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.
Buddhism Without Rebirth
I think I may have asked this here or somewhere else, but I will again. First off, when asked what religion I am I always say I am an Agnostic Buddhist. If they are interested, I go on to explain that I see God(s) as irrelevant and put much more trust in ethics and action rather than creeds or set-in-stone dogma. When it comes to the afterlife, I honestly am not all that interested because I see this life as being more important and much more interesting. I tend to believe nothing happens and once the mind shuts down, all counsciousness, thought processes, souls, or whatever else there may be die with it.
So my question is thus. Do you feel that a belief in a literal rebirth (karma or counscience carrying on to another entity) is necessary for practicing of Buddhism? Steve Hagen and Lama Surya Das seem to say 'no' in their books I have read. I also say no because I do not believe in a literal rebith personally.
Now I know there are many stories about past lives, future births, heavens, hells, different realms. But that is all they are; just stories. And when it really comes down to it, my belief or lack of belief in rebirth will not change the way I think or act at all.
Any thoughts?
So my question is thus. Do you feel that a belief in a literal rebirth (karma or counscience carrying on to another entity) is necessary for practicing of Buddhism? Steve Hagen and Lama Surya Das seem to say 'no' in their books I have read. I also say no because I do not believe in a literal rebith personally.
Now I know there are many stories about past lives, future births, heavens, hells, different realms. But that is all they are; just stories. And when it really comes down to it, my belief or lack of belief in rebirth will not change the way I think or act at all.
Any thoughts?
0
Comments
In my opinion...........This is one of the many great things about Buddhism.
My thoughts:
A.) An understanding of rebirth is a part of mundane Right View, which is the support and requisite condition for the other factors of the Path (MN 117).
B.) The Buddha never said do not follow something simply because you disagree with it, he said that a view or belief must be tested by the results it yields when put into practice; and — to guard against the possibility of any bias or limitations in one's understanding of those results — they must further be checked against the experience of people who are wise. (AN 3.65).
C.) By the Buddha's own admission, if it were not important to the understanding and cessation of suffering, he would not have taught it at all (SN 56.31).
D.) Why follow a path whose teachings you do not believe in, or find unimportant? Outright rejection of these teachings would leave you with simple humanism—not Buddhism. However, taking these teachings as a working hypothesis instead of ignoring them altogether allows you to leave them aside for now, but still have them there for you to test in the future.
Best wishes,
Jason
No. The alternative is the source of more skilful practice - experience. The Buddha was pretty adamant that beliving in something just becaue it has a long tradition, or that this has been practiced for generations, or because of deference to your spiritual teachers; nor should you hold to certain views just because you are comfortable with them - but after due dilgence and careful investigation such practices leads to greater love, understanding and wisdom and are benefical to yourself and other sentient beings - then it is these things that should occupy to space and time and form the criteria against which you judge your actions.
baffled.
There is little mystery associated, nowadays, with how the Human body actually works. I think I may be right in saying that there is still room for conjecture as to why it works. What actually drives us.... what is the 'electricity/energy/force that actually compels/impels/propels us to move, speak, act and think as we do?
At the moment of conception - when the sperm meets the egg - a biological process takes place, but this is driven, or kick-started, by the influx of energy which in its own turn is activated by the biological process...(what came first, the chicken or the egg....?)
At this moment, too many factors to mention, or care about, happen here....the fertilised egg has inherited a portion of energy. Some from its own parents, and some from the automatic input at conception. What we inherit, we cannot change. What we are infused with, is ours to manipulate.
This energy is all around us. We live in it, constantly. It is the great collective of all life past, ready to re-activate.
Before you dismiss this as a load of hookum, consider that you exist in the middle of a vast amount of electrica energy already... it drives televisions, radios, mobile 'phones, computers and any electronic wireless equipment. You flick a switch, and the light goes on. But whilst the wiring in your house may conduct electricity, where it comes from is more vague...
As for who or what is re-born, I love the analogy of the two candles:
Light one candle.
Now light the second one, from the first candle flame.
Blow the first flame out.
This second flame, now....
Is it the same as the first, or different?
You don't have to accept any of this. You don't have to listen, take it on board, believe or even think about it if you don't want to.
Just leave it all aside, until maybe, some day, something 'clicks'.
It's all choice.
" by the Dali Lama. It has a very logical, easily understood and convincing expanation of this process. Only after reading this and rolling it over in my head for a few weeks was I able to understand the concept and be comfortable with it.
In summary, it suggests that previously exisiting material provides the basis for the physical aspects of your body, but not conciousness, and that only from previously existing conciousness could conciousness emerge. Federica's analogy of the candles is a very good one from this perspective. The flame of the second candle could only come from a pre-existing source.
Sorry. Off topic.
Well... kinda on subject anyway!
::
More than that, perhaps an answer to the question!
:
In Korean culture, the soul is considerd by some to be inherited from the father, so strong is the paternal family model there. Only now is South Korea starting to promote domestic adoption over international adoption.
...and I don't see how I could love any child (with my DNA or not) more than I love my Cecilia.
::
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wheel008.html
Also. From the preface to the Sutta:
_/\_
metta
Mag - thank you for that wonderful picture and statements love and affection.
Just made my morning.
-bf
Once you understand that there is in truth no "I", no "self" that exists apart from and independent of everything else, then the whole question of death and rebirth becomes moot. You are constantly dying and being reborn from instant to instant. It is our deluded notion of a separate "self" that keeps it going. Once the delusion is seen through and you have the realization of emptiness, there is no longer any doubt.
Palzang
Those babies are sooooooo cuuuuuuute!!!! They're killing me!! What fortunate little beings to have you as their parents. They're very, very beautiful.
If you ever feel like uploading a few more somewhere here, I, for one, would love it. I can never get enough of baby pictures. Never.
Mag,
Is Cecilia eating alphabet soup?
Hmm...Maybe Buddhist Humanist????
Palzang
The short answer: Meditation.
By practicing meditation — and having a mind concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability — one is able to direct their mind towards the three knowledges, namely: knowledge of the recollection of past lives, knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings, and knowledge of the ending of mental fermentations. In the Cula-hatthipadopama Sutta, for example, the knowledge of the recollection of past lives is described thus:
Although, this is not required.
Jason
While I have made similar comparisons in the past, I have since found that it is better not to make them for various reasons. One of them being, consciousness is not like our current understanding of energy in that consciousness has its supporting condition:
Consciousness is not an indestructible thing in and of itself. Consciousness, as with all conditioned things, is unsatisfactory, impermanent, and not-self. As such, it must follow the truth that whatever has the nature of arising, has the nature of ceasing. (SN 56.11)
Jason
Does it continue from moment to moment? Same thing...
Palzang
To simplify things a little bit, I thought I would give a quick review of this teaching. In short, the beginning of this round of rebirth in not evident, therefore, worrying about how and when it all started is essentially a waste of time (SN 15.3). Nevertheless, there is suffering, and as long as beings continue to be reborn, they will continue to experience suffering. Beings experience suffering due to the very nature of conditional existence—i.e. its unsatisfactoriness, inconstancy, and not-selfness.
The root cause of our suffering is ignorance, in particular, ignorance of the Four Noble Truths. Suffering will continue to arise as long as there are the supporting conditions for it to arise. Once the supporting conditions cease, suffering ceases. This knowledge of whatever has the nature of arising, has the nature of ceasing is realized when one attains the first stage of Awakening (SN 56.11). Once the root of ignorance has been complete uprooted from the mind, there is no more further becoming—whether in this world or any other.
Consciousness — the act of taking note of sense data and ideas as they occur — will also continue to arise and cease in this cyclic existence until the supporting conditions for its arising are completely cut off. Until then, it is but one link in a chain of conditionality that is essentially a self-perpetuating feedback loop called dependent arising. It is only with the remainderless fading and cessation of ignorance that this chain of causation can be broken, and subsequently, the cessation of this entire mass of stress and suffering (SN 12.2).
Now, the question might arise, “If an arahant has achieved this state of cessation, why does he still have a mind, body, consciousness, et cetera?” The answer is that even though the arahant has uprooted ignorance, and therefore there is no more becoming, there is still the results of past kamma in previous lives that must exhaust themselves—i.e. the mind and body. Once this kamma has been exhausted, and since no new kamma is being produced, the arahant passes away never to re-appear in any of the realms of existence again (Iti 44).
I believe that the real importance of rebirth in Buddhism is that it is warning us that suffering does not simply cease when we die if the conditions for its arising are still present. If you leave the root cause of ignorance unchecked, who knows how many more tears will be shed, in how many more lives, in how many more worlds. It is essentially a teaching that helps to arouse the urgency to practice within us because not only is this human birth rare, but so is our chance to practice (SN 56.48).
Sincerely,
Jason
"Once you understand that there is in truth no "I", no "self" that exists apart from and independent of everything else, then the whole question of death and rebirth becomes moot".
If there is no "I", then how can "I" be reborn? As Elohim reminds us, suffering may continue, but for whom or what? As I say, I can't get my head round it. For me, maybe it's best not to try.
Martin.
I consider myself a very happy person. Whether or not my counsciousness continues after death doesn't really matter and is not constructive to this moment and will not make me any more or less happy.
There is an 'I' that get's reborn. But the 'I' which we mentally refer to is simply a mental construction which is used to refer to the apparent continuity of our personal co-mingling khandhas. But there is no permanent, unchanging, independent entity such as "I" that exists aside from the co-mingingling of the khandhas. In other words, "I" is only a conventional reality, that arises under certain conditions. You might want to have a look at this article by Lama Thubten Yeshe Rimpoche:
http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamayeshe/whoareyou.shtml
Hope this helps.
_/\_
metta
For whom or what is an improper way of looking at it. Such designations are simply conventions. What matters is that there is suffering. If you suffer, it is a problem—a problem that the Buddha said will not go away on its own. There is nothing to really get your head around besides this idea.
I myself do not find consciousness abstract as I can directly experience it every waking moment. If you see something, that is consciousness of the contact between the eye faculty and the object of sight—without all four present, there is no seeing. The only difficult part comes with rebirth.
Basically, consciousness does not arise on its own after a being dies. Craving is the sustenance that sustains a being when it has yet to be reborn. Through craving, the process of rebirth continues uninterrupted until the craving is removed. Craving is removed by insight into the Four Noble Truths.
Nevertheless, no one has to believe in rebirth, or even try to understand it. One can (and should) practice the Noble Eightfold Path regardless, because it leads one to the end of suffering. I am simply trying to help those that are interested in learning more about the teachings on rebirth.
Sincerely,
Jason
For those of you who do not mind some heavy reading, I would suggest taking a look at this talk by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw on the Anattalakkhana Sutta—especially chapter four which deals directly with consciousness.
Sincerely,
Jason
Are bodies are like computers. Are consciousness is like the files, always changing. And behind the scenes in the OS which makes everything work together. Electricity is used, and necessary, but it is not the "self" of the computer. Take apart the computer and smash them up into bits. All of the matter is still there in one form or another, but you can't retrieve the file. You can melt down and recycle the parts into other computers and things, but that computer is gone.
Ok, not a perfect metaphor, but it's the best I can do. I also like the candle metaphor.
As you might have guessed, I don't believe in a soul. I don't think we need to rely on an immortal, mystical self driving the body to explain the workings of the body. No soul, nothing to go on - except karma. Our karma does keep going, affecting people. Example: How different would the world be if even the great grandparents of Caesar/Hitler/Jesus/Lincoln/insert-influential-person decided that they just "weren't in the mood" the night they conceived the grandparents of whomever.
Yes, that's the way I understand it too. While consciousness goes on from life to life, it is neither permanent nor unchanging, as Christians believe a soul is or Hindus believe the atman is. It is a mental construct based on our basic delusion of self and other, but it is not affected by death and dissolution as these are not of the mind but physical. Not an easy thing to understand, I know, especially when our social conditioning all our lives has been the exact opposite.
Palzang
Could it be something like the consciousness dissolves during the process of death but the karmic imprint doesn't and craving sustains the being until conception when a new but not independent consciousness is born? Thus, through karma and craving, the process of rebirth continues uninterrupted?
Not1, I love that article. It's one of my very favourites. Ever since I read it a few months ago I started calling myself just a "bubble of relativity".
I really want to understand this the best that I can. I need it so that I can understand the deeper part of impermanence and not-self. But I'm not going to force it. I'll just keep all the neural pathways open.
Now, don't expect a full liberation during the dying process unless your practice has been very deep & thorough. But I don't think you need to be fully equated with the minute technicalities to die well. I think the most important thing is to be very wary of all the desires which will naturally pop up, assuming you are lucid, during the dissolution of body conciousness, as this will greatly determine your rebirth & bring about the nutriment for a new birth. At least that's my basic understanding.
Anyway, it's bed time. Take care everyone.
_/\_
metta
life is painful enough as it is.. and i'm too nice a person to be constantly spawned in this hell-hole
This topic boggles my brain. I can't think about without getting bogged down in analytical philosophy - at which point i feel further from the truth. However, based on what i know and experience i have no reason to believe in rebirth as i have never had memories of past lives.
However, there's just a couple of ideas i'd like to bounce off you guys.
I once read an idea somewhere that rebirth is like waves in an ocean. Once a wave 'is over' it just disapates back into the sea. Every now and then when a new wave is formed, it contains enough water from the past wave to remember bits and pieces of its life.
This would mean that there is no direct lineage of rebirth and so i'm not sure how the law of kamma would work (any suggestions?).
Believing in no soul nor rebirth i am left with the problem of where kamma goes. Is it feasible that your kamma can be inherited by others and so bear fruition that way? Just an idea.
Think of it this way....
This 'mental construct - everything we have physically and mentally absorbed so far - is like a jar of marbles....multi-coloured,multi-sized..... and when we 'die', it's as if someone has opened the jar, and poured it into a big bathtub-sized container, full of other marbles.... then you plunge your hands in, and mix them all up.... and refill the jar, marble by marble, for the next stage in the development of this 'mental construct'....
That's really simplified, and very possibly way off bat.... but it's something I personally use to try to permit my own, feeble 'Light-years-from-Enlightenment' current entity to understand.... a bit.....
Palzang
Well, of course you don't! That's why the Buddha taught the Dharma, so that beings didn't have to continue on the Wheel of Death and Rebirth!
Palzang
Nope, sorry.
Palzang
Since karma to me means my actions, in a way the whole world inherits them. Every action I take, the world will reap the consequences of until it ends.
I recall an old quote from a Zen book I got a while ago. A layperson asked a great Zen master, "What happens to me after I die?"
"I don't know," responded the master plainly.
"But I thought you were a great Zen master," protested the man.
The master smiled and replied, "Yes, but not a dead one!"
i understand that the pure state of the mind is different from emotional and false perceptions, / the body.
But its still in the same entity, me and i don't think it can exist outside the body. I find it to be the same as chrsitians belief in heaven or other religions simply telling you that you will live forever, mans desire for immortality.
Also Buddhist belief system to me is based on questioning and only accepting that which has no questions and is considered truth, so i find it impossible for any person to believe in reincarnation and rebirth and call themselves a buddhist... sigh anyway
surely realisation is impossible on such a speculative subject and therefore its a personal and flawed belief created by the body and ego's need for eternal life.
There are other beings on this planet besides humans. There are other beings that are supposed to experience rebirth and reincarnation. For example, there used to be millions of head of buffalo on the N American plains...
-bf
I personally believe life ends utterly upon physical death. I also understand that Gautama believed in reincarnation as he came from a (proto-)Hindu society, but I don't consider his teachings any less relevant to my life because of this fact.
This has probably been said over and over on this thread, which I haven't read in it's entirety, but I'm a n00b, so whatevah. :buck:
the whole buddhist masters being reborn again.. i mean really dude.. that can never be prooven that is not mind talking and again contradicts what i understand of the path. And therefore it cannot and should not in my opinion be consider real or the ppl who are 'reborn' near worshipped.
what we cannot proove or even contemplate as true or not-true should not be practised and thats the way it should stay til we realise the 'truth'.. some subjects like rebirth and god are simply speculative and can never be prooved either way
I find it extremely peculiar that one person can find it impossible for another person to practice Buddhism and believe in rebirth. It should not strike one as being out of the ordinary — not to mention possible — since the Buddha himself taught rebirth.
Furthermore, the Buddha did not teach rebirth simply because it was one of the religious fads of that time, but because he experienced the knowledge of the recollection of past lives for himself on the night of his Awakening. The argument that since there is an ever-growing human population, this invalidates the Buddha's teachings on rebirth because “souls must be created without past lives”, is based upon a poor understanding of the Buddha's teachings.
First, there is no soul in Buddhism. Conditionality does not leave any room for such an idea. However, while the teachings on dependent arising combined with those of kamma and rebirth explain this, it is far too detailed and complex to sufficiently cover here. Secondly, rebirth includes all of the thirty-one planes of existence. To disprove rebirth by such an argument, you would have to count all of the various beings in all of the thirty-one realms.
While I agree that modern science cannot validate this directly, that does not mean that it cannot be proven—especially through direct experience, which is all the proof a person can truly hold onto as being true. Through meditation, this experience is possible.
Regards,
Jason
Honestly, while it is not necessary to believe in rebirth (and I openly suggest putting the issue aside for as long as necessary), rejecting it outright is even less necessary. Just focus on the aspects of the path that do make sense to you, and don't worry about rebirth.
Take care
_/\_
metta
Palzang
I don't think it has anything to do with my ego-clinging. I can be just as joyful in this life without believing in rebirth. I don't believe in a real self or soul.
I just have trouble believing in anything just because it worked for others or someone says so. In a way, it almost appears to be very dangerous to do so. The only absolute personal maxim that I live by is "Nothing goes unquestioned."
I question rebirth for the same reasons I question God, the Bible, the church, teachers, authorities, government, or anyone else in power. I am perfectly happy with or without believing in rebirth in my life. It doesn't make a difference.
The purpose of this subforum is to talk about the forms Buddhism is taking in this modern world, and it will be no different in the West, where a pro-science, gender neutral, egalitarian approach I'm sure will evolve. Will it rub a lot of people the wrong way? Maybe, but change is never easy, but it is required of everyone and everything. Abstracts that are impossible to prove will probably fall by the wayside for many Western Buddhists. Many of them may not even want to apply the term Buddhism for the religious connotations it evokes.
Besides, for those Buddhists who do believe in reincarnation, the whole point is to escape the cycle of rebirth and death by following the teachings, for those that don't believe, the point is to try to attain enlightenment in this lifetime by following the teachings. If we only disagree about something neither of us will ever prove to one another, and is irrelevant to the life we lead now, what's the point of contention? (Although, if this were a courtroom or a Logic 101 class, the "Burden of Proof" would be on the more specacular claimant, luckily Buddhism is neither of these things.
Of course, I'll accept not being a real Buddhist if I have to believe in Bronze Age faery tales, because the reason I got into it was that it was proven mental technology, for the most part, without the dogmatism, aggression and anti-intellectualism of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Also, please don't misinterpret me as saying that enlightenment can be reached through logic and thinking, I realize the folly in this, but completely turning off the rational faculties and filling my mind with legends of saints and demigods who sit in caves for thousands of years without eating is not a step I'm willing to take. I'm really positive about the direction modern Buddhism is taking.
:usflag:
Beyond that, you are free to be a rational skeptic all you want. In that case, follow the advice in the Kalama Sutta. But do keep in mind that this advice was given to non-buddhists and that the Buddha taught more authoritatively on these subjects to his disciples. Generally, to take refuge in the Triple Gem, it is understood that we take the buddha's words as authoritative and use the tools he gave us to verify them in our own experience.
take care
_/\_
metta