Thanks for your reply and thanks for clarifying your intentions, this was not clear to me.
In that chapter I explain the birth of form as part of the chain of dependent arising of the self. Besides the birth of form, there is also birth of the formless (through identifying it), however I do not explain this in that chapter, because someone who reads it at that point would probably not be able to understand it, as they are still consumed by form.You wrote:The equivalent Pali text says:Becoming – birth
From becoming, your ‘self’ is formed. This self is born mentally because you identify yourself with your desires. These desires become mentally separate from your objective sensatory awareness, because you define them, and thus create a self.
https://foundationsofhumanlife.com/10-the-self/Therefore, how does your explanation represent what is written in the Buddhist texts? How can you be sure your explanation is Buddhism?Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti? Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ tamhi tamhi sattanikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti abhinibbatti khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho. Ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, jāti.
And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates & acquisition of [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Note: The above English translation may or may not be accurate.
Everything that is defined is born (mentally) and formed, first it was not and then it is defined. It is quite literally referred to in the Pali text (whatever coming-to-be, coming-forth..), however understanding it requires context. Birth is understood in the context of dependent arising of the self. Something is formed through the 6 sense bases of form consciousness.
If one attains Nirvana everything in Buddhism becomes clear, like I mentioned to someone else earlier in this thread. One will also understand what is meant in all the sutta's. Although I can say this, you will still have doubt.
Quite the same as with birth but the other way around; every dissolving of form or formless results in the death (disappearance) of that. This death should not be seen in a physical sense, as what is really dying is only the thought of living. Maybe I should add this last sentence in the text, thanks.
You continue:To me, the above sounds like "death" is Nirvana (extinguishment).Birth-death (extinction)
From the birth of the self until its death (extinguishment) it will always be unsatisfied because the self has originated from sensory desires! These desires must constantly be satisfied. If you have a desire, you are dissatisfied. If all egocentric desires are extinguished (lifted), by taking away the first cause (delusion, ignorance, false-knowing) of mutually dependent origination, you are freed from your dissatisfaction. Your delusion or ignorance is taken away by the insight that the essence of reality is empty. Through this insight, the urge for meaning, interpretation or substance in life is removed and as a result, all consecutive chains disappear. The chain of dependent origination of the self is lifted in this way.
However, the Pali texts provide the following definition of "death":Therefore, again, how does your explanation represent what is written in the Buddhist texts? How can you be sure your explanation is Buddhism?Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Birth and death of form and formless all come forth from the desire to define and identify 'something,' out of ignorance. That is why it is important, for understanding these concepts, to not see these concepts as standing on themselves, but in relation to which birth and death they are referring to.
On the notion of rebirth;
First there is the identification of the formless. One experiences 'something,' but has not defined its form yet. This identification is the most subtle form of birth, as it lays the foundation on which form is defined. Form is based upon the identification of this 'something.' So, everytime when anything is formed, it is reborn. The image of the old and young women in the manual really helps in understanding this, in my experience that is. Thich Nhat Hanh explains this also in this video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwGsQxUdczw One will not fully understand this if one is still consumed by form.The moment you have let go of the identification with form, you are left with the identification with the formless. Although you do not define a form anymore, you do recognize you experience something.
Rebirth occurs whenever someone tries to define an experience in form and every time when someone tries to identify with an experience which is not defined in form (formless).
I am happy to help with other things which may be unclear. Although I will repeat that it will help if one reads the whole manual, as a lot of questions will probably be answered there. The manual is only 24 pages long in A4 format. Afterwards, we can still doubt if it is Buddhism or not. Although, I am also prepared to answer questions from people who have not read the whole thing.
I have written the manual in a way that even the most inexperienced people should be able to understand it (I hope), so it could be that in the first chapters you will read a lot of which you already know. However, for understanding the whole, they still might prove value. One should not expect to understand something one has read in the last chapter, if he has not understood the previous ones. One can't skip his way to Nirvana.