the great rebirth debate

[Vepacitta]

Vepacitta's Vow:

I vow, whenever tempted to reference Hitler in any internet debate, to use either Stalin or Mao insead.

From Mt. Meru,

V.

[lojong1]

rebirth debate

Literally metaphorical BOLLOCKS!

[Hanzze]

_/\_

[nowheat]

Plus, since he states rebirth as a part of Right View, I feel like I give myself a better chance at success in practice if I believe him. But hey, if it's wrong when I'm able to know so, then so be it. No harm, no foul. At least I lived a good life.

That's the traditional view, yes, that the Buddha said rebirth is part of right view. But it seems to be a *little* misunderstanding there. imho. Would you cite a sutta to support the Buddha teaching rebirth as Right View?

Yes, following the path is the best course even if we don't yet understand all of it. But what if developing a belief in rebirth keeps you from attaining liberation? Is that "no harm no foul"? How will you know, when will you know, whether a belief in rebirth held you back if there is no rebirth? If there is rebirth, you will be "able to know" when you are reborn. If there is no rebirth, you will never gain that certainty. Ever.

[Hanzze]

_/\_

[nowheat]

If you come across a strange theory in biology that you don't understand, you wouldn't think, "Maybe I need to take this theory more literally," or "Maybe it's simply a metaphor." No, you would recognize your ignorance and either give up or try to better understand the theory.

That's a great observation, and goes to the heart of the discomfort I have with discussions such as this. The Buddha's teaching of the Dhamma is radical and difficult to understand and appreciate: Complete eradication of dukkha - how can I even begin to imagine or approach that?

Pre-filtering these deep teachings with views: "These parts are just metaphorical"; "These parts are just for beginners"; "These parts must be understood in this particular way"; ..., seems to me to be completely missing the point that these are radical and difficult instructions to be tested by putting them into practise...

To Mike:
So when the Buddha uses the word "tanha" do you interpret that literally as "thirst"? As in "needs to swallow liquid"? Then the Buddha says, "Everything is burning. The eye is on fire..." Then you interpret that as literal too? If not, aren't you picking and choosing? Or listening to those who picked and chose before you?

When I read the suttas I am not "pre-filtering views" I am trying understand what's there. Just because my understanding is different than that of the Traditions does not mean I am "pre-filtering". Of course I also don't tell anyone that they must understand the views as I do, so maybe you're talking about different sorts of people than me, very very dogmatic people?

To Individual:

When you apply the terms "literal" and "metaphorical" as you do I think you are misunderstanding what the person who used them was saying. Not that the scientific theories used are "literal" or "metaphorical" in any sense -- you're right, that makes no sense. But that the words used to *describe* something are literal or metaphorical, and there is uncertainty about what is being described. If you get a translation of a translation of something that was written long ago in a much different culture and the phrase you are wondering about is "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" you might ask, "Are they talking literally? as in they believe angels are teensy tiny and can fit on the head of a pin? Or are they talking metaphorically about something else?" So "literal rebirth" and "metaphorical rebirth" here is similar to "literal angels" or "metaphorical angels".

I bet I didn't make that one whit clearer to you, did I.

[lojong1]

Would you cite a sutta to support the Buddha teaching rebirth as Right View?
Yes, following the path is the best course even if we don't yet understand all of it. But what if developing a belief in rebirth keeps you from attaining liberation? Is that "no harm no foul"? How will you know, when will you know, whether a belief in rebirth held you back if there is no rebirth? If there is rebirth, you will be "able to know" when you are reborn. If there is no rebirth, you will never gain that certainty. Ever.

Alex123 has been working on an answer to these questions for 5 thread-pages.
Khanti.

[Dhammakid]

Plus, since he states rebirth as a part of Right View, I feel like I give myself a better chance at success in practice if I believe him. But hey, if it's wrong when I'm able to know so, then so be it. No harm, no foul. At least I lived a good life.

That's the traditional view, yes, that the Buddha said rebirth is part of right view. But it seems to be a *little* misunderstanding there. imho. Would you cite a sutta to support the Buddha teaching rebirth as Right View?

Yes, following the path is the best course even if we don't yet understand all of it. But what if developing a belief in rebirth keeps you from attaining liberation? Is that "no harm no foul"? How will you know, when will you know, whether a belief in rebirth held you back if there is no rebirth? If there is rebirth, you will be "able to know" when you are reborn. If there is no rebirth, you will never gain that certainty. Ever.

Hello nowheat,
Thanks for your comments. I will try my best.

"And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...
— MN 117

Other members have posted other sutta references throughout this thread. Sorry I'm being lazy finding them...

Interestingly, however, I found this on the same A2I page:

"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person... does not discern what ideas are fit for attention, or what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas fit for attention, and attends instead to ideas unfit for attention... This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones... discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and attends [instead] to ideas fit for attention... He attends appropriately, This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices."
-MN 2

Right View, simply put:

"And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view."
-DN 22

Reading MN 9 (The Discourse on Right View), the Buddha mentions "birth into the various order of beings...precipitation in a womb," etc, but doesn't say anything specific about rebirth...

Okay, so that's my effort as far as the first part of your comments are concerned. You are, of course, correct with regards to the second portion of your comments. It's something I didn't think about when posting. Thanks for pointing it out.

I guess I'm okay with the impossibility of me finding out for myself if rebirth isn't true. Like I said, I will have cultivated a truly wonderful practice and lived a good life. That's enough for me.


Dhammakid

[Dhammakid]

Would you cite a sutta to support the Buddha teaching rebirth as Right View?
Yes, following the path is the best course even if we don't yet understand all of it. But what if developing a belief in rebirth keeps you from attaining liberation? Is that "no harm no foul"? How will you know, when will you know, whether a belief in rebirth held you back if there is no rebirth? If there is rebirth, you will be "able to know" when you are reborn. If there is no rebirth, you will never gain that certainty. Ever.

Alex123 has been working on an answer to these questions for 5 thread-pages.
Khanti.

I hope my laughing out loud is not perceived as provocative...

Just thought it was a funny yet true comment.


Dhammakid

[nowheat]

"And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...
— MN 117

Thanks, and I wouldn't call that lazy, we've got enough to work with here.

MN 117 discusses wrong view in terms of those who are denying common views of the day. It then goes on to offer up a better view in "Right View with Taints" -- a list of the common views of the day. Then it goes on to offer the actual right view -- not listed as tainted, listed as an actual factor of the path (which "right view with taints" is not) -- and the pure right view is the Buddha's path. The tainted right view, the one that causes the aggregates to keep forming, includes rebirth.

http://justalittledust.com/blog/?p=104" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person... does not discern what ideas are fit for attention, or what ideas are unfit for attention.... This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

I've seen this before in MN 39.23, right in the middle of a discourse on Dependent Origination. He's just described how we cause all our own problems, this result from that cause, Buddha's 12-step program, and ends by effectively saying, "Now you should have no reason at all to be discussing past lives, how you are or what you are in this life, or future lives." (as above). He's answered all the questions. If he'd just said, "and some aspect you should be concerned with will be reborn if you keep making kamma" then they *would* still be discussing all those things. But he has just shown that there is nothing they should be concerned with in this life that has any relation to past lives or future lives.

Just a few sections later he (39.26-30) he describes Dependent Origination again in terms of an actual person's life and he does not end by describing death and then another birth. (I see where the Traditions have tried to insert rebirth by interpreting the "gandhabba" as the "being" coming into the womb to be reborn but I think everyone agrees there is no "being" moving from a past life to the next and anyway if the Traditions had had context they'd have known that the gandhabba, the celestial musicians, love the ladies and play a part in success or failure in pregnancies and births; the gandhabba's role here is to explain the randomness of why, all things being equal, sometimes we conceive, sometimes we don't.)

"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: ... This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity....

This view above, this doesn't sound at all familiar to you? That bit about the ripening of good and bad actions, that's kamma. I understand that the Traditions say the difference between this view and the Buddha's is that this view has a self moving forward and the Buddha's does not but I never get a very good answer as to (1) if it is not the self moving forward in response to kamma, what does? Some say "consciousness" but the Buddha's "consciousness" is dependent on the senses, so it's not that (and he actually denies that it's consciousness in the suttas) (2) if what's moving forward has nothing to do with my existence here and now beyond using up the unused results of my kamma, why should I care? (the Buddha's just told us above in MN 2 that we shouldn't be thinking about any individuality in the future) Why shouldn't I be *more* concerned with what effect my unused vipaka has on *all* beings in the future, why think in terms of my rebirth at all? (Why? Because it's a good motivational tool for those who don't understand what the Buddha is teaching, that's why.)

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones... discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and attends [instead] to ideas fit for attention... He attends appropriately, This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices."
-MN 2

Absolutely right. It's not about "last life, how'd I get here in the first place, what'll I be next time" at all. It's just about stress right here, and what we can do about it now.

I guess I'm okay with the impossibility of me finding out for myself if rebirth isn't true. Like I said, I will have cultivated a truly wonderful practice and lived a good life. That's enough for me.

It's a great path, whether you believe the Buddha taught rebirth as necessary or not. May your feet always find the Way.

[nowheat]

If all existence is suffering and the death would be the end of the suffering (and equivalent to parinibbana), why not hasten it? Isn't cessation of dukkha (mental and physical) is what Buddhism all about?

The mistaken understanding here is a failure to notice that when the Buddha's teaching results in the end of suffering, there is an individual who still goes on living, teaching, taking care of others, just as the Buddha did. A "selfless" individual recognizable as different from others by name and form. Parinibbana and nibbana are not exact equivalents, that's why there are two different words to distinguish them. One might live a long time in a state without suffering and do much good in that time.

[rowyourboat]

Right view (samma ditti) includes rebirth. See the Mahacattasarika sutta below. It has implications for the development of the entire noble eightfold path. Science will never find complete evidence for this kind of thing, nor be able to disprove it completely in our lifetime. However there is enough anecdotal evidence to see it as a distinct possibility. If that is the case, the value in this lies in the utility of it for us, now. It helps to motivate us and to steer us away from lobha, dosa, moha (craving, aversion, delusion- the basis of most elements of right view) which leads to the entire development of the path. If it is extremely helpful for in overcoming suffering why not adopt it as a belief? Millions have done it all over the world.

"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view...

"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, wrong view is abolished. The many evil, unskillful qualities that come into play with wrong view as their condition are also abolished, while the many skillful qualities that have right view as their condition go to the culmination of their development...

"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right knowledge, right release comes into being. Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten...

"This Dhamma discourse on the Great Forty has been set rolling and cannot be stopped by any contemplative or priest or deva or Mara and Brahma or anyone at all in the world.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta

RYB

[Dhammakid]

Hi nowheat,
Thanks for your comments. You've raised some good points I am not studied enough to counter, so I will have some good study questions to ponder for a while.


Dhammakid

[Ceisiwr]

Wow this thread certainly has grown

Ive only really skimmed through but there was one or two things I wanted to comment on, all of them are from Alex (sorry its just yours stuck out more than others to me)


Firstly this

Right, and if one rejects the rebirth - then one has wrong view (MN117). If one has fixed wrong view (niyata micchādiṭṭhi), that is very bad weighty kamma that can be responcible for rebirth in Hell and other bad places.

Not holding a belief in rebirth is no the same as saying there is no rebirth. Incidently the Buddha taught that views were fetters to be abandoned

Therefore

Pr1) Rebirth is a view
Pr2) Views are fetters to be abandoned (as taught by Buddha)
C) Rebirth view it to be abandoned (without grasping another view)

"And how is there unyoking from views? There is the case where a certain person discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, & the escape from views. When he discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, & the escape from views, then — with regard to views — he is not obsessed with view-passion, view-delight, view-attraction, view-infatuation, view-thirst, view-fever, view-fascination, view-craving. This is unyoking from sensuality, unyoking from becoming, & unyoking from views.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... html#views" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Now some argue that "this is my view". To this I offer this sutta as my reply

"So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. You thus adhere to that very stress, submit yourself to that very stress."

"Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Now moving on

There is a misconception that it is only mental defilements that are dukkha and cause dukkha. I hate to burst your bubble, but even Arahants (who have no defilements) experience dukkha (physical pain + the fact of having aggregates).

This Is, in my opinion, a gross misunderstanding of the whole enterprise of the Buddha

"Now, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones, when touched with a feeling of pain, does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught. So he feels one pain: physical, but not mental. Just as if they were to shoot a man with an arrow and, right afterward, did not shoot him with another one, so that he would feel the pain of only one arrow. In the same way, when touched with a feeling of pain, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught. He feels one pain: physical, but not mental.

"As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is not resistant. No resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he does not delight in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns an escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure. As he is not delighting in sensual pleasure, no passion-obsession with regard to that feeling of pleasure obsesses him. He discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, and escape from that feeling. As he discerns the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, and escape from that feeling, no ignorance-obsession with regard to that feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain obsesses him.

"Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

"This is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor between the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .html#shot" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There would not be any need to strive and do anything good if there was one life.

Two problems here. First of all "there is no life" is just as speculative as saying there are two lives or a hundred million trillion. Both are not intrinsic to the Buddhas teaching.

Secondly just because you would not see any point to strive and do "good" ( I would say skillfull actions) in your life if somehow you knew this was the only one, DOES NOT mean that everyone else would act the same way


Ive heard this kind of argument before from Atheist V Theist debates. I think it says more about the person making the claim than the person its directed to.

Times and circumstances are different. As much as I dislike and don't agree with, often being 'bad' will get one ahead in life, in this life.

Maybe they will get ahead in wordly affairs but not in Dhamma. Remember wordly affairs are tied in with Dukkha.

One can much easier experience peace and calm through chemical means (not available or widespread during Buddha's time). But that wouldn't help with next-life.

As a person who has dabbled in drugs, both illegal and legal, in the past in order to deal with dukkha I can most definitely say that they do not help overcome it, they only suppress it for a few hours and then its back. You seem to be forgetting that they are Anicca



There was also another comment you made that if Rebirth isnt true, then its not fair because not everyone will reach nibbana in there here and now. The problem with this is that Buddha never claimed that everyone would, nor that everyone would be interested in his teachings.


metta


metta

[Ceisiwr]

Anuruddha, for what purpose does the Thus Gone One tell the disciples, without wasting time, before you die, be born in something higher. Stating one is born there, another there. (* 2) The Teaching’s origin is the Blessed One, its lead is from the Blessed One, and its refuge is the Blessed One. Good that the meaning occurs to the Blessed One.We, bhikkhus, hearing it from the Blessed One, will bear it in mind. Anuruddha, the Thus Gone One tells the disciples, without wasting time before you die, be born in something higher. Telling them one is born there, another there. Not to deceive people, not for prattling, and not for gain honour or fame and not thinking may the people know me thus. Yet, Anuruddha, there are sons of clansmen who are born in faith and are pleased, to hear it. Hearing it they would arouse interest and direct their minds to that and it would be for their good for a long time.

http://www.vipassana.info/068-nalakapana-e1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;