Yes, I agree it does seem broadly compatible. However, it also appears quite incompatible with the Teachers specific teaching that, “‘they’re not reborn’ doesn’t apply.” I take it that is the point Joseph is referring to when he says:
I’ve seen many proposals over the years how to reconcile. Here is a non-exhaustive list in no particular order:
- Find an alternative pali translation of one or both passages
- Deny that rebirth was ever taught by the Buddha
- Dismiss suttas that seemingly indicate otherwise as fake or late
- Assume that rebirth was taught only to lay people and no-rebirth was taught to mendicants
- That rebirth applies to sentient beings, but upon awakening one should no longer regard a Tathagata as a sentient being and hence rebirth does not apply to them
- Saying only suffering is reborn and since a Tathagata is no longer suffering then ‘not reborn’ does not apply
- Regarding rebirth as a conventional truth while ‘reborn doesn’t apply’ an ultimate truth and they are somehow different
- Saying that rebirth never ends and the Buddha never taught that rebirth ends
- Dismiss any suttas that seemingly disagree with any of the above - by adherents of the above - as fake or late
I take no position here on the above. Just trying to point out some ways I’ve seen people answer the problem that @josephzizys is seemingly pointing out.
