the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by ancientbuddhism »

mikenz66 wrote:
rowboat wrote:I'm sorry Kirk5a, I've scoured the web and I haven't found the original source. I remember the information being from an interview with someone from Suan Mokkh or from an article looking at the period between Ven. Buddhadasa's stroke and his death. I'll have a look again later.
These talks by Santikaro (formerly Ven Santikaro, and translator for Ven Buddhadasa) may be of interest:
http://www.audiodharma.org/teacher/129/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It's been a while since I listened to them, but he gives an interesting account of Ven Buddhadasa's hospitalization and eventual death.

I think there are some questions towards the end about the issue of Ven Buddhadasa's opinions on rebirth.

:anjali:
Mike


Towards the middle of the 4th in this series (37:~) Santikaro discusses Ajahn Buddhadasa’s critique of Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of DO, and toward 40:~ that his own pragmatism on rebirth was to change traditional (Thai) viewpoints of a Buddhist transmigratory class system – that contemplative life is only suitable for monks, whereas the laity can only make merit for hope of a better future life – and encourage them to ‘do something about suffering here and now’.

This is a rather common interpretation of his intentions and may be helpful with the debate going on in recent pages of this thread wrt rebirth agnosticism. In this regard Ajahn Buddhadasa was indifferent about rebirth as an essential right view, or that it had any significance to the contemplative work of Dhamma. Although Ajahn Buddhadasa made strong emphases on one life only, its central motivation was the utility of encouraging people to practice Dhamma; some hindered by traditional views on rebirth and others by the apparent incongruity of rebirth with scientific empiricism. In this sense his agnostic position was less a determined view on rebirth, than to help those who would practice Dhamma if not for being stuck on tradition or untenable metaphysical claims.
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
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny O'Norman »

daverupa wrote: The context of saying that "disbelief in rebirth is a view" is the secondary target;
If we're talking about questions on which we're not currently certain then of course disbelief is a view. The same way that belief is a view.

The only way to not have a view is to say "I don't know".

spiny
Last edited by Spiny O'Norman on Fri Mar 23, 2012 3:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny O'Norman »

Notron wrote:If the Buddha taught the absence of an ego (anatta), then what receives results of practice
This is a good question, but it's problematic even when considered across one lifetime.

Spiny
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny O'Norman »

daverupa wrote:..... that right view can be conveyed without rebirth-talk at all (this conclusion is also borne out by MN 9 as well as others).
But MN9 clearly describes how aging and death arise in dependence on birth, and how birth arises in dependence on the process of becoming in the 3 realms.


"And what is aging and death, what is the origin of aging and death, what is the cessation of aging and death, what is the way leading to the cessation of aging and death? The aging of beings in the various orders of beings, their old age, brokenness of teeth, grayness of hair, wrinkling of skin, decline of life, weakness of faculties — this is called aging. The passing of beings out of the various orders of beings, their passing away, dissolution, disappearance, dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying down of the body — this is called death. So this aging and this death are what is called aging and death. With the arising of birth there is the arising of aging and death. With the cessation of birth there is the cessation of aging and death. The way leading to the cessation of aging and death is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration."
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Spiny O'Norman wrote:
The only way to not have a view is to say "I don't know".

spiny
Hi, Spiny. Alternately, we can just dwell in emptiness abandoning all views.
Snp 4.5 PTS: Sn 796-803
Paramatthaka Sutta: On Views
translated from the Pali by
John D. Ireland
© 1994–2012
Alternate translation: Thanissaro
"A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

"They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."
source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by daverupa »

nowheat wrote:So what I hear you saying is that because Anathapindika was talking about what is right view, and he did not include rebirth in that right view, rebirth is not a necessary part of right view. Sariputta does the same in MN 9. Do I understand that correctly?
I would say those were examples of the point that right view has a number of ways of being correctly expressed, and that while rebirth appears to be a suitable approach, it is also suitable to take another tack.

In addition, I note that SN 35.153 does not even mention the first two of the three knowledges (faring-on according to kamma, past lives) when it teaches how a bhikkhu can declare final knowledge. In addition, observe MN 115:
16. “He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a wished for, desired, agreeable result could be produced from bodily misconduct...from verbal misconduct...from mental misconduct ― there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result might be produced from bodily misconduct...from verbal misconduct...from mental misconduct ― there is such a possibility.’

17. He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result could be produced from good bodily conduct...from good verbal conduct...from good mental conduct ― there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a wished for, desired, agreeable result might be produced from good bodily conduct...from good verbal conduct...from good mental conduct ― there is such a possibility.’

18. He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person engaging in bodily misconduct...engaging in verbal misconduct...engaging in mental misconduct could on that account, for that reason, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in the heavenly world ― there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a person engaging in bodily misconduct...engaging in verbal misconduct...engaging in mental misconduct could on that account, for that reason, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell ― there is such a possibility.’

19. He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person engaging in good bodily conduct...engaging in good verbal conduct...engaging in good mental conduct could on that account, for that reason, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell ― there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a person engaging in good bodily conduct...engaging in good verbal conduct...engaging in good mental conduct could on that account, for that reason, on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in the heavenly world.’
Kamma is important for right view in the sense of §§16-17; §§18-19 simply apply that principle to the prevailing cosmological structure, functioning to ethicize what was otherwise a largely ritualized affair. I'm not saying this ethicized rebirth matrix does not obtain as fact, nor am I saying it does so obtain. I am saying that the principle of the efficacy of kamma is hammered home as the essential point, but that this point can be applied to, say, a Xian soteriological cosmology just as easily as it can be applied to the brahminic soteriological cosmology.

(As to the utter absence of a soteriological cosmology - annihilationism - the Buddha declared at AN 10.29 that such a view was the highest of outside speculative views because one who accepts such a view will not be attracted to existence nor averse to the cessation of existence; this view is still to be seen with disenchantment, but a rebirth-view is not held up as a proper replacement - only liberation through non-clinging.)
  • "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]
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by daverupa »

A couple additions on this theme:
SN 42.11 wrote:"It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One would teach me the origination & ending of stress."

"Headman, if I were to teach you the origination & ending of stress with reference to the past, saying, 'Thus it was in the past,' you would be doubtful and perplexed. If I were to teach you the origination & ending of stress with reference to the future, saying, 'Thus it will be in the future,' you would be doubtful and perplexed. So instead, I — sitting right here — will teach you sitting right there the origination & ending of stress. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," Gandhabhaka the headman replied.
---
SN 42.13 - Pāṭaliya (no online copy?)

The beginning of this Sutta is basically MN 60, but strikingly, the "because there actually is the next world..." sections are absent. The context involves a headman being perplexed over differing views, including the "there is a next world" view, and the Buddha, rather than taking it up, simply juxtaposes it in a neutral way with its opposite view, and instructs that pervading the brahmaviharas might rid him of that perplexity if he were to "attain concentration of mind in that". The Sutta also treats the efficacy of kamma via this even-handed approach.

Tellingly, the practice of the ten wholesome courses of action (kammapatha, which includes having right view) comes first; then the practice of the brahmaviharas is done as a noble disciple - described as, among other things, "unconfused" - and all this before the Buddha says to go over the various earlier views according to "lucky throw" logic.

Fascinating.

:heart:

(the kammapatha + brahmavihara practice is called, here, "dhammasamādhi", and/or "cittasamādhi" - I'm not sure)
  • "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]
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by nowheat »

daverupa wrote: I would say those were examples of the point that right view has a number of ways of being correctly expressed, and that while rebirth appears to be a suitable approach, it is also suitable to take another tack.
I can see that.
(As to the utter absence of a soteriological cosmology - annihilationism - the Buddha declared at AN 10.29 that such a view was the highest of outside speculative views because one who accepts such a view will not be attracted to existence nor averse to the cessation of existence; this view is still to be seen with disenchantment, but a rebirth-view is not held up as a proper replacement - only liberation through non-clinging.)
I think we have to be a little careful in assigning the meaning of phrases like
'I should not be; it should not occur to me; I will not be; it will not occur to me.'
to annihilationism and then defining annihilationism in terms of what it would mean to us. The views presented in the canon are unlikely to be super-accurate renderings of the actual beliefs of folks of the day. We have only to read the way others distort the Buddha's views (for example, 'he an adherent of non-action') to recognize the strong possibility that the boilerplate for views in the Pali canon are also distorting what others believed.

:namaste:
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny O'Norman »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:
Spiny O'Norman wrote:
The only way to not have a view is to say "I don't know".

spiny
Hi, Spiny. Alternately, we can just dwell in emptiness abandoning all views.
I guess for me saying "I don't know" is the first step to abandoning views.
In the context of this debate, I personally have no idea whether rebirth occurs, though I'm pretty sure the Buddha taught it.

Spiny
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny O'Norman »

nowheat wrote: The views presented in the canon are unlikely to be super-accurate renderings of the actual beliefs of folks of the day.
Quite possibly. But for all we know the Buddha emphasized rebirth much more than the suttas suggest - we just don't know.

Spiny
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Buckwheat »

Spiny O'Norman wrote:
daverupa wrote: The context of saying that "disbelief in rebirth is a view" is the secondary target;
If we're talking about questions on which we're not currently certain then of course disbelief is a view. The same way that belief is a view.

The only way to not have a view is to say "I don't know".

spiny
In DN 1 - Brahmajala Sutta, "I don't know" is also a wrong view. It may be a more honest and less harmful wrong view than taking a leap to belief or unbelief, but it is still a wrong view.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Buckwheat »

Whenever we act, we come from a place of assumptions. We tend to either assume there is rebirth and act accordingly, or disbelieve rebirth and act accordingly. The third option of "I don't know" leads to a tension, acting sometimes as if rebirth is true and sometimes as if there is only this one life. Of the three possible approaches, the one that is most skillful for the elimination of suffering is belief in rebirth.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by daverupa »

Buckwheat wrote:In DN 1 - Brahmajala Sutta, "I don't know" is also a wrong view. It may be a more honest and less harmful wrong view than taking a leap to belief or unbelief, but it is still a wrong view.
I think that, if you check, you will not find this in that Sutta. You are probably remembering either the "dull and stupid" case, or the "confusion over whether something is wholesome or unwholesome" case, but neither of these amounts to a condemnation of simply not knowing.

[Buddha:] “It is fitting for you to be perplexed. Doubt has arisen in you about a perplexing matter."
~SN 42.13
  • "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
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Spiny O'Norman wrote:[I personally have no idea whether rebirth occurs, though I'm pretty sure the Buddha taught it.

Spiny
I was watching Robert Thurman's dissertations on The Triple Gem this morning and actually agreed that we have identified the mechanism of rebirth: evolution. I love it when science and the sutta's converge.
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by nowheat »

Buckwheat wrote:Whenever we act, we come from a place of assumptions. We tend to either assume there is rebirth and act accordingly, or disbelieve rebirth and act accordingly. The third option of "I don't know" leads to a tension, acting sometimes as if rebirth is true and sometimes as if there is only this one life. Of the three possible approaches, the one that is most skillful for the elimination of suffering is belief in rebirth.
I agree that we come from a place of assumptions, but I disagree that this necessarily results in wobbling back and forth between the two, or that belief in rebirth is the most skillful for the elimination of suffering. This may be your experience, but it is not my experience.

:namaste:
Post Reply