@jayarava
(As it seems unlikely that you would be aware of it, I should probably mention that this view of everything being continually re-created, moment by moment, though with obvious tendencies of continuing on the paths of least resistance, is a Zen orthodoxy with a lot of Soto practitioners. I can probably track down some references for it if you like, though I've mostly encountered it in dharma talks rather than literature.)

I know of at least one relatively well-known teacher with several books under his belt who likes to suggest that this is what the Buddha meant by "rebirth"-- the continual refreshing of all that is, with a lack of carried-over "identity" from one movie frame to the next. Ah, just remembered that the Japanese call each segmentary moment a "nen." Masao Abe wrote about it some, though I no longer have his book to look it up in.

Do I think every moment is a new world? Ultimately, yes, though to actually perceive even hints of it is rare. It's mostly just something interesting to think about, for me. Einstein also seems to have had some similar thoughts, based on some quotes I've seen.

Does it affect my everyday life in any way? Nope. Doesn't matter if it's actually an accurate assessment and has nothing to do with the actual work that is set before me. 😎

@AndyLowry By rebirth, "the Buddha" meant *rebirth*. No amount of eel wriggling will change that!

Unfortunately karma and rebirth are not entirely coherent (esp with dependent arising) so new versions kept having to be invented. I have yet to come across a good one.

"Moments" (Skt. kṣana) are also an epistemic issue. They have a subjective mode of being (only exist as mental constructs).

@jayarava
I think I've adopted Fronsdal's "agnostic" stance on that topic. Should there ever be actual evidence for rebirth in the EBT sense, I'll be delighted and follow the discoveries with great interest. Until then, it looks like a corruption to me. It's not difficult to imagine how such a thing could happen; religions incorporate little chunks and pieces from each other all the time. A lot of the Digha has a "hey, we have that too!" flavor, which makes me wonder, especially since some of that collection seems to have been late origin.

That long, long period between Parinabbana and the monks finally getting around to writing things down allows for a lot of speculation about what might have been interjected from the outside-- or simply made up from the inside, for whatever reason-- some of which will tend toward the wild. Especially in my case, since I fell into this whole Dhamma thing from the wrong direction-- an awakening or kensho or whatever (all the words for it are dirty since there really is no "achievement" involved) about a year before I even knew Buddhism existed other than just seeing the word somewhere.

And then, the times being the times, the first things I could find to read about my exciting new discovery ("Hey, have you heard about this Buddhism thing?" 😆 ) were from one or another Zen/Chan source, and off I went. So my approach will always have a paccekabuddha flavor, and I'm really grateful for that pacceka loophole!

Sorry for all the useless personal history stuff, and I'll get back to your more interesting topics of discussion now. I thought a little explanation as to why I might say things that seem misguided or perhaps nutty would be a good thing, just in the interests of understanding. Thanks for your patience.