Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is Samsara and other a "neccesary" belief for a Western Buddhist?
TheEccentric
Hampshire, UK Veteran
I am an agnostic on Samsara, because there is no way of knowing what happens when we die and there is no evidence for it so I do not see why I should believe in it, I also reject the other "magical" elements that are followed Buddhism such as the different Deities because I just don't see how it is possible for being like that to exist and the chakras. Is it Black and White that you have to believe in them?
0
Comments
It's not 'samsara' you're hesitant over. It's re-birth.
And that's fine. You join the legion of many other Buddhists who feel the same way. You're not expected to believe in it. There is nothing, anywhere in Buddhism which dictates you should.
Follow your own investigations and conclusions, this is what is suggested... Deities are personifications of particular attributes and qualities that Buddhists aspire to, or wish to develop. They're not 'real' in the sense that Buddhist believe they exist as actual persons.
They're particularly evident in Tibetan Buddhism/mahayana.... and they have a life-span exactly as a human has. They're not eternal or omnipotent, they have their own finite period of existence too.... Chakras are Yogic terms for locations of particular vortices of energy within the body. They feature in the Ayurvedic Indian medical system.
But you can take them or leave them.
Where do you get the impression that (a) they're an intrinsic part of Buddhism and (b) you HAVE to believe in them?
For example, one moment of consciousness conditions the arising of next (rebirth), just as one action conditions the quality of feeling a moment of consciousness cognizes (kamma); and in this process, moment-to-moment rebirth refers to the arising and ceasing of our sense of self, the ephemeral 'I,' which is ultimately the product of what the Buddha called a process of 'I-making' and 'my-making' (ahankara-mamankara) and something that's readily observable in the here and now.
According to the texts, a beginning point to samsara (literally 'wandering on') isn't evident (SN 15.3). The way I see it, this can be interpreted two ways — that a beginning point to the continual cycle of death and rebirth of beings isn't evident, or that a beginning point to the continual cycle of death and rebirth of the conceit 'I am,' the self-identification that designates a being (satta), isn't evident — and they're not mutually exclusive.
In my opinion, if you choose to not to accept the idea of post-mortem rebirth, the cycle of births and deaths that are said to take place due to the presence of craving in mind, you can still apply the general concept to your present experience, observing how mental processes continually arise and cease, particularly our sense of self—something that's always in flux, ever-changing from moment to moment in response to various internal and external stimuli.
Just something to consider in the course of your study and practice.
I used to feel the same in regards to the heavy agnosticism. But now I recognize what samsara or dualistic thinking and grasping is. I also recognize that the deities are aspects of ourselves and that the chakras are the enlightened energy of everything.
To help you out in regards to energy. Have you ever felt anger? Not as an idea but in the body. There is a massive surge of energy. This is chakra activity.
Anyways there are no necessary beliefs in Buddhism. You use what works.