I stumbled across this idea in my own head this morning. Please tell me what you think, and feel free to provide any relevant suttas.
I think I finally understand people's objection to rebirth, or even post-mortem continuation.
Anything that we would consider me, mine, not-mine, etc. etc. is going to decay, rot, and disappear. In fact it's happening right at this moment, as I write this. There is nothing that is mine, and even post-mortem continuation implies that something is continuing
. So it is easy to see how people would mistake re
birth or continuation as a form of eternalism.
But if you spend time concentrating deeply on impermenance, it becomes obvious that when we use the word emptiness we're also making reference to the immeasurably important truth of impermenance.
Therefore, when we talk about rebirth in any form, we're talking about becoming
. And craving. Though any shred of "I" is subject to change, decay, conditioning, and disapating. What provokes the continuation of samsara and birth is the craving to become. Therefore, that the Buddha taught literal rebrith is fine, if one considers that there's nothing to re-anything
I will not have future lives, and I do not have past lives. And I don't have
this life. But out of ignorance there is an ongoing process of becoming that is rooted in dependent origination.
All input is appreciated