[PlayboyAtWork]

THIS is the reason why I am against certain "buddhists" stating that Nibbanna is only a "psychological state/philosophical frame of mind."

It is not, as the concept of rebirth undermines the above statement, which actually degrades Nibbana to a "brain bound concept."

Hi Stephos,

Have you read our Code of Conduct #16 ?

My own position regarding rebirth is neutral, because I don't consider that speculating about it one way or another has any relevence to my practice here and now.

My comment about the possibility of the mind dissolving into space at death had nothing to do with rebirth.

kind regards,

Aloka

[Ankeseiband]

Hi Stephos,

Have you read our Code of Conduct #16 ?

My own position regarding rebirth is neutral, because I don't consider that speculating about it one way or another has any relevence to my practice here and now.

My comment about the possibility of the mind dissolving into space at death had nothing to do with rebirth.

kind regards,

Aloka

Hi Aloka,

I understand your concerns about the code of conduct.

I want to state my position clearly and with qualification, not argue which does nothing other than agitate and embitter.

Having said this, What exactly DO you mean about unbound mind dissolving into space if not a metaphysical stance?

Also, Could you perhaps explain why the reticence to not allow the discussion of rebirth or not in this forum please?
I saw nothing in the Code of Conduct saying that people couldn't discuss this issue, in all honesty.

To me, Buddhadharma is one body of teaching with a clear start and clear goal, but modern Buddhist schools do not reflect the Buddha's intent fully, which to someone like me is saddening.

Thank you and Be well sir,
Stefos

[cypedembeda]

So during the body being eaten by different animals the mind becomes lofty and noble? That sounds not at all logical to me.

hi Victor

It does not sound logical because it is imagined what is occuring to the body & mind happening at the same time. However, this is not explicit in the discourse. Consider reading the discourse 'spiritually' rather than 'materialistically'. Try to generate the liberation of mind the Buddha is promoting when speaking these words.

Regarding your appeal to logic, it seems to not be logical either because Theravadins believe rebirth occurs at the moment of death (and not when the body is being eaten by animals).

What does it even mean? Why would anybody care how noble the mind becomes while ones body is eaten by animals?No sorry I cant see it. But I am open for suggestions.

Yes. As I suggested above.

And on a second thought what about the Ghee becomming lofty and noble? What is noble about Ghee? Is it not much more logical that the Ghee which is fat will rise in the water, keeping seperate from it as the shards sink to the bottom? And that that is the meaning of the sutta to be applied also to the mind at this passage?

Imo, it is just a play on words; just a metaphor. We must bear in mind the language used by the Buddha is ancient language, which, like much language, is derived from words that originally referred to physical things. For example, I once heard 'panna' (wisdom), is derived from what was originally 'sword'.

Similarly, words such as patipatta ('path of practise') are derived from the word for "walking".

As a fellow Singalese, Deshy has mentioned the contemporary psychological meaning of visesa. But, in the Buddha's time, it seems the word could be applied in two ways, just as the word "cultivation" can be used both physically & mentally.

Regards

[Gymnarnemia]

Hi Aloka,

I understand your concerns about the code of conduct.

I want to state my position clearly and with qualification, not argue which does nothing other than agitate and embitter.

Having said this, What exactly DO you mean about unbound mind dissolving into space if not a metaphysical stance?

Also, Could you perhaps explain why the reticence to not allow the discussion of rebirth or not in this forum please?
I saw nothing in the Code of Conduct saying that people couldn't discuss this issue, in all honesty.

To me, Buddhadharma is one body of teaching with a clear start and clear goal, but modern Buddhist schools do not reflect the Buddha's intent fully, which to someone like me is saddening.

Thank you and Be well sir,
Stefos

Hi Stephos,

Firstly please don't call me 'sir' (or miss or ma'am) there's no need for formality. I don't live in the USA and I am a woman, as I mentioned to you in another post somewhere.

My comment about mind dissolving into space was my own fanciful guess according to the Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation and not meant as a firm statement of fact.

Where did I say rebirth can't be discussed at BWB ? We've had lots of topics about it in the past.

Please be aware however, that this a thread in the Theravada forum about a particular sutta, rather than a general rebirth debate.

Another topic is welcome in Beyond Belief or in the General Buddhist discussions forums if you want to debate rebirth with our members.

Thanks

PS

When people write words in capital letters in their posts to me, it always reminds me of shouting......

[derinasderun]

No sorry I cant see it. But I am open for suggestions.

I suggest that you try to comprehend the sutta's meaning by considering the Buddha's teachings as a whole. His teachings usually reflect the importance of mental development and letting go. What the Buddha probably says here is that even when a body, which is nourished by wholesome food, gets weak, beaten up or eaten by animals, a mind that is nourished by relinquishment and discernment becomes noble and sublime.

In other words, if your mind is well cultivated, you will not experience mental suffering when you are physically harmed (note that the sutta doesn't necessarily mention death). This is why the Buddha tells his disciple not to fear death because for such a person, death or physical pain could be less suffering.

Then he uses a simile to emphasize how such a developed, cultivated mind is unspoiled and unaffected by physical tragedies. There are instances where the Buddha taught dhamma, specially to lay disciples, using similes such as these. Ghee in water is simile for a developed, cultivated mind. Ghee rises higher like a developed mind (implying noble and supreme, surpassing the mundane) and it doesn't get mixed in water like a mind unaffected by common tragedies. With such a mind, facing death is not to be feared. Sounds like a perfect teaching by the Buddha.

Also, just because vesesa has one meaning in one place, it doesn't need to have the same meaning everywhere it is used, even in the same sutta. For the record, I think that the primary meaning of visesa should be noble or eminent given the fact that the word is absorbed so by other languages which are influenced by pali. This is just a calculated guess. However, the word visesa also has secondary meanings. Sometimes in translations like these, you need to make a sensible judgment as to what one word could mean in a particular context. There is not much use in copying and pasting a set of words and making it bold to make a point which is irrational and does not complement the rest of the dhamma.

[broksaksaak]

Then he uses a simile to emphasize how such a developed, cultivated mind is unspoiled and unaffected by physical tragedies.

From this, maybe it can be of some help to quote this sutta just to give some context to the Mahanama Sutta:

[...]what is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists herein between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling?

"When an untaught worldling is touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. He thus experiences two kinds of feelings, a bodily and a mental feeling.

[...]

"But in the case of a well-taught noble disciple, O monks, when he is touched by a painful feeling, he will not worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. It is one kind of feeling he experiences, a bodily one, but not a mental feeling.

[...]

"This, O monks, is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling."

Sallatha Sutta

[SypeKifef]

for me, the highlight of the Mahanama Sutta is the Buddha's compassion

there is Mahanama, a faithful lay follower (but contrary to dubious commentary, not appearing to be a stream enterer)

Mahanama has fears about dying with mind without mindfulness & clear comprehension

Buddha assures Mahanama with compassion & sets Mahamana's mind free from fear


****

Buddha taught there are three kinds of gifts:

(1) the gift of material gifts & helpful acts;

(2) the gift of fearlessness (safety)

(3) the gift of equality

Buddha has gifted 'no fear', to a faithful friend, uplifting his mind with some liberation from 'self' obsession

[Kryfamid]

I kind of agree that Mahanama was probably not a stream enterer... He was apparently fretting over death. So when the Buddha said that a man with a mind well cultivated had no reason to fear death, he probably said so with compassion and with the sole purpose of consoling the worried (and probably old) disciple.

However, if someone is to take a lesson from the sutta, that IMO is the benefit of cultivating wholesome mental qualities, to be experienced in this life, even when faced with death or physical harm.

[myhackingtosh_ws]

...with the sole purpose of consoling the worried (and probably old) disciple.

yes, it is important to not overlook the context here that Buddha was essentially teaching a puthujjana

[scewLacysmazy]

Hi Element.

I think that you are overcomplicating things and seeing things that are not there. I can understand your point and actually agree but I do not think this sutta portrays it.

As you say it is important to keep the context in mind.

1. Mahanama was a lay follower.
2. His question is that of what happens after Death in both suttas.

I.e. he asks:

[I]At times like that my mindfulness with regard to the Blessed One gets muddled, my mindfulness with regard to the Dhamma... the Sangha gets muddled. The thought occurs to me, 'If I were to die at this moment, what would be my destination? What would be my future course?"
[/I]

What he is afraid of is the age old dilemma for people beliving in reincarnation. According to popular belief the state of the mind at the moment of death is instrumental for future reincarnation. That is why you recite gatas and the merituous deeds of the person near death (or dead) in his presence so his mind will be at peace and can thus reach a higher state of reincarnation.

Mahanama is worried that if he dies at a moment when his minds is muddled he will fall into a bad reincarnation.

And that is the question that is answered. The reference to diffrent animals eating of the body is because of the old indian tradition to leave the dead unburied in those days cemetaries. A custom that still prevails in Tibet and some places in India (as you well probably know.) In Tibet I have heard that some even cut the body to pieces so the animals can eat it easier.

So whatever happens to the mind in this sutta happens after physical death of the body.

If the answer is that a well trained mind rises and seperates out that would probably imply that reincarnation in a better place is meant. But if the mind after death becomes lofty and noble there is no rationality to that notion. Why would a mind change state just because of physical death?

Being pretty bad at pali I would love if you would take the time and translate the entire sutta according to how you see it?

Btw two things

1. Are you Sri Lankan?
2. I do not really give a hoot when the Theravadians think that rebirth occurs. And I do not think you do either. Am I right?

Best regards
/Victor

[CelexaNY]

Also, just because vesesa has one meaning in one place, it doesn't need to have the same meaning everywhere it is used, even in the same sutta. For the record, I think that the primary meaning of visesa should be noble or eminent given the fact that the word is absorbed so by other languages which are influenced by pali. This is just a calculated guess. However, the word visesa also has secondary meanings. Sometimes in translations like these, you need to make a sensible judgment as to what one word could mean in a particular context. There is not much use in copying and pasting a set of words and making it bold to make a point which is irrational and does not complement the rest of the dhamma.

Visesa does not mean noble. It means special or apart(positive value) or an you say eminent. In Sinhala as well as Telugu if I am not wrong.

And dudette there are no forum rules for bold typing. But I wish there was one for being impertinent.

/Victor

[Snitiendumurn]

I think that you are overcomplicating things and seeing things that are not there.

Imo, seeing this suttas has anything to do with after-death is "seeing things that are not there".

Mahanama asked the Buddha a question a typical puthujjana would ask. Namely, "what will happen when I die or what will happen after my death"? The Buddha did not answer his question by saying "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your rebirth will not be a bad one". He merely said "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your death will not be a bad one".

apapakam te maranam bhavissati, apapika kalakiriya maranam means death. kalakriya means death. As I see it, he was merely speaking of the experience of death; not after-death.

Edit: I think what Element initially said was correct. It is important to keep in mind the context of this whole discussion and who the Buddha was addressing. The Buddha's focus was consoling a worried lay disciple who was seemingly not a stream enterer, possibly old and apparently believed in rebirth. It seems that the Buddha's words were carefully chosen to address Mahanama's specific fears and worries rather than to teach him.

[Hoijdxvh]

If the answer is that a well trained mind rises and seperates out that would probably imply that reincarnation in a better place is meant. But if the mind after death becomes lofty and noble there is no rationality to that notion. Why would a mind change state just because of physical death?

A better question is, how does mind exist without a physical body? Please explain what mind (citta) is as you understand it.

[Barryrich]

Visesa does not mean noble. It means special or apart(positive value) or an you say eminent. In Sinhala as well as Telugu if I am not wrong.

Well.... while ariya could be a closer translation to "noble", visesa also means distinguished. A distinguished person in society could be termed as an ariya puggala - a noble one so I don't think the translation is completely misapplied. However, I do agree that eminent is a better translation while apart is not. Visesa does not mean distinction; it is "a mark of distinction" meaning speciality or a distinguishing quality.

I wish there was one for being impertinent.

Irrelevant. You can raise your concerns regarding forum rules to the admins.

[StevenS]

I do not really give a hoot when the Theravadians think that rebirth occurs.

Try adding this part at the beginning:
Victorious: "For someone who once proclaimed rebirth fanaticism in a public forum, I do not really give a hoot when the Theravadians think that rebirth occurs" That's better.

[Pypeassesty]

What he is afraid of is the age old dilemma for people beliving in reincarnation. Mahanama is worried that if he dies at a moment when his minds is muddled he will fall into a bad reincarnation.

Sure. Possibly. But, consistant with my view, Buddha has answered Mahanama according to his disposition. In other words, Buddha can speak with language and with metaphor that means one thing to the listener and other thing to the Buddha.

If the answer is that a well trained mind rises and seperates out that would probably imply that reincarnation in a better place is meant. But if the mind after death becomes lofty and noble there is no rationality to that notion.

Of course the notion of lofty & noble has rationality. But your view of reincarnation has no rationality in Buddhism. Your view is Hinduism.

Buddha taught about "rebirth", that is, "taking birth (jati) again". When a mind is noble, such a stream-enterer, one-returner or non-returner, the superstitious interpretation of the death of these noble minds is they are "reborn" in heaven or a pure abode. In the suttas, when noble minds die, they take birth in a heavenly realm rather than are reborn in a human or other "earthly" realms. In other words, these noble minds are not "reborn" into a physical body but instead in heaven (according to superstition). Thus, Hindu reincarnation has no relevance because Hindu reincarnation is the mind entering another physical body. In Tibetan Lamaism, Hiindu reincarnation has relevence because this religion is based on Lamas being reincarnated again on this earth rather than Hinayanistically being reborn in heaven where they cannot help sentient beings.

To end, the essence of Dhamma is not found in obscure little suttas tucked away in the suttas given to puthujjana.

Kind regards

[kneexyFreedly]

Mahanama asked the Buddha a question a typical puthujjana would ask. Namely, "what will happen when I die or what will happen after my death"? The Buddha did not answer his question by saying "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your rebirth will not be a bad one". He merely said "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your death will not be a bad one".



maranam means death. kalakriya means death. As I see it, he was merely speaking of the experience of death; not after-death.

Well read.

[ancexiaepidge]

Imo, seeing this suttas has anything to do with after-death is "seeing things that are not there".

Mahanama asked the Buddha a question a typical puthujjana would ask. Namely, "what will happen when I die or what will happen after my death"? The Buddha did not answer his question by saying "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your rebirth will not be a bad one". He merely said "Have no fear, Mahanama! Have no fear! Your death will not be a bad one".

Oh yeah right. That I did not think of that. Then in that case the the solace for mr Bigname is that while being alive and the body is eaten by crows, vultures, hawks, dogs, hyenas, or all sorts of creatures, nevertheless the mind becomes lofty and noble?


Yes I can see that that makes a lot of sense. A noble diciples mind becomes noble when these animals are ripping him apart? But not when he is shot or tortured by humans or run over by a car? Very logical. Surley.

maranam means death. kalakriya means death.

Kalakriya means ending! Not death. As in ending of lifetime or Demise.

/Victor

[Baromaro]

A better question is, how does mind exist without a physical body? Please explain what mind (citta) is as you understand it.

Please try to stay focused on the topic Deshy.

/Victor

[avaiguite]

Try adding this part at the beginning:
Victorious: "For someone who once proclaimed rebirth fanaticism in a public forum, I do not really give a hoot when the Theravadians think that rebirth occurs"That's better.

What on earth are you talking about. I would NEVER say that. You have me confused with my evil, reincarnation believing, Twin brother.

Yeah that is the way it is!
Besides you can not prove anything!


/Victor