The Danger of Rebirth

[seanpdx]

Yes. I have been most direct and frank on my statement. Is that really the word you wish to use?

Just because somebody is a respected scholar is, in my books, insufficient reason to accept what they say in all cases. Scholarship is one thing, and though it overlaps the "Dhamma", the two terms are not synonymous. In some - not all - cases of scholars, though there is an understanding of the word, there is little experience with what it means.

It has nothing to do with accepting everything that a scholar says, and more to do with not dismissing everything a scholar says on the basis of their lack of practice or not being a "buddhist".


(ps, my copy of greater magadha arrived last week -- woot!)

[meindzai]

As I noted in another thread I think we benefit from the contributions of Scholars, buddhist or non Buddhist, as well as "non scholar" teachers, who are more practice oriented. Scholarly knowledge tends to be wider but less deep. This is evident in some of the theories they come up with. But they catch a lot of the cultural and historical background that we tend to miss when we focus on only on "Buddhist" material. IMO we need scholars becuase we weren't "there" when the Buddha was alive teaching and so it's easy to miss the parts of his teaching that may have been implied when delivering to his audience. But the caution against scholarly "theories" I think is that they make a lot of points that are tangential and may be distracting for those who are interested in actually practicing rather than just engage in speculative debate.

-M

[Annapurna]

Great discussion by all - learned lots from following this thread.
However, I'm still inclined to simply dismiss the idea of rebirth - much as I would the idea of Christ being resurrected.
The way I understand rebirth is how it happens in my own life. I was reborn from child to teenager, teenager to young man, young man to adult and now to old geezer. Furthermore, I am reborn each time I reawaken myself from delusion, aversion ect. I am reborn each time I awake to mindfulness. Thus the goal of not being reborn makes sense to me - because it will mean the end of delusion - becoming fully mindful.

Does this make sense?

Nate

I understand how you experience it.

I think we all have our individual ....filters? ...through which we experience things. It could be that objections you have against the resurrection of Christ influence your dismissal of rebirth.

I was reborn from child to teenager, teenager to young man, young man to adult and now to old geezer. Furthermore, I am reborn each time I reawaken myself from delusion, aversion ect. I am reborn each time I awake to mindfulness.

In order to justify a 'rebirth', something would have to die first, right?
But does the child we were die, when we become a teen?
Does the teen die, when we become adult?
... I never thought of the child or teen in me as dead and gone, now that I'm adult. Do you?

Is it not a slow process of developing and changing?

Change is not death. Death is final, change is not.

I think, pardon me, it's using an alienated word here, to say we are reborn, while still alive.

Change would be closer to the process....

what do you think?

[BlackBird]

I was a little surprised, given the research on the ground in Asia that Prof Gombrich has done, that he didn't say something like: "It is often said that meditation masters have this ability", rather than dismiss it as fanciful.

Maybe he couldn't find a good academic citation?