In Buddhist philosophy, kamma is volition, and the incitement of volition is 'cause' of rebirth. It relates directly to 'craving' (desire and aversion) because the volition is incited instantly upon cravings, and all cravings are reactions to sensations. The reason we we react to them is we are ignorant as to the underlying nature of their 'impermanance'. We are deluded into believing feelings have endurance when in fact they are momentary. Every psychological reaction elicits self referential thought, me, my, mine, I; which give rise to the sense that 'all this' is happening to 'me'. Thus self is re-fabricated and perpetuated from the last moment to the next creating the illusion of myself as an enduring identical identity.

In the meditation it starts to be revealed that feelings are not enduring and at some point you are no longer affected by them, and reaction stops, so volition ceases to be generated. That's when the one you used to think was 'me' becomes exposed to full conscious awareness and you realise it is not me. We also notice how the one that pretends to be me is inherently depraved by nature, but by that stage one has no reaction to that and can observe the egocentric antics with complete neutrality - since that one aware is neutral by nature.

It is a very delicate balance, though, and that old 'me' has many tricks that work to distract you and get you lost in the reactivity that keeps us in delusion and bondage.

This has very deep moral implications in context with being depraved. We have to be quite acutely aware of how we react to things and what of sort of will (good will or ill will) such reactivity incites within ourselves, and thus we might understand 'just what we do', as opposed to 'know not what we do'.

Perhaps you may begin to understand "the sin of the world", Gem. And salvation.
?
We are the evolved animal/mammal, evolved in illusory time, (and space).
Which? The chief rebel instigated at the Fall, in Paradise.

Everybody, gotta knock off bringing Buddhism into the Christianity thread or section.
Think it, don't post it.

Thank you

You can say that again. So, let me repeat once more the question that I had put to you, which you, with your many tricks and ramblings have failed to address, and that question was; "What happens to all those who at the close of each cycle of universal activity have not attained Moksha or Nirvana, according to your belief?"

And let me here add, are they reborn in the next cycle of universal activity as the person that they were in their previous life, or reincarnated as another life form?

Peace Gem.

What's 'sin of the world' about? I thought salvation was based on the story of Jesus coming back to save believers. I really don't think anyone knows what 'chief rebel' is supposed to mean... are you using your own original terms which no one else knows?

That's one of those of times I have to be wary of my reactions and the consequential volition I generate.The cycle is a reactive one within which a self-referential thought is perperpeted by the process of volition. If I react adversely, I generate ill will and hence become depraved. If we are not aware of that 'we know not what we do'. Hence we need to be aware of our reactivity and the sort of volition we generate. Then we 'know what we do'.

In the first place, your question assumes there is someone who reaches nirvana and/or is trapped in the reaction/action cycle, but the sense of there being someone is flawed. For as long as volition regenerates a self-impression it will seem as if there is continuity of self being affected by everything that happens, That which is affected has a reaction, which perpetuates the one affected, ans so reacts, perpetuates etc etc etc.

You stop, which means volition ceases. Christians would conceptualise that as surrendering one's own will to the will of God. Until such time, we remain ignorant in delusion, and continue reaction/volition/action over and again.

In other words you are afraid to speak the truth, and admit that according to your belief, reincarnation is not a rebirth of self, which is destroyed when the eternal soul is given a different body in the eternal cycle of reincarnations, in which new body the eternal soul develops a new self, a new mind/spirit, that in the next cycle may attain to Moksha or Nirvana.

The old self is not reborn, so what has become of it?

Peace.

This may help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_in_Jainism
So if your soul attracts karma, the re-birth will not erase all your past volition.
But I'm quite sure that the new self body mind will materialise karma in a different way each time.

That, I'm not sure.
If I tell you the famous "do not think of an elephant", you can't help thinking of it. That's why meditation is all about letting go of the thoughts. Letting go, not fighting, you can't push away your volition.

No one was actually being born and reborn. It's a reactive cycle which perpetuates a self impression. The problem is that sense of self is fundamentally depraved because it is nothing but wound up reactivity that assumes the position of me. 'Rebirth' pertains to the overall delusion, but when when you become aware of it, "you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Indeed. Pushing away implies an aversion toward the thoughts, which has already incited the volition, and implies 'I' push away 'my' thoughts which are 'mine', thus regenerating the one pretending to be 'me'. As we see in this example, 'me' is a construct off psychological reactivity, and as such is pretty a pretty horrid concoction. In so saying, I wouldn;t want to generate distaste toward it, as that is more aversion upon aversion and a continuation of the same issue. It's a tricky, sticky situation.

Meditation is fundamentally the means by which the dillemma can be resolved, so to me it is a very particular thing. Most would say 'whatever works for you', but 'works' implies you get what you want which means desire is still an endemic factor.

I think meditation is about the truth. You examine to find out what is true, and the truth has nothing to do with what anyone wants, making any factor of desire futile. This means there is intention to 'see it as it is' without the volition to make it 'as I want it to be'.

People have argued with me saying the volition is to cease volition, but that's an infinite regression. It makes no sense, so its a terrible argument. The intent is to find out what's true, and as JK put it, "it is the truth that liberates; not your efforts to be free".