the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by binocular »

dharmagoat wrote:Still, there is no benefit in persisting with a teaching that you fundamentally disagree with.
It's not clear how one could persist with a teaching that one fundamentally disagrees with.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by dharmagoat »

binocular wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:Still, there is no benefit in persisting with a teaching that you fundamentally disagree with.
It's not clear how one could persist with a teaching that one fundamentally disagrees with.
I admit that I wasn't very clear in my wording.

What I meant to say is that, in my experience, no matter how much one tries, one can't force oneself to accept a teaching, or an aspect of a teaching, that goes against the grain of their current understanding, even if they recognise the benefits of doing so.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote:Only few factors could be separated by LONG time, ex: avijjā and resultant dukkha, birth and death.
But we could say that "birth" of new implies the death of old, so even here there is a way how these are nearly simultaneous.
Not really. In DO birth, aging and death are described in physical terms, and clearly involve a progression through time ( see the nidana definitions in MN9, SN12.2 etc ).

In DO this /that conditionality ( idappaccayata ) is summarised by the following verse:
1. When this is, that is;
2. With the arising of this, that arises;
3. When this isn't, that isn't;
4. With the ceasing of this, that ceases.

Clearly 1 and 3 describe simultaneous causality , while 2 and 4 describe causality over time. I've seen these described as synchronic and diachronic causality respectively.
IMO understanding DO involves consideration of both these modes of conditionality.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

dharmagoat wrote:
porpoise wrote:
binocular wrote: But one ought to put them aside for the right reason, for a wholesome reason.
I agree. Merely disliking a teaching or idea isn't usually a sound basis for putting it aside.
Still, there is no benefit in persisting with a teaching that you fundamentally disagree with.
Sure, but likewise there is no benefit in continually arguing against it.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

porpoise wrote:Not really. In DO birth, aging and death are described in physical terms, and clearly involve a progression through time ( see the nidana definitions in MN9, SN12.2 etc ).
You are right that some factors in DO progress over time. But not all. Of course DO can and should be interpreted in multiple ways. The most important is the main principle: Avijjā -> dukkha.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by binocular »

dharmagoat wrote:What I meant to say is that, in my experience, no matter how much one tries, one can't force oneself to accept a teaching, or an aspect of a teaching, that goes against the grain of their current understanding, even if they recognise the benefits of doing so.
Sure. But what seems to be the problem here?
That something seems to be too good to be true?
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by dharmagoat »

binocular wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:What I meant to say is that, in my experience, no matter how much one tries, one can't force oneself to accept a teaching, or an aspect of a teaching, that goes against the grain of their current understanding, even if they recognise the benefits of doing so.
Sure. But what seems to be the problem here?
That something seems to be too good to be true?
Someone with an empirical understanding of phenomena will have difficulty accepting a view that is based on inference and not supported by evidence. Likewise, someone with a religious understanding will have difficulty accepting a view that is in conflict with their chosen beliefs.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote: You are right that some factors in DO progress over time. But not all. Of course DO can and should be interpreted in multiple ways. The most important is the main principle: Avijjā -> dukkha.
Yes, although an important aspect of "dissolving" avijja is contemplation of anicca.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

daverupa wrote: The Pali term "akāliko" seems to support the non-temporal discussion.
I'd associate timelessness with the un-conditioned and therefore with the cessation of DO, not with DO itself.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by binocular »

dharmagoat wrote:Someone with an empirical understanding of phenomena will have difficulty accepting a view that is based on inference and not supported by evidence. Likewise, someone with a religious understanding will have difficulty accepting a view that is in conflict with their chosen beliefs.
It's still not clear what the problem is here that you are pointing at.
??
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

binocular wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:Someone with an empirical understanding of phenomena will have difficulty accepting a view that is based on inference and not supported by evidence. Likewise, someone with a religious understanding will have difficulty accepting a view that is in conflict with their chosen beliefs.
It's still not clear what the problem is here that you are pointing at.
??
Religious people believe what their religion says.
People who go by empiric evidence have difficulty believing what religion states when there is no solid proof.

IMHO.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by binocular »

So?
Where's the problem in that?
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by dharmagoat »

binocular wrote:So?
Where's the problem in that?
Have you ever found yourself wanting to believe in rebirth, confident of the benefits that such a belief brings, but, because of your trust in critical thinking, were so wracked with doubt that you were unable to even play along?

It's a problem.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by daverupa »

dharmagoat wrote:
binocular wrote:So?
Where's the problem in that?
Have you ever found yourself wanting to believe in rebirth, confident of the benefits that such a belief brings, but, because of your trust in critical thinking, were so wracked with doubt that you were unable to even play along?

It's a problem.
Saying "confident of the benefits" alongside "wracked with doubt" seems contradictory...
  • "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]
dharmagoat
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Gone Bush

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by dharmagoat »

daverupa wrote:Saying "confident of the benefits" alongside "wracked with doubt" seems contradictory...
Belief in rebirth provides an additional layer of meaning and purpose to our lives, motivates us to practice, and is an inextricable part of what the Buddha taught. The Buddha also taught the importance of critical thinking, which, when applied, can cast doubt on the literal existence of rebirth.
Post Reply