[Buddha-l] rebirth

[Joy Vriens]

Mike Austin wrote:

>> I am not sure that the Buddha were teaching anything related to truth 
>> or that would convey truth.

> Am I missing something here? What about those Four Noble Thingies?

As I wrote, apparently "satyam", rather than "truth" and all the 
connotations that word can have for Westerners, means something like 
ritual exactitude. The Four noble infallible formulas? Satyam seems to 
be more concerned with the workings of the world than with an underlying 
"truth" to identify with (or whatever). But I am not a Sanskritist, nor 
a connoisseur of Indian philosophy.

>> Yes, for me there is no difference between the concept of 'rebirth', 
>> as originally intended and worry. It is one of the many forms of worry.

> Yet,  I suppose you observe and experience something that corresponds to 
> the concept/label 'dukkha' as described by Buddhist teachings?

Yes I can imagine everything as dukkha (transitory, "imperfect" and 
impersonal) when comparing with something else which is not-dukkha and 
which I really want badly.

> Then also 
> perhaps this recognition slips from time to time. Perhaps the concept of 
> rebirth is equally valid, coming from the same trustworthy source. It is 
> possible that the recognition of this has slipped. Therefore, reflecting 
> on it could be as worthwhile as reflecting on dukkha.

I don't accept it as a re-cognition (although I will try to remain open 
to that possibility), but I can imagine it being a kind of help to open 
my mind, as a spiritual exercise.

> I never even addressed the possibility of annihilation,  so hope was not 
> something I looked for. But I do recall my first recognition of the word 
> 'reincarnation'. I was being driven round a roundabout by my father. The 
> circulating manoeuvre was quite fitting. I was in my early teens. It was 
> something that just seemed natural - nothing to hope for or to dread.

Interesting. It's interesting how such apparently very banal moments can 
have great meaning for us or mark us. Do you know Trungpa's teaching of 
gdra lha (Drala?), manifestations of the sacred I believe he calls it?

> If 
> one feels that something is right - that there is some explanation or an 
> answer to things,  it becomes more a case of finding the right questions 
> rather than the right answers. For me rebirth, is not an answer. Rather, 
> it presents a focus for finding the right questions.

Or perhaps there is nothing to find or search other than that. No 
explanation needed?

>> Although the Budda also advised not to investigate worry (the man with 
>> the arrow). Is there anything we know (which is not understand) better 
>> and more intimately?

> The Buddha *did* advise to investigate worry and its causes. What he did 
> not advise was to investigate avenues of causation that have no bearing 
> on it.

Its causes, not worry itself (if I am not mistaken). Worry doesn't need 
to be investigated, it's self-evident.

>>> A map is not the place where one wishes to go - nor can it be 
>>> recognised  as the place where one wishes to go - but it is 
>>> nevertheless useful.

>> Ok, so "the truth" is only the map of the Truth. I would rather speak 
>> of goal than of truth. It's only depending on a set objective that the 
>> goal can be true, a goal is not true in and by itself.

> How true that is!

:-)

Joy