Dear Jou,
Thank you for your earlier reply and also for reposting this one.
I appreciate your looking up the pali to the phrases I gave.
One thing: I am not sure why the sutta about dependent origination
is evidence against literal rebirth?
best wishes
Robert
--- In
Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Norman Joseph [Jou] Smith" <> > > I
had a look through the majjima and samyutta and found many
> > > references to rebirth.
> > > I trust these examples suffice:
> > > Saccasamyutta (p1885 Bodhi)
> > > "so too bhikkhus those beings are few who when they pass away
as
> > > human beings are reborn
> > > as human beings. but numerous are those who,
> > > when they pass away are reborn in hell.."
> >
> > M v 474 = M 56.102
> >
> > Evameva kho, bhikkhave, appakaa te sattaa ye manussaa cutaa
> > manussesu paccaajaayanti; atha kho eteva bahutaraa sattaa ye
> > manussaa cutaa niraye paccaajaayanti.
> >
> > This last word, in one dictionary I have gives both meanings of
to
> > be born AND to be RE-born.
> >
> > > Khandavagga (samyutta nikaya)p1026
> > > here bhikkhus someone practises good conduct of body, speech
and
> > > mind....then with the break-up of the body he is reborn in the
> > > company of devas who dwell in fragrant roots"
> >
> > S iii 251 = S 31.3
> >
> > Ayam. kho, bhikkhu, hetu, ayam. paccayo, yena midhekacco kaayassa
> > bhedaa param. mara.naa muulagandhe adhivatthaanam. devaanam.
> > sahabyatam. upapajjati.
> >
> > This last word, in one dictionary I have gives both meanings of
to
> > be born AND to be RE-born.
> >> The most damning evidence for the multiple life and rebirth
theory would
> seem to be the positive version of Dependent Origination, which
shows
> how the gradual path IS Dependent Orignation. Therefore "When one
sees
> the Dhamma [process of liberation], one sees Dependent
Origination" and
> vice versa. See furthest left hand column of the following table
> compared to other teaching of the Buddha [a study method he gave
for his
> teaching]:
> http://home.vicnet.net.au/~jousmith/buddhism/jo/d_o_compare.html.
It is
> no wonder that those that promote the gross/physiological or the
> impractical psychological understanding of Dependent Origination
do not
> know of, or do not speak much of the positive version of D.O.
>
>