Reincarnation; why I don' t believe.

compassionate_warrior

I have lost control of my own tread. :-/

So many new questions, so many new valuable links and ideas. Thank you.

I have tried to start from the beginning and then from the end but I am overwhelmed by over 100 posts.

haha! See what happens when you start a thread on rebirth/reincarnation? Welcome to our community!

Victorious

I got to 430 posts before it was shut down on my first rebirth thread.
lol.

seeker242

Rebirth, no rebirth, reincarnation, no reincarnation. Does it really matter with regards to real life situations?

Yes, it does matter.

For people who believe in rebirth, who struggle to accommodate impermanence & not-self, such as Victor, belief in rebirth, going to heaven with Jesus, etc, provides their mind with some comfort.

This is why the Buddha taught rebirth. It can help end the suffering of those who cannot accommodate impermanence & not-self. It is compassionate.

Please think of very worldly people, for example, professional surfers. They spend everyday getting high on surfing waves. But when one of them dies, these non-religious people believe their deceased friend is now surfing waves in heaven, sending them waves, etc

Ordinary people wish to believe these things because letting go is not that easy

That is not the only thing they get high on. Trust me I know this. I've been a "surfer" since I was a little kid, but never good enough to go pro, heh. But yes, I see what you are saying.

compassionate_warrior

For people who believe in rebirth, who struggle to accommodate impermanence & not-self, such as Victor, belief in rebirth, going to heaven with Jesus, etc, provides their mind with some comfort.

This is why the Buddha taught rebirth. It can help end the suffering of those who cannot accommodate impermanence & not-self. It is compassionate.

Several assumptions here. Have you polled people to find out why they believe in rebirth? Some don't actually "believe", they "know", because of past-life memories, or they have friends who have had past-life recall. It's not about comfort, it's about simple fact, and besides, if some of the rebirthers succeed in becoming enlightened in the current lifetime, they're not going to be reborn anyway, unless they choose to as a bodhisattva. So there goes the "comfort" argument.

You're assuming the Buddha taught rebirth out of compassion to those who couldn't accept there's an end, or impermanence. (Sounds a bit condescending, like idiot compassion. Why not teach people the truth as he saw it? We had a suttric quote earlier today that there were no false teachings by the Buddha.) Rather than he taught it because, well, he believed in rebirth.

Victorious

You're assuming the Buddha taught rebirth out of compassion to those who couldn't accept there's an end, or impermanence. (Sounds a bit condescending, like idiot compassion. Why not teach people the truth as he saw it? We had a suttric quote earlier today that there were no false teachings by the Buddha.) Rather than he taught it because, well, he believed in rebirth.

It not only sounds condescending but is also total transgression of the precept of lying. Why would a Buddha do that?

Not only that but as you point out he is obviously robbing them of their only opportunity to become enlightened. Sounds a bit devious dont you think?

The Devious Lying Buddha. lol.

DhammaDhatu

You're assuming the Buddha taught rebirth out of compassion to those who couldn't accept there's an end, or impermanence. (Sounds a bit condescending, like idiot compassion. Why not teach people the truth as he saw it? We had a suttric quote earlier today that there were no false teachings by the Buddha.) Rather than he taught it because, well, he believed in rebirth.

The quote is as follows and it does not say what you are saying:

The Awakened One, best of speakers,
Spoke two kinds of truths:
The conventional and the ultimate.
A third truth does not obtain.

Therein:
The speech wherewith the world converses is true
On account of its being agreed upon by the world.

The speech which describes what is ultimate is also true,
Through characterizing dhammas as they really are.

Therefore, being skilled in common usage,
False speech does not arise in the Teacher,
Who is Lord of the World,
When he speaks according to conventions.

(Mn. i. 95)

DhammaDhatu

You're assuming the Buddha taught rebirth out of compassion to those who couldn't accept there's an end, or impermanence. (Sounds a bit condescending, like idiot compassion. Why not teach people the truth as he saw it?

Mahayana Buddhism, as follows:

THE BODHISATTVA VOWS

The Eighteen Root Downfalls

11. teaching emptiness to the untrained

http://www.bodhicitta.net/BODHISATTVAVOWS.htm

The Buddha as follows:

It's just that for a long time I have attended to the Teacher, and to the monks who inspire my heart, but never before have I heard a talk on the Dhamma like this."

"This sort of talk on the Dhamma, householder, is not given to lay people clad in white. This sort of talk on the Dhamma is given to those gone forth."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.143.than.html

The ascetics and brahmans thus ministered to as the Zenith by a householder show their compassion towards him in six ways:

(i) they restrain him from evil,
(ii) they persuade him to do good,
(iii) they love him with a kind heart,
(iv) they make him hear what he has not heard,
(v) they clarify what he has already heard,
(vi) they point out the path to a heavenly state.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html

The above clearly states it is the duty of a monk to point out the path to heaven to a lay follower (and not to Nibbana).

vinlyn

You're assuming the Buddha taught rebirth out of compassion to those who couldn't accept there's an end, or impermanence. (Sounds a bit condescending, like idiot compassion. Why not teach people the truth as he saw it?

Mahayana Buddhism, as follows:

THE BODHISATTVA VOWS

The Eighteen Root Downfalls

11. teaching emptiness to the untrained

http://www.bodhicitta.net/BODHISATTVAVOWS.htm

The Buddha as follows:

It's just that for a long time I have attended to the Teacher, and to the monks who inspire my heart, but never before have I heard a talk on the Dhamma like this."

"This sort of talk on the Dhamma, householder, is not given to lay people clad in white. This sort of talk on the Dhamma is given to those gone forth."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.143.than.html

The ascetics and brahmans thus ministered to as the Zenith by a householder show their compassion towards him in six ways:

(i) they restrain him from evil,
(ii) they persuade him to do good,
(iii) they love him with a kind heart,
(iv) they make him hear what he has not heard,
(v) they clarify what he has already heard,
(vi) they point out the path to a heavenly state.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html

The above clearly states it is the duty of a monk to point out the path to heaven to a lay follower (and not to Nibbana).

WHOA! HEAVEN????

DhammaDhatu

It not only sounds condescending but is also total transgression of the precept of lying. Why would a Buddha do that?

The Buddha does not lie. This has already been quoted above.

When the Buddha uses words such as "rebirth" and "after death", the interpretation falls upon the listener.

As for the Buddha's opinions about rebirth belief, they are quoted below. Please note, they fall within views about existence & attachment, which are not related to enlightenment.

In ultimate truth, the Buddha taught all mental formations have no substance and are merely illusory. Obviously, your concretisation and reification of the mental formations in your mind does not accord with the supramundane insight of the Buddha.

You believe the mental pictures in your head are actually "your" past lives

Where as the Buddha regards such mental fabrications as empty, void, without substance

Now, householders, of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three unskillful activities — bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three skillful activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct.

With regard to this, a wise person considers thus: 'If there is the next world, then this venerable person — on the break-up of the body, after death — will reappear in the good destination, the heavenly world. Even if we didn't speak of the next world, and there weren't the true statement of those venerable brahmans & contemplatives, this venerable person is still praised in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence. If there really is a next world, then this venerable person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the wise here-&-now; and in that — with the break-up of the body, after death — he will reappear in the good destination, the heavenly world. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides, and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.060.than.html

And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings...

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html

Now suppose that a man desiring heartwood, in quest of heartwood, seeking heartwood, were to go into a forest carrying a sharp ax. There he would see a large banana tree: straight, young, of enormous height. He would cut it at the root and, having cut it at the root, would chop off the top. Having chopped off the top, he would peel away the outer skin. Peeling away the outer skin, he wouldn't even find sapwood, to say nothing of heartwood. Then a man with good eyesight would see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a banana tree?

In the same way, a monk sees, observes & appropriately examines any fabrications that are past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing them, observing them & appropriately examining them — they would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in fabrications?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.095.than.html

Dazzle

These threads keep being 'reborn' lol!

Here's a helpful quote from Ajahn Sumedho of the Theravada Forest Tradition in his book " Don't Take Your Life Personally"

"Every thought and every attachment gives a sense of limitation. The very fact that you can open to infinity, to space, to consciousness, however, gives you perspective on that; it frees you from just this endless rebirth, this habit of going from one thing to another."

Have a great day everyone !

DhammaDhatu

WHOA! HEAVEN????

Certainly

The Buddha adopted the Brahmin/Hindu cosmology of the many heavens

zidangus

Check this paper out, its makes some very convincing arguments.

http://my.unil.ch/serval/document/BIB_84209201AE31.pdf


Metta to all sentient beings

compassionate_warrior

When the Buddha uses words such as "rebirth" and "after death", the interpretation falls upon the listener.

This seems to be the crux of the problem.

Where as the Buddha regards such mental fabrications as empty, void, without substance

Except when he himself experiences past life memories.

There are spontaneously reborn beings;

*ahem* :rolleyes:

fivebells

Except when he himself experiences past life memories.

If he did, he would have ascribed to them exactly the level of personal reality and significance he did to mundane memories. Which is to say, note that they are part of the five skandhas, and that they are suffering, impermanent, and not self. Then he would let them go. He was very explicit about this:

When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer.

Dakini

Sure, like the Dalai Lama states he cannot remember any past lives or what made him choose the sacred objects as a child

Has the Dalai Lama has lost his connection with ultimate reality?

Apparently he has lost his connection with a certain aspect of Ultimate Reality. Like other children, his past life memories faded after the age of 6 or so. Imagine, he had a very intense schedule of book-learning from a very early age. That's one thing that conditions the mind to material reality, and away from Ultimate Reality. Does his meditation practice help him "keep in touch" with Ultimate Reality? Only he knows. But if he's not recalling past lives, then he hasn't realized the Enlightenment of the Buddha. Yet.

DhammaDhatu

There are spontaneously reborn beings; *ahem* :rolleyes:

Actually, this is a mistranslation. The term is simply "spontanously born", as in the following quote, for those in higher training. But it is you who interpret it as you do. If your understanding was supramundane, it would understand "being" is as state of mind.

All the best

32. "Sariputta, there are these four kinds of generation. What are the four? Egg-born generation, womb-born generation, moisture-born generation and spontaneous generation.

33. "What is egg-born generation? There are these beings born by breaking out of the shell of an egg; this is called egg-born generation.

What is womb-born generation? There are these beings born by breaking out from the caul; this is called womb-born generation.

What is moisture-born generation? There are these beings born in a rotten fish, in a rotten corpse, in rotten dough, in a cesspit, or in a sewer; this is called moisture-born generation.

What is spontaneous generation? There are gods and denizens of hell and certain human beings and some beings in the lower worlds; this is called spontaneous generation. These are the four kinds of generation.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html

"'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications...

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn23/sn23.002.than.html

DhammaDhatu

Except when he himself experiences past life memories.

As has been posted countless times, the Buddha experienced his previous "becomings". This is the Classical Theravada interpretation, even by those who believe in rebirth, such as Buddhaghosa.

For example, if we generally think back to the past, like when we watched a certain movie as a child, our mind still gets emotionally involved in that past experience because our mind still has the same previous craving & attachment towards that experience.

But all those old cravings & attachments (in brief, "becomings") embedded in the Buddha's psyche unravelled. In their unravelling, they were re-experienced.

On the night of his enlightenment, not only did the Buddha's mind's current craving & attachment end, but the craving & attachment embedded in his mind's memory banks also ended. The Buddha's mind was 100% purified on "self-view".

That is how I regard it.

But if you wish to regard the word "birth" as exclusively physical birth, you can. That is your choice

32. "Sariputta, there are these four kinds of generation. What are the four? Egg-born generation, womb-born generation, moisture-born generation and spontaneous generation.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html

compassionate_warrior

I've seen suttric quotes here about the Buddha recalling past "abodes",past lives, not "becomings". But perhaps better to leave that to the "Why I believe" thread.

The Buddha adopted the Brahmin/Hindu cosmology of the many heavens

Didn't you say the Buddha didn't engage in metaphysics? Wouldn't the existence of many heavens (or any heaven) be an imponderable?

DhammaDhatu

I've seen suttric quotes here about the Buddha recalling past "abodes",past lives, not "becomings".

The suttas you are referring to say: "I experienced my past abodes, namely, one birth (jati), two births....one thousand births (jati)".

The word 'jati' here means 'becoming'.

In his Vissuddhimagga, written 1000 years ago, when the Pali language was better understood, the Venerable Buddhaghosa explained:

Now this word "jati" has many meanings.

For in the passage 'he recollects one birth, two births, etc', it is becoming.

In the passage 'Visakha, there is a kind (jati) of ascetics called Niganthas (Jains)', it is monastic order.

In the passage 'birth is includes in two aggregates', it is whatever is formed.

In the passage 'his birth is due to the first consciousness in the mother's womb' (Vin.i,93), it is rebirth-linking.

In the passage 'as soon as he was born (sampatijata), the Bodhisattva' (M.iii,123) it is parturition [childbirth].

In the passage 'one who is not rejected and despised on the account of birth', it is clan.

In the passage 'sister, since i was born with noble birth', it is the Noble One's virtue.

As highlighted above, the passage 'his birth is due to the first consciousness in the mother's womb' is not from the suttas.

:mullet:

tess

Perhaps he meant it's true but it is OK if you don't believe it. Just keep practising and you will attain liberation either way. This is a safe bet for non believers.

One thing we can agree on is the aim of getting out of the cycle of rebirths is the the right path.

"I have never met one Tibetan lama, ever, who has not cheerfully accepted my non belief in rebirth"

I can remember a friend saying to a Tibetan tulku: "I can't accept rebirth beliefs" and the tulku laughed and said " Oh don't worry about other lives, this is the one that's important !"

Perhaps he meant it's true but it is OK if you don't believe it. Just keep practising and you will attain liberation either way. This is a safe bet for non believers.

One thing we can agree on is the aim of getting out of the cycle of rebirths is the the right path.

No, I don’t agree because you take “cycle of rebirths”” as an axiom and then follow by saying it is the right way.

tess

I understand subscribing objective experience with labels and such. An experience is neither good, bad or neutral, it just is an experience. To me what defines reality, you pick up a racket, you hit a ball with a racket. Thats reality. A chainsaw goes through your forearm, you have no forearm, thats reality.

Recent advance of Quantum Physics put big question to statements above.

tess

Shera and Victorious make a common argument Christians make that I think is very superficial. Namely that if you dont believe you will be judged why treat ppl well, why not go out and try to screw everyone over and always seek pleasure. To me that is just a false proposition, I chose and want to be good because that is what I want to be, even if no one will judge me ever and if my life ends and thats it, I would still rather leave a positive mark. If your moral code is solely based on an idea of continuing life or judgment then I think it is that person who has to re-evaluate his stance. I choose to do good, I am not compelled.

I think maybe you have a littebit too livley fantasy...I was referring to a good family life with my woman and my sons...

And what has doing good to do with buddhist training? I know how to behave but doing good will not get you to nibbana. That is totally irrelevant to the issue.

So this is really no good refutal of anything I have said.

I have to admit that I read your comments the way that Ric read them.

I think what Ric and I are saying is that getting to nibbana is not all there is in life, particularly when we don't KNOW FOR A FACT that that is the way it all works. And so, we chose to live a life that is positive, not because we feel compelled to due to scriptures from any source, but because we think it is the right thing to do.

:clap: :rockon:

tess

Victorious
Do you think a memory from yesterday is real? How about a memory from your childhood? Or from a previous life?

That was what I was getting at.




Memory is a neural activity, patterns interconnections, involving many different areas and of the brain.
As such it can’t really apply to previous lives. Can it?

zidangus

So DD please correct me if I am wrong, I may have misunderstood you. Are you saying that Buddha never actually believed in the concept of rebirth ?


Again if you have time read the paper published in the "Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies" in the link, and check some of the other references cited in it if you have time. There are pretty good arguments by scholars to suggest that Buddha did believe in the concept of rebirth and also karma.

http://my.unil.ch/serval/document/BIB_84209201AE31.pdf

Of course if you know any papers in a journal or other publications that suggest otherwise than please share as it would also be useful to read, and also give a good balance to the discussion.

Metta to all sentient beings

tess

Victorious

You said:

“I have heard testimonial from atheists that do not believe in rebirth about past life memories.”

Could you kindly give me some links or reference?

Whoknows

Hi @Tess ,

Here are my personal cases for, noting that when I started on the Buddhist journey I did not believe in rebirth.

1) Things in Buddhism have been too familiar to me,
2) Its hard, though granted not impossible, to envisage meditative familiarity being selected during natural selection in the evolution process,
3) I have had some dreams of the dying process,
4) I accept that mind and brain are not exactly the same thing: brain is part of the aggregate of form; mind is included in the aggregates of feeling, perception, consciousness and volition; with brain and mind interacting in a co-dependent manner.
5) Mind is subject to a causal situation, like matter it is reasonable to think that it can neither be created or destroyed.

But it doesn't really matter if you believe or not. If Buddhism suits you go with it, you can put aside some of the things like this, and occasionally reassess them as you go along. Your mind may not change on this but it doesn't matter as its more important to undertake the journey than to work out whether rebirth exists or not. Great benefit can be obtained irrespectively to your concept of rebirth, taming the mind is a universal benefit of Buddhism and well worth the effort.

Ric

WhoKnows,

"I accept that mind and brain are not exactly the same thing" followed by " Mind is subject to a causal situation, like matter it is reasonable to think that it can neither be created or destroyed."

You cant have it both ways. When you say mind is not brain, then what is mind? Obviously you are inferring that it is something apart from the body, therefore something not physical (pretty much the soul view). Right after, you state that mind is subject to conservation of mass, a physical law. So you are saying the mind is not physical but obeys physical law.

tess

Hi Whoknows ,

Point 1 The fact that so much Buddhism has been familiar to you might be because Buddhism has a profound understanding of human psychology.

Point 2 could you kindly rephrase it as I don’t know what do you mean.

Point 3 I am sure you did but why to make correlation between them and reincarnation. Dream is a dream and has a physiological background.

Point 4 Very important. We know what the brain is however; mind and consciousness are symbolic terms. As we can't precisely define them – in my opinion it is wrong methodology to try looking at the differences or similarities.

Point 5. This is a very complicated problem and to have a valuable discussion we need to come with mutual definition of mind.

I totally agree with your last paragraph.

tess

WhoKnows,

"I accept that mind and brain are not exactly the same thing" followed by " Mind is subject to a causal situation, like matter it is reasonable to think that it can neither be created or destroyed."

You cant have it both ways. When you say mind is not brain, then what is mind? Obviously you are inferring that it is something apart from the body, therefore something not physical (pretty much the soul view). Right after, you state that mind is subject to conservation of mass, a physical law. So you are saying the mind is not physical but obeys physical law.

Good point.

tess

o...and Ive never had any visions or memories of past lives...

In general, it is a lack of experience of the "other side" that gives a person space for doubt. After deeply lucid and visceral experiences of such things, that which was in doubt previously, suddenly becomes an aspect of ones clarity.

I don't know much about ''deeply lucid and visceral experiences'' when it comes to previous lives. However, many subjective experiences in near death cases are quite straightforwardly explained by neurology.

Whoknows

WhoKnows,

"I accept that mind and brain are not exactly the same thing" followed by " Mind is subject to a causal situation, like matter it is reasonable to think that it can neither be created or destroyed."

You cant have it both ways. When you say mind is not brain, then what is mind? Obviously you are inferring that it is something apart from the body, therefore something not physical (pretty much the soul view). Right after, you state that mind is subject to conservation of mass, a physical law. So you are saying the mind is not physical but obeys physical law.

Hi Ric,

How are you? I am using the concept of conservation of mind which is similar to conservation of matter/energy but the experience of mind obviously does not occur on the physical domain. A previous state of mind leads to a following state of mind, it cannot be created or destroyed. Conservation of matter/energy is based on the reasonable concept that matter/energy can neither be created or destroyed. As this theory corresponds to the physical domain it has been able to be verified, or rather more correctly, it has failed to be falsified. It is therefore accepted by science.

As mind is not physical or related to energy (which I consider to be physical in this respect due to its association with matter) it cannot be physically measured and thus cannot be falsified in this way. As it cannot be physically measured and falsified it is, by present definitions, outside the scope of science, as science currently limits itself to physically measurable and falsifiable phenomena. Because something is outside the scope of science does not mean it doesn't exist. Yet because of this limitation you will find no scientific proof of conservation of mind, its a theoretical idea that some, like myself, find useful and reasonable even though its not proven.

As to what mind is, it is that which experiences. The best subjective example of mind is pain, sure you can talk about ions passing along neurons, axions, etc but that does not tell anyone what the experience of pain is, it must be felt, and "what" feels pain, the mind. So in my terms, mind is that which is able to experience. Basically mind is, as I stated above, all of the aggregates except for form. Mind can easily be experienced and it can also be known by meditation. I have no idea what a soul is or how it relates to life in general.

Hope that clarifies my view.

Cheers.

tess

Whoknows

You said: ''It is therefore accepted by science''

With full respect to your views.
Science has never accepted your statements, for the reason which you have mentioned.
It only deals with physical things.

As to your example about pain: If you add to your reasoning ‘’emotions’’ / we can measure them/ then you only need a brain to feel a pain. Therefore, you don’t need to introduce a hypothetical term mind.

vinlyn

I don't know much about ''deeply lucid and visceral experiences'' when it comes to previous lives. However, many subjective experiences in near death cases are quite straightforwardly explained by neurology.

Sometimes I think there are an awfully lot of Buddhists out there who simply enjoy wallowing in abstract thinking and mystical thinking, rather than simply seeing what is real right in front of their faces.

tess

Yes, I can imagine: ‘’imagine ceasing to exist, to percieve, to be conscious.’’

Personally, I imagine this often, so my mind is at perfect ease & acceptence with it.

The Buddha called it meditation on death and recommended the practice highly for those for which it is suitable.

:coffee:

Monks, mindfulness of death — when developed & pursued — is of great fruit & great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.020.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.019.than.html

When sensing a feeling limited to life, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling limited to life.' One discerns that 'With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html

Thank you for your links. I will read them during my holiday. Looking forward to it.

tess

Below is a traditional common chanting meditation on death. In many Theravada monastaries, such chanting is done on a daily basis.

(Source: http://www.thomasriddle.net/swan_mokh/chants/pages/swan-mok-chanting_16.htm)

Thank you. More reading on my list.

tess

We talk here a lot about previous experiences, memory of previous lives.

What about DNA memory?

Maybe all those experiences have something to do with it?

tess

This consciousness produces ethics, which from the evolution point of view is total waste of time.

From the evolutionary perspective ethics is not a waste of time, it is rather essential. For human beings to survive and thrive they need communities and the only way a society or community will function is with ethics. This social ethics can be seen in primates so its not even exclusive to humans. In a way evolution created the golden rule.

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.

Impermanence – certainly it does. The problem is that majority of humans try to apply here their own soul, ego, individuality, people they love, consciousness. In short ‘’I’’

Ethics in reference to your own species, tribe, and family is beneficial to the evolution.

However, using resources to maintain disabled or ill people, humans after reproduction age /assuming their off springs are able to look after themselves/ from the evolution point of view is a waste of energy.

Before you behead me for my last statement: NOTE that my ‘’moral spine’’ does not represent or agrees with the laws of evolution.


:hair:

tess

Rebirth, no rebirth, reincarnation, no reincarnation. Does it really matter with regards to real life situations? If there really is rebirth, would that actually change anything right now? If there is really is no rebirth, would that actually change anything, right now? Are either of the above going to help when someone steals your car or your money or when you lose your job or when one of your parents dies of a heart attack?

I does to me.

Most worldly religions tell you will suffer in hell or might be lucky and reborn as a worm.

Fear, fear, fear as a motivation.

I want to believe that people are good and moral not only because there are afraid of consequences of their evil actions.

Being religious you have a chance 1 / X. (X number of religions) to avoid suffering after your death.

Atheists will suffer in all the hells or face a negative reincarnation - 100%.
Unless......

The earthly suffering of atheists will end up in a very easy way -we will stop existing.

At least we had a chance to brought up our kids the best we can / adding to the tree of evolution/ and were decent not because of fear of punishment.

tess

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

This is very close to the recent ideas of Quantum physics and multiple universes.

tess

Yes, he is about as open to the possibility of post-mortem rebirth as I am. (I accept post-mortem rebirth as a possibility, I just think it's very unlikely because there's no information available about post-mortem experience.) He is quite insistent, however, that the belief is not necessary to effective practice, and that his own practice was held back for years by confusion about that and other forms of magical thinking and authoritarianism in traditional Buddhist institutions.

Hi fivebells,

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

Interesting video. Thank you for a food to thought.
I am going to look deeper and try to find the data it has mentioned.

Statements - I disagree:

‘’Talking irrationally’’ as a ''must'' is just a brain storm, with all the consequences of the method.

Human personality can be explained better by neuropsychology then any religions.

Psychology is not a science. It uses statistics to give just probable theories.
Look at its history.

tess

...what does it matter how I act in this lifetime if in the end it all goes black?

The problem with this line of reasoning is that empirically there's no obvious connection betwenn a lack of belief in post-mortem retribution and unethical behavior.

At the same time Norway has a huge problem with alcoholism and bad statistic for suicide and depression.

Don’ ask why. I don't know. :banghead:

It seems that wealth and good life is in the negative correlation with ‘’happiness’’ :bawl:

This is also probably why I am Buddhist site. :om:

tess

I need to take a break from this tread. I will be dreaming about reincarnation tonight . :-/

If I come tomorrow with some data from my dreams PLS would you ask me to have a glass of cold water before post it here.

Dakini

I understand subscribing objective experience with labels and such. An experience is neither good, bad or neutral, it just is an experience. To me what defines reality, you pick up a racket, you hit a ball with a racket. Thats reality. A chainsaw goes through your forearm, you have no forearm, thats reality.

Recent advance of Quantum Physics put big question to statements above.

Really? could you tell us more, or provide a link?

At the same time Norway has a huge problem with alcoholism and bad statistic for suicide and depression.

Don’ ask why. I don't know. :banghead:

It seems that wealth and good life is in the negative correlation with ‘’happiness’’ :bawl:

Tess, I think this has been studied quite a bit. I thought a widely acknowledged factor was the northern climate and lack of sunshine in the winters. It's not just Norway: Sweden, Finland, Russia, Alaska, Scotland. All across the North, though alcoholism and suicide can be caused by other factors unrelated to the North (as with Native Americans).
Norway is doing a very impressive job of managing its economy and its wealth.

Memory is a neural activity, patterns interconnections, involving many different areas and of the brain.
As such it can’t really apply to previous lives. Can it?

This is an important and interesting question. But the answer lies beyond the current understanding of Western science, and so, aren't acceptable to the scientific-minded. Past life memories can be stored in the "Higher Self", or the energetic body. Most of the time our conscious mind doesn't have access to that, but sometimes a trigger can cause recall. Or in the case of the Buddha, Enlightenment perhaps builds a bridge between the physical body and the "Higher Self" or energetic bodies. If I'm not mistaken, our member, Vajraheart, has recall of his past lives. So does Vincenzi. Perhaps they can explain more.

Sabre

Human personality can be explained better by neuropsychology then any religions.

To be honest I think Buddhism does quite a good job explaining the mind and to my knowledge nowhere does Buddhism contradict science or psychology. It's not Buddhism versus science, in fact the Dalai Lama together with neurobiologist/monk Matthieu Ricard has set up a great research in this field.

Neuroscience really can not explain a lot yet. There are some cause/effect relations that are found, but those don't say a lot, because it can not change a person forever while meditation can. I heard the Dalai Lama once said, if science finds proof that what we teach/believe is wrong, we will have to change it. But I'm sure this will not happen.

This is a nice documentary on a new research facility founded by Alan Wallace:
http://www.walterhottinga.com/consciousness-awareness/the-conscious-universe/

It also explains a common Buddhist view on memory, that it is not (all) stored in the brain. The fact neuroscience or psychology can't (yet) prove certain things doesn't say they aren't true. But we don't have to wait for it because we might all realize it for ourselves one day.

Sabre

tess

I understand subscribing objective experience with labels and such. An experience is neither good, bad or neutral, it just is an experience. To me what defines reality, you pick up a racket, you hit a ball with a racket. Thats reality. A chainsaw goes through your forearm, you have no forearm, thats reality.

Recent advance of Quantum Physics put big question to statements above.

Really? could you tell us more, or provide a link?

At the same time Norway has a huge problem with alcoholism and bad statistic for suicide and depression.

Don’ ask why. I don't know. :banghead:

It seems that wealth and good life is in the negative correlation with ‘’happiness’’ :bawl:

Tess, I think this has been studied quite a bit. I thought a widely acknowledged factor was the northern climate and lack of sunshine in the winters. It's not just Norway: Sweden, Finland, Russia, Alaska, Scotland. All across the North, though alcoholism and suicide can be caused by other factors unrelated to the North (as with Native Americans).
Norway is doing a very impressive job of managing its economy and its wealth.

Memory is a neural activity, patterns interconnections, involving many different areas and of the brain.
As such it can’t really apply to previous lives. Can it?

This is an important and interesting question. But the answer lies beyond the current understanding of Western science, and so, aren't acceptable to the scientific-minded. Past life memories can be stored in the "Higher Self", or the energetic body. Most of the time our conscious mind doesn't have access to that, but sometimes a trigger can cause recall. Or in the case of the Buddha, Enlightenment perhaps builds a bridge between the physical body and the "Higher Self" or energetic bodies. If I'm not mistaken, our member, Vajraheart, has recall of his past lives. So does Vincenzi. Perhaps they can explain more.

I have to go but I am really looking forward to learn from you.

Quick comments:


As to Scandinavian countries, I would be not so sure.
Exposé to a sun and a warm climate are very important factors. /Explained by biochemistry/

However, there is plenty scientific data which implies that standard of living is in the negative correlation to a subjective feeling of happiness.

As to your statement:

"Higher Self", or the energetic body.

PLs could you tell me more about those things or at least direct me where I can find explanations of those terms.

tess

Dakini
''Really? could you tell us more, or provide a link''


With a great pleasure.

I will provide you with many QP links and I am really look forward to hear what you think.

But I have to go now. Sorry.

Victorious

Shera and Victorious make a common argument Christians make that I think is very superficial. Namely that if you dont believe you will be judged why treat ppl well, why not go out and try to screw everyone over and always seek pleasure. To me that is just a false proposition, I chose and want to be good because that is what I want to be, even if no one will judge me ever and if my life ends and thats it, I would still rather leave a positive mark. If your moral code is solely based on an idea of continuing life or judgment then I think it is that person who has to re-evaluate his stance. I choose to do good, I am not compelled.

I think maybe you have a littebit too livley fantasy...I was referring to a good family life with my woman and my sons...

And what has doing good to do with buddhist training? I know how to behave but doing good will not get you to nibbana. That is totally irrelevant to the issue.

So this is really no good refutal of anything I have said.

I have to admit that I read your comments the way that Ric read them.

I think what Ric and I are saying is that getting to nibbana is not all there is in life, particularly when we don't KNOW FOR A FACT that that is the way it all works. And so, we chose to live a life that is positive, not because we feel compelled to due to scriptures from any source, but because we think it is the right thing to do.

:clap: :rockon:

That conclusion You made the three of you is exactly the reason why it is vital to understand rebirth.

But dont worry with age and experience and in your case a heap of luck you will get there eventually stringhoppers.

/Victor

Ric

Hey Sabre,

Why would you think not all memory is stored in the brain? Do you think their is a mechanism that specifies some memories as special and stores them in some meta-physical place?

Why do you think if we open your brain, destroy all your stored memory you will forget everything ? Even if you meditate for eons, you will not get those memories back.

Ric

Shera and Victorious make a common argument Christians make that I think is very superficial. Namely that if you dont believe you will be judged why treat ppl well, why not go out and try to screw everyone over and always seek pleasure. To me that is just a false proposition, I chose and want to be good because that is what I want to be, even if no one will judge me ever and if my life ends and thats it, I would still rather leave a positive mark. If your moral code is solely based on an idea of continuing life or judgment then I think it is that person who has to re-evaluate his stance. I choose to do good, I am not compelled.

I think maybe you have a littebit too livley fantasy...I was referring to a good family life with my woman and my sons...

And what has doing good to do with buddhist training? I know how to behave but doing good will not get you to nibbana. That is totally irrelevant to the issue.

So this is really no good refutal of anything I have said.

I have to admit that I read your comments the way that Ric read them.

I think what Ric and I are saying is that getting to nibbana is not all there is in life, particularly when we don't KNOW FOR A FACT that that is the way it all works. And so, we chose to live a life that is positive, not because we feel compelled to due to scriptures from any source, but because we think it is the right thing to do.

:clap: :rockon:

That conclusion You made the three of you is exactly the reason why it is vital to understand rebirth.

But dont worry with age and experience and in your case a heap of luck you will get there eventually stringhoppers.

/Victor

lol does rebirth automatically give you a sense of superiority or do you acquire that with age? or luck?

Victorious

Victorious
Do you think a memory from yesterday is real? How about a memory from your childhood? Or from a previous life?

That was what I was getting at.




Memory is a neural activity, patterns interconnections, involving many different areas and of the brain.
As such it can’t really apply to previous lives. Can it?

The bumble bee cant fly can it?

It can obviously. But dont ask me how.