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.
Reincarnation
comicallyinsane
Veteran
I was thinking on ths subject this morning. Does it exist? Maybe. I am not sure. I believe that when we dire we watch our loved ones. I think it takes until they die for you to reincarnate. I don't know how many generations it takes but who knows. I know some are going to say that we will love our grandchildren we never met but that's not what I mean.
0
Comments
Through my practice I feel no other way but reincarnation, just my opinion though...
I also see no evidence of reincarnation... yet, I also have no recollection of the beginning of this stream of thoughts. I see no evidence that this stream of thoughts existed yesterday, or ever before this moment. Very odd, all of this.
Harlan,
There is a 800 year-old tradition of tulkus in Tibet. These are teachers who choose to be reborn. The new person often has many memories from previous lives. In the description of the Buddha's Night of Enlightenment, he is said to have seen all his previous lives.
There is a lot written about tulkus, of whom H. H. the Dalai Lama is probably the best known.
Having no personal experience of any past lives, or of any future ones, I try to live by the old motto, "I wasn't born yesterday" so that every moment is truly a wonderful surprise.
I also have asked myself what difference it would make to my engagement with the world or to my practice if I were to have any certainty about rebirth.
The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying by Sogyal Rinpoche. There is a section on "Reincarnations In Tibet". This is a wonderful book, written with us Westerners in mind but without too much compromise or "dumbing down".
The Buddha taught anatta.
Anatta means no-self.
If there is no-self that dies, only aggregates going the way of aggregates, then there is no-self to be reborn. If there is no-self to be reborn, only aggregates going the way of aggregates, then "who" is there to remember anything?
What is there to be remembered?
Memory is a mental process, and hence mental phenomena. Mental phenomena are not "ourselves". Mental phenomena are conditioned things. All conditioned things are without a "self".
For there to be "anyone" to remember there must be a "self" to do the remembering.
In the Budhha's teachings, this "self" is nowhere to be found.
So my problem is that I don't see "what" there is, or "who" there is to be reincarnated. I don't mean to offend anyone who does believe it is possible - I just don't see a base for it's belief.
No-self.
Memory is not a "self", it is a process. When the sense organ that over-sees this process of memory breaks up at death what will be left? Will there be "anyone" remaining to remember anything?
To me it seems this life is this life. There are aggregates that construct this mind and body. It's all cause and effect. The effect of your mental process "memory" will last only as long as it's cause of having a sense organ "mind" to be based upon.
If reincarnation is true and allowed for, then the Buddha's teachings on anatta and anicca seem to be proven false. There would appear to be a self that is either immortal and continues from life to life, or a self that is at least semi-permanent until it achieves release in enlightenment. Whatever name is placed of this "self" i.e. self, no-self, I, tulku, soul, etc, it still exists after the nama-rupa (mind-body) falls apart. The body dies and this "self" retains memories and personality from it's previous life, and carries them to it's new incarnation. That is indeed a self no matter what word is used to wrap it up with.
And yet the Buddha supposedly recalls past lives in some of the suttas. I can either conclude that these were added on after the Buddha's death to help convince people to practice, or what he taught about anatta is not entirely complete/correct.
Either way, I am sure that there is indeed skillfulness in living the life the Buddha suggests. The Eight Fold Path, the precepts, and meditation are worthy ways of conducting oneself no matter what belief you have, religion you are, color of skin, style of hair, height, weight, or diet you have. Following this way of life leaves you blameless, light, and radiant. There doesn't even need to be a "next life" because we will have lived this one skillfully and to it's fullest, as long as we stay on the Path.
And that is today's "Final Thoughts". (Comical refernece to Jerry Springer incase you didn't get it)
When the hand of thought is opened it is nothing more or less than birth and death.
Unfortunately an intellectual knowledge of teachings cannot make this clear.
Only meditation can bring you to the true path.
I was thinking last night about the some of what you were saying in your last posts.
I wonder if our minds or souls (whatever) separate and combine with someone ele's fragmented (whatever) and goes into another person. What does everyone think of that?
QUOTE: "Perhaps you have either confused yourself when reading the teachings on anatta or taken the concept of reincarnation too literally."
Perhaps, but I think the teachings on anatta in the suttas are pretty clear on this, and reincarnation is not the same thing as rebirth. That's another story.
QUOTE: "Unfortunately an intellectual knowledge of teachings cannot make this clear. Only meditation can bring you to the true path."
Intellectual knowledge is all we have to begin with. I don't think any of us here has reached the "state" of remembering past lives yet. So, technically, in that case none of us should be talking about it in any form. It is at this point pure speculation. But, I enjoy these conversations and I think they do help us to understand some of the teachings better. (Unless of course someone has reached this "state", and then this statement is null and void)
You should not follow a Path that you do not understand. Even the Buddha said that this was foolishness. You must follow something if, at first, you have a good intellectual understanding of it, and see it's skillfulness. The Buddha was never about the blind following of any religion, idea, view, or belief.
That is why I question these things. If it seems to contradict something else, I must investigate it thoroughly. I do this with meditation as well as logical thinking. I cannot share my insights from mediation in any tangible form, but I can express my intellectual ideas on the matter.
As I said before, I may be wrong in my understanding of these things. It is only my view on the matter. I do not think anyone should believe in, or against anything based on my comments. If I am not ready to "know" these things, then I'm just not ready. If that's the case my ignorance will show in my words and people can kindly disregard them as being such.
Do you you really believe this?
Water still though not river.
Moving though still.
I figure if we choose this path or if it chooses us then do a lot of things we talk about really matter or is it just us trying to figure out whether it "matters". ALl I know is that through Buddhist studies I am a happier person.
Obviously my defilements are so thick that I cannot see these things clearly for myself. He has to guide me because I am unable to find my own way. That is the whole reason I am trapped in samara, in this continued becoming.
I practice to have more than just my intellectual knowledge. I truly believe that is the whole point of practice.
Death is a natural part of life- Yoda
Do we start out with this intellect or is it something that creates itself within the conditioned mind?
If ignorance begins the chain of dependent origination, and is the cause for rebirth, then it would appear from the Buddha's teachings that we begin with this "intellectual knowledge".
To clarify, if everything is based on cause and effect, then there is nothing that can "create itself". This intellect must be based on some cause, which I believe is ignorance.
Ignorance is the cause for craving which is the cause for birth, so it would naturally have to already be with us at birth.
Our intellectual knowledge (knowledge from thinking and thought constructs, as opposed to directly experienceing something) is also a product of this ignorance.
As we already have ignorance in the chain, which is the reason I do not "know" the Dhamma, I guess theoretically my answer has to be, yes we start out with this.
It doesn't matter in anycase, because it's what I have now. It is my belief that we must practice so as to discover the truth with "direct knowledge", destroying this ignorance, and freeing us from our conditioned thought processes.
That is the only way I see to be free of this cycle of becoming.
Enjoy.
Also I would like to thank Kin Lee for the link, welcome to the site.
Not that that means anything negative. I'm just reading on book by her at the moment (Buddhism for Beginners) and either I'm too stupid to understand some of her concepts or that I cannot grasp the Tibetan mindset regarding all the various avatars and such of Buddha.
Michael
You are welcomed. :P
I had an enjoyable time here reading some of the posts.
Yes She is a Buddhist nun - an American I think.
http://www.thubtenchodron.org/Biography/about_ven_thubten_chodron.html
No you are not stupid, I choose to believe that you are rather intelligent to engage effort to investigate and explore. Always, this will take time.
Cheers,
I think that the point you make here (and elsewhere) is a crucial one and concerns language and context.
I have already told the story of the elderly geshe who said to me that he would have to "learn a whole new language" if he ever wanted to become a Christian. This is just as true in the other direction.
We are used to the terminology, history and geography of Judaism and Christianity. They are integral to our daily lives. We use the words and they have certain meanings for us. When we speak of "god", we mean something completely different from the Tibetan notion of deity. We use words like 'reconciliation' and 'salvation', 'sin' and 'judgment'. We speak of Christ and confuse the Logos with the human Jesus, encompassing 1500 years of theological debate which is completely unknown to non-Christians (and of less interest). We can situate Israel on a map and may even be able to point at Jerusalem.
The Wheel of Dharma was turned within a specific cultural context, as was the Gospel message. Buddhism has developed a specific language, and redefined certain ancient Hindu and pre-Hindu notions in particular ways. Christianity has done the same.
The major difference comes from the fact that Buddhism has continued to use the ancient languages of Pali, Sanskrit and Tibetan in which the Dharma was originally taught. Christians have largely abandoned the teaching and use of the three basic languages of Hebrew, Greek (Koine) and Latin, in which the fundamental texts were written. We no longer even teach them in schools.
A Buddhist child, growing up in a Buddhist environment, will take for granted the words, sights and sounds of daily Buddhist practice. In Tibet, it used to be said that a child's first words were OM MANE PADME HUM, just as a Christian child will be made to learn the Lord's Prayer or, if Catholic, the Ave Maria.
Coming to Buddhism from a completely different cultural context, we are faced with a puzzle hidden with the labyrinth of technical and complex language. Translations will, inevitable, betray the original but they are what we have to use and each translator will have favourite equivalences. Add to this that the Dharma is not contained (nor can it be contained) in a few brief tracts that can be gathered into a single book like the Bible but stretches across libraries full of tens of thousands of volumes, and you have some idea of the scale of the student's task.
It is, of course, possible to strip Buddhism down to the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path but we quickly run into problems such as the notions of 'non-self', non-dualism, samsara, nirvana, and sunyatta. The English equivalents serve to confuse us, as you point out.
For example: The Buddha's teaching called Paticca-samuppada, usually translated as Dependent Origination, is fundamental to the Dhamma (Truth) awakened to by The Buddha on the night of His Enlightenment. The Buddha is recorded to have said: "One who sees Dependent Origination, sees the Dhamma. One who sees the Dhamma, sees Dependent Origination." -- MN 28
Also, the saying of the Buddha that deals with the practice regarding Sunnata (emptiness/voidness) is the saying that is the heart of Buddhism. It requires our careful attention: "Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya." (Nothing whatsoever should be clung to as "I" or "mine.") He said that to have heard the phrase "Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" is to have heard everything; to have put it into practice is to have practiced everything; and to have reaped its fruits is to have reaped every fruit. ~ Buddhadasa Bhikkhu
And even the Four Noble Truths can be enough, "Bhikkhus, it is through not realizing, through not penetrating the Four Noble Truths that this long course of birth and death has been passed through and undergone by me as well as by you. What are these four? They are the noble truth of dukkha; the noble truth of the origin of dukkha; the noble truth of the cessation of dukkha; and the noble truth of the way to the cessation of dukkha. But now, bhikkhus, that these have been realized and penetrated, cut off is the craving for existence, destroyed is that which leads to renewed becoming, and there is no fresh becoming.-- DN 16
So, although there are countless words that we may not understand, or suttas/sutras we have never read we can still realize the Dhamma if we concentrate and practice just a few of the many teachings expounded by the Buddha. The Dhamma can be as complex or as simple as you make it. The Buddha taught all of these different ideas and yet they all lead us to the same place -- nibbana.
In many of the stories of the Buddha Shakyamuni and his hearers, individuals became arahants as a result of 'seeing' a single aspect of the Dharma. The fun lies in studying until that moment of awakening occurs. It is described, over and over again, as just that: a split-second event after which all is changed.
Perhaps it is worth adding that practice does not finish at awakening. If anything, it expands and deepens.
And to add to the subject of psychic mediums, my sister and I have always had a strange sense of each others feelings. There are countless 'freaky-deaky' occasions. Yesterday I suffered SEVERE period pain for the first time in years. I had a migraine the night before. She had been in labour, and gave birth yesterday. Nobody can tell me that is a coincidence.... (twilight zone tune)
This discussion makes little or no sense in Western, 'scientific' terms.
We do well to remember that Buddhist scriptures, be they in Pali or Sanskrit/Tibetan, Chinese or Japanese, use language in a completely different way from the logical positivism of post-Baconian physics. Indeed, the strange, Western method of writing words out in letters, rather than the Chinese/Japanese ideographic approach, conditions consciousness to the myth of linear comprehension. This is a mind-trap, another example of 'ego-grasping'.
As for where the energy goes when we die, I think another way of looking at it as taught by Suzuki Roshi might be helpful. He described death as a river going underground. It's no longer visible, but it's still the same river and at some point it returns to the surface (i.e. takes a new life) and becomes visible again. Just like the river, we have no memory of the previous existence (well, not without some very specific tantric practices at least), so we think this life is the first one. You may also enjoy reading Suzuki Roshi's book, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind , as he writes very clearly and was a marvelous teacher.
Palzang
Energy cannot be created nor destroy. But can change from one state to another. This is science.
I think it can also be applied for Karmic energies.
cheers,
I think of the similie of the candle.When one candle burns down and we light another candle from it,is the flame of the second candle the same flame as the first candle?,or has the last moment of the first candle become the first moment of the second candle?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF3KqGpxXvo&feature=player_embedded
There is quite a good debunking of some of it on Skeptico.
Why does reincarnation imply transmigration of a soul?
I'd argue this is an unwarranted imputation, possibly stemming from popular use in non-Buddhist contexts. "Re-in-carnation" just means "again becoming flesh" which -in my understanding- carries no connotation of soul or self, just as the word "recycling" does not signify the transmigration of a plastic bottle.
Cheers, Thomas
Rebirth, however, is a different kettle of fish.
Speaking in very general terms, Buddhists ascribe to the rebirth model. Having said that, there are many Buddhists who do not believe in rebirth.
It's a bit complicated and I think it will require some independent research by the original poster.