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.
Reincarnation; why I don' t believe.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Victor thank you for your post but I need to take my time to search some terms in it.
Before - I can only say: No comment and hope you will have patience with me.
PLS forgive me but I had so much food for thought here that I need time to answer your post with the full respect which it deserves...
All the posts there left me with so much food for thought that I have to take a break.
THANK you because all those posts were valuable to me and I respect them too much to just enter the ‘’blabla mode’’
Namasti
The Buddha called it meditation on death and recommended the practice highly for those for which it is suitable.
:coffee:
(Source: http://www.thomasriddle.net/swan_mokh/chants/pages/swan-mok-chanting_16.htm)
They used to have those on Market St. and around Embarcadero in the 90's. I think they locked them all up due to misuse of them. You can imagine all the hell like illegal activities that went on in those things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatana.
Agreeing to disagree is alright with me.
Since I have alot of Christian friends I have compared the two and there is nothing that really contradicts the other. The Buddhist view on the spirit world encompasses the Christian.
BTW. I know Buddhist people who have seen devas by following the excersises described to se Devas. It should be possible for any one to do. But I do not really see any point out of Buddhist perspective.
The burden of proof in buddhism is on your self. You are free to believe or disbelieve whatever you like whatever others may say. So you can believe in bigfoot or that the world is round because others say so.
You do believe the world is round dont you Ric? Because others who have not seen it for them selves says so? Whats the difference then in your belief in that the round world or your belief in bigfoot?
In this case I agree with Ric. I do not really give a hoot what the suttas says. I remember what I remember. Exactly. So you keep telling me but can never explain what that has to do explicitly with rebirth? It extends to all strong attachment.
You are free to believe what ever you like but the one saying rebirth is a myth is not scientific nor logical. Just so you know...
ha aha ha hah ha. Very funny.
However our energy can be spread 2% to the future grasshopper, 0,001 to the grass or an apple in etc etc.
Karma implies ethics and I don’t think morality has any influence on physical energy.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you very much for your comment about my arrogance. I should not use the word ‘’amusing’’
I am trying hard to stop my ego but after whole life habit it does not come easy.
Sorry if I have offended.
Reincarnation is not the third one. It is a relative truth. I believe it is the first category and for some the second. In the first category it can pull you out of other more afflictive wrong views into a view that it is easier to use skillfully and easier to lead to non-grasping of the manifest sensual world.
So in my view these threads are a story in getting mixed up in the levels of teaching. But it is worthwhile to understand how the three levels are part of a whole of the teachings.
Are you saying that if not for religion, "consciousness-essence", karma, bible etc, we humans can be evil??????
Good question / I will need to think about it longer/.
However,
Humans are product of cruel laws of evolution.
Energy working for million and million years – matter – living organism – consciousness.
This consciousness produces ethics, which from the evolution point of view is total waste of time.
What next?
No idea. Consciousnesses when it comes the age of universe humans are only for a millisecond. So how can we answer?
Having morality as a product of my awareness – I hope that the universe have other ideas then evolution in the future.
Again I got stuck on this post. I will be back soon.
and "cruel laws of evolution"....what cruel law is that....its actually a very amazing and inspiring process. in a way it even substantiates impermanence.
http://www.purifymind.com/LessMind.htm
Also just because the amount of time life has been on our planet is tiny compared to the age of the Universe does not mean that life did not exist before our planet existed. There are a lot of stars in the Universe each of them with a possibility of having a planet which can sustain life.
Metta to all sentient beings
This is my conjecture and creative thinking rather than a dharma teaching I have received.
The important point about karma/rebirth is that although most people only need to be aware of karma as it operates in the current lifetime in order for it to function as a moral check, some people do get away with causing all manner of pain in this lifetime, without suffering the consequences. Knowing that those people will face the consequences in the next life can be a comfort to the victims of such people. Does being aware of the potential ripening of negative karma in a future lifetime deter people from leading an immoral life? I think it probably only serves as a deterrent to people already inclined to lead a moral life. We can't know for sure without going to Buddhist countries and conducting a study. This is helpful, Jeffrey.
I was hoping you could tell me.
But if we start over from the beginning...
First of all no-self is a literal translation of Anatta. The Buddha did not teach that there was no self. Actually he stated that this was in fact as wrong to believe as if there is a self.
But many people that want to make a case against rebirth use the literal translation of Anatta to indicate that there is no self to be reborn. But since that is not what is meant then that conclusion is wrong.
Second of all it is not entirely correct to say that life is suffering since any one life can be very plesurable. But on the whole it is not. But maybe that is what you meant?
/Victor
In fact Christianity has formulated the laws of morality in the easiest and most supirior form:
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Simple as Pie. No need to bother with karma and wierd Nibbana.
/Victor
"Why does all this matter so much? Why did it cause me so many sleepless nights? It matters because the entire edifice of traditional Buddhist thought stands or falls on the belief in rebirth. If there was no rebirth, then why would one expend any effort in trying to liberate oneself from the cycle of birth and death and attain nirvana, the final aim of Buddhism? If there was no rebirth, then how would moral acts that do not ripen before one's death ever bear their fruits? If there was no rebirth, why would you vow to attain enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings, a task that will take endless lifetimes to complete?"
" Right view that sides with merit..."
Believing in rebirth will make it easier to part with a loved one who dies because you know sooner or later you will meet them again.
When you lose your job or wallet you know on the whole it does not really matter. And it is easier to have empathy with the thief since you know that once upon a time you have been in the same position as the thief and sometime in the future you will be again.
/Victor
If I am not mistaken.
/Victor
"rebith...not to be confused with reincarnation!"
The evolution of the universe is all just atoms taking various forms meaninglessly, isn't it? Or is it?
What I'm saying is that fundamentally if there is no consequence for me beyond this lifetime, then it is ok for me to do lawful but immoral acts (so I don't get caught and punished) in this lifetime. And to answer fivebells from earlier, if I decide that the benefits of these acts are more appealing to me than meditation, then that's my choice.
What does it matter if the universe is evolving in a particular direction if in the end it all goes black?
And, again, what does it matter how I act in this lifetime if in the end it all goes black?
You say there is no information, but that's not true. If you are interested, if you can find some work of Ian Stevenson I'd highly recommend it. He thoroughly checked a lot of past-life memory experiences and devoted his life to researching the subject.
This is a comment on his work by a professor in philosophy that gives a good introduction.
Not to convince you or anything, but if you are open to the subject, this is really very interesting to read.
With metta,
Sabre
It is like the hypothesis that there could possibly be other senses in an organism. Such as a magnetic sense, though there is no sense organ. We don't have evidence that a magnetic sense is possible (ok pretend there is no study of biology of organisms other than humans and that we may only study ourselves). But it is internally consistent that we shouldn't have evidence since of course we don't have a sense organ for magnetic sense.
Similarly a being that is not highly realized (as internally consistent with discussion of rebirth) does not have the 'sense organ' (understanding) to realize rebirth.
Also, it's over four years since his death, now. But maybe his reincarnated self hasn't learned numbers yet? Or maybe reincarnation doesn't work that way, and he just hasn't come back to earth yet? Or maybe it's just that his reincarnation has forgotten the combination he was supposed to bring back to his department members? That's one of the problems with his "research." There's no coherent conceptual framework to it. No one knows how reincarnation/rebirth would actually work, so there's very little in the way of hypotheses to test.
I wish I could use parts of the quotes on this forum. / Can I? /
Or at least use Italic or different color to note what is the quote?
So my own way:
YOU said:
‘’The evolution of the universe is all just atoms taking various forms meaninglessly, isn't it? Or is it?’’
Meaninglessly?
Not at all.
The evolution of matter and even further of simple life was not pointless.
As far as we know our consciousness was a product / or a by product. / and an able reciver of it.
You said:
‘’What I'm saying is that fundamentally if there is no consequence for me beyond this lifetime, then it is ok for me to do lawful but immoral acts (so I don't get caught and punished) in this lifetime. And to answer fivebells from earlier, if I decide that the benefits of these acts are more appealing to me than meditation, then that's my choice.’’
Sure it is your choice. /assuming that the free will exists/.
Do tell me , are you not being immoral because you are scared of punishment?
You said:
“”What does it matter if the universe is evolving in a particular direction if in the end it all goes black?””
I don’t know what direction the universe is evolving.
I believe that for me individually will go blank / you call it black/
BUT SO WHAT??? :coffee:
Batchelor: Stevenson investigated something like 1,700 cases in the course of his life of which I think he says that there are 47 that he cannot explain by any other means than by past and future lives, and I agree with you that that's evidence.
Read the entire article here
http://www.tricycle.com/feature/3857-1.html'
Right. So the obverse would be true as well. There's no obvious connection between unethical behavior and a lack of belief in post-mortem retribution.
..."full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".
There either is or isn't rebirth. Two possibilities. Does that make it 50 50 by your logic? Flip a coin. Equal probablity that there is and isn't a spaghetti monster.