Namdrol wrote:TMingyur wrote:[
Matter can be transformed into non-material energy. Why shouldn't it be possible that matter is transformed into consciousness?
There is no such thing as "non-material" energy.
If gamma-ray radioactivity is considered "material". Or visual rays like visual light are considered "material". But where or what is "matter" in these cases? As far as light is concerned you may see it both ways "corpuscular" or "wave".
One may also considers matter to be energy but then there is no basis for your differentiation between "material" and "non-material".
Namdrol wrote:TMingyur wrote:Namdrol wrote:The first moment of mind in this life therefore must be dependent on a previous moment of mind from the last life.
Ergo, it is proven through inference that rebith is a valid teaching.
Now that's a logic that is based on presuppositions that beg the question themselves.
Yes, that is the point. Either one assumes mind has a material cause or not. If not, rebirth is proven.
So you admit that your reasoning is based on an arbitrary assumptions that actually is not different from the alleged "inference". Circular reasoning.
Namdrol wrote:TMingyur wrote:
But rebirth neither can be validly proven nor validly disproven. Obviously this causes discontent in the minds of some so that they are willing to even discredit logic.
Rebirth can be inferred, and inference is a type of pramana. The only people who reject inference as a pramana are materialists and some modern so called "Buddhists" who have a hard time giving up their materialist views.
Yes, rebirth can be "inferred" if one assumes that
1. there is rebirth
2. the supporting factor is what is called and known as "consciousness"
3. rebirth is based on a continuity of what is called and known as "consciousness"
4. that the arbitrary categorization of "material" and "non-material" is a valid one
5. based on 4 that "homogeneity between causes and effects" is required.
If one is interested to infer rebirth one may choose the appropriate assumptions and take those as valid and "infer" rebirth.
I am a Buddhist. I am not a "materialist". I do not reject rebirth. But I reject dishonest reasoning which discredits reasoning and which also dicredits Buddhism if conducted in the context of Buddhism.