I quickly browsed Bhikkhu Thanissaro's PDF called Paradox of Becoming, where the Venerable says:
Like bhava, “non-becoming”—vibhava—is a term that the Buddha does not define. It is related to the verb vibhavati, which means to stop becoming, to stop being, to go out of existence
Thus craving for non-becoming would mean a desire for something already existing to perish or be destroyed.
The central paradox of becoming is also evident in the second noble truth, where one of the three forms of craving leading to becoming is craving for non-becoming—the ending of what has come to be.
This poses a practical challenge for any attempt to put an end to becoming. Many writers have tried to resolve this paradox by defining non-becoming in such a way that the desire for Unbinding (nibbana) would not fall into that category.
Some questions that arose in relation to the above:However, the Buddha himself taught a strategic resolution to this paradox, in which the four noble truth—the path to the end of suffering—involves creating a type of becoming where the mind is so steady and alert that it can simply allow what has come into being to pass away of its own accord, thus avoiding the twin dangers of craving for becoming or for non-becoming
1. Do the suttas not define "bhava" and "vibhava"?
2. Is "non-becoming" an accurate translation of "vibhava"?
3. Is there really a "paradox" in the 2nd noble truth?
4. What is meant by "the ending of what has come to be"? Must this involve "vibhava"?
5. Can the desire for Nibbana not be bhava or vibhava?
6. Did the Buddha himself really teach a Path of "becoming", i.e., do the suttas say a mind so steady and alert is a type of "becoming"?
7. What do we think "bhava" & "vibhava" are & mean?
Please discuss.