Why is reincarnation a part of Buddhism?

Omniwolf1

I've heard buddhists say that believing in God or an afterlife is pointless because these things are unknowable right now. Not necessarily that they are untrue but that buddhism is only concerned with the here and now of the present. My question is...why then do buddhusts believe in reincarnation? How does anyone really know if living beings are reborn as another living being? Is reincarnation more plausible than the traditional christian idea of going to heaven? It seems to me that the concept of reincarnation is just as much of a guess as the concept of heaven/hell.

Sabre

It's a part of Buddhism because the Buddha taught it. Buddhism isn't only about here and now, it's also about what happens after death. In fact, that is an important part of it, the Buddha told us to reflect on death.

But you don't have to believe in it. What makes Buddhism stand out is the fact you can follow the religion without believing everything it teaches. It makes no sense to believe things just because somebody tells you so. It's also not about what's more plausible. You'll have to figure it out for yourself. The Buddha gave us the means to do so.

Talisman

Birth is happening right now.

Omniwolf1

I find it to be a contradiction for the Buddha to teach us what happens to us in the future after we die, yet to always concentrate on on the present including during meditation.

Talisman

"You" are a contradiction.

thickpaper

I've heard buddhists say that believing in God or an afterlife is pointless because these things are unknowable right now. Not necessarily that they are untrue but that buddhism is only concerned with the here and now of the present. My question is...why then do buddhusts believe in reincarnation? How does anyone really know if living beings are reborn as another living being? Is reincarnation more plausible than the traditional christian idea of going to heaven? It seems to me that the concept of reincarnation is just as much of a guess as the concept of heaven/hell.

It's not clear that the Buddha taught it, or why he would have taught it.

It's not clear how it fits in with The Four Noble Truths.

Some Buddhists believe it. Some are agnostic. Some believe the Buddha was anti-rebirth.

What is clear and crucial is that Dharma works with or without an afterlife and we will never know if there is an afterlife, at least in this life, which might be all there is.

caz

I find it to be a contradiction for the Buddha to teach us what happens to us in the future after we die, yet to always concentrate on on the present including during meditation.

There is no contradiction in that if you understand his teachings. Simply put the present always leads to the future so it is good we make the best of the moment by engaging in virtue, Through his insight he recounted many past rebirths and saw what happens to those who take many future rebirths and what actions create the causes for us to experience such existences. So it is non contradictory to be focused on this present now to pre-empt a unwanted out come in the future. Rebirth is a conventional reality and one as accomplished as Buddha is able to perceive directly cause and effect so it is certainly important we understand his teachings in the context of what Samsara is (Uncontrolled rebirth and death) and all the sufferings that arise from the our ignorance and karma.

Knowing that future lives can be long and unending without the practice of Dharma now is the time to practice, not later NOW.

Gui

because we all have great imaginations

SimpleWitness

@Omniwolf1
There is rebirth in existence, this is observed by the pattern in events. It is part of many religions (For example: Hindu and Buddhism) and reincarnation was even one of the Christian tenets, until condemned by the 2nd council of Constantinople in 553 c.e. They still believe in the human "spirit" or "soul" and that it is a fragment of the divine which is separate form existence; but, back then they believed, and some Christians still do, that their souls or spirits will eventually return to its divine source.

However, Buddhist believe in no soul. Buddhist witness the rebirth of new awareness as part of the wheel of existence, not separate from it. The Buddha teaches us to witness the life death and rebirth of temporary pleasures, problems, and suffering from the center of the wheel of existence. The Buddha teaches us not to be attached to any of these. As a result we are reborn with new awareness.

Perhaps rebirth is part of both Christianity and Buddhism, just, in different ways.

Respectfully yours, Omniwolf1:
SimpleWitness

Mountains

If you believe in the law of kamma (karma), then it follows that there must be something after "this". If you believe that, then it follows that what comes after "this" is rebirth (not, btw, reincarnation - they're not the same thing).

DhammaDhatu

It's a part of Buddhism because the Buddha taught it.

the Buddha did not teach reincarnation. despite the desparate attempts of some buddhists over the centuries, desparately trying to manufacture a reincarnation mechanism from DN 15, MN 38 and Dependent Origination, the buddha never taught reincarnation and never taught a mechanism by which a mind enters another body

the Buddha simply taught beings fare on according to their actions. when beings create impure or self-centred karma, they will take "birth" again in a state that must be resolved

kind regards

DD

DhammaDhatu

I find it to be a contradiction for the Buddha to teach us what happens to us in the future after we die, yet to always concentrate on on the present including during meditation.

the Buddha did not contradict himself. if you log onto Youtube and search for 'Buddhism', the first video is called 'Introduction to Buddhism' by the Dalai Lama. here, it is made clear, the Buddha did not contradict himself. the Buddha just taught different teachings for different people

for example, for those seeking the end of all suffering (Nirvana), MN 2 makes it clear any kinds of views related to reincarnation are inappropriate

but for the unenlightened householder, still immersed in sensuality & filiality, MN 60 makes it clear to believe in continued existence is appropriate for them

so on this forum, members such as Sabre fall into the second category of Buddhists. even if they are not householder, with family, they remain clinging to their gurus like a child clings to their mother or father

kind regards

DD

Sabre

It's a part of Buddhism because the Buddha taught it.

the Buddha did not teach reincarnation. despite the desparate attempts of some buddhists over the centuries, desparately trying to manufacture a reincarnation mechanism from DN 15, MN 38 and Dependent Origination, the buddha never taught reincarnation and never taught a mechanism by which a mind enters another body

the Buddha simply taught beings fare on according to their actions. when beings create impure or self-centred karma, they will take "birth" again in a state that must be resolved

kind regards

DD

Nonsense. To those who studied the suttas for a little it is obvious the Buddha taught and believed in literal rebirth/reincarnation. Even Stephen Batchelor has to agree with that, and that says something

Talisman

The gloves are out!

genkaku

Among the things that become apparent in a meditation practice is the fact that the past is gone and cannot be grasped; the future cannot be known and cannot be grasped; and any attempt to grasp the present places that present in the past ... which is ungraspable.

Thus, the things we try to grasp or claim we can grasp are outside our reach. This is not just some airy-fairy religious or philosophical exercise in hot air. It becomes obvious in meditation practice.

With attention, every moment flows seamlessly into the past and is likewise informed by an ungraspable past. 'Something' is born and dies in this moment only to be reborn in the next moment. 'We' are the same, but different. 'We' are reborn in every nanosecond, but what is reborn is impossible to say.

"Reborn" is probably an easier (and more accurate?) term than "reincarnation" since reincarnation suggests that something, some personality, some set of past facts is actually graspable.

Whether any of this is true or not, whether it was taught by Gautama or not, whether scholars debate its value or not doesn't amount to much more than hot air. The important part is to discover what is actually true in this actual lifetime ... realize and actualize that truth.

Just noodling.

jll

The simple answer is Buddha taught the truth.
If as DD believes, Buddha did not teach reincarnation,
then there is no problem.
So, the problem arise if Buddha did teach reincarnation.
Then, either reincarnation is true or the Buddha is wrong.
You decide for yourself.

SeaOfTranquility

Some Buddhists believe in reincarnation and some don't.

Although the belief in reincarnation was deeply held in the Buddha's time and still is for many people. I think what the Buddha taught was anatta and the middle way. And to look inside your mind through meditation and see for yourself what is real and true.

Reincarnation requires a permanent and separate me to be reincarnated. And this is what most people want to think they are. Permanent and separate. It is conditioned into us and manifests as a concept of my identity and self delusion. It is as if somehow impermanence, emptiness, and dependent origination does not apply at all to me. Not only does that not make sense, it creates an attachment to self that is the source of suffering.

Present moment rebirth, as genkaku described above, does make sense and can be seen through meditation.
If you let go of the belief of permanence and separation, it is not so hard to imagine there have been countless past lives and will be future lives. They are not me and they are not not me. In the same way that I am neither the same person, nor a different person than I was 20 years ago or 20 minutes ago.

As I have no recollection in this life of previous lives, why would it matter anyway?

DhammaDhatu

..it is obvious the Buddha taught and believed in literal rebirth/reincarnation...

actually, it is not obvious at all...

if it was obvious, the follow verse would not exist in Buddhism

worse, you believe Dependent Origination is about reincarnation :eek2:

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

The simple answer is Buddha taught the truth.
If as DD believes, Buddha did not teach reincarnation,
then there is no problem.
So, the problem arise if Buddha did teach reincarnation.
Then, either reincarnation is true or the Buddha is wrong.
You decide for yourself.

the Buddha did not teach about reincarnation

it is you that is wrong rather than the Buddha

show me where the Buddha taught a soul, mind or consciousness leaves on life and enters into a new life???

the Buddha taught about the reappearance or rebirth of the results of actions

the buddha taught as follows:

all the best

I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world..

DhammaDhatu

The simple answer is Buddha taught the truth.
If as DD believes, Buddha did not teach reincarnation,
then there is no problem.
So, the problem arise if Buddha did teach reincarnation.
Then, either reincarnation is true or the Buddha is wrong.
You decide for yourself.</block

DhammaDhatu

So, if one understands Dependent Origination, each arising of ignorance & formations conditions a new (nama & rupa) kaya (body). Each act of karma or becoming experiences marana (death) at the 12th link. After death, there is the result, a new cycle.

Example, get drunk, dance & party is the arising of a certain energised happy kaya (body). After the passing or death of that body, there is the result or a new body, eg. hangover, addiction, headache, immobile, painful, wrecked body, etc.

That the Buddha taught one is "born again" from one's karma is true. But to believe this "birth" is post mortem depends on our opinion.

The Buddha does not lie. Dhamma Dhatu does not lie.

But if you deny Dhamma Dhatu, you have not discerned how karma functions.

There is no evidence the Buddha was referring to literal post-mortem rebirth. However, there is undoubted evidence what he taught applies to the here & now.

With metta

DhammaDhatu

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.

(Mn. i. 95)

often, we take everything literally :coffee:

For it is death (marana) in the Discipline of the Noble One, Sunakkhatta, when one abandons the training and reverts to the low life; and it is deadly suffering when one commits some defiled offence.

http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/68-mn-105-sunakkhatta-sutta-to-sunakkhatta.html

andyrobyn

Sabre said:
..it is obvious the Buddha taught and believed in literal rebirth/reincarnation...


Dhamma Dhutu said :
actually, it is not obvious at all...

if it was obvious, the follow verse would not exist in Buddhism

worse, you believe Dependent Origination is about reincarnation :eek2:



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)


Hi DD, just as it is a long stretch to conclude that the Buddha of the Pali canon taught and believed in reincarnation in the way that all schools of Buddhism rely on, it is also a long stretch to conclude that different schools interpretations are not in essence consistent with the base message - and the Sutta above expresses this.

andyrobyn

The important point from my perspective is that rebirth/reincarnation or not rebirth is not the important and the essential question which needs to be addressed and answered.

DhammaDhatu

Hi DD, just as it is a long stretch to conclude that the Buddha of the Pali canon taught and believed in reincarnation in the way that all schools of Buddhism rely on, it is also a long stretch to conclude that different schools interpretations are not in essence consistent with the base message - and the Sutta above expresses this.

Sure...the message can be interpreted in different ways yet the message is the same, namely, cultivate non-harmful karma!

With metta

andyrobyn

:rockon: :clap:

zenmyste

Lots of crap got added over the years after buddhas death...
Buddha said he only taught 2 things. 4 Noble truths and 8 fold path..
(of course he would have said other things and made up quotes etc etc, but he only *taught* these 2 things...)

But we dont even know if this is true as it was 2500 years ago so we dont actually know what really happened. We just gotta read what we want and if we like what we hear then practice it in your daily life. Do good, avoid evil. Be nice, compassionate and just do your best. Practice meditation and hopefully you might gain your own knowledge and truth like buddha did.

genkaku

Buddha said he only taught 2 things. 4 Noble truths and 8 fold path..

@zenmyste -- My understanding is that Gautama did indeed say he only taught two things and those two things were suffering and the end of suffering.

zenmyste

The sufferings he was talking about are in the 4 noble truths..

And the path to end suffering is The 8 fold path...''

Talisman

@zenmyste
That is now the second time I have seen you misquote what the Buddha said. The Buddha did not say that the only thing he taught was the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. He said that he taught suffering the end of suffering. These two things are encompassed by MANY other teachings.

goshiki

Nothing infact is connected or related to Buddha - the purity . No text / scripture / tradition / monks practice / meditation or even Mr Siddharta himself as the introducer of this purity to mankind can associated to Buddha . Buddha is final destination for all living or non-living . All living or non-living have its own purification process to free themself from pollutants and to be pure emptiness - the Buddha . Reincarnation or believe in Mr siddharta statues or in many practice of tradition is just an expression of own culture or believe and NOTHING got to do with Buddha . In my awareness in Buddha , I do re-born / die and re-born again and again to learn my awareness that is my pollutant ...to be free of it ...to be pure ...to be Buddha .
Reincarnation or birth/death/re-birth is "road" to destination - the Buddha and NEVER in ANY POSSIBLE WAY related to Buddha .
Buddha never "teach" me anything , Buddha will never "show" me anything , I must learn to know Buddha in order to be pure again .I must born , I must survive and I must die to keep learning to free myself from "life" - that is my pollutant .

dorje

Nothing infact is connected or related to Buddha - the purity . No text / scripture / tradition / monks practice / meditation or even Mr Siddharta himself as the introducer of this purity to mankind can associated to Buddha . Buddha is final destination for all living or non-living . All living or non-living have its own purification process to free themself from pollutants and to be pure emptiness - the Buddha . Reincarnation or believe in Mr siddharta statues or in many practice of tradition is just an expression of own culture or believe and NOTHING got to do with Buddha . In my awareness in Buddha , I do re-born / die and re-born again and again to learn my awareness that is my pollutant ...to be free of it ...to be pure ...to be Buddha .
Reincarnation or birth/death/re-birth is "road" to destination - the Buddha and NEVER in ANY POSSIBLE WAY related to Buddha .
Buddha never "teach" me anything , Buddha will never "show" me anything , I must learn to know Buddha in order to be pure again .I must born , I must survive and I must die to keep learning to free myself from "life" - that is my pollutant .

That sounds like you are describing the Jain interpretation of Karma.

Talisman

@goshiki
You said "All living or non-living have its own purification process to free themself from pollutants and to be pure emptiness - the Buddha ."

This is not correct.

There was an instance where the Buddha was approached by Ajatasattu asking about the fruit of the contemplative life in the here and now. He talks about the many different teachers he has spoken with:

"Another time I approached Makkhali Gosala and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings and courtesies, I sat to one side. As I was sitting there I asked him: 'Venerable Gosala, there are these common craftsmen... They live off the fruits of their crafts, visible in the here and now... Is it possible, venerable sir, to point out a similar fruit of the contemplative life, visible in the here and now?'

"When this was said, Makkhali Gosala said to me, 'Great king, there is no cause, no requisite condition, for the defilement of beings. Beings are defiled without cause, without requisite condition. There is no cause, no requisite condition, for the purification of beings. Beings are purified without cause, without requisite condition. There is nothing self-caused, nothing other-caused, nothing human-caused. There is no strength, no effort, no human energy, no human endeavor. All living beings, all life, all beings, all souls are powerless, devoid of strength, devoid of effort. Subject to the changes of fate, serendipity, and nature, they are sensitive to pleasure and pain in the six great classes of birth.
[...]
"'Though one might think, "Through this morality, this practice, this austerity, or this holy life I will ripen unripened kamma and eliminate ripened kamma whenever touched by it" — that is impossible. Pleasure and pain are measured out, the wandering-on is fixed in its limits. There is no shortening or lengthening, no accelerating or decelerating. Just as a ball of string, when thrown, comes to its end simply by unwinding, in the same way, having transmigrated and wandered on, the wise and the foolish alike will put an end to pain.'

"Thus, when asked about a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, Makkhali Gosala answered with purification through wandering-on. Just as if a person, when asked about a mango, were to answer with a breadfruit; or, when asked about a breadfruit, were to answer with a mango. In the same way, when asked about a fruit of the contemplative life, visible here and now, Makkhali Gosala answered with purification through wandering-on. The thought occurred to me: 'How can anyone like me think of disparaging a priest or contemplative living in his realm?' Yet I neither delighted in Makkhali Gosala's words nor did I protest against them. Neither delighting nor protesting, I was dissatisfied. Without expressing dissatisfaction, without accepting his teaching, without adopting it, I got up from my seat and left.

-DN 2

The relevance of this quote is that you are trying to assert that by "wandering on" one is purified automatically. This is incorrect. One is made wholesome through the 4 right endeavors, namely:

[i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen.

[ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen.

[iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen.

[iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort."

— SN 45.8

This means that only through one's persistant effort is purity attained. It isn't going to happen on its own.

goshiki

In Buddha or in search of Buddha or even in Buddhism there is NO RIGHT or WRONG . Is all depend on own awareness . In Buddha is only "learning" process as I must learn to know I am no greater than my own shit or smaller than Mr Siddharta . All living or non-living is a source to know my own purity-The Buddha .
Learning Buddha MUST NOT limited to text / to scripture / to what might Mr Siddharta said , or what Dalai Lama do but from all source even a rubbish bin , a rock , a tree , my own shit is my "master" of Buddha .
Dont involve yourself in WAR of BUDDHA "knowledge" as in learning Buddha "knowledge" is on very tiny part ........learning Buddha from your awareness

zenmyste

@goshiki
You said "All living or non-living have its own purification process to free themself from pollutants and to be pure emptiness - the Buddha ."

This is not correct.

Talisman - forgive me, but i feel you really need to stop this defensive state you are in and have towards buddhism. Fair enough your *really* into it but ive even spoke to Monks who dont go on like you do. In fact alot of monks have even said to me 'they actually know nothing'
But you seem to think you know everything about Buddha and what he said and did not say. When in fact 'YOU DONT'
it was 2500 years ago that he lived. We know nothing. Its all hear-say. ill believe what i want and you believe what you want but dont go round telling people 'Their wrong with this and that..'

All traditions have different beliefs. I dont know what tradition you are in, but unless you have studied EVERYTHING in ALL Traditions then stop pushing your words on others. Opinions are fine but i just think you seem to PUSH and always think your RIGHT. (you remind me of 'Mr know it all')

I know you mean well. And we're all hear to help one another. But not all of us believe Buddhism is THE ONLY way...There are many paths and Buddhism happens to be one that helps me a little but like i said there are many more.And the most important thing we should all remember is: ''the one thing i know is that i know nothing''

this is the best quote EVER and its by socrates NOT BUDDHA. im sorry to say.


Best wishes.

Talisman

@goshiki

...what?...

goshiki

Learning Buddha MUST BE FUN , MUST BE EASY , MUST BE EXCITING , MUST BE HAPPY .
If hard or boring or had to memorize this words or that words or which monk say what or what might Mr Siddharta said ...and is brain storming or hard ...STOP it ..IT MUST BE WRONG

Talisman

@zenmyste

If I can't express my opinion on an open internet forum, then where can I? If I say something on here that you or anyone else disagrees with, people are qucik to correct me. If someone says something that seems pretty blatantly incorrect, I don't think it's wrong to try and offer what knowledge I can to correct their understanding.

I don't think it's fair to squelch me just because I say something in a way that might sound in your mind to be arrogant or imposing. A lot of my tone is lost in translation when it comes to internet forum postings.

goshiki

In Buddha or in search of Buddha there is no right or wrong , no true or false . Even I kill any living , in Buddha or in search of Buddha I am not wrong , simnply I am still not understand my own awareness . Perhaps I will have to undergo many purification process , to learn or to be aware of my own awareness / action . In Buddha I am just like 2 years old boy so how can anyone blame a 2 years old boy if he pour water into your computer right ?

Talisman

:orange: :wtf: :screwy:

zenmyste

@zenmyste

I don't think it's fair to squelch me just because I say something in a way that might sound in your mind to be arrogant or imposing. A lot of my tone is lost in translation when it comes to internet forum postings.

Ok fair enough! Didnt mean anything bad about it.
There are just some things that you say are 'wrong' when i have read otherwise.
Thats why id be interested in knowing what traditon you follow??

Talisman

I don't have a tradition yet. I study by myself. There are no local sanghas near me and the ones I could get to within 2 hours of here are not my cup of tea. (There is a Korean zen center 2 hours from me, but I'd prefer to study under the soto tradition, of which the nearest center would be in chicago, 3 hours away by train.)

dorje

@goshiki sounds like someone we know from a while back.

goshiki

Sir , lets "learn" from each other .

goshiki

Hi Talisman , why dont you "open" and "know" buddha from things on your computer desk , your pen, your table , the tree outside your window , your pets etc ?
There are trillions source of knowing Buddha in trillions method . Why limit yourself to only one ?

goshiki

Dorje , you know me? have we discuss any topic before ?

Lazy_eye

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)

Hi DD,

Which sutta is this from? I haven't been able to locate the passage using the numerical reference. It's interesting to see a Pali Canon basis for the conventional-ultimate truth distinction.

Thanks

DhammaDhatu

@zenmyste
That is now the second time I have seen you misquote what the Buddha said. The Buddha did not say that the only thing he taught was the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. He said that he taught suffering the end of suffering. These two things are encompassed by MANY other teachings.

Talisman

That is now probably the 100th time you have misquoted the Buddha.

The 4NTs is the same as suffering & the end of suffering.

Your cherished reincarnation theories do not end suffering according to the Buddha

Regards

DhammaDhatu

Which sutta is this from?

hi

it is not from a sutta. It is from a commentary.

Lazy_eye

Ah ok...but is the commentary commenting on a sutta? (I don't know the commentarial tradition too well).

DhammaDhatu

it is from the Manorathapūraṇī: Buddhaghosa's commentary on the Anguttara-nikaya

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=537