Buddhists Against Reincarnation!!!

ThailandTom

lmao@victorious pass me some. And yes yellowswing, I am super serious you guys.

Theswingisyellow

"I am super -cereal"

ThailandTom

that is exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote the comment. Glad someoe shares the humor ^^

pegembara

The concept of rebirth or reincarnation can be dangerous if grasped wrongly. This concept, though accepted in Buddhism as a fact, observable by developed minds, and also regarded in Buddhism as a wholesome view that encourages good living, it is not an essential dogma of Buddhism.

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?"

This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress. Sabbasava Sutta

praxis

My question, if there is no continuation of life after death, if a person never evolves spiritually beyond their short life time and ceases to exist after death, why live? I know this is a pretty silly question and I might get flack for it, but if a buddhist's main goal is to cease his suffering, why not just kill himself? that would be the ultimate end of attachment, desire, and suffering, wouldn't it?

Many people do commit suicide to end their suffering, of all faiths I imagine. Even people who believe that it's a sin commit suicide. I'm sure that people who believe in reincarnation commit suicide also.

Can you appreciate the depth of their suffering?

ThailandTom

Well it is logical to take medicine if you are unwell as it will end the suffering, that is given. The dharma is a medicine also for sufffering. So, if you have say terminal cancer and there is really now way you will survive it and are given 3 months to live what would you do? Stick out the horrible inevitable pain or kill yourself? Why suffer, you will die anyway so those close to you will suffer either way, if you explain to everyone and say your goodbyes whilst you are still slightly healthy and then kill yourself, I see no fault there personally. The only fault is that with my idea I would leave a big mess behind for someone to clean up after my building jump.

Victorious

Just to get one fact straight that seems to allude the majority of discussies everywhere.

THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE PROVED OBJECTIVELY.

And I Double Dare anybody to prove me wrong.

Objective thruth is a myth. Yeah thats right. Deal with it science people.

:rocker:

@ThailandTom. Come over and you can have al the popcorn you want!

/Victor

praxis

THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE PROVED OBJECTIVELY.

And I Double Dare anybody to prove me wrong.

Your reading these words is proof that you read it.

Victorious

@praxis

nice try but still subjective.

/Victor

praxis

Indeed, it will be the same proof to every subject that reads it.

lufool

Just to get one fact straight that seems to allude the majority of discussies everywhere.

THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE PROVED OBJECTIVELY.

And I Double Dare anybody to prove me wrong.

Objective thruth is a myth. Yeah thats right. Deal with it science people.

/Victor

This is true, essentially, but it can end up taking you down a rabbit hole of confusion and delusion. It did for me anyway. We must rely on logic, rationality, and intuition when deciding what's true, as well as empirical evidence in most cases. Things can be known, just not proven. For example, I know that other people exist even though I cannot sense their experience directly and cannot prove they are conscious. For a period of time, however, during a fit anxiety, this line of reasoning plagued me and I constantly feared that solipsism was reality and that I was the only conscious being while others were a figment of my imagination. I never thought this was true, I only feared it to be, and further yet, feared my fear that it was. Now it's clear how false such an assumption and it's fine that I can't prove it.

ThailandTom

You MUST believe in rebirth because this thread keeps being reborn over and over There is your evidence right there :rolleyes:

Simonthepilgrim

You MUST believe in rebirth because this thread keeps being reborn over and over There is your evidence right there :rolleyes:

As indeed does the same joke.

caz

There are some elements of Buddha's teachings the lay peron takes on faith, Buddha highly praised developing faith in the Dharma what he taught is true and this is eventually discovered by those serious practitoners who engage in the path he taught. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_in_Buddhism

Simonthepilgrim

There are some elements of Buddha's teachings the lay peron takes on faith, Buddha highly praised developing faith in the Dharma what he taught is true and this is eventually discovered by those serious practitoners who engage in the path he taught. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_in_Buddhism

Now that's a stick with which to stir the hornets' nest! The very idea of 'faith' really upsets some people here; probably because they confuse it with beliefs.

caz

There are some elements of Buddha's teachings the lay peron takes on faith, Buddha highly praised developing faith in the Dharma what he taught is true and this is eventually discovered by those serious practitoners who engage in the path he taught. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_in_Buddhism

Now that's a stick with which to stir the hornets' nest! The very idea of 'faith' really upsets some people here; probably because they confuse it with beliefs.

Yes I know it upsets some people, But this is a part of the path developing right faith to remove deluded doubt about Buddha's teachings having a right understanding of Buddha's teachings is essential so we can not only accomplish the path but in time help others by teaching them these methods that have to be the unadulterated words of an Enlightened being such as Buddha, not the personal opinions of Samsaric fools.

Iktomi

There are some elements of Buddha's teachings the lay peron takes on faith, Buddha highly praised developing faith in the Dharma what he taught is true and this is eventually discovered by those serious practitoners who engage in the path he taught. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_in_Buddhism

Now that's a stick with which to stir the hornets' nest! The very idea of 'faith' really upsets some people here; probably because they confuse it with beliefs.

Yes I know it upsets some people, But this is a part of the path developing right faith to remove deluded doubt about Buddha's teachings having a right understanding of Buddha's teachings is essential so we can not only accomplish the path but in time help others by teaching them these methods that have to be the unadulterated words of an Enlightened being such as Buddha, not the personal opinions of Samsaric fools.

Simon is right, you're confusing faith with belief. Faith is being open to whatever arises. Belief is clinging to words and dogmas.

federica

No, yet again, that error.
Faith in Theism infers 'hope'.
Faith in buddhism infers 'Confidence'.

Faith is being open to whatever arises.

this is still somewhat akin to the 'Hope' variety... Trust in god...

Belief is clinging to words and dogmas.

you consider the belief of the suttas to be 'clinging to words and dogmas'...?

Just illustrating you may need to re-think things, IMHO....

Iktomi

No, yet again, that error.
Faith in Theism infers 'hope'.
Faith in buddhism infers 'Confidence'.

Faith is being open to whatever arises.

this is still somewhat akin to the 'Hope' variety... Trust in god...

Belief is clinging to words and dogmas.

you consider the belief of the suttas to be 'clinging to words and dogmas'...?

Just illustrating you may need to re-think things, IMHO....

If someone you regard as an authority told you that being open to whatever arises infers theism and hope, well, that is of course reliably true. lol

jll

Reality is more subtle than we think.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm

federica

If someone you regard as an authority told you that being open to whatever arises infers theism and hope, well, that is of course reliably true. lol

I didn't say it infers theism.
I said it still somewhat akin to the sentiment being inferred by hope.

Intelligence is being open to whatever arises.

Hope - is crossing your fingers with blinkers on.

Remember Pandora's box?
The story goes that Pandora was given a beautiful box, or in fact, a jar which she was not to open under any circumstance. It contained "all the evils of the world".

Impelled by her curiosity, Pandora opened the jar, and all evil contained escaped and spread over the earth. She hastened to close the lid, but the whole contents of the jar had escaped, except for one thing that lay at the bottom, which was Hope.

Nowhere, anywhere, does it say that Hope was the exception to the rule. The jar contained ALL the evils of the world. hope is one of that kind.
When people have hope, all too often, it can turn around and bite them where they sit.
Hope is not a healthy sentiment to cling to.

Iktomi

Lol, well, if unnecessarily argumentative at least you're having fun.

aura

When people have hope, all too often, it can turn around and bite them where they sit.
Hope is not a healthy sentiment to cling to.

I'm oh so glad you're not a nurse in an oncology ward...

Jeffrey

I think hope in the sense of a delusion can just make you suffer. When Thich Nhat Hanh was present in a conference about global warming he rarely spoke. But when he did he advised the panel to accept the fact that they might fail and the world could be destroyed. They asked him why he said that and he said that if you can accept the worse possiblity then you can be at peace and become a better worker for the environment.

So it's not good enough to look at websters dictionary you also have to look at a context. In a cancer ward the patients should make peace with death. At the same time there is a possibility of beating the cancer and they can work hard to make that outcome. The best medicine is non-grasping wisdom of emptiness with a close second chemo and surgery.

shadowleaver

Why does it matter so much whether or not there is reincarnation?

I think that's a great question to deeply meditate on. Not trying to answer it intellectually but observe the mind as it is being pulled towards some idea of what happens after death...

aura

In a cancer ward the patients should make peace with death. At the same time there is a possibility of beating the cancer and they can work hard to make that outcome.

Believing that anybody ever works toward any goal in life at all without any hope of success is delusion.

caz

You should fear death and use this fear to inspire yourself to practice Dharma because future lives are very long and unfamiliar without a death awarness we create endless negative causes to benefit our circumstances in this life alone what good will that do you at the time of your death ? We will enter the next life in fear and pain in a lower realm.

The only protection against this is the practice of Dharma and to practice Dharma purely you need to be deeply aware of the impending presence of death.

federica

When people have hope, all too often, it can turn around and bite them where they sit.
Hope is not a healthy sentiment to cling to.

I'm oh so glad you're not a nurse in an oncology ward...

I take your point; however, actually, I've worked in a hospital, and also volunteered at a hospice for the terminally ill...
hope, I have found, is not the primary sentiment in evidence.

And I did state that it's not a healthy state to CLING to...
in the context of the specific discussion regarding faith, it's pertinent.

Simonthepilgrim

No, yet again, that error.
Faith in Theism infers 'hope'.
Faith in buddhism infers 'Confidence'.

............

With all respect to your knowledge, @federica, you must have been asleep during your schooling by the nuns (if I remember correctly). Saint Paul makes it quite clear that faith and hope are two different things, both of which are secondary to caritas (compassion). I refer you to his letter to the Christians in the Greek city of Corinth.

federica

Yes....

I don't claim reference to st Paul, I'm afraid. Particularly when he also said:

"Let the women keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a disgrace for a woman to speak in church."

Corinthians 14:34-35

So he may well have been quite clear.
I don't agree with him.
On a lot of things.

Simonthepilgrim

You, of all people, dear @federica, know the difference between core teachings and discipline. The text you quote refers to discipline which was acceptable - even insisted upon - at that time and in that context. Disciplinary rules can and are changed over time. I'm sure that much more knowledgeable members than I can give examples across Buddhist history and geography.

On the matter of faith, hope and compassion, we are addressing core principles.

poptart

Why does it matter so much whether or not there is reincarnation?

I think that's a great question to deeply meditate on. Not trying to answer it intellectually but observe the mind as it is being pulled towards some idea of what happens after death...

Quite.

Simonthepilgrim

It seems to me that many in the West, Jews and Christians included, who believe in rebirth/reincarnation do so as part of their denial and bargaining around avoidance of their fear of their own death. Indeed, I am convinced that the insistence by so many believers in an as-yet-unproven 'life' after death, however that is envisaged, partakes of the same avoidance.

As I understand the Second Noble Truth, this sort of avoidance is as conducive to dukkha as 'clinging'. We are encouraged, by many teachers, to meditate on our own impermanence and post mortem dissolution. Personally, I have found this most fruitful, leading to peace of mind as I approach that "awfully big adventure". It is while we are alive that we can walk the Noble Eightfold Path or, as Jesus put it, labour while the light lasts. Dead, we have missed our chance and belief that we shall have another go at it is, to my way of thinking, a sop to Cerberus, an avoidance of fear we can confront and dissolve.

Jeffrey

there is no 'our'.

Simonthepilgrim

there is no 'our'.

And your point is?

Jeffrey

that's my point. There is no 'our'. Thus we haven't missed. And there is nothing to fear or defend.

"HAN NYA HA RA MIT TA KO SHIN MU KE GE MU KE GE KO MU U KU FU ON RI

prajna paramita because mind no obstacle. Because of no obstacle no exist fear; go beyond"

~heart sutra

Simonthepilgrim

I think you have missed my point. I cannot accept that there is no 'our'. It reminds me of the statement by Thatcher that there is no such thing as society. Or do I miss your/i> point?

vinlyn

No, yet again, that error.
Faith in Theism infers 'hope'.
Faith in buddhism infers 'Confidence'.

Faith is being open to whatever arises.

this is still somewhat akin to the 'Hope' variety... Trust in god...

Belief is clinging to words and dogmas.

you consider the belief of the suttas to be 'clinging to words and dogmas'...?

Just illustrating you may need to re-think things, IMHO....

I would say that it's invalid to change the definition of a word when you discuss different religions.

Jeffrey

You can see this in meditation. You could say "I missed my chance to be blissful... I did not 'let go'..." During meditation. And this is what I think I do quite often. I was just noticing that today. So how does it make sense to say "I missed it"?

It's like you become sad because your children grow up. "oh i missed it.. i didn't seize theday" Is this a true perception?

vinlyn

You, of all people, dear @federica, know the difference between core teachings and discipline. The text you quote refers to discipline which was acceptable - even insisted upon - at that time and in that context. Disciplinary rules can and are changed over time. I'm sure that much more knowledgeable members than I can give examples across Buddhist history and geography.

On the matter of faith, hope and compassion, we are addressing core principles.

Simon, there's a difference in saying that some practice or principle that occurred in one time is understandable as compared to right.

The act of being a slave owner, at various times in man's history, has been understandable. It has never been right. And, although it didn't occur to me until I was writing these words, the teaching of St. Paul's in question here (an almost subtle slavery in context of other laws of the era) were never right, but they were understandable in the context of the time. And, if a teacher was wrong on one issue, one cannot wonder how right he was on other issues.

SattvaPaul

How do you distinguish right from understandable?

vinlyn

How do you distinguish right from understandable?

Slavery is a good example. I understand the times in which our colonial forefathers lived. Slavery was a well established institution. And that made it seem justifiable to many people of the time to own slaves. It's pretty well established that Jefferson struggled with the concept of slavery. He appeared to believe it was wrong, but also couldn't quite see the economics of not having slavery as institution (probably fostered by his own failure to be economically successful in running Monticello even with slaves, among other factors).

But, would any of us here agree that in any time in world history that human slavery was the right and moral thing to do?

I am reminded also of a visit I once made to one of the old Civil War battlefields near Fredericksburg, Virginia (not far from where I lived at the time). The Confederate flag in today's South is seen very different depending who you are and the story of your ancestors. So I was looking at some of the headstones in the Union cemetery. Across the park road was a small Confederate cemetery. And as I was standing there, a family drove up, took flowers and a small Confederate flag to place on one of the gravestones. Obviously descendants of a Civil War soldier. It really hit me while I watched them that while very wrong in their support of slavery, these Southerners were people with families and were considered "good" people by those in their communities and churches, etc. And that goes back to understanding what was understandable for given time, which still may not have been morally right.

Iktomi

I think hope in the sense of a delusion can just make you suffer. When Thich Nhat Hanh was present in a conference about global warming he rarely spoke. But when he did he advised the panel to accept the fact that they might fail and the world could be destroyed. They asked him why he said that and he said that if you can accept the worse possiblity then you can be at peace and become a better worker for the environment.

So it's not good enough to look at websters dictionary you also have to look at a context. In a cancer ward the patients should make peace with death. At the same time there is a possibility of beating the cancer and they can work hard to make that outcome. The best medicine is non-grasping wisdom of emptiness with a close second chemo and surgery.

When I wrote that faith is being open to whatever arises I was paraphrasing Alan Watts, a British philosopher, writer, Buddhist practitioner and someone with extensive study in both Western and Eastern philosophy and religion.

"Faith is a state of openness or trust. To have faith is like when you trust yourself to the water. You don't grab hold of the water when you swim, because if you do you will become stiff and tight in the water, and sink. You have to relax, and the attitude of faith is the very opposite of clinging, and holding on. In other words, a person who is fanatic in matters of religion, and clings to certain ideas about the nature of God and the universe becomes a person who has no faith at all. Instead they are holding tight. But the attitude of faith is to let go, and become open to truth, whatever it might turn out to be."
– Alan Watts

Letting go in this way is not confidence in the suttas as ferderica believes. That's like trying to grab hold of the water when you swim. Faith is like when you trust yourself to the water. It is to "be a lamp unto yourself," as the Buddha said.

It's by clinging to words and dogmas that get people confused about hope and faith. Hope is simply a human emotion what we all feel. As Aura aptly points out, believing that anybody ever works toward any goal in life at all without any hope of success is delusion.

federica

I would say that it's invalid to change the definition of a word when you discuss different religions.

I never changed the definition.
it's a recognised definition, and as such, just as valid.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith


I have 'faith' that the earth will continue to revolve on its trajectory around the sun, and that in some hours it will be morning.
i think that can reliably be defined as confidence.
I have equal - if not more - 'faith' in the veracity and foundation of the buddha's teachings.
that is, I am as confident as i can be that the guy knew what he was talking about.
How is that 'changing' a definition?

federica

"Faith is a state of openness or trust. To have faith is like when you trust yourself to the water. You don't grab hold of the water when you swim, because if you do you will become stiff and tight in the water, and sink. You have to relax, and the attitude of faith is the very opposite of clinging, and holding on.

precisely. you need to develop the confidence that your buoyancy is enough to hold you afloat, and through diligent practice and training, you become more and more confident....

QUOTATION CONTINUES:
In other words, a person who is fanatic in matters of religion, and clings to certain ideas about the nature of God and the universe becomes a person who has no faith at all. Instead they are holding tight.

this too, illustrates my point; their faith is founded on an illogical premise and as such, is based more on hope than on confidence....

But the attitude of faith is to let go, and become open to truth, whatever it might turn out to be."
– Alan Watts

....And this is where my view and definition of faith, differs. but it makes him no more wrong - or right - than i am.
in fact, i am more open to the different definitions, whereas Alan Watts is relatively more narrow-viewed in his definition than I.

Letting go in this way is not confidence in the suttas as ferderica believes. That's like trying to grab hold of the water when you swim. Faith is like when you trust yourself to the water. It is to "be a lamp unto yourself," as the Buddha said.

No, quite the contrary. Having now explained and illustrated that my definition is just as valid, i have to point out that you are incorrect in your assessment of my faith. If that is what you are implying....you may not be. i may have misunderstood your intention...

It's by clinging to words and dogmas that get people confused about hope and faith. Hope is simply a human emotion what we all feel. As Aura aptly points out, believing that anybody ever works toward any goal in life at all without any hope of success is delusion.

I don't deny I have often felt hope.
I merely think that Faith can be just as defined by it, as much as it can be defined by 'confidence'.

vinlyn

I would say that it's invalid to change the definition of a word when you discuss different religions.

I never changed the definition.
it's a recognised definition, and as such, just as valid.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith


I have 'faith' that the earth will continue to revolve on its trajectory around the sun, and that in some hours it will be morning.
i think that can reliably be defined as confidence.
I have equal - if not more - 'faith' in the veracity and foundation of the buddha's teachings.
that is, I am as confident as i can be that the guy knew what he was talking about.
How is that 'changing' a definition?

I see it differently than you, but that's okay. Semantics, I guess.

federica

I fail to see how you can 'see it differently' if I have just put written proof before you.
It's not semantics. it's an accurate definition of a word that perhaps you weren't aware of.

And yes - I will hold my hand up, if you like, and admit - I am being a complete and obstinate pedant, and I apologise unreservedly for that.
But language, definition, grammar and usage are things I get quite passionate about.

aura

I take your point; however, actually, I've worked in a hospital, and also volunteered at a hospice for the terminally ill...
hope, I have found, is not the primary sentiment in evidence.

Fear, of course is the primary sentiment in evidence everywhere on earth.
However, I find tremendous hope in evidence at the hospital and among those in hospice, and it is a unifying, motivating, and beneficial emotion.
"Clinging," unlike hope, is not an emotion, but an action, a manifestation of personal will.

At the hospital, hope is the motivating force inspiring staff, patients, and loved ones to help the ill and wounded pursue their goal of living and regaining strength and health. The hospitals were founded on the hope of helping the ill and the wounded regain their strength and health.

In hospice, hope is likewise the motivating force inspiring staff, patients, and loved ones to help the terminally ill pursue their goal of dying with maximum dignity and minimal discomfort. The hospice was founded on the hope of helping the terminally ill pass with maximum dignity and minimal discomfort.

federica

I take your point; however, actually, I've worked in a hospital, and also volunteered at a hospice for the terminally ill...
hope, I have found, is not the primary sentiment in evidence.

Fear, of course is the primary sentiment in evidence everywhere on earth.

that's not the primary sentiment I was talking about.
i was referring more to a peace of mind, and serene resignation...evident in abundance.


Permit me to give my slant on your assertions:

However, I find tremendous positivity in evidence at the hospital and among those in hospice, and it is a unifying, motivating, and beneficial emotion.
......

At the hospital, dedication is the motivating force inspiring staff, patients, and loved ones to help the ill and wounded pursue their goal of living and regaining strength and health. The hospitals were founded on the sincere intention of helping the ill and the wounded regain their strength and health.
In hospice, compassion is likewise the motivating force inspiring staff, patients, and loved ones to help the terminally ill pursue their goal of dying with maximum dignity and minimal discomfort. The hospice was founded on the dedicated motivation of helping the terminally ill pass with maximum dignity and minimal discomfort.

...is how I would put it.
As i have said - I am as susceptible to the feeling and sentiment of hopefulness, as much as anyone else can be.


But as i have now exhaustively illustrated whence my definition comes, i really do not feel the need any further to clarify my meaning.

Jeffrey

Just throwing this out there. Not directed at anyone moreso the vibe of my thoughts/response..

"would that I could find somebody who is not caught up in words. So that I could have a word with them." ~Chuang Tzu a taoist thinker