of course it is a literal body that dies...no one is putting forward another hypothesis that i am aware of.

I refer you to the body of work of Ajahn Buddhadasa...and withdraw.


I have no mission or agenda. Apart from pointing to the alternatives to the Three Lifetimes model.

:anjali:
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

PeterB wrote:Of course it is a literal body that dies...no one is putting forward another hypothesis that i am aware of.
And then, it doesn't end with the death of this body. Rebirth occurs:

"with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in "

PeterB wrote: Apart from pointing to the alternatives to the Three Lifetimes model.
I don't reject momentary DO interpretation of some factors. There is just no sutta evidence presented to show us that the Buddha rejected rebirth of a process conventionally called "such and such a person". The Buddha just rejects the idea of metaphysical Atta that is reborn.
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by PeterB »

Alex...which part of " I refer you to the body of work of Ajahn Buddhdasa and withdraw " do you not understand..? ;)
Post Reply