Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Buddhism without Rebirth.- questions.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
.
:crazy:
Meow ...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.063.than.html
That sounds very zenny to me
Pretty sure mam.
I find it very relevant whether a person is lying or not. The ends do not justify the means. I agree that Jesus and Buddha both thaught to mitigate suffering but lying is not the road that leads to such mitigation.
Yes thanks.
The meaning or emphasis for one person of a sutta is not given per see to another. The self gets in the way...
I am trying to investigate Your view of the sutta not my own. But I am in the process of reading the suttas and building my own view about them.
This was my question to this answer.
"Is there a place in the suttas Where the Rebirth doctrine and/or the Karma doctrine are said to be for the worldlings only?"
The link above leads to MN 143 not MN 149. The linked sutta containes the citation so I am going by that sutta.
Anyway neither of these suttas contained the answer to my question...? What am I missing?
See what I mean I see this sutta as verifying the whole concept of Karma and Rebirth!
This is why I keep nagging you for your understanding of suttas.
/Victor
This seed consciousness I have never heard before. But we did discuss consciousness as a discrete flow. thereof my answer. A continues flow is not correct. That is evident to anyone who watches himself/herself watching the world for 10 min.
I have no idea how consciousness gain a footing in an embryo.
You have quoted this text to me a couple of times
He also taught about Aryan puggalas who will attain Nibbana within 1, 3 or 7 lifetimes.
I have never been taught to see the DO as divided into past now and future. That would be unlogical since not only past Karma forms our "now" but also the karma of present actions.
I do not think that anybody who adhers to that DO thinks about it the way you just presented it. If by "result of your actions come in the next life" you mean birth, old age and death. Then that would really not compute.
I would say many wise men will abonden Buddhism if its followers try to claim such anti-scientific notions as non-rebirth too.
Btw what is a floating soul?
/Victor
Thank you DD.
I think a clarification is necessary.
1. I have total confidence in rebirth due to personal experiences and because as you say Buddha taught it and I consider him wise. Of its importance to cultivation I am not so sure anymore.
2. I do not begrudge anybody who do not believe in Rebirth. As the Buddha taught you should avoid believing in anything that could not be verified as wholesome by you.
3. I do as I said early in the thread think that totally Denying Rebirth is totally unlogical and unscientific. That is why I started this thread to see if I could find anyone who believed that and to find out how they could support such a theory.
But so far noone here seems to totally deny rebirth. So no luck so far.
But on the other hand I have had one of the most fruitful Dhamma discussions ever thanks to You guys.
My question about the lying Buddha was asked in a hurry, spontaneously and without much thought:o and I can see in hind sight that it did not come out very well. If I have insulted anybody I apologize. It was not my intention.
With Metta
Victor
Good for you that rebirth has been verified.
Maybe you could win a Nobel Prize for science?
I already made a post denying the possibly of rebirth. I said consciousness dissolves defilement, just like water cannot carry fire. This is shown in meditation.
So tell us about your meditation? When you meditate, does consciousness awareness dissolve defilements or maintain them?
Defilements whilst mental are related to the body. They cannot go from one body to another after death.
Consciousness the Buddha called vinnana or cognition. It is simply knowing, that is all.
I totally deny it. Rebirth is impossible, also in view of human population growth. As though animals make the karma to be born as human?
There was once a time when both the human and animal population was small and growing.
Unless the 'souls' came from Mars, Venus or elsewhere, rebirth is an impossibility.
If I am engaged in sexual activity, I possess a certain kind of body, a body aroused physically by sexual desire. It is not an ordinary body but a sexual body. Then with the break up of that body, upon the death of sexual activity, my mind is reborn into a state of hungry ghost or even hell, craving or heart broken about that sexual activity.
If I go to war, in battle I have a certain kind of body, due to adrenalin. I kill many men, with power and fitness of body. Then with the break up of the body, I return home and suffer from post traumatic stress disorder and then commit suidice. Here, the mind is reborn in hell.
The Buddha did not lie. Please stop saying the Buddha lied.
You might be nagging but not really taking anything in. Your "tea cup" is full so nothing new can really enter.
I simply reply to your posts because for myself and others, it is "path food".
Consciousness is arising based on the six ordinary sense bases. That's all I know
But Buddhaghosa's commentary to the Mahanidhana sutta states:
Which would imply that there is a consciousness waiting to land on the womb.
Good idea
Realms in Buddhism are mere mental states.
This has already been addressed in some other thread by DD. I will quote him here:
How I see Kamma has already been addressed in my previous posts
Would you mind giving me some explanation as to how you see the DO please? Then probably I will be able to answer this
Where did I say "result of your actions come in the next life"?
If non-rebirth is anti-scientific then rebirth should be scientific. Good.
Has rebirth been scientifically proven? If so I need to see a reference and also I would beg you to tell me what you think is reborn. How is it reborn. I would like some specific explanation how it happens with some verifiable examples pls. Thank you
Have you heard of that Ian Stevenson bloke? He has a book called 20 cases suggestive of reincarnation.
If i'm correct, rebirth and reincarnation are different. Buddha has talked of rebirth (where there is no soul or consciousness that is carried on) and reincarnation is when there is such a thing.
From the way I understand it, both are possible. That's my opinion of it.
Also have a look at this, Ajahn Brahm on the issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htQ12Z2MV0Q
From the way I understand it both are irrelevant to the cessation of suffering caused by mental clinging. Also, I find it hard to understand what it is that is reborn or continues when the physical body breaks. The Buddha did not teach speculative theories. He only taught about eradicating dukkha which is verifiable in this lifetime.
I agree with that, it is irrelevant. But if it is speculation, how can you disprove something that you cannot prove, whichever way you believe in it?
Different people find comfort in believing different speculative teachings in different ways, maybe it aids in their path to the cessation of suffering. :smilec:
Check your pm pls.
If someone says the DO contains notions of rebirth and rebirth is an integral part for the cessation of suffering due to self-clinging then they are mistaken. Belief in rebirth is defiled. It entertains self-clinging. Suttas are already quoted more than once in this same thread.
I am not sure what you are asking here but Cultivation "dissolves" all illusions in the end. Even the illusion of no-rebirth and rebirth and neither rebirth or no-rebirth.
There is nothing in your statements sofar in this thread that could support such a theory. Here read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
Your statement falls under the heading:
Argument from personal incredulity
I have never in this thread said he does. If there is such a place please point it out to me so I can edit it.
I thought you just said that the above is not possible?
You said: If there is no body between the moments of conciousness then how does the physical body migrate between these moments? Or rather the defilements as you suggested that they do in this life?
Anyway it seems far fetched. I have never experienced a break up of the body. Of feeling, mental processes and so on yes. But the body changes slowly most of the time. It does not break up and dissolve until physical death. That is the common view. Even during cultivation. The perception of the body on the other hand is discrete. Was that what you were saying?
It is very hard to understand and "take in" what you are saying because. In one post you seem to claim that Buddha taught rebirth to the worldlings and then in the next you seem deny it.
Which is your view in easy yes or no. Did or did not the Buddha teach rebirth (life after death kind) to the worldlings?
Happy to oblige.
/Victor
Did you get my mail about descent into the womb? It is reasonable that they could deduce that from disecting deceaced pregnant women even in those days. But I would not know.
Where does the Buddha state that consciousness can never dependently arise without base in the sense organs of a physical body?
How would that explain the Sakadagami? Such a person has 5 fetters intact but still will need to only "break through" once? Or the Anagami? The non returner?
Will get back to you tonight on that.
I quoted you the passage. It is in this thread not far back.
That is false. You are assuming only two alternatives exist and that they are mutually exclusive. Listen to fivebells and jthel on this. We are just misunderstanding each other.
Please read this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
I do not think our points of view differ much on this really. The agnostic view is acceptable through science.
Well I do not know if there is any proof, but there is a passage in the tricycle mag where Steven Batchelor is is discussing with Thurman and they both agree that there is scientific proof of rebirth. I have not read the reffered paper myself but...
Here is the debate:
http://www.tricycle.com/feature/3857-1.html?page=0,0
look on the firts page of the debate and search for "Stevenson"
As to the rest of the questions I would not know. Sorry.
/Victor
this response to it called Nonsense in Buddhism is interesting
:coffee:
meditation dissolves defilement
the buddha called nibbana the end of defilement, the end of asava
it is a different body
when we were a child eating ice-cream, the body was in a certain way
when our mother took the ice-cream away from us & we cried, there was a different body
i would also not blame DD for how one comprehends the teachings
the buddha taught on the supramundane level as follows:
Seeing aging & death, its arising, it passing.
How does a live body see the arising of aging & death?
How does a dead body see the passing of aging & death?
How is death subject to cessation?
not just consciousness but also nama-rupa and the sense organs
obviously the buddha did not speak it
MN 38
I would suggest expressing your statement more clearly.
The Buddha explains consciousness as dependently arising based on sense organs of a physical body. He does not state that consciousness can exist without a physical body anywhere. If you can explain such a theory, give a sutta reference or prove the existence of such a consciousness, please go ahead. Otherwise it is going to be mere speculation.
As far as I know, science has not proven the existence of rebirth or given any explanation as to what it is that survives when the physical body breaks and gets reborn. If you can explain this please go ahead. I am not interested in reading some “debate” between two people in so and so magazine/website/wiki page or reading some article on egg fertilization. If you present me with solid proof which is verifiable then I will believe it. There is really no use in pointing someone to a debate when you are asked to produce proof verifiable by others.
You say that your views on rebirth is agnostic but you seem to have a hard time letting go of the rebirth believe. A person with agnostic views should understand the difference between belief and knowledge. I feel that you do believe in rebirth although you cannot explain it to yourself. But that’s ok. If you want to believe it then believe it. With time you will realize that it is not in the least related to suffering and the cessation of suffering as the Buddha explained it.
Also, this entire conversation is going around in circles. You started off with questions to which you got replies according to the suttas and verifiable facts. I think if you take some time off and read the texts we pointed you to it will be a lot more useful at this point.
the suttas consistently describe the arising of consciousness in only one way. So you're basically asking "where did the Buddha state that the Boogie Man doesn't exist?" and then shouting "Aha!" as if you've made a valid argument. You've put forth a theory and so it's up to you to prove it--
But luckily the Buddha at one time did have to address this: http://www.thisismyanmar.com/nibbana/tipitaka/mahatan1.htm
I wonder why Buddha first asked him what he meant by consciousness, rather than say "nothing traverses".
consciousness in pali is cognition. that is all
the suttas on rebirth teach a 'person' is reborn
some buddhists, including Buddhaghosa have tried to assert empty phenomena is reborn
such a view does not accord with the moral efficacy of the rebirth teachings
Those are to very different mental states but more or less the same body.
I was not asking about the supra mundane level but the mundane.
Did the Buddha teach rebirth on the mundane level to the worldlings?
You have said yourself that he did.
Since he did, obviously he believed in rebirth because the Buddha would not lie.
On this we agree that a Buddha does not lie.
So in stating that there is no rebirth you are contradicting the belief of the Buddha.
I see a problem with your non-rebirth notion other than the scientific one mentioned.
/Victor
Hmm.
Btw are you saying that Death is exempt of the anicca doctrine?
That all things have a beginning, middle and an end?
Curious
Victor
Where does the Buddha state that consciousness can never dependently arise without base in the sense organs of a physical body?
You answered
That sutta state that consciousness can never dependently arise without base in the sense organs.
There is no reference to a physical body.
Here is the sutta
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/038-mahatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.html
/Victor
The question was for Deshy but this is the explanation.
You explained that the Sotapanna will be reborn only 7 more times saying that rebirht in this context actually meant that a sotapanna has 7 more fetters to break.
I was wondering how that translates on the teaching that the Sakadagami only has one more rebirth before attaining arahanthood but still have 5 fetters and that the anagami will not return at all?
Regards
Victor
How can one even attempt to respond to this? What do you think the sense organs are?
It was about Buddhahhosas DO not Kamma. It was not important anyway.
That might be so, if you disregard the teachings of finematerial bodies or those of the formless abodes.
Where does he say that the consciousness is based on a physical body?
That is what I said. Did you read and comprehend the answer I gave you?
Do you know who Stephen Batchelor is? Never mind, it is not relevant.
Where did you get the notion that I said there is scientific proof? Or even that Science has proven rebirth at all?
I said science refutes proving a negative. Read any book or article you like if you do not want to read the wiki link I sent you.:). They all say the same.
Look like this. If I say that is is false to say that there is no rebirth according to scientific standards It does not automatically mean that it is correct by sciencetific standards to say that there is rebirth. They are two seperate thesis and must be proven apart from each other.
That is why I have no problem with the agnostic view.
That is because I am a rebirth fanatic.
I have never said I am an agnostic.
Yes this conversation does seem to move in circles.
Thank you for the suttas and links.
/Victor
Sensory organs can be part of the body of any Peta, Deva or Asura. They do not have to be physical bodies of this world.
Simple.
Sorry what are we talking about again?
/Victor
The word used in the translation is "the cause" or condition Paccaya i think. How does that translate to "physical body"?
/Victor
Seriously what is the question actually about?
The thread is about buddhism without rebirth. And suddenly I am defending a view of transmigrating consiousness. Why am I doing that?:eek:
I am getting pictures in my mind of the invisible woman walking around naked.:eek::eek: It is too late I am going to bed.
Can you pose the question anew please? What do you really want to know?
/Victor
Certainly, it would be difficult to pass cognition between objects. Then what qualities do the suttas assign to the 'person' that is reborn?
Oh, I bet you are. :eek::eek:
You asked a question and put forth nonsensical arguments and so they were addressed:
The condition of the consciousness is fabricators. That doesn't mean the"origin" of consciousness is fabricators. If so enlightened beings should lose their consciousness. Fabricators merely condition consciousness. Ignorant fabricators would condition/taint the consciousness like when you look at the sky wearing a pair of pink glasses you see a pinkish sky. Similar is the work of fabricators on consciousness.
Consciousness is the initial cognition that arises when the physical sense organs like the eye make contact with a form like a woman. The form (woman), the eye ( physical sense organ) and the cognition (consciousness) together is called contact.
The Buddha wanted us to see consciousness as arising based on sense organs of the physical body. That is why he said there are six types of consciousness as
eye-consciousness
ear-consciousness
...
mind-consciousness
Nontheless you carry on arguing that consciousness can exist without a physical body just like bhikku sathi did. :crazy:
We don't know. Probably because you are a "rebirth fanatic" desperately trying to find some solid evidence to support rebirth? This is not uncommon :cool:
The first of those was an rethorical question to Deshy. To imply that she is making the same logical mistake she made in an earlier post.
Somehow the rethorical part got lost in the posting.
The second reply was because I was tired, did not understand the question and felt generally silly. :rolleyes:
There is no way I am going to try and explain any transmigration of souls for real since I do not hold that view.
/Victor
That is the third time you assign a view to me that I do not hold.
First you wanted me to produce scientific proof about rebirht for god knows what reason. Then I was a rebirth agnostic, then I am Sati.
Whats up with that. Is my case so strong you can not find any real defect in it to critisize? :cool:
I have no idea how something migrates from life to life.
All I know is that you have agreed that the Buddha himself held that belief. Since he taught rebirth to the worldlings.
And that I have enough personal experience of rebirth and life after death that I have no doubt in my mind that there is rebirth.
As to how it works your guess is as good as mine.
/Victor
Yeah we rebirth fanatics are a silly lot. But since we have many lifes to have fun in we are like the blondes.
We just have more fun!