07-25-2010, 12:06 AM
Tiff wrote:Okay, thanks. The reason I asked is because I didn't see about the "one candle lighting another" quote so was not sure you were referring to my article.
I was referring to the Wiki article your post linked to. Here's the quote from the Wiki article:
Some English-speaking Buddhists prefer the term "rebirth" or "re-becoming" (Sanskrit: punarbhava; Pali: punabbhava) to "reincarnation" as they take the latter to imply a fixed entity that is reborn.[7] It is said to be the "evolving consciousness" (Pali: samvattanika viññana, M.1.256)[8][9] or "stream of consciousness" (Pali: viññana sotam, D.3.105).[10] that reincarnates. The early Buddhist texts make it clear that there is no permanent consciousness that moves from life to life.[11] The lack of a fixed self does not mean lack of continuity. In the same way that a flame is transferred from one candle to another,there is a conditioned relationship between one life and the next: they are neither identical nor completely distinct.
About rebirth, I'm okay with that, its cyclic exisitence, that which arises due to ignorance. Are you saying you perceive I don't support the idea of rebirth in any form?No.
BTW, my main reason for the article though was to show dependent arising as an original teaching of Gautama.Heh...well, as usual, I read the parts that interested me.
I was referring to the Wiki article your post linked to. Here's the quote from the Wiki article:
Some English-speaking Buddhists prefer the term "rebirth" or "re-becoming" (Sanskrit: punarbhava; Pali: punabbhava) to "reincarnation" as they take the latter to imply a fixed entity that is reborn.[7] It is said to be the "evolving consciousness" (Pali: samvattanika viññana, M.1.256)[8][9] or "stream of consciousness" (Pali: viññana sotam, D.3.105).[10] that reincarnates. The early Buddhist texts make it clear that there is no permanent consciousness that moves from life to life.[11] The lack of a fixed self does not mean lack of continuity. In the same way that a flame is transferred from one candle to another,there is a conditioned relationship between one life and the next: they are neither identical nor completely distinct.
About rebirth, I'm okay with that, its cyclic exisitence, that which arises due to ignorance. Are you saying you perceive I don't support the idea of rebirth in any form?No.
BTW, my main reason for the article though was to show dependent arising as an original teaching of Gautama.Heh...well, as usual, I read the parts that interested me.