the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
BrokenBones
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by BrokenBones »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:25 am
BrokenBones wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:24 am Besides the pronouns list, maybe we should also have a list of subjects that may be discussed. I don't see this thread fitting into the Buddha's prescribed list.
Watch those pronouns! ;)
The five aggregates once known as brokenbones is/was sorry 🤪
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

BrokenBones wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:45 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:25 am
BrokenBones wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 2:24 am Besides the pronouns list, maybe we should also have a list of subjects that may be discussed. I don't see this thread fitting into the Buddha's prescribed list.
Watch those pronouns! ;)
The five aggregates once known as brokenbones is/was sorry 🤪
This sphere of conditioned aggregates acknowledges that sphere of aggregates conventionally known as BrokenBones and there is thanks for the conditioned arising of the apology.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Coëmgenu »

Don't be ridiculous. "Things" don't "arise" when they're spherical.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 3:07 am Don't be ridiculous. "Things" don't "arise" when they're spherical.
:anjali:
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Coëmgenu »

Your imputations of an "anjali" are subjectless and objectless.
:sage:
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3073
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Pondera »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 3:07 am Don't be ridiculous. "Things" don't "arise" when they're spherical.
A bubble :spy:
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by cappuccino »

sam·sa·ra
noun
the cycle of death and rebirth to which life in the material world is bound.

:coffee:
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by DooDoot »

sam·sa·ra
noun
moving on, circulation

fr. saṁsarati
saṁ + sar + a
moves about continuously

described as follows in sutta:
Just as a dog, tied by a leash to a post or stake, keeps running around and circling around that very post or stake; in the same way, an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for people of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He assumes feeling to be the self...

"He assumes perception to be the self...

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.

"He keeps running around and circling around that very form... that very feeling... that very perception... those very fabrications... that very consciousness.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by cappuccino »

I recollected my manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two...five, ten...fifty, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion: 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there.


Maha-Saccaka Sutta
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by DooDoot »

Eko Care wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 11:32 pm
DooDoot wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:28 pm .. use an etymological approach ...
So it is an (unpublished) etymological dictionary.
Wikipedia
Etymological dictionaries are the product of research in historical linguistics.
For many words in any language, the etymology will be uncertain, disputed, or simply unknown.
(may be like this)
the above is why a sutta "contextual" approach is also required. for example:
If anyone says, ‘the eye is self,’ that is not tenable.
‘Cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya taṁ na upapajjati.

The arising and vanishing of the eye is evident,
Cakkhussa uppādopi vayopi paññāyati.

so it would follow that one’s self arises and vanishes.
Yassa kho pana uppādopi vayopi paññāyati, ‘attā me uppajjati ca veti cā’ti iccassa evamāgataṁ hoti.

That’s why it’s not tenable to claim that
Tasmā taṁ na upapajjati:

the eye is self.
‘cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya.

So the eye is not self.
Iti cakkhu anattā.

MN 148
They don’t have the unethical conduct that causes an uneducated ordinary person to be reborn—when their body breaks up, after death—in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.

Yathārūpena ca kho, āvuso, dussīlyena samannāgato assutavā puthujjano kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā apāyaṁ duggatiṁ vinipātaṁ nirayaṁ upapajjati tathārūpassa dussīlyaṁ na hoti.

SN 55.13
the above is not reconcilable for the dictionary or commentary sects; how the word "upapajjati" is translated as both "tenable" and "to be reborn"

it appears only an "etymological" approach can resolve the above "contextual" conundrum for the wikipedia dictionary sects :reading:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by DooDoot »

Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:00 am
DooDoot wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:28 pm For example, the word 'upapajjati' is found in MN 148, where it obviously does not mean 'reborn' or 'reincarnated'.
I feel like ven. Buddhaghosa speaking.
You seem like re-inventing gunpowder.
MN 148 Chachakkasuttavaṇṇanā
.... Tattha na upapajjatīti na yujjati. .....
DooDoot wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:28 pm if we use an etymological approach and also analyze how words are used contextually in the suttas;
we can find the meaning of a word that will fit most or all contexts.
or some
DooDoot wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:28 pm the above is not reconcilable for the dictionary or commentary sects; how the word "upapajjati" is translated as both "tenable" and "to be reborn"
Inverse Theory
DooDoot wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:28 pm only an "etymological" approach can resolve the above "contextual" conundrum
can re-solve what has already solved.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by DooDoot »

Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:00 am I feel like ven. Buddhaghosa speaking.
u feel like dependent co-origination over 3 life times or empty dhammas reborn continuously? :roll:
Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:00 amInverse Theory
non-dhammic speech above, it appears. "Eel-wriggling", it appears
Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:00 am can re-solve what has already solved.
so does MN 148 say what is said below? it appears you avoided MN 148 therefore, by default, show the error of the dictionaries
“Someone with ten qualities is cast down to hell. What ten? They lie. They’re summoned to a council, an assembly, a family meeting, a guild, or to the royal court, and asked to bear witness: ‘Please, mister, say what you know.’ Not knowing, they say ‘I know.’ Knowing, they say ‘I don’t know.’ Not seeing, they say ‘I see.’ And seeing, they say ‘I don’t see.’ So they deliberately lie for the sake of themselves or another, or for some trivial worldly reason.

AN 10.211
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by Eko Care »

again permission!
DooDoot wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:31 am
“Someone with ten qualities is cast down to hell. What ten? They lie. They’re summoned to a council, an assembly, a family meeting, a guild, or to the royal court, and asked to bear witness: ‘Please, mister, say what you know.’ Not knowing, they say ‘I know.’ Knowing, they say ‘I don’t know.’ Not seeing, they say ‘I see.’ And seeing, they say ‘I don’t see.’ So they deliberately lie for the sake of themselves or another, or for some trivial worldly reason.
AN 10.211
This is irrelevant.
This is about a deliberate lying when bearing witness.
You have a habit of arguing with irrelevant or false facts.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by DooDoot »

Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:22 pm This is about a deliberate lying when bearing witness.
You have a habit of arguing with irrelevant or false facts.
Sorry but the above appears about your 'self'. U avoided the subject matter by claiming without evidence it was "resolved". I offered a practical example for discussion but you totally avoided it and, worse, appeared to claim to be a reincarnation of Buddhaghosa.
PTS Pali English Dictionary
upapajjati
to get to, be reborn in (acc.) to originate, rise Vin.iii.20 (nirayaṁ); AN.iii.415; AN.v.292 sq.; Snp.584; Iti.13 (nirayaṁ), Iti.14 (sugatiṁ; variant reading upp˚), Iti.67 (saggaṁ lokaṁ; variant reading upp˚); Iti.43 = Dhp.307 (nirayaṁ); Dhp.126, Dhp.140; Pv.i.10#7 (variant reading BB. udapajjatha = uppajja Pv-a.50); Pp.16, Pp.51, Pp.60; Ne.37, Ne.99, cp. Kv.611 sq. pp. upapannā (q.v.)
If anyone says, ‘the eye is self,’ that is not to get to, be reborn in (acc.) to originate, rise .
‘Cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya taṁ na upapajjati.

The arising and vanishing of the eye is evident,
Cakkhussa uppādopi vayopi paññāyati.

MN 148
The PTS Pali English Dictionary above appears to be clutching at straws.

The PTS Pali English Dictionary above says:
doubtful whether a legitimate form as upa + pad or a diaeretic form of uppajjati = ud + pad. In this case all passages ought to go under the latter. Trenckner however (Notes 77) defends upa˚ & considers in many cases upp˚ a substitution for upa. The diaeresis may be due to metre, as nearly all forms are found in poetry. The variant reading upp˚ is apparently frequent; but it is almost impossible to distinguish between upap˚ and upp˚ in the Sinhalese writing, and either the scribe or the reader may mistake one for the other
How can a sincere student be a "believer" in the gibberish above; including the dictionary appearing to fall back on primitive Singhalese culture? Even though Singhalese Buddhism nearly become extinct a number of times and probably degenerated into different types of superstition, the PTS Pali English Dictionary appears to be relying on the Singhalese language in defining Pali words from 2600 years ago. :alien:
Eko Care wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:22 pm "Ekayana Magga"?
The above appears not possible if crucial words are misunderstood. :alien:
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:50 am, edited 11 times in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Are you a Dictionary-believer or Commentary-believer?

Post by Coëmgenu »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:29 am... your 'self' ... U ... I ... you
I was told this was on-topic in situations like this.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Post Reply