[j2Y6Ysmb]

My dear friends,

There is a simple question here,''is rebirth an attachment or not?''To me, to believe rebirth of a person after he/she has has passed away clearly is an attachment. Because such a unnatural phenomenon is not possible. However if rebirth is not used in this sense, and if it is not a personal one, then I have a right to ask what is it then?

With love,

[engideNedmupe]

Rebirth is the result of attachment. No attachments, no rebirth (i.e. no fuel for continuation in samsara).

One thing that is sometimes not clear to newcomers: rebirth in Buddhism is not actually a good thing. The goal is not to be reborn. If one can't meet that goal (because it is difficult...requiring completion of the eightfold path), one at least strives to avoid an unfavorable rebirth.

[spoddersedpn]

Hello Bothi,

I have always thought that rebirth (as reincarnation) are an attachment. The kind of rebirth that Buddha taught is about the Birth of the sense of a self many times by the untamed mind:

'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?'

Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

"Sabbasava Sutta" Even this, there are some Buddhists that believe in rebirth but personally non of them have given a clear explanation of it, ending always in weak speculations, strange stories and highly metaphysical mind adventures... all because of craving, wandering of mind, wilderness of views... clinging to the aggregates.

[furillo]

There is a simple question here,''is rebirth an attachment or not?''To me, to believe rebirth of a person after he/she has has passed away clearly is an attachment. Because such a unnatural phenomenon is not possible. However if rebirth is not used in this sense, and if it is not a personal one, then I have a right to ask what is it then?

dear Bothi

the scriptures show the Buddha taught:

1. rebirth belief is an attachment; however

2. rebirth belief also sides with merit or motivation to do good karma

imo, Buddha had one goal, which was to help free human beings from suffering

one experience which generates suffering in ordinary (unenlightened) people is death

so, imo, believing in rebirth can help ordinary people free their minds from suffering in relation to death

often, ordinary people do not devote time & practise to feeling at peace with the realities of impermanence, death, not-self & emptiness

kind regards

element


[Buddha said:]

And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the other worlds. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the others after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.

And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the strength of wisdom, analysis of realities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent [lokuttara], a factor of the path.

Maha-cattarisaka Sutta: The Great Forty

acquisitions = 'upadi'
attachment = 'upadana'
synonyms

[P3bWjm1j]

There is a simple question here,''is rebirth an attachment or not?''To me, to believe rebirth of a person after he/she has has passed away clearly is an attachment. Because such a unnatural phenomenon is not possible. However if rebirth is not used in this sense, and if it is not a personal one, then I have a right to ask what is it then?

again, if we wish to develop right understanding, it is important to see the Buddha taught from compassion (rather than from pure logic)

in Theravada Buddhism, it is taught there is two kinds of Dhamma: (1) lokiya (worldly) dhamma; and (2) lokuttara (transcendent) dhamma

lokiya dhamma is for ordinary people. teachings about honoring mother & father, good & bad karma, rebirth, etc, are lokiya dhamma

lokuttara dhamma is for Awakening-Enlightenment. the word 'lokuatta' literally means 'beyond the world' or 'above the world'

teachings on the four noble truths, the three characteristics, dependant origination, emptiness, the elements, etc, are lokuttara dhamma

****

in the original scriptures, we can rarely find the buddha teaching lokiya dhamma and lokuttara dhamma together

but later buddhists created their own teachings to mix lokiya dhamma & lokuttara dhamma together

for example, many famous buddhist scholars, such as the Theravadin Buddhaghosa, taught 'empty dhammas' cycle thru the rounds of 'rebirth'

or some Mahayanans taught 'samsara is nirvana' or introduced an 8th kind of consciousness

or both Theravadins and Mahayanans created an absurd & illogical theory of Dependent Origination over three life times

but buddha did not teach like this

****

buddha, for the most part, taught lokiya dhamma to ordinary people and lokuttara dhamma to enlightenment students

buddha kept lokiya dhamma and lokuttara dhamma separate

so it is important to decide what kind of buddhism we wish to study & develop conviction to

if the difference between lokiya dhamma & lokuttara dhamma cannot be understood, then understanding Buddhism may be difficult

kind regards

[Brewpralgar]

buddha taught lokiya dhamma to ordinary people and lokuttara dhamma to enlightenment students

buddha kept lokiya dhamma and lokuttara dhamma separate

so it is important to decide what kind of buddhism we wish to study & realise

if the difference between lokiya dhamma and lokuttara dhamma cannot be understood, then understanding Buddhism may be difficult

kind regards

Thanks for this Element. It is more clear why some Buddhists are convinced about rebirth and the convenience of having lokiya and lokuttara separate. Brings more insight to why and from where some are rebirth believers.

[Bill-Watson]

Dear Element,

I am thankful for your kind explanation but, it seems to me that natural truth never does play with two different sides. When we observe the sun, we see that it gives its rays equally to everyone, every sentinet being, without making any discrimination if they were enlightened or not. So I would expect the same from such a mind as Buddha.

Therefore this lokiya and lokuttara does not conform with the normal logic.

Respectfully yours,

[nilliraq]

Hi Bothi,

The questions you ask here have been debated countless times and it's very difficult to arrive at a resolution. Simply put, interpretations differ. Perhaps the best thing to do is to look at the relevant scriptures and decide for yourself.

The key passage is the one which records the Buddha's successive stages of realization on the night of his awakening. There were three:

1. During the first watch of the night, he directed his mind to his "past lives" (or "past abodes", in an alternate translation). There is argument as to what this means. I go with the simplest explanation, i.e. that it means literal past lives in the round of rebirths.

2. During the second watch of the night, he directed his mind to "the passing away and rearising of beings" in accordance with their kamma -- in short, what is referred to as "kammic rebirth".

Note that neither #1 or #2 were the ultimate, liberating insights, and there is argument over whether there is anything distinctively "Buddhist" about them (since rebirth and kamma are found in some other Indian religions as well). And note also that both still involve a concept of self. As you suggested, attachment remains.

3. During the third watch of the night, he realizes dependent origination -- or, in the Mahayana take on it, full understanding of sunyata (emptiness). This is the world-transcending knowledge which brings release.

Now, does this mean that #3 alone is what mattered, and we can jettison the first two as so much lokiya dhamma or residues of prior spiritual traditions? Or are the three intertwined, so you need to go through the same sequence of realizations as Siddartha Gautama did? I won't attempt to provide an answer. The suttas are there for anyone to read and form his/her own judgement.

When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of recollecting my past lives. I recollected my manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two... five, ten... fifty, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion: 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus I remembered my manifold past lives in their modes & details.

"This was the first knowledge I attained in the first watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; knowledge arose; darkness was destroyed; light arose — as happens in one who is heedful, ardent, & resolute.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

"This was the second knowledge I attained in the second watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; knowledge arose; darkness was destroyed; light arose — as happens in one who is heedful, ardent, & resolute.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. I discerned, as it had come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' My heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, was released from the fermentation of sensuality, released from the fermentation of becoming, released from the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there was the knowledge, 'Released.' I discerned that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'

"This was the third knowledge I attained in the third watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; knowledge arose; darkness was destroyed; light arose — as happens in one who is heedful, ardent, & resolute."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....019.than.html

[erepsysoulptnw]

My dear friends,

There is a simple question here,''is rebirth an attachment or not?''To me, to believe rebirth of a person after he/she has has passed away clearly is an attachment. Because such a unnatural phenomenon is not possible. However if rebirth is not used in this sense, and if it is not a personal one, then I have a right to ask what is it then?
With love,

Hello

Rebirth in Buddhisme is not "a personal one", there is no person,self or soul which are reborn again.
Reincarnation is a tranfer of soul from one life to the next, and Buddhism does not recognize any soul.
In any living being is a lifecontinium which works together with the 5 aggregates, and when the 5 aggregates break up (the body dies) the life continium find 5 new aggregates as its host, and this will continue until the final release from samsara.
What is called individual existence is in reality nothing but a mere process of mental and physical phenomena.

[payloansday]

In ''Anatta and Rebirth" Bhikkku Buddhadasa stated the following :

''The Buddha said that, "I teach only one thing: dukkha and the quenching of dukkha." That is what all the teachings are about, dukkha and the quenching of dukkha. He didn't talk about other things.

Whether or not there is rebirth is not the fundamental question, because once one is born here and now, there is dukkha like this and it must be quenched like this. Even if you are born again, dukkha is like this and must be quenched in the same way.

Why bother talking about birth or no birth? Talk only about how dukkha arises and how dukkha is quenched. Just this is already enough. For this reason the Buddha taught anatta. Once anatta is fully realized, there is no dukkha. When there is no atta, dukkha isn't born, anymore. Therefore, he taught the quenching of dukkha, that is, he taught this matter of not-self.

The teaching of anatta is essential for the ending of dukkha. Arguments and discussions about whether there is rebirth or not are a waste of time. Whether "it" will be born or not, there is still this business of quenching dukkha like this.

It's better to speak about this quenching of dukkha instead. This quenching of dukkha is the fact that there is no atta, is understanding that everything is anatta.

We can conclude by saying that if you understand anatta correctly and truly, then you will discover for yourself that there is no rebirth and no reincarnation. The matter is finished. ''


http://das-buddhistische-haus.de/pag...nd_Rebirth.pdf


In 'MN 140 : An Anaysis of the Properties'.... Buddha said:


''He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a construing. 'I shall not be'... 'I shall be possessed of form'... 'I shall not be possessed of form'... 'I shall be percipient'... 'I shall not be percipient'... 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient' is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is said to be a sage at peace.

"Furthermore, a sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? It was in reference to this that it was said, 'He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.''


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....140.than.html

[BoomBully]

Dear Friends,

How many of you believe in hungry ghosts?
Or demons from other realms?
You can think of them as outer expressions of inner experiences.
Just as ideas and mind arises or is reborn.
If you so desire you can waste time debating the number of rebirths a
hungry ghost requires for rebirth in the human realm?

Or I suppose we can return to the Middle Way?
Our choice

[Pateeffelty]

I am thankful for your kind explanation but, it seems to me that natural truth never does play with two different sides. When we observe the sun, we see that it gives its rays equally to everyone, every sentinet being, without making any discrimination if they were enlightened or not. So I would expect the same from such a mind as Buddha.

you are welcome, Bothi

however, again, your expectation of Buddha does not conform with the reality of Buddha

as i advised, Buddha teaches from compassion & wisdom (rather than from the mind of non-discrimination you believe is nirvana)

one title of the Buddha is Lokavidu, meaning "knower of the [different] worlds"

i have tried to suggest many times on this forum that the mind of enlightenment is not the non-discrimitative samadhi of Advaita

the mind of a Buddha sees the characteristics of things, both mundane (worldly) and supramundane (lokuttara)

the mind of a Buddha sees with discriminative wisdom (dhamma vicaya) rather than non-discrimination

the mind of a Buddha sees & knows with full comprehension (abhiññāya)

the word 'Buddha' means 'intelligent one'; 'the one who knows'

the word 'Buddha' does not mean 'spaced out zombie'

with metta




Buddha said:

Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the world with its many and different elements. That too is a Tathagata's power...

Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is how beings have different inclinations. That too is a Tathagata's power...

Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the disposition of the faculties of other beings, other persons. That too is a Tathagata's power...

Maha-sihanada Sutta: The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar

[Illirmpipse]

1. During the first watch of the night, he directed his mind to his "past lives" (or "past abodes", in an alternate translation). There is argument as to what this means. I go with the simplest explanation, i.e. that it means literal past lives in the round of rebirths.

hello Lazy Eye

the famous Theravadin scholar Buddhaghosa, in his Vissuddhimagga, interpretated this verse to mean "past becomings"

in Pali, "becoming" is a mental outflow (asava), together with the asava of sensuality and the asava of ignorance

thus, an alternative explanation is on each occassion in a life a mind believes "I am this", "this is mine", etc, this is one becoming

kind regards

[sykanaxer]

How many of you believe in hungry ghosts?
Or demons from other realms?
You can think of them as outer expressions of inner experiences.

welcome, friend

a verse of seemingly relevant interest

the Dhamma states:

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.

Therein:
The speech wherewith the world converses is true
On account of its being agreed upon by the world.
The speech which describes what is ultimate is also true,
Through characterizing dhammas as they really are.

Therefore, being skilled in common usage,
False speech does not arise in the Teacher,
Who is Lord of the World,
When he speaks according to conventions.

(Mn. i. 95)

[Qwjyrgij]

Dear Element,

It is for sure you have a very extensive Dhamma knowledge which I do appreciate it very deeply. You've also stated that as i advised, Buddha teaches from compassion & wisdom (rather than from the mind of non-discrimination you believe is nirvana) Compassion and wisdom as far as I know does not play with two different sides of the same truth...I always state that one whoever knows does not believe, one whoever believes does not know As for nirvana, neither I know it, nor I believe it. To know anything, one has to experience it in person. Otherwise it does not mean much.

So I only care for the truth, nothing but the truth.

With love and respect,

[BeksTeene]

Compassion and wisdom as far as I know does not play with two different sides of the same truth...

Compassion & wisdom discriminate. For example, due to wisdom & discrimination, one may respond differently to the same question asked by a child and by a professor. Also, wisdom & compassion may speak in a way the leaves the final understanding to the listener. Thus, the wise say: "False speech does not arise in the Teacher."

Kind regards

[WhileKelf]

The two different sides of truth for Buddhists is the conventional (or relative truth) and the absolute truth. For a non-enlightened being there are always these two truths but an enlightened being, and only an enlightened being, realizes the two truths simultaneously. One could roughly equate thee two truths as being a state of post-meditation and a state of meditation - we ordinary humans have to be in one state or the other, wheras a Buddha can be in both states at the same time. A Mahayana Buddhist would say this means comprehending the nature of reality as both empty and dependent arising.