New answers tagged

1

Generally, the suttas say "a being" is "reborn", as follows: 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 &...


0

The earlier answer is excellent and exceeds my knowledge of the question in the sutras. However, this issue is also addressed (perhaps with a twist) in the tantras, albeit, less accessibly (depending on what it is being compared to). Generally, to fully understand the meaning of Buddhist tantras, it requires oral transmission because the information in any ...


1

I agree with the answer by Andrei. Whatever ignorance is left in the mind continues to arise. So not only the self idea but all the ignorance not removed by following the right path will arise. That said, I would like to add that these higher teachings could be risky if parroted to everyone without regard to the person's stage of development. Some people who ...


0

From Snp 4.14 (translated by Ven. Thanissaro): "I ask the kinsman of the Sun, the great seer, about seclusion & the state of peace. Seeing in what way is a monk unbound, clinging to nothing in the world?". "He should put an entire stop to the root of objectification-classifications: 'I am the thinker.' From the translator's commentary: ...


0

I don't know Yeshe (: But I think you don't exist as an identity, if you are always changing as a ''person'' and in body then you don't exist or you wouldn't change. What you really are is beneath what you believe and think. And because you aren't an identity that doesn't accompany you. Only your karma which is your pure essence I think. Is like you are a ...


1

From Milindapanha: -- “What is it, Nàgasena, that is reborn?” -- “Mind and matter (namarupa).” -- “Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?” -- “No, it is not, but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds....


0

The difference is that the law of causality is a general principle whereas paticcasamupadda is a special case of it's application. Special because it's about something specific. The law is like an abstract mathematic forumulae of xyz that can be applied to any calculation whereas dependent origination is more like doing physics where one uses the forumulae ...


2

Re. the first point. There's a truism according to scientific logic, "correlation doesn't imply causation" -- i.e. that "if I do X and then Y happens" that doesn't mean that "X caused Y". The answer to "what's the cause?" can become debatable in fields like sociology or politics. Sometimes the question is important -- ...


1

There is an explanation of Buddhist conditionality in the Bundles of Reed Sutta (SN 12.67) below, together with an analogy. Name-and-form (mind-body) is a condition for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name-and-form. If any one of these ceases, the other will cease too. This is like two bundles of reed leaning on each other. However, the rest ...


1

Science deals with the physically measurable. Buddhist teachings focus on the end of suffering. Both discuss causality, but in different ways. The scientific method emphasizes reproducibility of results for a given hypothesis. In schools we can all drop large and small weights to observe they fall at the same speed. However, we have to be very very careful ...


Top 50 recent answers are included