SuttaCentral
I just check the suttas I thought this was from and had that backwards, I’ve only seen Craving > Bhava > Birth, my bad. Another analogy might be that a stream full of water (craving) needs a place to flow into (bhava) to continue its existence/extension (rebirth), without water the river would cease to flow anywhere and eventually dry up without any replenishment.
I think I feel resolved in understanding more what is meant by bhava and its function in DO.
There are also a few suttas with punabbhava, i.e. ‘again-bhava’. Eg in SN 12.38 & SN 12.64 we have mini-DOs in the form of
sankhara - punabbhava - jātijarāmaraṇa
I haven’t done a full analysis, but punabbhava might be a legit synonym for the DO bhava - which would mean that the ‘again’-aspect would be baked in the DO bhava
Antara , is this something valid ? So the moment of death for A and rebirth as B , there is a gap , were that state kind of “vacuum” ?
Fyi, in Tibetan buddhism this gap is also called Bardo:
Some nice links on the topic in the thread! I’ve found bhava to be a rather vague term.
If one gives credence to the three lives theory of Dependent Origination (DO) (seems one reasonable enough way of approaching things to me), there appears to be a certain correspondence between sankhara (DO step 2) and bhava, the earlier being past kamma (where ignorance regarding the four noble truths led to the DO chain not being cut, leading to one’s current birth) and the later (bhava) being more related to currently active kamma that may lead to future birth.
I suppose bhava is also the root of bhavana or cultivation. The metaphor of a seed planted in the ground has come to mind regarding bhava. Perhaps bhava might correspond to selecting a seed, deciding where to plant it, and watering and preparing the ground around it. Sankhara has the dual meaning of being both the process of fabrication and also what is fabricated. I suspect bhava also may have something of this dual nature. As well as cultivating this “seed”, it would seem to also refer to the produced seed itself (the embryonic sense-sphere/fine-material/formless being). I suppose jati is distinguished as being the point when the seed actually finally takes root and sprouts (too late at that point to move it to another nicer garden or stop it sprouting).
In paṭiccasamuppāda there are two similar terms: bhava and jāti. Literally bhava means birth where jāti has the same meaning. However these are two different terms. The Buddha explains the term bhava in AN3.76 about the term bhava(see also AN3.77).
Bhava means the formation of kamma to experience the result(vipāka).The formation of kamma to result a rebirth in a kāmaloka is called kāmabhava. Similarly rūpa and arūpa bhava. When there is upādāna there is the formation of kamma to experience the kammavipāka. Therefore the birth occurs accordingly. When there is bhava to be born in kāmaloka they will be reborn in a kāmaloka.
bhavapaccayā jāti
Continued existence is a condition for rebirth
When there is continued existence there is a birth. If there is no continued existence there is no (re)birth.
If bhava is the seedling;
So, Ānanda, deeds are the field, consciousness is the seed, and craving is the moisture.
Iti kho, ānanda, kammaṃ khettaṃ, viññāṇaṃ bījaṃ, taṇhā sneho.
The consciousness of sentient beings—hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving—is established in a lower realm. That’s how there is rebirth into a new state of existence in the future.
Avijjānīvaraṇānaṃ sattānaṃ taṇhāsaṃyojanānaṃ hīnāya dhātuyā viññāṇaṃ patiṭṭhitaṃ evaṃ āyatiṃ punabbhavābhinibbatti hoti. (AN 3.76)
Bhava as Bhante Sujato has said is life. It can be life in any of the three worlds - Sensual, Form or formless. Whatever intentional actions performed in any life generate the potential for rebirth because of the potential for consequences inherent in intentional actions. It is like getting Apples if an Apple tree is planted.
Bhava or life therefore is a work in progress. It is dynamic and never static. That is why someone like Angulimala could realize Nibbana although he had committed murders.
With Metta
Tattha katamo upādānapaccayā bhavo? Bhavo duvidhena -atthi kammabhavo, atthi upapattibhavo. Tatta katamo kammabhavo? Puññābhisaṅkhāro, apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro -ayaṃ vuccati “Kammabhavo”. Sabbampi bhavagāmikammaṃ kammabhavo.
Tattha katamo upapattibhavo? Kāmabhavo, rūpabhavo, arūpabhavo, saññābhavo, asaññābhavo, nevasaññānāsaññābhavo, ekavokārabhavo, catuvokārabhavo, pañcavokārabhavo -ayaṃ vuccati “Upapattibhavo”. Iti ayañca kammabhavo, ayañca upapattibhavo. Ayaṃ vuccati “upādānapaccayā bhavo”.Definition of Continuation
Herein, what is ‘with attachment as condition: continuation?’
Continuation is two-fold: there is continuation through (intentional) deeds, there is continuation through rebirth.
Herein, what is ‘continuation through (intentional) deeds?’
(There is) a meritorious (volitional) process, a demeritorious (volitional) process, an impertubable (volitional) process.
This is said to be ‘continuation through (intentional) deeds’.
All (intentional) deeds leading to continuation is continuation from (intentional) deeds.
Herein, what is ‘continuation through rebirth?’
(There is) continuation in the sense-world spheres, continuation in the form-world spheres, continuation in the formless-world spheres, continuation with perception, continuation without perception, continuation with neither-perception-nor-non-perception, continuation with one constituent, continuation with four constituents, continuation with five constituents.
This is said to be ‘continuation through rebirth’.
Thus, this is continuation through (intentional) deeds, this is continuation through rebirth.
This is said to be ‘with attachment as condition: continuation’(Ven.Anandajoti).
Note: Continuation = bhava
I thought here only for ebt !?
I don’t understand your comment? 
No ? Isnt here at suttacentral one is not allowed to post mahayana or vajrayana material afaik .
Hi @anon85245511, I don’t know where you got this understanding from. You may benefit from contacting moderators to understand better the rules.
Beside that, if you read the link I posted you will learn that the concept of antarabhava is found in the Pali Nikayas.
It does even have a placeholder for fruition of awakening taking place in that gap state, it is the case of antarāparinibbāyī, as found in SN46.3, AN7.55.
Its been quite sometimes but forgotten where i read it but sort of .
That’s why i didnt read link you posted . Anyway thanks .
Hello Ven. @Amatabhani
In your post above, you noted:
And your later post:
Given the distinction between continuation via deeds vs. continuation via rebirth, would it be fair to interpret bhava as being the mental conditioning that results from clinging and hence further inclines the mind toward craving in this very life? So from a practical perspective, bhava reflects the deepening of ignorance and self-views?
The reason I ask, sir, is that I am trying to compre the EBTs to my own practice. I work to weaken self-views and craving by labelling every unwholesome distraction as “dangerous, not me, not mine”, and then releasing the clinging to the phenomenon.
When I get this right, these phenomena fade away and do not reappear, i.e., cessation. So I have rather come to the conclusion that it is clinging that makes phenomena seem “solid” and persist through time. When craving ends, by abandoning self-views, clinging ends. And when clinging ends the unwholesome phenomena do not reappear. So from a practical perspective, it seems to me practically speaking that the bhava through deeds is the kamma (resulting from clinging) that causes phenomena to reappear in this life.
I would love you thoughts on this!
With much metta,
Matt
Greetings Gene 
You are correct in that this forum is for the discussion of EBT’s, but in order to bring out understanding, other source materials are sometimes used. The point of note is that other texts are used to highlight and clarify points related to the EBT’s, and not discussed in their own right. I hope this clarifies things. 
In the first post I explained the bhava (kammabhava) which can be found as an element of dependant origination. As bhante Sujato explained, the basic meaning of bhava is “existence” or “life”. Which is the second type of bhava (uppattibhava) explained in Paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅga (2nd post).
Here is not a place to discuss about practice and personal experiences. So let’s stick to thefacts from the texts.
If we are to connect self-view and dependant origination, Dependant origination is the middle way to explain the existance of beings without jumping to two extremes.
In a way it is correct to interpret likewise. Craving is an element of dependant origination. When there is no craving tge circle brakes. When it brakes there is no bhava (both types) (SN12.35).
And when a person realizes the truth(arahant), he still lives but without craving or volitional formations (sankhāra), there is no formation of new kamma. His existence after realization is due to pubbakamma (old deeds); as a result of old deeds.
I am not sure what you are implying here as deepening, but it is certain that bhava arises due to ignorance, or one can say due to craving (taṇhā). Self-view is a part of ignorance (Avijjānīvaraṇa).
Self-view is explaind in SN 22.93, and that is 20 fold.
It’s the age old question ‘why are we here?’ or better yet ‘how are we here?’.
The meaning of life, or the answer to the question: “What is the meaning of life?”, pertains to the significance of living or existence in general. Many other related questions include: “Why are we here?”, “What is life all about?”, or “What is the purpose of existence?” There have been many proposed answers to these questions from many different cultural and ideological backgrounds. The search for life’s meaning has produced much philosophical, scientific, theological, and metaphysical speculation throughout history. Different people and cultures believe different things for the answer to this question.
The way I see it. After death if you still have attachment for the five khandas or the six sense spheres you’ll take up(upadaya) a new birth in other words. Your desire or anger; felt and impassioned by oneself in this life that you crave in this life with continue in the next life
Peter Harvey also translates bhava as becoming, I wonder where this error comes from? 
In “The Selfless Mind: Personality, Consciousness and Nirvana in Early Buddhism”:
Although he also seems to translate it into existence in other cases as well:
