Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Thread: "the consciousness that is generated from previous lives"

  1. #1
    Forums Member soundtrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    94

    "the consciousness that is generated from previous lives"

    From Ajahn Sucitto's "Kamma and the End of Kamma", page iv:

    Variously translated as ‘formations,’ ‘volitional formations,’
    ‘fabrications’ (and more) I render sankhara as ‘programs and
    patterns.’ Some of these programs are functions, such as
    metabolism, that are bound up with the life-force (ayusankhara);
    some are carried by the consciousness that is generated from
    previous lives; and some are formed through this-life interactions.
    Did the Buddha actually teach this? Isn't Sucitto just repeating (rebirthing?) the bhikkhu Sati's heresy (MN 38) here?

    What do you think?

  2. #2
    Welcome to the group, soundtrack !

    I'm adding a link to "Kamma and the End of Kamma" and your quote is from the Preface to the main text, in case anyone wants to read it at the source for themselves.

    http://www.forestsangha.org/index.ph...-ajahn-sucitto


    with kind wishes,

    Aloka-D

  3. #3
    Greetings Soundtrack,

    Welcome.

    What do you think?


    Metta,
    Retro.
    Last edited by Element; 23 Sep 11 at 12:12.

  4. #4
    Forums Member soundtrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Aloka-D View Post
    I'm adding a link to "Kamma and the End of Kamma" and your quote is from the Preface to the main text, in case anyone wants to read it at the source for themselves.
    Thanks friend, I read the guidelines just a few minutes before posting the thread but apparently I didn't have enough coffee this morning.


  5. #5
    Forums Member Element's Avatar
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,343
    Quote Originally Posted by soundtrack View Post
    Did the Buddha actually teach this?
    welcome Soundtrack

    personally, i am not familiar with the Buddha teaching in such a way

    the Buddha taught when ignorance arises, formations arise with that ignorance; then when formations arise, consciousness arises with those formations

    for example, due to ignorance, a thought formation arises based on a memory (mental formation) about an event in the past. consciousness arises & generates with those formations and consciousness is pre-occupied with & drawn into those formations

    regards

    element
    Last edited by Element; 23 Sep 11 at 12:12.

  6. #6
    Forums Member stuka's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    "Oh, Gawd, uh 'nuther Sutta Thumper..."
    Posts
    1,717
    Quote Originally Posted by soundtrack View Post
    From Ajahn Sucitto's "Kamma and the End of Kamma", page iv:


    Did the Buddha actually teach this?

    No.

    Isn't Sucitto just repeating (rebirthing?) the bhikkhu Sati's heresy (MN 38) here?
    Yes.

    What do you think?
    I think Sucitto should just paint a red dot on his forehead and be done with it...

    (Sucitto):

    Rebirth and kamma
    The agency of samsara is not a body or an identity.
    Bodies endure dependent on conditions for one lifetime
    only. Identity – as daughter, mother, manager, invalid and
    so on – arises dependent on causes and conditions. What is
    above referred to as ‘transmigration’ is not ‘rebirth’ but the
    process whereby a persisting current of grasping continues
    to generate sentient beings. Moreover, this current isn’t
    something that only occurs at death, but is continually fed
    by kamma in the here and now. Through an inclination
    called ‘becoming,’ kamma forms something like a psychological
    genetic code. This code, which is the pattern of each
    individual’s kammic inheritance, is formed through dynamic
    processes called sankhara. Like one’s personal genetic code,
    the sankhara retain our kammic blueprints, and so from day
    to day we remain the same person in relative terms.
    "Sankhara" as Atman. I love playing "Find the Atman"....
    Last edited by stuka; 23 Sep 11 at 14:07.

  7. #7
    Forums Member Lazy Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    560
    Quote Originally Posted by soundtrack View Post
    Isn't Sucitto just repeating (rebirthing?) the bhikkhu Sati's heresy (MN 38) here?

    What do you think?
    I don't think so. Sati's heresy lay in claiming "this same consciousness" transmigrates from life to life -- i.e. that consciousness is some sort of permanent entity.

    Ajahn Sucitto speaks of consciousness being "generated" from previous lives; in other words, because of a causal relationship. In a similar way, the 5-year-old "me" gave rise to the 20-year-old "me", and eventually the current 45-year-old "me", but the process doesn't require an Atman. It can be explained via causality and dependent origination. So "generated" actually strikes me as a fairly appropriate word.

    There may be good reasons for skepticism about rebirth, but purported conflict with MN 38 isn't one of them -- in my opinion.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by stuka
    I think Sucitto should just paint a red dot on his forehead and be done with it...
    ...and I think you should refrain from making unneccessary personal comments about people, Stuka.

    I am now banning the use of this recurring red dot remark in our discussions - and that also includes it being used by Element, or anyone else who's a member of the group.

    Thanks.

  9. #9
    Forums Member srivijaya's Avatar
    Location
    breathing in... breathing out...
    Posts
    1,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazy Eye View Post
    the process doesn't require an Atman. It can be explained via causality and dependent origination. So "generated" actually strikes me as a fairly appropriate word.
    I agree with that Lazy. Seems he's looking at the process itself and not some eternal 'whatever'.

  10. #10
    Forums Member stuka's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    "Oh, Gawd, uh 'nuther Sutta Thumper..."
    Posts
    1,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazy Eye View Post
    I don't think so. Sati's heresy lay in claiming "this same consciousness" transmigrates from life to life -- i.e. that consciousness is some sort of permanent entity.
    That is an often-quoted and commonly-held misconception, but that is not at all what the Buddha objects to in the sutta. He does not say, "have I not taught that consciousness is impermanent?" and then go on about how "consciousness" carries the results of actions from life to life, etc, like rebirthers would have it.

    The Buddha's objection is to the whole shebang, and he immediately goes into a long and detailed explanation of his the six forms of consciousness as sense awareness through each of the sense doors.

    Ajahn Sucitto speaks of consciousness being "generated" from previous lives; in other words, because of a causal relationship. In a similar way, the 5-year-old "me" gave rise to the 20-year-old "me", and eventually the current 45-year-old "me", but the process doesn't require an Atman. It can be explained via causality and dependent origination. So "generated" actually strikes me as a fairly appropriate word.
    That is also an often-repeated pseudo-argument, but the causal relationship between the young me and the older me does not provide or support a claim of any sort of mechanism of continuity from one life to another.

    There may be good reasons for skepticism about rebirth, but purported conflict with MN 38 isn't one of them -- in my opinion.
    Sure it is. One has to read the whole sutta, rather than equivocating over a single word or repeating what one reads on DW.
    Last edited by stuka; 23 Sep 11 at 22:21.

Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Los Angeles Mexico City London Colombo Kuala Lumpur Sydney
Sat, 1:27 PM Sat, 3:27 PM Sat, 9:27 PM Sun, 1:57 AM Sun, 4:27 AM Sun, 6:27 AM