So as I read and watch lessons and there is no self. Everything thing I know is not permanent or real I can’t grasp what knowledge we take with us at death and rebirth so we are not reinventing the wheel the next go around?
2 Likes
Hi Kasey, welcome to the forum.
I’m not 100% clear what you are asking but I believe it’s about what get’s reborn. If that is the case then you might want to look at AN3.76 and AN3.77
AN3.76:2.3 “So, Ānanda, deeds are the field, consciousness is the seed, and craving is the moisture. The consciousness of sentient beings—shrouded by ignorance and fettered by craving—is established in a lower realm. That’s how there is regeneration into a new state of existence in the future.
5 Likes
I wouldn’t say anyone takes anything with them.. No fixed “them” or “us” moves on anywhere. Kamma will simply bear fruit until the “debt” is paid. In the new rebirth, the newly conditioned arisen “person” gets to respond to the results of previous bad kamma and benefit from the good kamma. Good kamma means good rebirth, so then conditions are better for deeper spiritual cultivation. Bad kamma means bad rebirth, which makes it more difficult. That’s at least how I understand it. In the tradition I was trained in, we never talked about rebirth..
4 Likes
Welcome @Kaseydog24! 
According to MN 2 the speculative view ”there is no self” is incorrect and only leads to more suffering and confusion:
“This is how he attends unwisely: ‘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 did I become 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 become in the future?’ Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the present thus: ‘Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where will it go?’
“When he attends unwisely in this way, one of six views arises in him. The view ‘self exists for me’ arises in him as true and established; or the view ‘no self exists for me’ arises in him as true and established; or the view ‘I perceive self with self’ arises in him as true and established; or the view ‘I perceive not-self with self’ arises in him as true and established; or the view ‘I perceive self with not-self’ arises in him as true and established; or else he has some such view as this: ‘It is this self of mine that speaks and feels and experiences here and there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine is permanent, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and it will endure as long as eternity.’
This speculative view, bhikkhus, is called the thicket of views, the wilderness of views, the contortion of views, the vacillation of views, the fetter of views. Fettered by the fetter of views, the untaught ordinary person is not freed from birth, ageing, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; he is not freed from suffering, I say. - MN 2
On the contrary, the making if merit and kamma are very real things, Kp 8 being one out of countless examples.
Then I thought, ‘Of what deed of mine is this the fruit and result, that I am now so mighty and powerful?’ Then I thought, ‘It is the fruit and result of three kinds of deeds: giving, self-control, and restraint.’”
The Buddha spoke this matter. On this it is said:
“One should practice only good deeds,
whose happy outcome stretches ahead.
Giving and moral conduct,
developing a mind of love:
having developed these
three things yielding happiness,
that astute one is reborn
in a happy, pleasing world.”
This too is a matter that was spoken by the Blessed One: that is what I heard. - iti 22
- Kamma-rebirth are intertwined.
Likewise all the good & bad, skillful & unskillful, blamless & blameworthy intentions/actions are very real, with very real consequences:
What do you think, Sāḷha? Is greed real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Covetousness’ is what I mean by this. A person who is greedy and covetous kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think, Sāḷha? Is hate real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Malice’ is what I mean by this. A hateful and malicious person kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think, Sāḷha? Is delusion real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Ignorance’ is what I mean by this. A person who is deluded and ignorant kills living creatures, steals, commits adultery, lies, and encourages others to do the same. Is that for their lasting harm and suffering?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think, Sāḷha, are these things skillful or unskillful?”
“Unskillful, sir.”
“Blameworthy or blameless?”
“Blameworthy, sir.”
“Criticized or praised by sensible people?”
“Criticized by sensible people, sir.”
“When you undertake them, do they lead to harm and suffering, or not? Or how do you see this?”
“When you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering. That’s how we see it.”
“So, Sāḷha and friend, when I said: ‘Please, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think “The ascetic is our respected teacher.” But when you know for yourselves: “These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering”, then you should give them up.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.
Please, Sāḷha and friend, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are skillful, blameless, praised by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness’, then you should acquire them and keep them.
What do you think? Is contentment real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Satisfaction’ is what I mean by this. A person who is content and satisfied doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think? Is love real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Kindness’ is what I mean by this. A loving and kind-hearted person doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think, Sāḷha? Is understanding real?”
“Yes, sir.”
“‘Knowledge’ is what I mean by this. A person who understands and knows doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit adultery, lie, or encourage others to do the same. Is that for their lasting welfare and happiness?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What do you think, Sāḷha, are these things skillful or unskillful?”
“Skillful, sir.”
“Blameworthy or blameless?”
“Blameless, sir.”
“Criticized or praised by sensible people?”
“Praised by sensible people, sir.”
“When you undertake them, do they lead to welfare and happiness, or not? Or how do you see this?”
“When you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness. That’s how we see it.”
“So, Sāḷha and friend, when I said: ‘Please, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think “The ascetic is our respected teacher.” But when you know for yourselves: -AN 3.66
The continuation after death is different depending on where one happens to be living right now.
Those here on earth right now who are bound for heaven after death due to good deeds will be able to easily remember this earthly life they had here in great detail, so in this case there is a clear continuation.
But those now currently in heaven who will after their death there take rebirth here on earth will not remember their heavenly life when being reborn here, unless they happen to reach a deep meditative state of recollection.
- The reality of kamma-rebirth is something The Buddha constantly said we have to know for ourselves irrespective of what others might claim:
Please, Kālāmas, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’, then you should give them up. - AN 3.65
Thank you for your response. It definitely give me something to thing about.
I’m not a 100% sure what I’m talking about either
1 Like
@Bion Very interesting. Could we hear more about what tradition that is and what you talked about, if not rebirth?
Soto Zen. Zen is concerned with the wholehearted practice of the way right here and now, regardless of what there is to gain, achieve or accomplish. Master Dogen, the founder of Soto Zen, much like Ajahn Chah, for example, believed in every activity as practice, wheteher it is sitting, chanting, cleaning, fetching water, cooking rice, washing the face or shaving the head.
Zen is concerned with understanding the true nature of everything, especially the self, and abandoning it. Much like the teaching of Ajahn Dune, about Mind is Buddha. One of his famous teachings was the four noble truths of the mind:
*The mind that is sent outwards is the origin of suffering (Samudaya).
*The result of the mind that is sent outwards is suffering (Dukkha).
*The mind that sees the mind clearly is the path (Magga).
*The result of the mind that sees the mind clearly is the cessation of suffering (Nirodha).
Master Dogen’s approach to the dharma was that practice is a natural expression of life. So, while he was someone that believed in rebirth and emphasized it in some of his later writings, much of the western Soto Zen practitioners don’t believe in it. Nevertheless, one can still engage in practice, which is to be done sincerely, with a no-gaining mind. We practice for the sake of the dharma, not for the sake of attaining anything, and besides, for a good rebirth, it is still right here and now that one has to make all the right efforts and create the causes and conditions necessary for it.
I hope you find this answer satifying.
2 Likes
Thank you very much. I did indeed.
1 Like
Please don’t get confused between the sense of “I am” and the word “Self”.
The word "Self"is a translation for atta, which in the EBT sense means a fixed, eternal, ultimate, unchanging essence that one is / controls.
The Buddha is clear (MN 38) that he examined the aggregates, including Consciousness and found only impermanent processes which were clung to.. thereby creating the sense of “I am” and consequently, Suffering.
This “I am” is not an atta. It is a processual manifestation, dependent upon the underlying running processes of the aggregates. There is an answer to how it is generated- “I and mine making” - but no answer to what it is other than circular reasoning pointing back at the aggregates. It does not have to be a Real Thing though, to have real effects! The influence of the “I am” is evident in deeds of thought, speech and bodily action. Though the natural working of the mind is flawless, when it passes through the lens of the “I am” it gives rise to the defilements of Greed, Hate & Delusion (MN 7). Self serving thoughts, speech and action arise.. aka bright/dark kamma (AN 4.233).
Since the sense of “I am” is a processual manifestation (like a flame) it is not destroyed by what is commonly known as Death. When an unenlightened person’s aggregates break up, the “I am” process that was running at this spatio temporal location ceases, only to restart again at another location, experiencing yet another substantial reality (SN 22.105) - all because of craving.
The “I am” is a changing process, now pointing to this, now that as “itself” - like the liquid Terminator 1000 struggling to retain its form - when enquired into, of course one experiences confusion …
which is why, IMO it is better to put aside this question and instead ask - where does this sense of continuity originate- this feeling of being an unchanging, enduring entity which is in control of and enjoying body/ sense experience now, in the past and in the future?
3 Likes
@faujidoc1, this distinction you’re drawing between the sentiment “I am” and the attā is an interesting one, the way you describe it. Can I ask you how it relates to the distinction drawn by the Venerable Khemaka in SN 22.89 between “I am” (asmī’ti) and “I am this” (ayamahamasmī’ti)? That’s one of my go to suttas for questions like this, and I’d like to see how what you’re saying fits in with that paradigm or how you see it.
1 Like
IMO, Ven Khemaka in SN22.89 points to the processual origin of the “I am” as a net manifestation of the interacting processes of the 5 aggregates when he compares the conceit “I am” to the scent of the flower that cannot be said to arise from any specific part.
For an ordinary person, there is no question at all that “I am” (SN 44.10)- rather they think in terms of what (as in some Ultimate Existing Thing - atta) is it that “I am” - and the answer is usually in terms of the 5 aggregates… especially the Body (sakayaditthi).
They conceive of the Body as being an existent, evident Thing which is the “I am” or which has the “I am” as an intrinsic property contained within it or think of the “I am” as being some Thing apart from the Body or the Body as belonging to the “I am”… in these ways they approve and delight in Thing-ness (atta) rather than questioning it or going beyond it (MN 1).
Given the Gradual Instruction and Training, the disciple proceeds with Contemplation and Inquiry into the characteristics of the Body and Mind (SN 12.62). They gradually realize the phenomenological, processual, impermanent nature of arising and ceasing of the aggregates. With their insight into anicca, dukkha and anatta they give up sakayaditthi - they are now certain that the sense of “I am” is not any of the 5 aggregates viz “I am this” (ayamahamasmī’ti) is done away with - … but the bringing into being (sankhara) of this sense of “I am” (asmī’ti) still continues. The I and mine making is still not done! 
Why does this lingering sense of “I am” remain? And how is it to be given up?
When Ven Khemaka ponders this question in the later part of SN 22.89, he realizes that the processual re/construction of “I am” is dependent on Ignorance (avijja) because of which volitional acts (abhisankhara) - effectively the “I am” that is the doer, the watcher, the knower- still continue. Repeated examination of the processual nature of the 5 aggregates (AN 3.33) results in giving up that conceit through final and complete understanding.
***************************************************************************************************
(The above reflects my current understanding of the matter - I have no intention of misrepresenting the Buddha. If its helpful, that’s great - if its not, let it go!)
4 Likes
This is the reason I believe, khandas can’t be ultimately said to exist, as the only thing that can utter “I am” is nothing but the khandas (not something imaging itself in or as the khandas… but the very khanda that speaks), and even if that is not granted, then perhaps ultimately, we can’t talk about the existence or cessation of khandas in a meaningful sense. 
When I have mental contact with feelings of happiness/ unpleasant or neutral, I know feelings exist. For those who attain to the cessation of perception and feelings, emerging from that, they can know, feeling had ceased in that absorption.
This is valid for Theravada Abhidhammic form of ultimately, it may not be valid for Mahāyana form of ultimately.
It was insightful (helpful). Thank you.
1 Like
faujidoc1, your last two posts were very well articulated and your sutta references are excellent. I agree with all of what you said including
Not understanding this, one takes the aggregate consciousness as a sense of self rather than “as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as a boil, as a dart, as gloom, as an affliction, as alien, as breaking apart, as empty, as not-self.” [MN 64].
Part of the gradual path is: understanding consciousness and cultivating wisdom to the point where one can see how those two are tangled together and then developing wisdom to the point where one can begin to operate from a wise mind rather than a conditioned consciousness. (MN 43)
1 Like
What happens if you get severe Alzheimer’s in a few decades or less? Or have a massive stroke tomorrow? No more knowledge, even the most rudimentary. So knowledge can be clearly seen as impermanent even in this life. And from that example, the reality of aging, sickness, and death can be clearly seen as dukkha in this present life.
What we take with us to future lives is our kamma. “Kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, craving the moisture” (AN 3.65). Since death can happen any moment, we should make a refuge in the Triple Gem and make good kamma while we can while we have the knowledge of a Buddha’s teaching. Encountering Buddhadhamma and obtaining the conditions to practice it is a very rare and precious thing (AN 8.29) and we don’t know when we’ll encounter it again.
2 Likes