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.
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited May 2011
From Quantum and the Lotus on why high lamas can remember their previous lives while they're children.
Matthieu Ricard: When you wake up in the middle of the night, after a general anaesthetic or a fainting fit, you feel extremely confused and for a few moments don't know where you are. This transient interruption of our mental faculties caused by minor traumas is similar to what happens after death, but not to the same degree. It's easy to see that death is far more traumatic and so we forget more. If, however, we possess a great clarity of mind when we die, or if we die young, then memories can go over into the next life. This phenomenon occurs during early childhood because, as we get older, our new life imposes itself on our consciousness, and our impressions of our past life disappear. The obscurity caused by death is less marked in people who have reached an advanced stage of contemplative mastery in their previous life and know how to pass lucidly through the intermediate stage between death and rebirth. That's why in Tibet we think these kinds of memories are most commonly found in young children who are reincarnations of dead sages.
This is nice, person. But one doesn't have to be a reincarnate sage to have past life memories in childhood, as many published studies have shown. Not to mention some of our own members who remember past lives: aura and Vincenzi. As has been discusses elsewhere (we have several overlapping threads going at the moment), small children (and some advanced meditators, according to HHDL) have easier access to the "very subtle mind" where past life memories are stored. The "gross mind" hasn't yet come to dominate the consciousness when one is very young.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@compassionate_warrior Yeah, I'm still looking around for an answer to that one. All the non-sage past life stories I can remember reading about have a rather sudden and/or traumatic death in the previous life. My personal theory at the moment is that this has something to do with it.
The mind may or may not be dependent of the body (the brain). I like to think that my consciousness will exist in some form of energy after I physically pass here. @NamelessRiver
Every serious Buddhologist will tell you the Buddha taught rebirth.
I agree, however:
First argument:
… The fact that you can imagine a story about yourself without your body indicates that what you call consciousness(mind) and body are logically different.
Try imagining a story about a block of wood without a block of wood: you can't. That's because a block of wood is just a block of wood: it can't exist and not exist and make sense. But mind can exists without body and make sense. They are logically different concepts. (i.e. mind is not an appendix of the body).
As you say about wood: a mind can't exist and not exist and make sense. But this is simply a statement about logic, not about the mind in particular. Also, personally, I can't imagine mind existing without body, so by your own argument, that means they are the same: of course, it is not simply what we can imagine that determines the ontological status of objects.
Second argument:
This one presupposes you believe in free will. The universe is deterministic. If you kick a ball in normal circumstances it will move - there is no "choice" involved.If your body is deterministic (which it obviously is), for your mind to be a part of your body it wouldn't be able of having free will. (BTW I don't see how denying free will is compatible with Buddhism :P)
You assume the universe is deterministic, however, chaos theory kinda makes this a problematic thesis. Furthermore, even if we don't actually have free will, there are good arguments to say that we should nonetheless behave as if we do For example, you get sick. In a deterministic universe, you don't have free will. But does that mean you shouldn't see a doctor and leave your fate to the universe? No, you should see a doctor, because, who knows, maybe that's part of your fate. The point is: even if determinism is true, we don't have the ability to calculate the future (and, thanks to chaos, never will) and so shouldn't take anything for granted.
(Your third argument has already been refuted by talisman) ..
I didn't know there were two independent sources of Dzogchen: Odiyana, and Bon. I'll check it out, thanks. So you feel that the Dzogchen tradition from Odiyana is very close to what the Budhha taught? Odiyana in its day had some pretty wild and wooly practices unrelated to anything the Buddha taught... (I hope you don't mind my picking your brain.)
You would only think that if you didn't accept that the Buddha taught Mahayana. Or that there were Buddhas after the Buddha who Buddharifically expanded on what the Buddha taught in the Mahayana.
I think that you would only think that if you didn't accept that the Buddha taught Mahayana. Or that you can't accept that there were Buddhas after the Buddha who Buddharifically expanded on what the Buddha taught in the Mahayana. For me, it's easy to see how the Pali Suttas lead to the Mahayana to Vajrayana to Dzogchen.
You have to meet Buddhism where you are at, there is no convincing anyone of anything unless they are open to it.
These so called, "wild practices" are aspects of realized Buddhism for me, it's quite clear.
Memory is an easily distorted phenomenon. By my way of thinking, just because someone claims to remember past lives is not sufficient to count as proof. What is needed is someone to know something from a past life that they absolutely couldn't know from any other source - such as a fact that is completely unknown to anyone, which is then remembered, and only discovered to be true after they remember it. This is very hard to prove indeed.
Memory is an easily distorted phenomenon. By my way of thinking, just because someone claims to remember past lives is not sufficient to count as proof. What is needed is someone to know something from a past life that they absolutely couldn't know from any other source - such as a fact that is completely unknown to anyone, which is then remembered, and only discovered to be true after they remember it. This is very hard to prove indeed.
Yes, and there are plenty of examples of that. The thing is, is to challenge yourself to go deep enough into meditation to prove it to yourself. That takes a rare level of longing for deeper self reference. Getting enlightened is not a common thing, so one must think on an uncommon level to get there. All these doubts about past lives, is very common, even for those that believe in them just because they've been conditioned to, they also have doubts that they wouldn't admit in public if they are raised around such ideals.
Prove things to yourself, don't wait for outer evidence. But, there is plenty out there if you search as such, but then, if you don't have the experience yourself, you will naturally doubt, even on a subtle level.
Memory is an easily distorted phenomenon. By my way of thinking, just because someone claims to remember past lives is not sufficient to count as proof. What is needed is someone to know something from a past life that they absolutely couldn't know from any other source - such as a fact that is completely unknown to anyone, which is then remembered, and only discovered to be true after they remember it. This is very hard to prove indeed.
Yes, and there are plenty of examples of that. The thing is, is to challenge yourself to go deep enough into meditation to prove it to yourself. That takes a rare level of longing for deeper self reference. Getting enlightened is not a common thing, so one must think on an uncommon level to get there. All these doubts about past lives, is very common, even for those that believe in them just because they've been conditioned to, they also have doubts that they wouldn't admit in public if they are raised around such ideals.
Prove things to yourself, don't wait for outer evidence. But, there is plenty out there if you search as such, but then, if you don't have the experience yourself, you will naturally doubt, even on a subtle level.
Meditate on your own nature, deeply!!
I wouldn't trust my own memories to be any more reliable as proof of past-lives than other peoples' memories. Only if i remembered something i could *only* have known from a geniune past-life experience (rather than consciously or unconscious knowledge from this life) would i consider my own memory to be genuine beyond doubt.
However I believe there have never been any such verified memories, despite many people putting forward claims - usually with a strongly vested (personal or economic) interest i might add. All reported instances that I am aware of (Stevenson etc) have been seriously flawed in their objectivity - unscientific, you might say.
Memory is an easily distorted phenomenon. By my way of thinking, just because someone claims to remember past lives is not sufficient to count as proof. What is needed is someone to know something from a past life that they absolutely couldn't know from any other source - such as a fact that is completely unknown to anyone, which is then remembered, and only discovered to be true after they remember it. This is very hard to prove indeed.
Yes, and there are plenty of examples of that. The thing is, is to challenge yourself to go deep enough into meditation to prove it to yourself. That takes a rare level of longing for deeper self reference. Getting enlightened is not a common thing, so one must think on an uncommon level to get there. All these doubts about past lives, is very common, even for those that believe in them just because they've been conditioned to, they also have doubts that they wouldn't admit in public if they are raised around such ideals.
Prove things to yourself, don't wait for outer evidence. But, there is plenty out there if you search as such, but then, if you don't have the experience yourself, you will naturally doubt, even on a subtle level.
Meditate on your own nature, deeply!!
I wouldn't trust my own memories to be any more reliable as proof of past-lives than other peoples' memories. Only if i remembered something i could *only* have known from a geniune past-life experience (rather than consciously or unconscious knowledge from this life) would i consider my own memory to be genuine beyond doubt.
However I believe there have never been any such verified memories, despite many people putting forward claims - usually with a strongly vested (personal or economic) interest i might add. All reported instances have been seriously flawed in their objectivity - unscientific, you might say.
Having a past life memory is not like a regular memory, it's more like time travel, where you viscerally re-experience it, closed eyed or open, you're there. It has nothing to do with hypnotic suggestion either. Once you've opened it, you can have memories surface that are like you remembering what you ate yesterday, like an image in your head with the knowledge that this is true. But the initial memory of a past life is an actual re-experiencing.
Anyway, there have been many revelations of it's validity. One of the more famous ones was the little boy who remembered details of a previous life as a WW2 pilot I think? That was corroborated by facts, here in the USA. Later on he said he didn't remember anymore, but that's natural. The details were stunning and he had no reference outside of actually remembering as a very little boy. Of course, people who are more attached to their doubts will make up all sorts of reasons why not to believe in order to remain identified to their doubt, which seems natural for most as well, due to fear. But, I feel you should be more agnostic and less assured, especially as a Buddhist.
It seems you are less agnostic and more have your mind made up? Without the direct experiences, which can be corroborated, which have been for me, of course doubt will be natural. I just suggest that you also doubt your doubts.
It seems to me that material like the article linked in the "extremely interesting read" thread allows for the possibility that memories or visions that someone may have, may in fact not be their own. Or more, that claiming ownership of memories may not be correct at all.
The desire for certainty of knowledge, obtained through logic and intellect, is only another form of attachment.
Nor are we even guaranteed that any intellectual activity, steeped in the ignorance of non-enlightenment, will actually come to correct conclusions about these matters.
I think the best thing to do is to do your practice as your teacher has instructed you to, and wait with an open mind and heart to see what happens. Warning: much patience is required.
The desire for certainty of knowledge, obtained through logic and intellect, is only another form of attachment.
Nor are we even guaranteed that any intellectual activity, steeped in the ignorance of non-enlightenment, will actually come to correct conclusions about these matters.
I think the best thing to do is to do your practice as your teacher has instructed you to, and wait with an open mind and heart to see what happens. Warning: much patience is required.
Excellent advice. But, we are on a discussion board, and working things out in this way isn't all that harmful, most of the time. But yes... I fully agree, it takes practice and patience.
FoibleFull, I don't know what tradition you practice, but Vajrayana emphasizes intellectual understanding of advanced concepts to guide one in one's practice and meditation. If he didn't think it would be helpful, HHDL wouldn't lecture and publish on these topics; he would just tell everyone to go practice. And the hundreds, possibly thousands, of books Vajrayana teachers have published would just be wasted paper. But I would agree, that one obviously shouldn't depend entirely on the written or spoken word. Intellectual understanding and insightful meditation go hand-in-hand.
Comments
Matthieu Ricard: When you wake up in the middle of the night, after a general anaesthetic or a fainting fit, you feel extremely confused and for a few moments don't know where you are. This transient interruption of our mental faculties caused by minor traumas is similar to what happens after death, but not to the same degree. It's easy to see that death is far more traumatic and so we forget more. If, however, we possess a great clarity of mind when we die, or if we die young, then memories can go over into the next life. This phenomenon occurs during early childhood because, as we get older, our new life imposes itself on our consciousness, and our impressions of our past life disappear. The obscurity caused by death is less marked in people who have reached an advanced stage of contemplative mastery in their previous life and know how to pass lucidly through the intermediate stage between death and rebirth. That's why in Tibet we think these kinds of memories are most commonly found in young children who are reincarnations of dead sages.
@NamelessRiver
(Your third argument has already been refuted by talisman) ..
Namaste
I think that you would only think that if you didn't accept that the Buddha taught Mahayana. Or that you can't accept that there were Buddhas after the Buddha who Buddharifically expanded on what the Buddha taught in the Mahayana. For me, it's easy to see how the Pali Suttas lead to the Mahayana to Vajrayana to Dzogchen.
You have to meet Buddhism where you are at, there is no convincing anyone of anything unless they are open to it.
These so called, "wild practices" are aspects of realized Buddhism for me, it's quite clear.
Don't bother picking my mind.. pick my Rinpoches mind, as he's far more qualified and even answers his emails man... he's fire!!
It's seriously an excellent book that puts this stuff into great experiential perspective... well from a Masters point of view that is.
Memory is an easily distorted phenomenon. By my way of thinking, just because someone claims to remember past lives is not sufficient to count as proof. What is needed is someone to know something from a past life that they absolutely couldn't know from any other source - such as a fact that is completely unknown to anyone, which is then remembered, and only discovered to be true after they remember it. This is very hard to prove indeed.
Prove things to yourself, don't wait for outer evidence. But, there is plenty out there if you search as such, but then, if you don't have the experience yourself, you will naturally doubt, even on a subtle level.
Meditate on your own nature, deeply!!
However I believe there have never been any such verified memories, despite many people putting forward claims - usually with a strongly vested (personal or economic) interest i might add. All reported instances that I am aware of (Stevenson etc) have been seriously flawed in their objectivity - unscientific, you might say.
Anyway, there have been many revelations of it's validity. One of the more famous ones was the little boy who remembered details of a previous life as a WW2 pilot I think? That was corroborated by facts, here in the USA. Later on he said he didn't remember anymore, but that's natural. The details were stunning and he had no reference outside of actually remembering as a very little boy. Of course, people who are more attached to their doubts will make up all sorts of reasons why not to believe in order to remain identified to their doubt, which seems natural for most as well, due to fear. But, I feel you should be more agnostic and less assured, especially as a Buddhist.
It seems you are less agnostic and more have your mind made up? Without the direct experiences, which can be corroborated, which have been for me, of course doubt will be natural. I just suggest that you also doubt your doubts.
http://www.google.ca/search?q=past+life+proof&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
There's all sorts of stuff on google.
Nor are we even guaranteed that any intellectual activity, steeped in the ignorance of non-enlightenment, will actually come to correct conclusions about these matters.
I think the best thing to do is to do your practice as your teacher has instructed you to, and wait with an open mind and heart to see what happens. Warning: much patience is required.