Question about Nirvana (Theravada tradition)!

mile83

Hello everybody, I'm new here, and also kinda new to Buddhism. I'm mostly interested in the Theravada tradition.

I have a question regarding Nirvana, which is, what actually reaches Nirvana(?), if there is no soul and what happens to me when I die and I don't reach Nirvana in this lifetime. Let's pretend I reach Nirvana in my next lifetime, but since there is no Self, that next lifetime would not be me, it would be a different person, right? So what happens to me in this lifetime where I don't reach Nirvana?? It sounds so complicated. I hope you get what I mean.

Is it true that only my karmic tendencies create a new body and so to speak 'survive', but that next body would not be me, why should I then practice buddhism, if I die everything will be over for 'me' anyways (of course that sounds very egoistical).

I tried googling answer to my question, but I honestly couldn't find anything. I hope you can help me . And excuse my bad English.

Thanks alot

Sabre

Hi and welcome!

Let's start off with what there is now before talking about next lives. What's here now? You say there is a 'me' here, that would be a different person in next life. But is that 'me' here? Can you point to it, really? Because if it isn't here now, it also wouldn't make sense to talk about a different person in a next life.. I guess you can agree on that.

Turns out there is no 'me' here, that's the teaching of no-self, or selflessness. All experience is without a core, without a center, without a solid 'person'. So the next life is not the same person, but it also is not a different person. But the same is true for when you wake up after a night sleep. The body may be sort of the same as yesterday, but the mind is totally different. Actually this happens every moment. There is no self now and there is no self never.

So all questions with 'what happens to me?' or 'why should I practice?' don't really make sense if seen in that light.

mile83

It's so difficult to grasp to me, thank you for answering though.

But it's true, that once I die, it's basically game over for me, isn't it? Thank you

PrairieGhost

Hi mile83:

But it's true, that once I die, it's basically game over for me, isn't it?

Dying is a trick of the light, It doesn't really happen. The only you who dies is the one who believes in death (and he didn't exist in the first place).

mile83

The body may be sort of the same as yesterday, but the mind is totally different. Actually this happens every moment. There is no self now and there is no self never.

Is that what happens after death as well, a continuity? but wouldn't that be a "me" or some kind of 'self'?

PrairieGhost

Hi again mile83:

Is that what happens after death as well, a continuity?

There's no continuity right now. There are no individual moments.

You're thinking from the perspective of a film playing. From our perspective we think the image displays continuous motion, events etc because we're standing away from it: the rest of the scene outside the frame contrasts with the movie screen, giving us relative motion.

But in real life, there is no one standing apart from the screen, and nothing relative to it, therefore no motion.

There is no such thing as absolute motion, only relative motion. And since there are not two phenomena in awareness, there can be no relative motion either.

Sabre

It's so difficult to grasp to me, thank you for answering though.

But it's true, that once I die, it's basically game over for me, isn't it? Thank you

It's not just difficult to grasp, it's impossible to grasp. Because what I think you mean is grasping intellectually. The intellect can not reach these things. You have to get the understanding out of following the path.

Your question is impossible to answer because again you ask about this 'me'. A 'me' that isn't there. But to still try and give an answer that might work from your prespective: It's really game over for the 'me' when experiencing stream entry, before that it's not and there will be rebirth after rebirth, forever. That's because until then you'll be trying to get this 'me' to somehow survive, based upon attachment, something I wouldn't advice. So with the disappearance of this feeling of 'me', there will also naturally come the end of attachment and thus to rebirth.

So question yourself what is 'me' instead of what will happen to 'it' after death.

With kindness!
Sabre

mile83

Thanks to both of you PrairieGhost and Sabre!

I have a last question, I wanted to practice Theravada buddhism instead Vajrayana Buddhism because I've read that a teacher is absolutely necessary for Vajrayana. Is that really true?? I mean I get it that I need a Guru for special meditation practices that require a lot of effort, but what about normal meditation like vipassana(is there sth like that in Vajrayana?). If it's really not possible I'm gonna stick to Theravada, because I really cannot go see a teacher at the moment, maybe in the future!

Thank you, I know this question is kinda Off Topic but I couldn't edit my post anymore and I really don't want to start a new thread! ^^

Thx.

Sabre

In Theravada teachers are useful, but don't have a guru-like status. Also there are no hidden teachings or 'secret' meditation techniques.

Don't know about Vajrayana, though.

mile83

Thank you

PrairieGhost

Thank you for stopping by.

Songhill

Mile83

I have a question regarding Nirvana, which is, what actually reaches Nirvana(?),

It is the very self (paccattam) that reaches nirvana (cp. S.iii.53-54). Putting this into modern English, it is you who personally attains nirvana.

Moderator Edit: This material is inappropriate and incorrect for a Theravada perspective.

PrairieGhost

Well it sure isn't anyone else

mile83

Thanks guys, you've been very helpful

mile83

what I've always wondered as well is to what happens to all the spiritual progress I make in this life?? Do I have to start from the beginning in next life basically from zero?

PrairieGhost

mile83:

I have a last question, I wanted to practice Theravada buddhism instead Vajrayana Buddhism because I've read that a teacher is absolutely necessary for Vajrayana. Is that really true?? I mean I get it that I need a Guru for special meditation practices that require a lot of effort, but what about normal meditation like vipassana(is there sth like that in Vajrayana?). If it's really not possible I'm gonna stick to Theravada, because I really cannot go see a teacher at the moment, maybe in the future!

Noticing the way things are doesn't necessarily need a teacher, but there's no need to be lonely in your practice either.

PrairieGhost

mile83:

what I've always wondered as well is to what happens to all the spiritual progress I make in this life?? Do I have to start from the beginning in next life basically from zero?

What does it feel like the answer is?

mile83

it feels like my 'progress' won't be in vain ^^ Well at least I hope so

PrairieGhost

mile83

it feels like my 'progress' won't be in vain ^^ Well at least I hope so

Nothing you learn is in vain.

But, sometimes we have to unlearn our progress, even things like hope.

All the picking up is for letting go in the end.

mile83

PrairieGhost said:

mile83

it feels like my 'progress' won't be in vain ^^ Well at least I hope so

Nothing you learn is in vain.


This sounds comforting . Thank you all again, this seems like a nice forum

mile83

Can the idea of 'stream of consciousness' also be applied to Theravada?? Or is this a Tibetan concept. I've found something on wiki, which explains it pretty well, but I don't know if this can be applied to theravada as well. I hope I may copy this passage.

Some English-speaking Buddhists prefer the term "rebirth" or "re-becoming" (Sanskrit: punarbhava; Pali: punabbhava) to "reincarnation" as they take the latter to imply a fixed entity that is reborn.[10] It is said to be the "evolving consciousness" (Pali: samvattanika viññana, M.1.256)[11][12] or "stream of consciousness" (Pali: viññana sotam, D.3.105).[13] that reincarnates. The early Buddhist texts make it clear that there is no permanent consciousness that moves from life to life.[14] The lack of a fixed self does not mean lack of continuity. In the same way that a flame is transferred from one candle to another, there is a conditioned relationship between one life and the next: they are neither identical nor completely distinct.

oh btw, the text is from wiki article on rebirth

PrairieGhost

Buddha specifically said that there isn't a consciousness which migrates from life to life. Consciousness is an idea, the idea that we are people (physical objects) each possessing a consciousness, as you would possess a coin.

Without causes and conditions, the notion of consciousness, and the behaviour that follows never arises.

'Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"

"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."

"Sati, what is that consciousness?"

"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."

"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."'

http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm

PrairieGhost

Obviously the Buddha wouldn't have been as annoyed at your post as he was with Sati though, since you were asking a good question rather than misrepresenting his teachings.

PrairieGhost

This was to Songhill. Who made a point about vinnana existing in nibbana. I don't think he is wrong exactly. Anyway... I said:

Well, yes, we're talking about the samsaric vinnana because the nibbanic vinnana you're talking about isn't vinnana. It looks, smells, feels, cognates, tastes, sounds like vinnana, but it isn't.

Conscious means a being who is conscious of phenomena. That isn't the case. There are just phenomena. And since phenomena are codependent on conscious beings to perceive them, what are we left with?

Don't you understand that I'm asking that question because there is no answer? The deepest sigh of the ocean couldn't answer it. We live the answer.

Sabre

mile83 said:

Can the idea of 'stream of consciousness' also be applied to Theravada??

Yes, as long as you realize a stream of water is never made up of the same water, a stream of consciousness is never made up of the same consciousness.

mile83

Sabre said:

mile83 said:

Can the idea of 'stream of consciousness' also be applied to Theravada??

Yes, as long as you realize a stream of water is never made up of the same water, a stream of consciousness is never made up of the same consciousness.

Thank You , that metaphor is quite useful really!

coz

it seems like the whole talk and thought about self is the wonder of do we know who we are in the next life but here we are in this life with the ability to be happy or sad and the only time we think of a past life is to say how can i do better but for the most part we have a certain contentment with this preasant life so with this life all i can think about is the now i am in , and know matter what life i am in, there will always be the now.
and my ability to say here i am a part of a greater conciousness so to me being satisfyed
with the now gives me a strong vision of nervana

Jeffrey

mile83 said:

Thanks to both of you PrairieGhost and Sabre!

I have a last question, I wanted to practice Theravada buddhism instead Vajrayana Buddhism because I've read that a teacher is absolutely necessary for Vajrayana. Is that really true?? I mean I get it that I need a Guru for special meditation practices that require a lot of effort, but what about normal meditation like vipassana(is there sth like that in Vajrayana?). If it's really not possible I'm gonna stick to Theravada, because I really cannot go see a teacher at the moment, maybe in the future!

Thank you, I know this question is kinda Off Topic but I couldn't edit my post anymore and I really don't want to start a new thread! ^^

Thx.

Tibetan Buddhist Perspective

The teacher gives the method. The method is:

Overcome attachment to pleasure by understanding suffering
Overcome attachment to life by understanding impermanence
Overcome attachment to peace by loving kindness

The teacher points out the method. If you don't have a teacher that is ok as much can be accomplished without one. You can even take refuge without a teacher as shown in the kagyupa text the Jewel Ornament of Liberation.

Jeffrey

Transmigration I theorize is like a mandala. So even a sport team they have a goal, the title. And then new players are always coming and going but the mandala is always there as the new team never wants to lose the game.

In the next life the desire to be happy and loving and so forth is like a new player going onto the team of awakening. I am not sure how the 'tendencies' migrate, but the mind need not be the same as the body (which turns to dust).

Sabre

mile83 said:

Sabre said:

mile83 said:

Can the idea of 'stream of consciousness' also be applied to Theravada??

Yes, as long as you realize a stream of water is never made up of the same water, a stream of consciousness is never made up of the same consciousness.

Thank You , that metaphor is quite useful really!

Thank the Buddha

mile83

Just to be sure again, the spiritual progress I make in this life won't be in vain?? what if in my next lifetime I get reborn as a Hindu, Taoist, Christian, or Muslim (NOT that I have anything against these religions!!) ? Would I have to start the journey for the right path from the beginning??

Surely that must be imprinted in my Karma, right??

RebeccaS

@mile83 Maybe they all lead to the same place eventually anyway. Just a thought

PrairieGhost

"The emperor asked, "I have endowed temples and authorized ordinations - what is my merit?'

Bodhidharma replied, "No merit at all."

The emperor asked, "What is the first principle of the holy teaching?"

Bodhidharma said, "Vast emptiness, nothing holy."

The emperor was upset and asked, "Who is this confronting me?"

Bodhidharma said, "I don't know.""

http://www.ordinarymind.com/html/pacify.html

PrairieGhost

Don't try to pile up spiritual progress like treasure. Practice with no expectations.

Life isn't a game of snakes and ladders, no god or force of nature is conspiring to reset your progress. Everything's on your side and nothing's futile.

mile83

well, I was just wondering if everything is happening in some sort of progress or is there a possiblity in regress as well

I mean what if I progress in this life but in the next life the opposite happens

Sabre

Could happen, could not happen. But one thing you can know is that if you practice now, you can progress now. And if you don't practice, you won't progress. In a next life you will take whatever progress you made, because things don't happen by pure change, including rebirth.

But, and this is important, progress is not towards something to grab. Progress is letting go. Progress is being less instead of being more. If you want something to contain in the next life, to keep with you, that's still clinging, so that's not nirvana.

So if you can let go of things now, in the future (whether it is a new life or not) you will benefit.

PrairieGhost

mile83

I mean what if I progress in this life but in the next life the opposite happens

Well that's Samsara - wandering on through the ups and downs. That's exactly why we're choosing a better way.

Jeffrey

There is a possibility of regress. Now mind you this is the mahayana info, but they say that there is no regress once going from 7th bodhisattva level to 8.

That is a great being to even be a hearer let alone a bodhisattva. So yes, you can regress. No coasting, it's time to get comfortable being uncomfortable.

mile83

sorry for bumping this thread again, I hope you can forgive me, but I again found some explanation that makes sense to me and how I see it too, maybe this is completely wrong though, take it with a grain of salt, it's from Yahoo answers

i am sorry but there is no simple answer, because what many buddhists believe is not what the buddha taught (and only some buddhists are willing to accept). also it depends on whether you're a buddha or just a regular creature. for regular creatures, a lot of buddhists seem to think that you are reborn, and how high or low you are in the chain of being (i.e. how close or far from the enlightenment that will free you from further rebirths) depends on what you did (karma) in your previous life. but the buddha taught that this is NOT what happens. rather when you die, it is true that other creatures are born, whose births are influenced by your karma (and those of others), but none of them is YOU. so in effect by being good you contribute to the welfare of others who come after you, not YOURSELF, because YOU no longer exist. as for a buddha, that is someone who is believed to be ready not to be reborn anymore at all but to go into nirvana, i.e., nothingness (which is supposed the goal of all beings). one might argue that there are contradictions involved in this view, and indeed that's what i would argue, but these do appear to be the two versions of buddhism that are around. there is all kinds of special pleading to explain what happens when some buddhists, like those in tibet and mongolia, believe in the rebirths of their religious leaders (like the dalai lama), and that seems to me entirely incoherent, but never mind.

you don't have to read the whole paragraph, the bolded part is essential! Thank you, and I apologize again

PrairieGhost

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html

You should read the suttas for information on what Buddha said, and you should work it out for yourself.

Of course no one knows if the suttas are genuine, and of course we are here to help. But I'm not going to respond to that quote, though others may.

mile83

oh sorry, I didn't mean to come across as disrespectful or something

thanks for the link

PrairieGhost

That's not what I meant . It's just that for me, a lot of conflicting opinions from Buddhists were resolved by reading the suttas alongside practice.

mile83

Okay I thought that maybe I said something wrong

PrairieGhost

mile83

you should work it out for yourself.

Yes, that phrasing sounded a bit bossy, sorry.

mile83

nah, it's okay, you don't have to apologise are you a Theravadin, I thought that maybe I posted something insensitive

PrairieGhost

mile83:

are you a Theravadin

No, I'm just some opinionated guy on an internet forum. And if you're studying Buddhism, I probably won't be the last opinionated guy on an internet forum who you'll come across.

p.s. I have studied a good portion of the Theravadin Canon, and read a lot by Theravadin authors, if that helps. I'm not orthodox, but in my experience, there are orthodox Theravadin Buddhists who see things similarly to me.