the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
green
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by green »

A Buddhist should NEVER argue about rebirth without discussing Dependent causation - to discuss it without a detailed discussion of this cycle would be like falling into a trap or wrong views.

The Arahant gains the "Tevijja" or three knowledges -- which includes the knowledge of past lives.

:anjali:
Last edited by green on Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by nathan »

Most Arahants could not answer these questions. Most Arahants would likely admonish a follower or disciple for asking these kinds of questions. There is little if anything in these lines of inquiry that will help on the path in any way. That would probably be the main reason that few Arahants could resolve most of these issues with 'answers'. That is not to say that it could not be done.

To give the kind of detailed answers on how kamma functions the Arahant would need to perfect:

CATUPAṬISAMBHIDĀ IN THERAVĀDA BUDDHISM
(THE FOURFOLD ANALYTICAL KNOWLEDGE IN PĀḶI LITERATURE)

"In reviewing the foregoing process of representation, we would have in view the following:

The key word ‘paṭisambhidā’ has a dual connotation. On the one hand, it signifies the analytical nature of the knowledge; and on the other hand, it refers to the knowledge that knows different categories of phenomena, such as the categories of resultant phenomena, categories of causative phenomena, and so on.

Concerning the analytical knowledge of result (atthapaṭisambhidā), it is the knowledge that comprehends analytically the five categories of resultant phenomena, namely, ‘whatever conditionally produced’ (yaṃkiñci paccayasamuppanna), ‘unconditioned state’ (Nibbāna), ‘meaning of the Buddha’s Word’ (bhāsitattha), ‘resultant’ (vipāka) and ‘inoperative’ (kiriya) phenomena. Alternatively, the analytical knowledge of result is the knowledge that comprehends the three categories of resultant phenomena, namely, ‘result being born’ (nibbattetabbo attho), ‘result being attained’ (pattabbo attho) and ‘result being known’ (ñāpetabbo attho).

Similarly, the analytical knowledge of cause (dhammapaṭisambhidā) is the knowledge that comprehends analytically the five categories of causative phenomena, namely, ‘whatever cause that produces result’ (yo koci phalanibbattako hetu) ‘Noble Path’ (Ariyamagga), ‘the Buddha’s Word’ (bhāsita), ‘wholesome phenomena’ (kusala) and ‘unwholesome phenomena’ (akusala). Alternatively, the analytical knowledge of cause is the knowledge that analytically comprehends the three categories of causative phenomena, namely, ‘cause that produces’ (nibbattako hetu), ‘cause that makes known’ (ñāpako hetu) and ‘cause that leads to’ (sampāpako hetu).

Thus, the Commentaries and Sub-commentaries classify those phenomena such as the four noble truths, the dependent origination and so on, which are described in the Canonical Texts, and which are comprehended by the analytical knowledge of result and the analytical knowledge of cause, into different categories belonging to result and cause respectively. Accordingly, there are various kinds of analytical knowledge of result, so are there various kinds of analytical knowledge of cause. Each of them in the same kind may not be the same from the aspect of object, purity and person in whom it arises. For example, the analytical knowledge of cause, which arises taking the Path as object in a Stream-Enterer (Sotāpanna) is not the same as the analytical knowledge of cause, which arises taking the Path as object in a Once-Returner (Sakadāgāmi). This is because the Path in the Stream-Enterer and that in the Once-Returner are diverse. For another example, the analytical knowledge of cause, which arises taking wholesome phenomena in one Non-Returner and the analytical knowledge, which arises taking the same wholesome phenomena in another Non-Returner is not the same. This is because the two kinds of knowledge are different from the aspect of purity or analyticity in different persons.

With respect to the analytical knowledge of language (niruttipaṭisambhidā), it is perhaps the most intricate to explain. The ambiguity lies in the technical term ‘dhammanirutti’, especially ‘dhamma’. The Commentaries and Sub-commentaries comment on this term in an evolutional process. At first, ‘dhammanirutti’ is commented as ‘sabhāvanirutti’ literally translated as ‘natural terminology’, next as ‘aviparītanirutti’ ‘terminology which is not changed’, then as ‘abyabhicārī vohāro’ ‘actual vocabulary’, which is always connected with the understanding of such and such meaning, and then as ‘Māgadhabhāsā’ ‘Māgadha dialect or Pāḷi language’.

Nevertheless, the final generalization of the study has revealed two dimensions of ‘dhammanirutti’. On the one hand, it refers to ‘grammatically correct terminology’; on the other hand, to ‘terminology related to ultimate realities’ in Māgadha dialect. Thus, the analytical knowledge of language has the function to understand the grammatically correct terminology of ultimate realities in Māgadha language, the stereotype of Pāḷi language nowadays. The ultimate realities are nothing but those atthas and dhammas comprehended by the foregoing analytical knowledge of attha and of dhamma respectively. In other words, the analytical knowledge of language knows the grammatically correct terminology of consciousness (citta), mental concomitants (cetasika), material qualities (rūpa) and Nibbāna as the four types of ultimate realities in Buddhism, in Pāḷi language.

Relating to the analytical knowledge of knowledge (paṭibhānapaṭisambhidā), it is the knowledge of the foregoing threefold analytical knowledge—the analytical knowledge of result, of cause and of language. It takes them as objects; and at the same time, it also understands their respective functions.

In conclusion of this thesis, there are three points noteworthy to highlight. Firstly, the fourfold analytical knowledge is distinctive, profound, yet attainable by practising the correct method shown by the Buddha and his distinguished disciples. The Buddha himself and his noble disciples, as recorded in the most authentic Pāḷi Canon, are clearly an embodiment of these kinds of knowledge.

Secondly, the fourfold analytical knowledge, though endowed with various categories, forms an inseparable set of knowledge as the whole. The Buddha and his noble disciples who attain these kinds of knowledge attain them altogether. In other words, the analytical knowledge of cause is related to the analytical knowledge of result and vice versa just like cause to result and word to meaning; likewise, the analytical knowledge of language is related to those of result and cause by means of terminology, expression, explanation and interpretation. The analytical knowledge of knowledge may then be compared to a wise overseer of its preceding ones; it clearly knows them and their functions by the state of non-delusion. Thus, of the fourfold analytical knowledge, it is the analytical knowledge of knowledge that depicts the liberated and enlightened characteristics of Buddhism—non-attachment and non-delusion.

Finally, the path to attaining the fourfold analytical knowledge had been revealed by the Buddha and his Noble Disciples; the rest is on our side. It is our own choice to tread the path, for the Buddha is just the path discoverer. Once, the Master said in the Dhammapada:

"Tumhehi kiccamātappaṃ, akkhātāro Tathāgatā..." [Dhp. 276]

"You yourself should strive to practise;
The Buddhas only teach the way...""

http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/catu/catu07.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is what is involved, see the above link for a fuller discussion to understand the nature of this kind of understanding. It may provide much more insight into the difficulties involved in correctly answering such questions.

from:Nibbana as Living Experience / The Buddha and The Arahant
Two Studies from the Pali Canon by Lily de Silva
Some arahants are endowed with the special accomplishment of the fourfold analytical knowledge (pa.tisambhidaa-~naa.na), which qualifies them even more thoroughly for creative work.54 These are spelt out as analytical knowledge of the meaning or goal, profound truth, language or the medium of communication, and originality of expression (attha, dhamma, nirutti, pa.tibhaana). These four special qualifications make arahants experts in communicating to their audience the exact meanings and goals of the profound truths they have discovered, through the medium of refined language, using their own original modes of expression such as eloquent similes, metaphors, etc. Several arahants, both male and female, are recorded as eloquent speakers and erudite exponents of the Dhamma.55 Special mention must be made of the Theragaathaa and Theriigaathaa, which comprise poems of exquisite beauty. They are utterances of monks and nuns embodying their varied experiences. Literary critics rank them among the best lyrics in Indian literature.56 They remain unrivalled in the literary history of the world as creative writing issuing forth from the undefiled purity of the human heart and the nobility of human wisdom. They are ever-fresh fountains of inspiration to the truth-seeker and lasting monuments to the creative genius of the liberated beings.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el407.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aside from Sariputta we have further examples:
On the part of the Venerable Maha Kassapa Thera, no arrogance arose in him just by getting the Buddha's robe; he never thought: "Now I have obtained the robe previously used by the Exalted One: I have nothing to strive now for higher Paths and Fruitions." Instead, he made a vow to practise the thirteen austere (dhutanga) practices most willingly as taught by the Buddha. Because he put great efforts in developing the ascetic Dhamma, he remained only for seven days as a worldling and on the eighth day at early dawn attained Arahantship with the fourfold Analytical Knowledge (Patisambhida-magga nana).
http://www.triplegem.plus.com/gcobbku3.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by nathan on Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
green
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by green »

An Arahant would guide one to the Patitya samutpada in any question related to rebirth. Buddha's Dhamma is well expounded --i.e. well explained.

An Arahant has a job to make sure one gains right view and gains a mastery of the Dhamma.

What Buddha discovered and guides one too is something quite major, to realize what he discovered, one does not say, "Buddha ONLY discovered this path and is ONLY a guide..." as if what was done was "something anyone can do."
:smile:
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by nathan »

green wrote:An Arahant would guide one to the Patitya samutpada in any question related to rebirth. Buddha's Dhamma is well expounded --i.e. well explained.

An Arahant has a job to make sure one gains right view and gains a mastery of the Dhamma.

What Buddha discovered and guides one too is something quite major, to realize what he discovered, one does not say, "Buddha ONLY discovered this path and is ONLY a guide..." as if what was done was "something anyone can do."
:smile:
I don't think that is the intended meaning of the words "just the discoverer" used by the Venerable writer of the article on the fourfold analytical knowledge and not what I would mean if using similar terms either.

I am re-posting this because because it was the best post in the thread so far:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Importance of the Doctrine (of Dependent Origination) by Mahāsī Sayādaw

Beyond Reasoning and Speculation

When the Buddha was first considering whether or not to teach, he thought, “This truth that I have realised is very profound. Though it is sublime and conducive to inner peace, it is hard to understand. Since it is subtle and not accessible to mere intellect and logic, it can be realised only by the wise.” Great thinkers from all cultures have thought deeply about freedom from the misery of aging, disease, and death, but such freedom would mean nibbāna, which is beyond the scope of reason and intellect. It can be realised only by practising the right method of insight meditation. Most great thinkers have relied on intellect and logical reasoning to conceive various principles for the well-being of humanity. As these principles are based on speculations, they do not help anyone to attain insight, let alone the supreme goal of nibbāna. Even the lowest stage of insight, namely, analytical knowledge of mind and matter (nāmarūpa-pariccheda-ñāna), cannot be realised intellectually. This insight dawns only when one observes the mental and physical process using the systematic method of mindfulness (satipatthāna), and when, with the development of concentration, one distinguishes between mental and physical phenomena — for example, between the desire to bend the hand and the bent hand, or between the sound and the hearing. Such knowledge is not vague and speculative, but vivid and empirical.
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
appicchato
Posts: 1602
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by appicchato »

mikenz66 wrote:Most of the important stuff the Buddha taught is just a belief.
mmm...not so sure about this one Mike...
How can you know that following the Eight-Fold path will actually work?
Easy, by practicing it... :smile:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by retrofuturist »

Venerable Appicchato is cool. 8-)

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by mikenz66 »

Greetings Venerable,
appicchato wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Most of the important stuff the Buddha taught is just a belief.
mmm...not so sure about this one Mike...
How can you know that following the Eight-Fold path will actually work?
Easy, by practicing it... :smile:
Perhaps my post was too general or too terse. I could rephrase it:

DarkDream noted that accepting the teachings on rebirth is just a belief. My point was that accepting that the Eight-Fold Path will take me to the advertised goal (Arahantship) is also just a belief. I can have some confidence in that belief because the preliminary steps seem to work as advertised, but I cannot be certain at this point. I can see no logical reason why the teachings on rebirth should be considered less reliable than the teachings on the Eight-Fold Path. Which, I guess, is related to the statement by the Buddha in the Kalama Sutta not to rely on logic...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.
Metta
Mike
User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by jcsuperstar »

its not just the 8fp but also the 4 truths that require faith, i mean sure there is suffering, that we can all see but why is there suffering? its quite obvious that many have looked at this problem of suffering and come up with different reasons so why should one automaticly assume the buddha was right? we have to have faith that he was right about the cause of suffering, then we again have to have faith that it can in fact end, that he wasnt just unloading a bunch of BS on us and then at that stage we have to have faith that his path will work and that he wasnt just faking it... buddhism actually takes a lot of faith if you really think about it. it just doesnt ask us to have blind faith like other religions do.
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
DarkDream
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by DarkDream »

tiltbillings wrote:
Bottom line: literal rebirth after death is a belief. To me it is just speculation. It seems I can't know for myself that it is true. As such I think it is for Buddhism a thing that should be put aside. Unfortunately, I see it as Buddhism's greatest attachment besides trying to sneek back ontology and the answering of metaphysical questions that the Buddha refused to answer.
Then why did the Buddha teach it as if it were true?
This is a very good question. I don't have all the answers but here is my opinion on the matter.

Let us remember that the Pali Canon was not written down hundreds of years after the Buddha. The scriptures were passed orally over hundreds of years. That is not to say that the preservation of the teachings orally was not accurate, but it is not conceivable that corruptions slipped in accidentally. Also even after the scriptures were written down there were alterations, additions and so on. Many scholars talk about different statifications in the canon itself.

There were no audio or video recorders back then so we must remember we have only artifacts of the teachings.

Also another point is that many of the followers maybe still maintained old notions of karma and rebirth which invertedly slipped in. Also it is almost certain the Buddha when talking to people specfically used terms as being born in heaven and so on as a skill in means. For example, a soldier came to the Buddha and asked him if he would go to hell. The Buddha said, yes. Was the Buddha necessarily telling the man there was a literal hell he would go to? I don't think so. He was just using his particular set of beliefs to tell him if he continued this way he would end in a hellish existence in the mind (think of war verterans that come back for example with terrible mental ailments).

As pointed out by Richard Gombrich, there was a great penchant for the early traditions to takie things literally. So when they saw the Buddha talking like that in the suttas, they then did not take the context into account and elevated as a doctrinal position.

If you look at the first sutta of the Digha Nikaya, Brahmajala Sutta, http://web.ukonline.co.uk/theravada/brahma1.htm you have the Buddha knocking down all kinds of various metaphysical positions. This was a very celebrated sutta and was specifically mentioned in the history of the early Buddhist Councils. In here you specifcially have the Buddha speaking against all the different doctrines about whether one exists after death or not.

I hope to show in an upcoming blog post that the 10 unanswered questions were altered so that the unanswered question of "Does a tathagata exist after death", was changed from "Does a being (or self) exist after death." My opinion is if someone asked him directly whether a self exists after death he would have maintained a noble silence.

Why? Ultimately to avoid what we have being doing here (I know I'm the chief culprit with this particular thread). We can argue and go in circles but at the end of the day have we at all stepped one step closer to the end of suffering? I also think that the questions of life after death can also be a great source of attachment, and no matter how we explain or phrase it there always seems to be a subtle notion of "self" or me that slips in.

This is my best guess, and I'm going to try to explore it further.

All the best,

--DarkDream
DarkDream
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by DarkDream »

mikenz66 wrote:Dear DD,
tiltbillings wrote:
Bottom line: literal rebirth after death is a belief. To me it is just speculation. It seems I can't know for myself that it is true. As such I think it is for Buddhism a thing that should be put aside. Unfortunately, I see it as Buddhism's greatest attachment besides trying to sneek back ontology and the answering of metaphysical questions that the Buddha refused to answer.
Then why did the Buddha teach it as if it were true?
Most of the important stuff the Buddha taught is just a belief. How can you know that following the Eight-Fold path will actually work? Are you going to put that aside as well?

Metta
Mike
I think the Venerable Appicchato answered this one very succinctly but let me just elaborate a little.

I have to disagree with you that the "important stuff the Buddha taught is just a belief." Sure there is a lot of belief stuff in the scriptures, the existence of devas, earthquakes being caused by a Buddha reaching enlightenment, Mount Meru and so on. But the teachings of the Eight-fold path is totally different.

A lovely Pali word is ehipassiko which means "come see." The fundamental difference is you can actually walk the path and "come see" for yourself by experiencing it. Sure at first there is some faith involved, but I don't know if I would use that word. In Pali you have the word "saddha." This is more like confidence. At first you do need to have a little faith or confidence, but that is with anything in life. The fundamental difference with things like devas and things is that it is a faith where you can never have your doubts resolved. That is not like with the other teachings where you can experience it yourself and come to a conclusion.
DarkDream
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by DarkDream »

green wrote:A Buddhist should NEVER argue about rebirth without discussing Dependent causation - to discuss it without a detailed discussion of this cycle would be like falling into a trap or wrong views.

The Arahant gains the "Tevijja" or three knowledges -- which includes the knowledge of past lives.

:anjali:
I think you are mistaken here. Not arahants or enlightened beings have the three knowledges. There were many disciples of the Buddha (and even a few rare cases of lay people) who attained full spirtual realization without experiencing with the "divine eye" rebirth of beings and seeing one's own past lives. In fact, these two knowledges were described to been having attained by non-buddhist practioners, but they were not enlightened.

--DarkDream
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DD,
Yes, I'm familiar with ehipassiko...
DarkDream wrote: A lovely Pali word is ehipassiko which means "come see." The fundamental difference is you can actually walk the path and "come see" for yourself by experiencing it....
Which may take many lifetimes, and is not certain until Arahantship, according to the Suttas.
See this post: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 9416#p9416" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta
Mike
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by tiltbillings »

DarkDream wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Bottom line: literal rebirth after death is a belief. To me it is just speculation. It seems I can't know for myself that it is true. As such I think it is for Buddhism a thing that should be put aside. Unfortunately, I see it as Buddhism's greatest attachment besides trying to sneek back ontology and the answering of metaphysical questions that the Buddha refused to answer.
Then why did the Buddha teach it as if it were true?
This is a very good question. I don't have all the answers but here is my opinion on the matter.

. . .

This is my best guess, and I'm going to try to explore it further.

All the best,

--DarkDream
Best guess nicely sums it up.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by nathan »

Ditto, arrow out first, add it to the collection later. :smile:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
Element

Re: Buddhist Rebirth Refuted?

Post by Element »

DarkDream wrote: There were many disciples of the Buddha who attained full spirtual realization without experiencing with the "divine eye"...
Such as Venerable Sariputta. Of Sariputta, the Buddha declared no other upheld the Dhamma like him.
Last edited by Element on Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply