Pali Term: Bhava

[SarathW]

Hi Lucas
This is not how Ven. Vijithananda explains it.
For instance, we can experience the Bhave here and now.
For instance if you practice Samath, you can experience Rupavacara and Arupavacara's mental state right here and now (present).
Jati means that after you pass away you are physically re-born to Rupavacara or Arupavacara realm (future).
But I have my reservations. This depends on if you believe in three life model. (past, present, and future)
But some argue on one life model that means you experience both here and now.

It is interesting to note what the Buddha said to Angulimala. According to that Jati is here and now.
I like that. I need the results here and now.
Say I want to become a monk (Bhava) then I go to Burma and ordained as a monk (Jati)

[Lucas Oliveira]

Hi SarathW..

it's a good explanation too..

for me it makes sense that this explanation of the topic ..

Two points stand out here. First, bhava is not “Being” in the sense of a primary metaphysical absolute. Instead, it is part of an on - going, dynamic process, something produced repeatedly in a complex network of cause and effect — what Sn III.12 calls the “stream” of bhava. It’s a type of being that follows on doing, a doing in anticipation of what will become. For this reason, in choosing an English equivalent for bhava, “becoming” seems more appropriate than “being,” in that it better captures bhava’s conditioned, purposeful, dynamic nature.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... coming.pdf

In paṭiccasamuppāda there are two similar terms: bhava and jāti. Literally bhava means birth where jāti has the same meaning. However these are two different terms. The Buddha explains the term bhava in AN3.76 2 about the term bhava(see also AN3.77).

Bhava means the formation of kamma to experience the result(vipāka).The formation of kamma to result a rebirth in a kāmaloka is called kāmabhava. Similarly rūpa and arūpa bhava. When there is upādāna there is the formation of kamma to experience the kammavipāka. Therefore the birth occurs accordingly. When there is bhava to be born in kāmaloka they will be reborn in a kāmaloka.

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/wh ... g/15710/14

[DooDoot]

Hello Pāli friends,

Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi writes:

Bhava is concrete sentient existence in one of the three realms of existence posited by Buddhist cosmology, a span of life beginning with conception and ending in death.

The above does not appear to be true. For example, MN 38 says "bhava ceases" when the eye sees the form, as follows:

On seeing a form with the eye, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having thus abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he does not delight in that feeling, welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in feelings ceases in him. With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi

[asahi]

But I have my reservations. This depends on if you believe in three life model. (past, present, and future)
But some argue on one life model that means you experience both here and now.

It is interesting to note what the Buddha said to Angulimala. According to that Jati is here and now.
I like that. I need the results here and now.
Say I want to become a monk (Bhava) then I go to Burma and ordained as a monk (Jati)

If you not believe in 3 life , there is no after life , and you believe only in 1 life , what is the point for you to practice dhamma ?
Unnecessary , save your times and enjoy life while still can , you are running out of time .

As for explaining dependent arising in term
of 1 life is unlikely . Because then no bad kamma produce in next life that anyone should fear of because there is no next life or future life . A person not feel ashame and fear of doing bad deeds is without hiri ottapa . Now , in even in the beginning step of the path , that person already has wrong view . Without abandoning wrong view and developing right view , no one is able to proceed further . Even those believer in God creator are fear to go to hell .

[DooDoot]

enjoy life

What is there to enjoy in life?

because there is no next lufe or future life . A person not feel ashame and fear of doing bad deeds is without hiri ottapa .

The above is false.

[SarathW]

But I have my reservations. This depends on if you believe in three life model. (past, present, and future)
But some argue on one life model that means you experience both here and now.

It is interesting to note what the Buddha said to Angulimala. According to that Jati is here and now.
I like that. I need the results here and now.
Say I want to become a monk (Bhava) then I go to Burma and ordained as a monk (Jati)

If you not believe in 3 life , there is no after life , and you believe only in 1 life , what is the point for you to practice dhamma ?
Unnecessary , save your times and enjoy life while still can , you are running out of time .

As for explaining dependent arising in term
of 1 life is unlikely . Because then no bad kamma produce in next life that anyone should fear of because there is no next lufe or future life . A person not feel ashame and fear of doing bad deeds is without hiri ottapa . Now , in even in the beginning step of the path , that person already has wrong view . Without abandoning wrong view and developing right view , no one is able to proceed further . Even those believer in God creator are fear to go to hell .

It appears you misunderstood me.
What I am saying is the whole Dependent origination can operate in past, present, and future equally.

[Coëmgenu]

The above does not appear to be true. For example, MN 38 says "bhava ceases" when the eye sees the form, as follows:

Is this your new favorite quotation to proliferate on the forum? This is the second time you've proliferated this mistake here, at least, within the past two days.

Your misconstrual of this sutta is irrelevant to Venerable Bodhi's point. Ven Bodhi is correct. You are wrong. Ven Bodhi knows what "bhāva" means here. You do not know, and your quotation once again has nothing to do with yet another innovative & modernist thesis concerning the Dhamma from you.

[asahi]

But I have my reservations. This depends on if you believe in three life model. (past, present, and future)

But some argue on one life model that means you experience both here and now.



It appears you misunderstood me.
What I am saying is the whole Dependent origination can operate in past, present, and future equally.

Dont be shakened by wrong view .

[samseva]

The above does not appear to be true.

So you refute an actual Pāḷi scholar about a word, using a single Sutta passage, in English—translated by the very scholar you are refuting?

For example, MN 38 says "bhava ceases" when the eye sees the form, as follows:

Here is the Pāḷi:

So cakkhunā rūpaṁ disvā piyarūpe rūpe na sārajjati, appiyarūpe rūpe na byāpajjati, upaṭṭhitakāyasati ca viharati appamāṇacetaso. Tañca cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ yathābhūtaṁ pajānāti yatthassa te pāpakā akusalā dhammā aparisesā nirujjhanti.

So evaṁ anurodhavirodhavippahīno yaṁ kiñci vedanaṁ vedeti, sukhaṁ vā dukkhaṁ vā adukkhamasukhaṁ vā, so taṁ vedanaṁ nābhinandati nābhivadati nājjhosāya tiṭṭhati. Tassa taṁ vedanaṁ anabhinandato anabhivadato anajjhosāya tiṭṭhato yā vedanāsu nandī sā nirujjhati. Tassa nandīnirodhā upādānanirodho, upādānanirodhā bhavanirodho, bhavanirodhā jātinirodho, jātinirodhā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti.

The discussion is about the definition of "bhava." You said "bhava ceases when the eye sees the form." However—when you look at the actual Pāḷi—what the passage describes is actually "bhavanirodha."

In addition, you not only misinterpret the passage you referred to, but you did not take into account how Ven. Bodhi is describing "bhava" not in the context paṭiccasamuppāda, but in the context of the realms of existence. The passage you quoted deals with paṭiccasamuppāda, not the realms of existence.

And, the very fact that you use Ven. Bodhi's translation to make your claim shows that Bodhi himself translated bhava as he did. If anything, you are saying he is correct.

[samseva]

The above does not appear to be true. For example, MN 38 says "bhava ceases" when the eye sees the form, as follows:

[...] With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.
https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi

Tassa nandīnirodhā upādānanirodho, upādānanirodhā bhavanirodho, bhavanirodhā jātinirodho, jātinirodhā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti.

Also... this is interesting:

In the other "bhava" thread, you kept saying that "bhava" translated as "being" is incorrect... but now in this thread, you quote Ven. Bodhi's English translation, where he describes "bhava" as "being"...

So which is it? You're even contradicting yourself, DooDoot—from one thread to another.

[samseva]

This is the second time you've proliferated this mistake here, at least, within the past two days.

Yes... he keeps using passages with "nirodhabhava" or other compound Pāḷi words... to define "bhava."

I think 4 or 5 users have repeatedly pointed out this mistake so far.

[Coëmgenu]

If there's some inconsistency, I would recommend pointing it out. This is a subforum for the serious discussion of real Pali. If your interlocutor, DooDoot, seems confused, then quote him and ask him to clarify the discrepancy you see between these two posts. If he asks you to stop talking to him, then your only recourse is to ask the forum what they think of the discrepancy between two posts and reach a consensus without him.

And, yes, his quoting of that passage with bhavanirodha is utterly mishandled and betrays a significant lack of comprehension.

[samseva]

If there's some inconsistency, I would recommend pointing it out. This is a subforum for the serious discussion of real Pali.

Yeah, I did—my first post is about incorrectly equating of "bhavanirodho" with "bhava," with the Pāḷi.

[Coëmgenu]

As I understood you, you were saying that it was argued that "bhava" translated as "being" was incorrect, and then it was quoted with this so-called "incorrect" usage to demonstrate a different point about "bhava." That's what I was referring to.

I went looking to see what you mean, but all I saw was:

Craving for good reputation, fame, honor, etc, must be a form of becoming.

This is consonant with the other false claim that:

Bhava is merely more intense upadana.

So, all in all, we have 1) the false claim that bhava is merely more intense upadana,

and 2) the false claim that craving (tṛ́ṣṇā, taṇhā) "must be" a form of bhava.

Persons with actual Pali knowledge can correct these wrong views at their own leisure. At this rate, it looks like all 12 nidanas are going to be described as different modalities of bhava. So far, it's been claimed that taṇhā, upādāna, and bhava are all modalities of bhava. The Buddha should have been more concise when he outlined DO and just said:

Nidana 8: Vedana is a condition for a form of bhava (called "tanha").
Nidana 9: A form of bhava is a condition for upadana.
Nidana 10: Upadana is a condition for a more intense upadana called "bhava."
Nidana 11: A more intense upadana is a condition for jati (meaning "the adoption of an identity by an identitarian").
Nidana 12: Jati is a condition for age-and-death (meaning "dissatisfaction with an identity and the eventual abandoning of it").

Wow. So much "smoother," if by smooth we mean an incoherent mess.

[samseva]

This is what I meant:

Bhava [cp. Sk. bhava, as philosophical term late, but as N. of a deity Vedic; of bhū, see bhavati] "becoming," (form of) re- birth, (state of) existence, a "life."

The dictionary above is obviously wrong. Obviously bhava as rebirth cannot lead to jati as rebirth. I already informed you MN 121 says when the experience of emptiness there is no bhava but life remains. MN 38 also clearly says bhava ceases when the eyes see the form. I suggest to take refuge in the sutta rather than in Oxford University dictionaries advised by Sri Lankans when the Sangha was close to extinct in Sri Lanka.

As in the quote, it's said that the PTS definition of "bhava" —"becoming, state of existence, life"—is incorrect (although with nothing to support that claim). Ven. Bodhi's translates "bhavanirodha" in MN 38 as "cessation of existence," of which this translation was quoted, to point how it was correct.