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.
Rebirth - what is it that goes back.
mockeymind
Veteran
HI everyone - I have no problem in accepting rebirth as the way things are. But I encounter a friend who is a christian and found rebirth in buddhism hard to accept. Since there is no self. soul or whatever they call it. Is it consciousness or something else.
0
Comments
I iz Christian? Bad cructacean, failed again . . .
The analogy use to understand it is as follows: Consider a rich tapestry constructed of the finest threads. When viewed from a distance, the patterns of the colored threads create an image. This image is analogous to the self. After a while this tapestry frays and the image falls apart, but the threads are reused and rewoven to form a new image. In this way, the image never truly had an existence of its own, it was an illusion created by the pattern. But new images can be born from new patterns, using the same threads.
I'd like to say nirvana is realizing there is no weaver and what we actually are... are the threads. But I've never experienced nirvana, so I cannot say for sure
.www.reddit.com/r/.../if_there_is_no_self_what_is_it_that_gets_reborn/
found hid interesting analogy
yildun
Stuff comes together, that be me. Stuff falls apart - no me. I iz frayed tapestry. Works for me, good analogy. Many thanks @yildun. Maybe I am a Buddhist after all . . .
Leave about rebirth, just try to analyze if there is a birth at the first place currently.
The suttas describe consciousness "descending" into a new life, but they are very scant on the detail and the mechanics of this process. But you could say it's kamma which is "reborn". Consciousness always arises dependently so there is no idea of a soul or essence which "wanders on", to use a phrase from MN 38 where Sati discusses this with the Buddha.
Anyway, don't worry about it, a lot of people leave this stuff to one side, and in some schools it's not regarded as relevant to daily practice anyway, the focus is more on "moment-to-moment" rebirth.
In my tradition is it described as a stream of consciousness, but not one that includes our aspects of self. More so one that is a collection of our carried karma. I always envision it as sort of a stream similar to that of stored memories in Harry Potter books and movies, lol. Not that stored memories transfer at death, obviously, but as a visual, that is always what comes to mind for me. That at death, there is a wispy stream that departs this plane.
When my ex died, I had for several months a sense that he was out there some where. I had many dreams where he was here, but not here. Kind of like in Poltergeist (I must have movies on the mind today) where the little girl is in her room, but not. Then that sense was just gone. I'm sure it has more to do with my processing of grief and moving through that process of acceptance and probably just how my mind chose to deal with it. But who knows, perhaps at that time is when "he" chose rebirth.
I recall that the Mahayana added two more categories of consciousness to the 6 in the suttas, one of them being store consciousness?
( the original 6 are one each for the five senses, plus one for the mind )
Nyanatiloka Mahathera, of the Theravada tradition, talks about bhavanga-sota, which he describes as similar to psychology's unconscious.
A kind of storehouse for former impressions, experiences and memories which has been going on since time immemorial.
He describes very vaguely how the passing on from one lifetime to the other takes place, by quoting the Visuddhimagga:
"Empty phenomena roll on, dependent on conditions all..."
He says: "Just as the image in the mirror or the echo are produced by one's face or voice without any passing over of face or voice, just so it is with the arising of rebirth-consciousness."
I'd forgotten about that. It doesn't appear much in the suttas.
http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Bhavanga-sota
@mockeymind
From my heavily biased Zen Buddhist view.
In Christianity, the undying essence, one's soul, continue intact beyond deaths doors.
This soul remains identifiable as the bearer of one's identity.
In Buddhism, our attachments, as karmic inertia, also continue beyond deaths door.
Karmic inertia, however, can be carried by countless expressions of sentience but
nothing continues on of those expressions of identity after death except that inertia.
I think it is helpful to look at those descriptions of what occurs after death, more as the respective lessons of what each practice offers, than of what may or may not be real.
If your Christian friend makes things difficult for you, @mockeymind, simply ask him to explain to you what is it about Christ that was resurrected, how Mary conceived a child being a virgin and a detailed explanation of the Holy Trinity.
This should stump him for a while...
@DhammaDragon - Not really difficult, it is just the way mind sometimes work, investigating, validating before believing (for some). For some reason I saw this "rebirth thing" once looked into and not finding answer acceptable to us leads to suffering. The christian tradition (where i came from) don't even explain what soul is either. They simply most of the time they just accept it by faith. It's subjective.
Same thing with us buddhists. There are lots of explanation how rebirth occurs, some of them acceptable some are not. But we know it's there.
On a personal view, I don't really need to know the process itself (specially if creates suffering) As the Buddha simply suggest the path of mindfulness, this is all that matters, to live just for the moment.
I don't know. But I do know that believing in reincarnation helps you remember that both good and bad deeds matter.
“Padmasambhava said: ‘Though the view should be as vast as the sky, keep your conduct as fine as barley flour.’ Don’t confuse one with the other. When training in the view, you can be as unbiased, as impartial, as vast, immense, and unlimited as the sky. Your behaviour, on the other hand, should be as careful as possible in discriminating what is beneficial or harmful, what is good or evil. One can combine the view and conduct, but don’t mix them or lose one in the other. That is very important.
‘View like the sky’ means that nothing is held onto in any way whatsoever. You are not stuck anywhere at all. In other words, there is no discrimination as to what to accept and what to reject; no line is drawn separating one thing from another. ‘Conduct as fine as barley flour’ means that there is good and evil, and one needs to differentiate between the two. Give up negative deeds; practice the Dharma. In your behaviour, in your conduct, it is necessary to accept and reject.”
~Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche (I think that's right)
https://theconsciousprocess.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/view-and-conduct/
right speech, action, and livelihood matter
@mockeymind , did you know that once upon a time Christians both accepted and promoted the ideology of rebirth/reincarnation, as standard?
"Rebirth - what is it that goes back."
Karma..."Like the flame of a candle igniting another candle!"
The Jewish people in the time of Jesus certainly had no concept-block, as it were, with the idea of reincarnation --if the gospels are to be believed. From Matthew, Chap 16:
When Jesus asked his disciples who the people said he, Jesus, was, they answered: "Some say thou art John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."
Reading on in the gospels, we see how King Herod insisted on Jesus being (just for spite) the Baptizer John whom he had beheaded, whereas others deemed him to be Elijah reincarnated (Mark 6:14ff). See also Mark 8:28 and Luke 9:19, and not least John 1:21, from the time before John the Baptist's death.
It rather seems to me that the Hebrew imagination left plenty of room for reincarnation, not even to mention the awesome idea of a possible transmigration of souls between living bodies, as King Herod feared.
It falls in the realms of the wordless. All words will just mislead.
Shunryu Suzuki said, not one, not two.
To say we die is wrong, to say we don't die is also wrong.
I personally don't believe it's consciousness but that which is aware of consciousness.
What that is I think nobody can ever describe in words.
I would explain that buddhist rebirth is not what people call reincarnation of a soul. I think you could only explain what it's not.
Anybody else? Hahah
It is the Satta or the being that goes on.
At least according to this.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/thag/thag.16.04.than.html
His heirs take over his wealth,
while the being goes on,
in line with his kamma.
No wealth at all
follows the dead one —
not children, wives,
dominion, or riches.
And here
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.009.than.html
"And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?"
"Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time."
Do not ask me what the being is!
You will be reborn (perhaps) but 'you' won't be there. Nobody owns buddha nature so the one who 'owns' is not reborn.
@Earthninja yes, I agree, I think. That's why we have such a hard time debating the topic...because not only do we not have (or remember) the experience to base our thoughts on, but we probably wouldn't have the words, either. Whatever there is, is just "something" and is undefinable, unlike consciousness.
@Earthninja @karasti - of course and that is the beauty of it. that we don't remember. It is like saying in order to know or gain anything, one must first lose everything (the memory of the past) It is the hard truth of our existence.
That is why rebirth is fair and just. With right understanding we can live at the present moment which is the basis of mindfulness. No past no future - just "now"
There are also stories of people coming to the Buddha and said - "I am leaving your teaching because you have not told me about whether there is a life after death"...
And the Buddha says, 'Did I ever say that I would give you the answers to these things?' 'No, Lord, you didn't.' 'Why do you think that I ever said that I would give you the answer to these things? Because these are not the things that you need to know....
"because at this very moment, what made you ask that question was suffering.'"
Another meaning for emptying our cup.