Dinsdale wrote: ↑Sat May 05, 2018 8:37 amSure, a "being" is a convention, but these are teachings on
anatta.
OK. You admit "a being" ("satta") is a "convention", "verbal designation" or merely a "view", as literally defined in SN 5.10, MN 98 and SN 23.2. I personally think this is a first step in having an honest, respectful & objective assessment of the suttas. Well done.
Dinsdale wrote: ↑Sat May 05, 2018 8:37 amThis doesn't negate the fact that in the suttas the descriptions of birth, aging and death are clearly physical/biological.
This appears to be a contradiction. It was just claimed "a being" is merely a "convention" or "view" yet now it is claimed the sutta descriptions of birth, aging and death are clearly physical/biological even though these descriptions revolve around the "birth" & "death" of "beings". How can a "being", which is a "convention", "verbal designation" & "view", suddenly become "physical & biological"?
Now what is aging and death? Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. 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.
And what is birth? Whatever production, entering, completion & birth of the various beings in this or that group of beings [constructed from] the appearance of aggregates acquired via the sense media , that is called birth
In summary, there is no evidence it is a "fact" the sutta descriptions of birth, aging and death are clearly physical/biological. The evidence or facts appear to point to the fact the sutta descriptions of birth, aging and death are mental/psychological because "the beings" that are born & that age & die are mere "self-views" or "conventions" that are mental constructed or construed.
This would probably explain why many suttas say Arahants are not born, do not age & do not die, as follows:
A sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? It was in reference to this that it was said, 'He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.'
MN 140
Dinsdale wrote: ↑Sat May 05, 2018 8:37 am They describe a physical process, not just the mental process of self-view arising.
No they don't, particularly the description of "birth", which has zero physical/biological components (apart from rupa khandha & the physical sense spheres). Every key Pali word ( sattā, jāti, sañjāti, okkanti, abhinibbatti, pātubhāvo & paṭilābho) in the description of "birth" is mental when compared with the use of these words ( sattā, jāti, sañjāti, okkanti, abhinibbatti, pātubhāvo & paṭilābho) in other suttas.
Please tell me. Are the descriptions below about physical arisings (such as the growth of a plant) or are they about mental arisings?
There is the case where 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 men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.
SN 22.81
There is the case where 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 men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.
SN 22.1
Responding, "As you say, lord," to the Blessed One, Angulimala went to that woman and on arrival said to her, "Sister, since I was born in the noble birth, I do not recall intentionally killing a living being. Through this may there be wellbeing for you, wellbeing for your fetus." And there was wellbeing for the woman, wellbeing for her fetus.
MN 87