[Buddha-l] Dependent arising variants

[Jim Peavler]

On Feb 1, 2006, at 8:48 PM, curt wrote:

>>
> Death is not inevitable. Take single celled organisms, for example.  
> They divide. Nobody "dies" when a cell divides.

You equivocate, senor. single-celled organizims aren't exactly born  
in the sense used here. If fact they are reincarnated, without the  
necessity of the conditional cell that divides having to disappear  
before the recincarnated forms can appear. Sort of a simultaneous  or  
serial reincarnation.  On the other hand, any single cell (or  
millions of single-celled) critters can be killed, as when you boil  
water or bake bread.
In short, what you say makes no sense, no matter how you slice it.

> Single celled organisms are the most numerous form of life - so any  
> sweeping generalizations should apply to them. The generalization  
> that death is inevitable does not, however, apply to them. So it is  
> invalid. It's possible that one could make a generalization about  
> "multicellular organisms of the Kingdom Animalia" - but even that  
> would not be a sure thing. Even deciding what exactly a  
> "multicellular organism" is, exactly, is not always clear. For  
> instance, what appear to be individual "Aspen trees" can, in fact,  
> be thought of parts of huge organisms that cover entire  
> mountainsides. I will die and Dan Lusthaus will die - but death is  
> not an inevitable event for a living thing.

And it keeps getting sillier. Yes, large groves of aspens (like many  
fungi) are multiple vertical manifestations of subterranean root  
systems. Of course every leaf of every branch of every trunk of every  
root is itself multicellular. It can also pass from a "living" state  
to a "dead" state, to wonderfully colorful effect. so what?



Jim Peavler

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755