Hello Chris,

There is good reason I think to believe that the
Buddha was ambivalent about the idea of rebirth but I
don't think this ambivalence is stated well in the
Kalama Sutta.
A better place to look I think is in the second sutta
of the Majjhima Nikaaya:

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the
past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past?
How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in
the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in
the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I
be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in
the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about
the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How
am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it
bound?'

I think it makes sense to consider which ideas of the
Buddha were original and which were already in
existence at the time of his birth. Many ideas were
so entrenched at that time, i.e., kamma and rebirth,
that it was not practical for Buddha to spend his time
refuting them. These beliefs were co-opted and
adopted into the Buddha's scheme of things.
For example, the idea of "non-self" is distinctly
Buddhist. But does it really fit well with rebirth
and kamma?
Not really. Not for most Buddhists. Most Buddhists
who think in a mundane way about kamma and rebirth
find the idea of "non-self" very upsetting.

You may be interested in exploring these issues in the
writings/transcriptions of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. Once
realizing the first level of enlightenment ideas such
as kamma and rebirth don't seem very useful.

Best Wishes,
Sumana

Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:53:24 -0400
From: Hugo <eklektik@...>
Subject: Re: Kalama Sutta and Rebirth

Hello Chris,

On 9/2/05, Chris André Stranden
<bobtarzan@...> wrote:

> 1) Is the following excerpt from Kalama Sutta a

valid argument for
the view

> that the Buddha did not have a clear opinion upon

the question of
wether or

> not we are reborn?

I don't think so, I agree with what Piya already
explained.

> 2) Are there any statements in the Tipitaka which

indicates that the
Buddha

> did not personally consider the teachings on rebirth

as valid?

Take a look at:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-117-tb0.html

"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of
two sorts:
There is right view with fermentations [asava], siding
with merit,
resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there
is noble right
view, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of
the path.

"And what is the right view that has fermentations,
sides with merit,
& results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given,
what is offered,
what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good
& bad actions.
There is this world & the next world. There is mother
& father. There
are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests &
contemplatives
who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim
this world & the
next after having directly known & realized it for
themselves.' This
is the right view that has fermentations, sides with
merit, & results
in acquisitions.

"And what is the right view that is without
fermentations,
transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment,
the faculty of
discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of
qualities as a
factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view in
one developing
the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free
from
fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble
path. This is the
right view that is without fermentations,
transcendent, a factor of
the path."


--
Hugo



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com