DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - The Questions of King Milinda and rebirth

**VtLe67WR** · 11-01-2011, 07:22 PM

Maybe this is the main aspect to be considered. As far as I have understood, what we are is a compound of the five khandas which in the unaware mind takes them as a self as it happens with the six senses where the unaware mind thinks, for example, that the eye is myself. Same happens with the mind, mind contact and mind consciousness taken as self.

Sounds like a good way to phrase it to me.

I think that the idea of stream of consciousness has never been taught in the [main?] Nikayas. What I see are moments not a flow. Very tiny moments of consciousness, its object and its sense organ: An idea-the mind-contact=consciousness. Right View or Samadhitti is developed to contemplate that moments. An idea arise and fade with no trace in our mind until we grasp, crave and cling. IMO, there is no such thing as a stream. I agree. It's a metaphor. Streams aren't genuine entities any more than people.

After the disruption of the body, where there is no more contact of the sense organ with its object, consciousness ceases. Or, where does such a stream goes? Where does a song go when it ends?

Again, it's just a metaphor. Not to be taken literally.

The case of the poem... The poem is an idea, be it written or be it spoken, that makes contact with the sense organ called mind where this contact is the birthplace of mind consciousness of the poem which can be taken as mine or my self which can lead to the idea of a flow.

What is felt by others are the consequences of actions but once a person has gone there is no way that the death person can still act over others. Or am I wrong? A person has hurt you in the past. The person harm your feelings and you have cling into such feeling tightly. The person is gone to another country or has died. That person can not harm you any more. Where the harm is, is in the mind that has cling tightly to the feeling of having being harmed.[/quote]

No, a dead person is no longer capable of creating new phenomena that could affect anything, as far as I know. Like you said, we harm ourselves by clinging to past experience and recreating the harm in our minds.

Consequences of past actions that will be experienced by others. Yes.

I think we are subject to consequences of past actions. Isn't this slightly different: actions from consequences? I think that's what the sutta is calling rebirth instead of transmigration. The actions of the teacher who taught the poem having consequences on the student, who subsequently tells the poem to others, etc, etc.

Once the person that loved me has gone there is no more love from that loved person. Just the feeling of having being loved and, IMO, the clinging to this feeling can lead to the ideas of "streams of consciousness" and other speculative issues. I think "stream of consciousness" describes something a little different. Keep in mind that it is a metaphor, not intended to claim that there is actually a "stream" that really exists somewhere. Present conditions are brought about by past conditions, and future conditions arise from the present ones. There is a quasi-causal continuum of phenomena, but phenomena are not entities. The mind evolved to be what is is because it helped our ancestors survive. The mind is less concerned with truth than survival. A useful fiction will survive as long as it aids survival and reproductive competitiveness. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of understanding what the mind is doing and seeing the fiction for what it is, I think. And I think that's what the Buddha was trying to teach us how to do.

11-01-2011, 07:22 PM	#10
VtLe67WR Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 435 Senior Member	Maybe this is the main aspect to be considered. As far as I have understood, what we are is a compound of the five khandas which in the unaware mind takes them as a self as it happens with the six senses where the unaware mind thinks, for example, that the eye is myself. Same happens with the mind, mind contact and mind consciousness taken as self. Sounds like a good way to phrase it to me. I think that the idea of stream of consciousness has never been taught in the [main?] Nikayas. What I see are moments not a flow. Very tiny moments of consciousness, its object and its sense organ: An idea-the mind-contact=consciousness. Right View or Samadhitti is developed to contemplate that moments. An idea arise and fade with no trace in our mind until we grasp, crave and cling. IMO, there is no such thing as a stream. I agree. It's a metaphor. Streams aren't genuine entities any more than people. After the disruption of the body, where there is no more contact of the sense organ with its object, consciousness ceases. Or, where does such a stream goes? Where does a song go when it ends? Again, it's just a metaphor. Not to be taken literally. The case of the poem... The poem is an idea, be it written or be it spoken, that makes contact with the sense organ called mind where this contact is the birthplace of mind consciousness of the poem which can be taken as mine or my self which can lead to the idea of a flow. What is felt by others are the consequences of actions but once a person has gone there is no way that the death person can still act over others. Or am I wrong? A person has hurt you in the past. The person harm your feelings and you have cling into such feeling tightly. The person is gone to another country or has died. That person can not harm you any more. Where the harm is, is in the mind that has cling tightly to the feeling of having being harmed.[/quote] No, a dead person is no longer capable of creating new phenomena that could affect anything, as far as I know. Like you said, we harm ourselves by clinging to past experience and recreating the harm in our minds. Consequences of past actions that will be experienced by others. Yes. I think we are subject to consequences of past actions. Isn't this slightly different: actions from consequences? I think that's what the sutta is calling rebirth instead of transmigration. The actions of the teacher who taught the poem having consequences on the student, who subsequently tells the poem to others, etc, etc. Once the person that loved me has gone there is no more love from that loved person. Just the feeling of having being loved and, IMO, the clinging to this feeling can lead to the ideas of "streams of consciousness" and other speculative issues. I think "stream of consciousness" describes something a little different. Keep in mind that it is a metaphor, not intended to claim that there is actually a "stream" that really exists somewhere. Present conditions are brought about by past conditions, and future conditions arise from the present ones. There is a quasi-causal continuum of phenomena, but phenomena are not entities. The mind evolved to be what is is because it helped our ancestors survive. The mind is less concerned with truth than survival. A useful fiction will survive as long as it aids survival and reproductive competitiveness. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of understanding what the mind is doing and seeing the fiction for what it is, I think. And I think that's what the Buddha was trying to teach us how to do.
	Quote