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.
I don't want to make this in a sutta vs sutta fight or "you misread this" blabla kind of stuff, because that is obviously a useless way to have a proper discussion and of these kind of discussions thre are already way too much in this world. I have read various translations of certain suttas and can only come to the conclusion that the Buddha actually talked about rebirth as in rebirth between multiple lifes, not rebirth in this moment or whatever. Some of you obviously didn't read it like that. And that ok with me, but claiming I misinterpret is actually saying you might have done the same. DD, with all respect, you already seem to need to quote a lot of suttas to make your point, that maybe says something about looking for confirmation of your views.
So to try and start a more useful conversation which might give rise to actual insights instead of arguing for the sake of being right: To those who seem to be claiming rebirth isn't taught by the buddha: (Why) are you afraid to die?
If you believe in emptiness you can find Nirvana really easily, you know :crazy:
If I didn't believe in rebirth I would find out at what time the next train leaves..
I guess a lot of problems come up with concept of rebirth.
Like what is being reborn? A soul? Our nature? Our essence? We don't have essences I recall. We are all empty and even that emptiness is empty. Isn't the Buddha directly pointing out that we don't have an Atman. Our Self is devoid of any substantial existence.
What created a soul or our nature? Then it is a question of a creator God. Who created God then? Ad Infinitum. Then it goes: how can nothing become something and how can something become nothing?
How does nothing turn into something. It is logically impossible.
Scientifically speaking just think about the law of conservation. energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed. So when we die, we become the soil and the water in us becomes the rain, etc. DEAD PEOPLE LITERALLY RAIN ON US.
To see this inter connectivity in life is to see that all life is empty. and so on and so on.
IMO: rebirth is an impossible notion to prove or disprove. just like the notion of god.
A somewhat similar point to sabre's came to mind. It strikes me that Asian Buddhists generally accept rebirth. It's the Westerners who have a problem with it, some of them. I would guess that the only people arguing the point are Westerners, who tend to look to the suttras to find what they want to find, to bolster whichever is their view. Which ultimately seems a bit silly, like a dog chasing its tail. Why not just respect each other's choice to accept rebirth or not, without feeling the need to lob suttra-grenades at each other? Chill, people.
@taiyaki, Consciousness itself is awareness (of sight, sound, smells, tastes, bodily sensations, and "mind"/thoughts/etc). Awareness is actually the better word IMHO.
So consciousness/awareness is that which is reincarnated based on our karma. In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism. If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
I guess a lot of problems come up with concept of rebirth.
Like what is being reborn? A soul? Our nature? Our essence? We don't have essences I recall. We are all empty and even that emptiness is empty. Isn't the Buddha directly pointing out that we don't have an Atman. Our Self is devoid of any substantial existence.
It's just our instances of mind extend into non-material or more refined material realms, not that there is an inherent atman. Also the elements that constitute a body have non-material nature as well.
What created a soul or our nature? Then it is a question of a creator God. Who created God then? Ad Infinitum. Then it goes: how can nothing become something and how can something become nothing?
It has nothing to do with god, our mind streams have no beginning nor end, we just decide if we are liberated or bound and you have to understand what the formless jhanas have to do with the mind and it's becoming, or holding the seeds of becoming.
How does nothing turn into something. It is logically impossible.
There was never an inherent nothing.
Scientifically speaking just think about the law of conservation. energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed. So when we die, we become the soil and the water in us becomes the rain, etc. DEAD PEOPLE LITERALLY RAIN ON US.
To see this inter connectivity in life is to see that all life is empty. and so on and so on.
IMO: rebirth is an impossible notion to prove or disprove. just like the notion of god.
It's not impossible to prove to yourself, not at all. You can understand data directly that reveals directly it's relative reality. There are also those little kids who remember their past lives without any parental conditioning towards the fact.
So consciousness/awareness is that which is reincarnated based on our karma. In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism. If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
Instances of consciousness, as consciousness is not an inherent non-thing either. It's also based upon the fermentation of elements, which have both non-material or refined material and even denser dimensions of manifesting through (as in classical heaven/hell realms).
@taiyaki, Consciousness itself is awareness (of sight, sound, smells, tastes, bodily sensations, and "mind"/thoughts/etc). Awareness is actually the better word IMHO.
Awareness is a product of consciousness, as one can be conscious but not aware. So, they are different but connected. Consciousness is your sentience, and awareness is your active potential of being conscious.
May I suggest keeping the discussion about what actually goes on from one life to the other in another thread? Might make things a little less messy.
So consciousness/awareness is that which is reincarnated based on our karma. In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism. If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
That's how I see it too. Rebirth is a cornerstone in Buddhism for me. Without rebirth, Buddhism would become nihilism. And I feel inside it is good to help others and be kind, so I realised nihilism isn't true.
If one says rebirth is 'just there' for the sake of morality, why even be moral? Because then you can be rude to everybody, it doesn't matter anyway. They'll die just the same. And you will too.
Nihilism, that would actually be great. Just die and then.. there is nothing! You've found nirvana. Why even bother to meditate if you can find nirvana that easily. But sadly it makes more sense that there is rebirth. So, rebirth isn't implemented in Buddhism just for morality. And it also hasn't been part of all major sects for thousands of years just because it was cultural.
That's how I see it too. Without reincarnation, Buddhism would become nihilism. And I feel inside it is good to help others and be kind, so I know nihilism isn't true.
is consciousness the function of higher brain or is consciousness outside of brain. like the mind is walking and consciousness is the legs?
i consider mind to be thoughts, feelings, and beliefs. basically all concepts/words. and i consider consciousness as the awareness behind the mind.
the mind being a tool a slave and the real master is consciousness, which is non local.
This is a GREAT question, Tai, and I think SherabDorje is right, it deserves its own thread. AFAIK, scientists haven't explored the difference between "mind" and "consciousness" (if there is one). All I know is that research has been done that confirms that mind (or...whatever) is non-local.
So consciousness/awareness is that which is reincarnated based on our karma. In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism. If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
I think you've got it, Tai. Karma attaches to consciousness, so it rides into the new body along with consciousness. (Distilling info from previous threads, here.) They are a package.
Karma is real it is how things are so it is an existent thing. Just like the sun is a part of the material universe and the earth rotates around it. :rarr:
AFAIK, scientists haven't explored the difference between "mind" and "consciousness" (if there is one).
See the work of Francisco Varela, especially as described in the book "Destructive Emotions- How Can We Overcome Them?" with HHDL and Daniel Goleman of the Mind and Life Institute.
I think there's a difference between mind and awareness or consciousness and awareness, as it's only awareness that can delve into the unconscious, or collective unconscious, or collective awarenesses.
Everything is a mental formation. The insights gained from meditation are a mental formation. All experiences become mental formations as soon as they become memory. Teachings are, or become, mental formations in our minds. So what's the point of meditating, studying or gaining insight in any form? And what's the point of pointing out that these are mental formations, in a discussion of how people arrive at their "belief" or knowledge of rebirth? I don't see how it's helpful or even particularly relevant.
I think the OP's questions are as simple as can be: "Do Buddhists Believe in Rebirth?" Generally, yes, except some of the Western ones. "Isn't belief in rebirth like Christian belief in god?" Well, insofar as it usually involves faith (more mental formations), yes. Some people are ok with faith. Others aren't. Some like to arrive at their insights re: rebirth via meditation, others via analysis and reflection (Thailand Tom), others by direct experience (which stores in the memory). All mental formations. So what?
,"the past is the past. what is true yesterday might not be true today"
As I mentioned in an earlier post......... The Buddha said (MN 131):
"You shouldn't chase after the past or place expectations on the future. What is past is left behind. The future is as yet unreached. Whatever quality is present you clearly see right there, right there.".
Well, guess what? When someone asks a question about believing in rebirth, it's necessary for some to discuss their insights, however they come about having them. (Otherwise there wouldn't be much of a discussion.) This doesn't mean anyone is clinging to the past. Memory is a tool that allows us to store information, and share it with others, or use it when we need it to accomplish a task. Are we really going to get hung up about sharing memories when appropriate to help people advance their understanding?
Karma is not scientific materialism. It is not the way things are ultimately. Look at your meditation experience and find if thought has any continuity.
If you have a line made of points. And the points have no dimensions (madyamaka division of time, space, degrees)... how is there continuity?
Only are thinking provides continuity and it is an appearance.
Because my Lama says! :rarr: :grr:
PS Laws of physics cannot be proven apriori and may not apply to all universes or spaces conceptual or otherwise. Until an infinite amount of data is gathered!
Schrodingers wave functions versus Dirac pointers are just models that fit observations. Games you play to make predictions. First they are experiential. 'Physical' and 'reality' are layers of ideation (self qualities) that we additionally tack onto the suchness of the observation emergent experience.
Well, guess what? When someone asks a question about believing in rebirth, it's necessary for some to discuss their insights, however they come about having them. (Otherwise there wouldn't be much of a discussion.) This doesn't mean anyone is clinging to the past. Memory is a tool that allows us to store information, and share it with others, or use it when we need it to accomplish a task. Are we really going to get hung up about sharing memories when appropriate to help people advance their understanding?
You have misunderstood Dakini. Just relax a little and let go.
Karma, cause and effect, and mental labels are a part of relative truths of the two truths which are a traditional teaching. Though there are problems with 'two truths' it is a skillful teaching and without attachment it can be useful.
'sun' 'east' 'physical' 'reality' are mental labels that speak of words pointing to observations and the connectivity. The connectivity is all relative. The cause and effect is a function of relative natures. No absolute laws of physics. Even the 3 laws of thermo.
For example stone is soft relative to diamond. Hard relative to skin. Skin is hard relative to butter. Butter is hard relative to water (at slow velocities). 'hard' is a 'mental' label describing phenominon.
There is no reference point (self, origin) but there is dependent origination and relative (but no reference point ) connections. All is dependently arisen like a conjurers trick. That is why we don't have to grasp to the skandas. Liberation upon contact.
See the work of Francisco Varela, especially as described in the book "Destructive Emotions- How Can We Overcome Them?" with HHDL and Daniel Goleman of the Mind and Life Institute. And start a new thread for the topic, please.
Karma is not scientific materialism. It is not the way things are ultimately. Look at your meditation experience and find if thought has any continuity.
Dear Jeffrey,
I honestly don't get your point because all you are saying is correct, but doesn't have to do with karma. Karma and thoughts are something different. Thoughts are an effect of karma, but if there are no thoughts it doesn't mean there is no karma anymore. I'm not saying this because of some kind of lama or Buddha, I experienced it myself. Without any thoughts you can still feel messed up, agitated etc, because there is still some kind of inclination to something that is programmed inside your mind sometime before. Overcoming these imprints is letting go of attachments which are there and are called 'bad karma'.
It's like gravity. You are kind of stating it is just a mental object. Of course, what exactly is gravity and what causes it is still a bit of uncertain, but one thing is for sure: things do fall down, so the effect can be described with gravity. To say things might one day fall upwards in another universe is a philosophical idea that doesn't get you anywhere. Well, maybe it can get you to a mental-institution if you really see things flying up Or in a UFO club
Anywa, it is the same with karma. How it works exactly is probably impossible to understand, but it describes a behavior that is describable like a physical law.
If fact, the Kalama Sutta itself mentions the benefits of Dhamma for when one believes in rebirth and also for when one does not believe in rebirth.
Rebirth belief is not compulsory in Buddhism. It is a choice.
Hey DD,
You are right of course, but I'd like to say one thing I think is quite important.
You can't choose to believe rebirth yes or no. But you can choose to hold on to a certain believe. Holding on to beliefs is an attachment and can really hold you down. If your view is wrong, the entire 8-fold path might get stuck. And that would be a shame, now wouldn't it?
So this goes for both camps in the rebirth vs no-rebirth "fight". It's a shame if you hold on to your view that there is nothing after this life because science hasn't proven it for example. But it is equally a shame if you hold on to your view because you want there to be something more than this.
Same goes for karma. You can find the truth through insights, not by only talking about it and rationalizing certain ideas to fit your view. That's why I tried to get this thread out of the sutta vs sutta fight. That doesn't help anyone.
I kind of see your point saber. But remember the bottom line is the mind. You observed karma agitation in your meditation with your mind. You observe gravity with your mind. And the mind is spacious awareness engendering a sensitive response. The awakening doesn't belong to a self. The lineages of the buddha are messages from this direction of awakening drawing us.
The bottom line isn't the mind, the bottom line is nature. If there was no person alive to see gravity, it would still be there. A mind to perceive it or not, that doesn't matter. Apples don't only fall out of the tree when there is someone to see it happen.
Buddhism seems way too familiar to find a more rational reason for its familiarity than rebirth. I have had some situations where I've known things I've never been exposed to. I can't remember any details of any past lives, though I have had some dreams that back up the possibility. All circumstantial but enough for me. Its difficult to put an evolutionary spin on these experiences IMO. Cheers, WK ======== Hope this works as its my first post from droid.
If fact, the Kalama Sutta itself mentions the benefits of Dhamma for when one believes in rebirth and also for when one does not believe in rebirth.
Rebirth belief is not compulsory in Buddhism. It is a choice.
Hey DD,
You are right of course, but I'd like to say one thing I think is quite important.
You can't choose to believe rebirth yes or no. But you can choose to hold on to a certain believe. Holding on to beliefs is an attachment and can really hold you down. If your view is wrong, the entire 8-fold path might get stuck. And that would be a shame, now wouldn't it?
So this goes for both camps in the rebirth vs no-rebirth "fight". It's a shame if you hold on to your view that there is nothing after this life because science hasn't proven it for example. But it is equally a shame if you hold on to your view because you want there to be something more than this.
Same goes for karma. You can find the truth through insights, not by only talking about it and rationalizing certain ideas to fit your view. That's why I tried to get this thread out of the sutta vs sutta fight. That doesn't help anyone.
Love, Sabre :vimp:
Just to clarify, I haven't been in any 'camp' in this thread. What I have tried to point out, probably unsuccessfully but certainly without agitation or intention to "fight", is that continually speculating about whether there is or isn't rebirth, is irrelevant to my practice in the here and now in this present lifetime. Naturally I wish everyone well, whatever view they choose to hold on to. Here's a quote from Ajahn Sumedho (an abbot and teacher with the Theravada Thai Forest tradition) in his book 'The Sound of Silence', :
"The historical Buddha refered to previous lives in the scriptures and things like this, but for me these things are speculative. Maybe you can remember previous lives, but I have no such memory. So all I know is from the here and now. We’re talking about direct knowing rather than Buddhist theory or Buddhist doctrine."
So to conclude this post...May all beings abide in well being, in freedom from hostility, freedom from ill will, and in freedom from anxiety. May they all released from suffering.
I understand your views and although I quote certain people, I'm generally not talking to anyone specifically. And certainly not just to convince them or anything. There are people reading who aren't responding and there will be more in the future. So I'm talking just in general to 'the world'. Just sharing my view, not to be right, but maybe it helps somebody. If not, that's fine too. And know I may have used some exaggerated words like "fight" and "camp" to make my point. That's also party because I'm not native in English and sometimes the right words don't come up. It's just a debate about certain views, of course. That would have been a better description.
Anyway, whatever helps you in your practice is the best thing of course.
I know my way of stating things can be a bit to-the-point and perhaps a bit harsh sometimes but I guess that's just me. If I have to include in every post "I'm not saying this just to convince you, this is just my view, see what you do with it" that would be kind of tiring.
Back to the topic of rebirth! Threads derail quite easily on this board. :P
I think so much emphasis on emptyness comes from Nagaryuna, not Shayamuni... and that rebirth was considered as a fact (although different from early hinduism concept of reincarnation).
I think ... that rebirth was considered as a fact (although different from early hinduism concept of reincarnation).
How was it different from the early hindu concept of reincarnation?
The Buddha revealed how non-linear it is, that causes for rebirth can be dormant and come to fruition due to secondary causes and conditions in different lives.
So consciousness/awareness is that which is reincarnated based on our karma. In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism. If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
Hi taiyaki, it seems to me, as you disucussed earlier - goodness has it's own reward ... can be seen in our lives, moment to moment.
Comments
I don't want to make this in a sutta vs sutta fight or "you misread this" blabla kind of stuff, because that is obviously a useless way to have a proper discussion and of these kind of discussions thre are already way too much in this world. I have read various translations of certain suttas and can only come to the conclusion that the Buddha actually talked about rebirth as in rebirth between multiple lifes, not rebirth in this moment or whatever. Some of you obviously didn't read it like that. And that ok with me, but claiming I misinterpret is actually saying you might have done the same. DD, with all respect, you already seem to need to quote a lot of suttas to make your point, that maybe says something about looking for confirmation of your views.
So to try and start a more useful conversation which might give rise to actual insights instead of arguing for the sake of being right: To those who seem to be claiming rebirth isn't taught by the buddha: (Why) are you afraid to die?
If you believe in emptiness you can find Nirvana really easily, you know :crazy:
If I didn't believe in rebirth I would find out at what time the next train leaves..
Like what is being reborn? A soul? Our nature? Our essence?
We don't have essences I recall. We are all empty and even that emptiness is empty.
Isn't the Buddha directly pointing out that we don't have an Atman. Our Self is devoid of any substantial existence.
What created a soul or our nature? Then it is a question of a creator God. Who created God then? Ad Infinitum.
Then it goes: how can nothing become something and how can something become nothing?
How does nothing turn into something. It is logically impossible.
Scientifically speaking just think about the law of conservation. energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed.
So when we die, we become the soil and the water in us becomes the rain, etc. DEAD PEOPLE LITERALLY RAIN ON US.
To see this inter connectivity in life is to see that all life is empty. and so on and so on.
IMO: rebirth is an impossible notion to prove or disprove. just like the notion of god.
Its sometimes best to just let it all go - and not 'believe' in anything.
.
is consciousness the function of higher brain or is consciousness outside of brain.
like the mind is walking and consciousness is the legs?
i consider mind to be thoughts, feelings, and beliefs. basically all concepts/words.
and i consider consciousness as the awareness behind the mind.
the mind being a tool a slave and the real master is consciousness, which is non local.
like the mind is walking and consciousness is the legs?"
Mind and Body interpenetrate.
by the way how do you make a quotation (like everyone else) in vanilla forum format?
In a way it seems reincarnation is a necessity in Buddhism.
If there was no reincarnation then what's the point of morality? What the point in anything?
If one says rebirth is 'just there' for the sake of morality, why even be moral? Because then you can be rude to everybody, it doesn't matter anyway. They'll die just the same. And you will too.
Nihilism, that would actually be great. Just die and then.. there is nothing! You've found nirvana. Why even bother to meditate if you can find nirvana that easily. But sadly it makes more sense that there is rebirth. So, rebirth isn't implemented in Buddhism just for morality. And it also hasn't been part of all major sects for thousands of years just because it was cultural.
Sabre
AFAIK, scientists haven't explored the difference between "mind" and "consciousness" (if there is one).
See the work of Francisco Varela, especially as described in the book "Destructive Emotions- How Can We Overcome Them?" with HHDL and Daniel Goleman of the Mind and Life Institute.
And start a new thread for the topic, please.
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/9405/consciousness#Item_2
I think the OP's questions are as simple as can be: "Do Buddhists Believe in Rebirth?" Generally, yes, except some of the Western ones. "Isn't belief in rebirth like Christian belief in god?" Well, insofar as it usually involves faith (more mental formations), yes. Some people are ok with faith. Others aren't. Some like to arrive at their insights re: rebirth via meditation, others via analysis and reflection (Thailand Tom), others by direct experience (which stores in the memory). All mental formations. So what?
Karma is not scientific materialism. It is not the way things are ultimately. Look at your meditation experience and find if thought has any continuity.
If you have a line made of points. And the points have no dimensions (madyamaka division of time, space, degrees)... how is there continuity?
Only are thinking provides continuity and it is an appearance.
Because my Lama says! :rarr: :grr:
PS Laws of physics cannot be proven apriori and may not apply to all universes or spaces conceptual or otherwise. Until an infinite amount of data is gathered!
Schrodingers wave functions versus Dirac pointers are just models that fit observations. Games you play to make predictions. First they are experiential. 'Physical' and 'reality' are layers of ideation (self qualities) that we additionally tack onto the suchness of the observation emergent experience.
.
'sun' 'east' 'physical' 'reality' are mental labels that speak of words pointing to observations and the connectivity. The connectivity is all relative. The cause and effect is a function of relative natures. No absolute laws of physics. Even the 3 laws of thermo.
For example stone is soft relative to diamond. Hard relative to skin. Skin is hard relative to butter. Butter is hard relative to water (at slow velocities). 'hard' is a 'mental' label describing phenominon.
There is no reference point (self, origin) but there is dependent origination and relative (but no reference point
I was referring to a 'mental birth'. This can certainly serve as an object of insight.
As for physical birth, I am not exactly sure how this can be seen directly (here, now, today) so to serve as an object of insight.
Kind regards
See the work of Francisco Varela, especially as described in the book "Destructive Emotions- How Can We Overcome Them?" with HHDL and Daniel Goleman of the Mind and Life Institute. And start a new thread for the topic, please.
One has been started, did you see, SD?
I honestly don't get your point because all you are saying is correct, but doesn't have to do with karma. Karma and thoughts are something different. Thoughts are an effect of karma, but if there are no thoughts it doesn't mean there is no karma anymore. I'm not saying this because of some kind of lama or Buddha, I experienced it myself. Without any thoughts you can still feel messed up, agitated etc, because there is still some kind of inclination to something that is programmed inside your mind sometime before. Overcoming these imprints is letting go of attachments which are there and are called 'bad karma'.
It's like gravity. You are kind of stating it is just a mental object. Of course, what exactly is gravity and what causes it is still a bit of uncertain, but one thing is for sure: things do fall down, so the effect can be described with gravity. To say things might one day fall upwards in another universe is a philosophical idea that doesn't get you anywhere. Well, maybe it can get you to a mental-institution if you really see things flying up
Anywa, it is the same with karma. How it works exactly is probably impossible to understand, but it describes a behavior that is describable like a physical law.
Love,
Sabre :vimp:
You are right of course, but I'd like to say one thing I think is quite important.
You can't choose to believe rebirth yes or no. But you can choose to hold on to a certain believe. Holding on to beliefs is an attachment and can really hold you down. If your view is wrong, the entire 8-fold path might get stuck. And that would be a shame, now wouldn't it?
So this goes for both camps in the rebirth vs no-rebirth "fight". It's a shame if you hold on to your view that there is nothing after this life because science hasn't proven it for example. But it is equally a shame if you hold on to your view because you want there to be something more than this.
Same goes for karma. You can find the truth through insights, not by only talking about it and rationalizing certain ideas to fit your view. That's why I tried to get this thread out of the sutta vs sutta fight. That doesn't help anyone.
Love,
Sabre :vimp:
About time we reach a collective nirvana!
Cheers, WK
========
Hope this works as its my first post from droid.
Just to clarify, I haven't been in any 'camp' in this thread. What I have tried to point out, probably unsuccessfully but certainly without agitation or intention to "fight", is that continually speculating about whether there is or isn't rebirth, is irrelevant to my practice in the here and now in this present lifetime.
Naturally I wish everyone well, whatever view they choose to hold on to.
Here's a quote from Ajahn Sumedho (an abbot and teacher with the Theravada Thai Forest tradition) in his book 'The Sound of Silence', :
"The historical Buddha refered to previous lives in the scriptures and things like this, but for me these things are speculative. Maybe you can remember previous lives, but I have no such memory. So all I know is from the here and now. We’re talking about direct knowing rather than Buddhist theory or Buddhist doctrine."
So to conclude this post...May all beings abide in well being, in freedom from hostility, freedom from ill will, and in freedom from anxiety. May they all released from suffering.
/\
I'm sorry if you feel offended in any way.
I understand your views and although I quote certain people, I'm generally not talking to anyone specifically. And certainly not just to convince them or anything. There are people reading who aren't responding and there will be more in the future. So I'm talking just in general to 'the world'. Just sharing my view, not to be right, but maybe it helps somebody. If not, that's fine too. And know I may have used some exaggerated words like "fight" and "camp" to make my point. That's also party because I'm not native in English and sometimes the right words don't come up. It's just a debate about certain views, of course. That would have been a better description.
Anyway, whatever helps you in your practice is the best thing of course.
I know my way of stating things can be a bit to-the-point and perhaps a bit harsh sometimes but I guess that's just me. If I have to include in every post "I'm not saying this just to convince you, this is just my view, see what you do with it" that would be kind of tiring.
Back to the topic of rebirth! Threads derail quite easily on this board. :P
Sabre :vimp: