[KellyLynchIV]

Why should I interpret these words differently. If the Buddha states that "he will feel the result of that here and now, or in his next rebirth, or in some subsequent existence.[13] ", why would you conclude that the Buddha meant something different than what he said. He could have chosen very different words but he chose these. That's why I asked about translation.

BTW my view may not be different than yours. I've never stated that I personally believed in rebirth. I grew up knowing nothing about rebirth and have always found it difficult to accept. It's something I am trying to work through. I am looking for help, but not looking to achieve an understanding by uprooting the clear meaning of properly translated phrases of what you claim is an authentic Sutta. If there are rules of interpretation that I am not seeing then state them. If, when the Buddha states "in the next life" or in his subsequent existence, he intends something different than the most obvious meaning then state the basis for the Buddha's own use of these phrases to ordinary beings. Please address the actual words and tell me why I should not understand them to mean what they appear to mean.

I am trying to make sense of the Jataka portion of the Pali Canon, and the various other Suttas in which the Buddha appears to recount and accept past and future lives, doing so with clear and unmistaken words. Anyone can claim that each moment is a subsequent existence but this is a philosophical position which requires interpretation. The Buddha generally used words in their everyday meaning and not in some coded way. If he says "bring me a mustard seed" we should not need to speculate on why he used "mustard" as the adjective to seed and that the pungency and bitterness of mustard epitomizes the condition of suffering of all beings. We should be able to rely on the fact that the Buddha asked for a mustard seed, period. If the Buddha states that "he" will feel a result in a subsequent life we should NOT have to go through the slightest bit of "meta", wherein we resort to coded language and context to alter the obvious meaning of plain-spoken language.

If you wish to avoid the error of interpolating a continuing "I" into the mix then why not see subsequent rebirth, existences, lives, for a single being as a type of transfer of energy and pattern from something that is not physical (the formulation called "my" mind) to another similar substrate (another being's mind). We have no problem with wave theory; we know that the wave that washes ashore doesn't contain the water of the preceding wave, which produced the final one; it contains the energy distributed in a specific pattern; this is dynamic and transferable. Then it's easy to read "he will feel the result of that here and now, or in his next rebirth, or in some subsequent existence.[13] " as referencing the experience of a merely ascribed "self" that experiences certain things due to the previous actions of some merely ascribed self.

In the end it's better to practice as if this in our only life. It's better not to speculate about past and future lives; it's also essential not to ignore the words of the Buddha because he didn't speak them idly or casually. They all were spoken for a purpose. In this case the purpose of the Sutta I quoted is very clear. Kamma/karma is certain, the time of ripening of result is uncertain; can kill people, use harsh speech, lie, steal, etc. in this life and have a comfortable existence in the next; you can serve people your entire life and have a miserable existence in the next. Those who only look a short way down the road (in this Sutta specifically that means the next life) and either see a definite connection with immediate actions or see no connection between actions and consequences are misstating the principles of Kamma, because the time of ripening is uncertain. So it's simply too difficult for me to read this entire Sutta as metaphor.