DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - "the consciousness that is generated from previous lives"

**CializCialiscsqw** · 09-24-2011, 06:06 AM

I don't think so. Sati's heresy lay in claiming "this same consciousness" transmigrates from life to life -- i.e. that consciousness is some sort of permanent entity.

That is an often-quoted and commonly-held misconception, but that is not at all what the Buddha objects to in the sutta. He does not say, "have I not taught that consciousness is impermanent?" and then go on about how "consciousness" carries the results of actions from life to life, etc, like rebirthers would have it.

The Buddha's objection is to the whole shebang, and he immediately goes into a long and detailed explanation of his the six forms of consciousness as sense awareness through each of the sense doors.

Ajahn Sucitto speaks of consciousness being "generated" from previous lives; in other words, because of a causal relationship. In a similar way, the 5-year-old "me" gave rise to the 20-year-old "me", and eventually the current 45-year-old "me", but the process doesn't require an Atman. It can be explained via causality and dependent origination. So "generated" actually strikes me as a fairly appropriate word. That is also an often-repeated pseudo-argument, but the causal relationship between the young me and the older me does not provide or support a claim of any sort of mechanism of continuity from one life to another.

There may be good reasons for skepticism about rebirth, but purported conflict with MN 38 isn't one of them -- in my opinion. Sure it is. One has to read the whole sutta, rather than equivocating over a single word or repeating what one reads on DW.

09-24-2011, 06:06 AM	#10
CializCialiscsqw Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 395 Senior Member	I don't think so. Sati's heresy lay in claiming "this same consciousness" transmigrates from life to life -- i.e. that consciousness is some sort of permanent entity. That is an often-quoted and commonly-held misconception, but that is not at all what the Buddha objects to in the sutta. He does not say, "have I not taught that consciousness is impermanent?" and then go on about how "consciousness" carries the results of actions from life to life, etc, like rebirthers would have it. The Buddha's objection is to the whole shebang, and he immediately goes into a long and detailed explanation of his the six forms of consciousness as sense awareness through each of the sense doors. Ajahn Sucitto speaks of consciousness being "generated" from previous lives; in other words, because of a causal relationship. In a similar way, the 5-year-old "me" gave rise to the 20-year-old "me", and eventually the current 45-year-old "me", but the process doesn't require an Atman. It can be explained via causality and dependent origination. So "generated" actually strikes me as a fairly appropriate word. That is also an often-repeated pseudo-argument, but the causal relationship between the young me and the older me does not provide or support a claim of any sort of mechanism of continuity from one life to another. There may be good reasons for skepticism about rebirth, but purported conflict with MN 38 isn't one of them -- in my opinion. Sure it is. One has to read the whole sutta, rather than equivocating over a single word or repeating what one reads on DW.
	Quote