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.
Does it matter to Dharma Practice if Rebirth is true or false?
The question “Is rebirth true or false?” can never be answered with absolutely certainty. In the same way as we can never answer with certainty about the existence of heaven or god from within this universe. The questions are perhaps not meaningless, but they seem close. At most we can have a faith.
Some faiths are backed up by science and experience and reason, others stand blindly on their own while all else must stand on them. But they are all faiths, from the extremely scientific and empirical to the mystical and unsupported.
So this fact that we must have some degree of faith in our reasonings about rebirth means there is no certainty. It is a pointless discussion that may be fun and interesting, but in terms of Dharma Practice it is just wasting time.
This does not mean that there are no serious and interesting and relevant questions about the issue of Rebirth in Buddhism. Perhaps , for Buddhists, the important metaphysical question is not “Is there rebirth?” but, “How would it change my life if I knew rebirth was false?”
Consider these two grounding metaphysical personal beliefs:
I don’t think we have to commit to either to see how a belief in one is incompatible with a belief in other. They are not the same belief, in any sense.
Now you can ask yourself is this Question:
“If I believe A will my life be morally, mentally and spiritually different than if I believe B?”
If you think that A and B would lead to comparable moral, mental and spiritual lives then it shouldn’t matter to you if Rebirth is true or false. If you think it does matter then it seems sensible that your Dharma practice contains an investigation of your reasons for believing in Rebirth or not, and your understanding of why it is important to you.
Incidentally, Buddhism is different from the Abrhamic religions and antitheists who hold that it matters very much if followers believe in A or B.
Thanks
Mat
Some faiths are backed up by science and experience and reason, others stand blindly on their own while all else must stand on them. But they are all faiths, from the extremely scientific and empirical to the mystical and unsupported.
So this fact that we must have some degree of faith in our reasonings about rebirth means there is no certainty. It is a pointless discussion that may be fun and interesting, but in terms of Dharma Practice it is just wasting time.
This does not mean that there are no serious and interesting and relevant questions about the issue of Rebirth in Buddhism. Perhaps , for Buddhists, the important metaphysical question is not “Is there rebirth?” but, “How would it change my life if I knew rebirth was false?”
Consider these two grounding metaphysical personal beliefs:
- A: This is my only life, it is short and rare.
- B: This is one of my countless lives, when I have left this life I will be reborn in the next life.
I don’t think we have to commit to either to see how a belief in one is incompatible with a belief in other. They are not the same belief, in any sense.
Now you can ask yourself is this Question:
“If I believe A will my life be morally, mentally and spiritually different than if I believe B?”
If you think that A and B would lead to comparable moral, mental and spiritual lives then it shouldn’t matter to you if Rebirth is true or false. If you think it does matter then it seems sensible that your Dharma practice contains an investigation of your reasons for believing in Rebirth or not, and your understanding of why it is important to you.
Incidentally, Buddhism is different from the Abrhamic religions and antitheists who hold that it matters very much if followers believe in A or B.
Thanks
Mat
0
Comments
In the end there is only this moment. That's all that matters.
If only I'd listen to him more
So if there is no self, and the five aggregates are all essentially 'empty', that means you could say that there is no difference between what you consider 'you' and what you consider 'the rest of the world'?
So if you could get to a point were you could know there is no actual difference between anything, i.e. - we are all apart of one big thing, then it would be fairly safe to presume that you existed eternally before your birth and will exist eternally after it? In this way rebirth could be seen as the birth of all new beings, not a personal thing where your 'soul' actually enters a new body after death.
This is just whimsical conjecture and may be completely at odds with Buddhist teachings, I'm not sure.
I think you may have missed the point of the post:)
Consider these two grounding metaphysical personal beliefs:
A: This is my only life, it is short and rare.
B: This is one of my countless lives, when I have left this life I will be reborn in the next life.
The point here is not about the nature of the self that is referred to, but the way A and B seem to lead to different mental, moral and spiritual experiences:)
Mat
Consider these two grounding metaphysical personal beliefs:
- A: This is my only life, it is short and rare.
- B: This is one of my countless lives, when I have left this life I will be reborn in the next life.
First of all your statements are tendentious. One could say (in a tendentious way, also) "This is the only life I have, so I am gonna have a blast, screw the rest"; "This is one of my countless lives, since I don't wanna screw up and be born as an orphan in [insert one of the poorest places in the world], or in hell, or in whatever I am gonna have to work hard". So let's stick for simplicity sake with this:- This is my only life.
- When I die I will be reborn.
How does believing in the 4NT and the noble eightfold path changes my life, for comparison sake? Probably in a different way than somebody that decided to become a monk, or to go on Buddhist Studies, or decided to make a website dedicated to it, or decided to help people in Somalia based on it, or had to get over the process of dying, or being bullied in high school, and so on. A single belief doesn't tell much about a person, it would be the same thing as saying "oh my god, you are a christian, so you must do this and this and this!"
“If I believe A will my life be morally, mentally and spiritually different than if I believe B?” Who knows? It might do a little or it might do a lot. We are not dealing with 2 identical robots with two different types of batteries.
The nature of the self that is referred to is what's important to Buddhist practice, though. Is this not the "mental/spiritual" aspect?
What you described as rebirth, for example, although it's undoubtedly how some people view it, is not how all Buddhists view it. If it reaffirms the self-illusion then yes, it's an issue.
But likewise, view A can be just as much a hindrance. It too can reaffirm the self-concept and seems to be clinging to consciousness/mind/thought as "self" just as much as some as many rebirth doctrines.
In regards to morals, again it depends on how those two views are understood. There are some who believe in rebirth and fear equal reprecussions for their actions in their next life, and some who believe in rebirth but do not fear because the person of the next life is not the same as this one and the kamma of their actions in this life will only ripen in the next. There's no "view A leads to these morals and view B leads to these ones."
B: If there is more than this life, and my actions in this life will effect the next life, and this cycle will continue over and over, suffering with each life, why would I not make every effort to rid myself of this cycle and attain nirvana... the end of suffering.
Both views are selfish. Both views are not the Bodhisatva way. Rather we should be saying;
A: If this is my only life, I'd do my best to make sure it is good and pure, to help other people live a happy life.
B: If there are countless lives, I shall do my best to make sure they are good and pure, to help other people live countless happy lives and help them attain nirvana... the end of suffering.
Either way Mat, whether you believe in rebirth or not, your intentions are more important than your beliefs. If you believe that a belief in rebirth will create a selfish person, than that is your view of reality. That is not to say that that IS reality.
Taken from the Dhammapada.
Yes you are right, this is better:
- This is my only life.
- When I die I will be reborn.
Or maybe we could have:
- This is my only life.
- This is not my only life.
>>>How does believing in the 4NT and the noble eightfold path changes my life, for comparison sake? Probably in a different way than somebody that decided to become a monk, or to go on Buddhist Studies, or decided to make a website dedicated to it, or decided to help people in Somalia based on it, or had to get over the process of dying, or being bullied in high school, and so on. A single belief doesn't tell much about a person, it would be the same thing as saying "oh my god, you are a christian, so you must do this and this and this!"
OK, again, you are right here I think:) A single belief doesnt tell much ... etc. But the point of my question isn't how it may effect the person in aggregate but specifically the moral, mental and spiritual aspects of my life.
>>>“If I believe A will my life be morally, mentally and spiritually different than if I believe B?” Who knows? It might do a little or it might do a lot.
Yes... but that is the question!:) It might a little or it might a lot, it is up to us each as individuals to answer that question for ourselves. What is important for the Dharmic enquiry, I believe, is that we do question and investigate these two profoundly opposed positions:)
Thanks
Mat
Because Dharma shows highlights, explains and offers a solution to the fact that that nihilistic attitude can only bring more suffering to oneself and those around you. (I also think positivising acts have value aside from their nonalturistic motives.)
Dharma is a not a solution to the problem of rebirth, it is, at its highest level of abstraction , a solution to the problem of human suffering.
>>>Both views are not the Bodhisatva way. Rather we should be saying;
A: If this is my only life, I'd do my best to make sure it is good and pure, to help other people live a happy life.
Yes, agree. But If I ask you why is this the best way, don't forget the Buddha also answers that philosophical question too:) (See above)
>>>B: If there are countless lives, I shall do my best to make sure they are good and pure, to help other people live countless happy lives and help them attain nirvana... the end of suffering.
Yes.
>>Either way Mat, whether you believe in rebirth or not, your intentions are more important than your beliefs.
I don't think you can have read my original post:) I make it very clear this is a specific question I seek an answer to, not a stipulation of doctrine:)
>>>If you believe that a belief in rebirth will create a selfish person, than that is your view of reality. That is not to say that that IS reality.
Same point as above:)
Peace:)
Mat
Well, I once didn't believe in rebirth and now I do. In my case, it helped me deal with suffering better, if it wasn't for it I would just have become a hardcore hedonist :P. Another question that I feel is more important, and that I am not confident about is whether or not enlightenment is possible in this lifetime. :P
:rockon:
A la the Kalama Sutta. :buck:
Palzang
But would you? Would you not have seen clearly with Dharmic light that that kind of destructive hedonism is never going to increase the happiness in the world in any lasting or meaningful sesnse.
Dharma is the path and it is the light along that path. The rest is all just signposts, and not all point along the path:)
>>>Another question that I feel is more important, and that I am not confident about is whether or not enlightenment is possible in this lifetime.
A while before I became convinced by DharmaI asked a Buddhist Monk this question. We spent a whole day together. He telling me about Buddhism. And I asked him if he knew if anyone was enlightened and he said he didn't. He couldn't even really say when the last enlightened person was. I guess his connection with "what is enlightenment?" set me off on a skeptcial footing with Buddhism from before i was "converted":)
I have another friend who is a Lamma in Tibet and he speaks with wonder a about an Enlightenemnet he witnessed a few years ago. I do not doubt he speaks the truth, I just cannot be certain his experience wasn't mistaken:)
My personal view is that enlightenment is not a lifetimes work. I think this because i have some faith that the talks about enlightenment in the suttras make it seem pretty abundant and quick to achieve in the time of the Buddha. I think enlightenment is probably pretty mundane:) The biggest gift in the smallest of realisations?
Mat
Hi Mat,
I have already given the answer.
Err..:p I dont follow how that can be the case:) But no matter!:)
Exactly, the Kalama sutta gives you the formula of how to reject things;
We then are given the formula of how to accept things;
<O:p <O:p
I cannot fault the Bodhisattva path. My belief in rebirth has not caused me to suffer, hasn't caused me harm or ill. Why should I reject it? Because the sutta tells me to doubt it? Bit of an oxomoron isn't it?
Nios.
Its not an oxymoron if there is no rebirth:)
Yet another pointless debate that will keep going in circles. Sorry. I'll take my leave from this one. Tea time.. :coffee:
I agree, its pointless:) It is pointless because you have distorted the discussion from the simple point it was:) Not because the thread started out without point.
Enjoy your tea:)
Mat
I disagree with the notion that such talk cant lead anywhere:) I would like to try and see:)
Life goes on, even if we don't.
Hi
Then lets be clear you both are Mystical Buddhists, which is fine, but its different to non mystical ones - New Buddhists?
I think this could be a useful distinction to prevent tension on here:)
Well wishes
Mat
Just a Buddhist.
I see nothing mystical about karma, rebirth, liberation etc. as they are taught in Buddhism.
If there is no rebirth then the consequence is that the goal of buddhism is NOT to end suffering. The goal must be to have pleasure. And a 'good life'. Otherwise we could relieve the suffering of countless sentient beings by nuclear war and destroying the earth. Or to be joyful, could be the goal. Doesn't sound too bad I guess.
Woah woah woah. I think you're jumping from point A to point anywhere-near-B there Jeffrey. IF, and only IF (we don't know) rebirth doesn't occur, all it would mean is we don't suffer for eternity, only for our singular lifetimes. The attainment of Nibbana is still the end of suffering within our lifetimes, however you view it. You can't know how long you've been suffering if rebirth occurs or for how long you will be... the only thing you can do is to practice right effort in attainment of the goal in this life.
To take the view we might as well be annihilated is really counterproductive. We're an effect of conditions upon this Earth, and in turn are other things affected by us. We're a completely natural part of this world and if we are not an important part of it you might as well say we should simply destroy the whole planet. Is that what you're saying? Destroy life to end suffering?
Whatever the case is, it's ALWAYS "this life", isn't it? Unless you attain the ability to see your past lives, they can't help you understand your past suffering, can they? You can only make assumptions. Try not to do that; just go with what you know, which is this life. Anything else must come as realization when you reach a certain level of Nibbanic attainment.
Sure you could hurl yourself off a bridge.. Or you can live free of suffering.
Mundus I am not sure if you were speaking too me. I believe in rebirth. I was just pointing out that if life ends at death so too does suffering. By most definitions of Nirvana it is defined as the end to suffering. Nirvana is neither defined as existence or non-existence. My purpose was to show materialists the consequence of their beliefs.
Jeffrey makes a solid point with this statement.
It points to the philosophical problems that arise from the denial of for lack of better terminology "an afterlife".
An outright denial of rebirth pulls the rug out from under the philosophical structure of many of the Buddhist teachings and leaves one open to hedonism, nihilism, and materialism.
Its fine to say its about this life and the here and now, which it is but the teachings on karma, rebirth, etc. serve specific functions in the role of conduct and right view.
One of the reasons Buddhism is referred to as the middle way is because of Buddha's skillful approach to these kinds of questions, in an historical atmosphere were other spiritual teachers were making statements of affirmation and negation the Buddha was maintain a flexible and rational freedom from the extreme views of other teachers. This is arguably the founding principle of the Buddhist tradition.
They also are of the view that there is no life that is free of suffering in conditioned existence and the only escape is Buddhahood. Their view of Buddhahood as it is presented in their scriptures transcends time, identity, and the extremes of existence and non-existence based upon the causally dependent nature of reality.
Secondly, if's and but's. How about lets talk what is: What IF we knew- there isn't an answer. It's stupid.
Third, most people have families and social interactions, and no stupid idea is going to change all that. (x) yes, or (y) no makes NO difference. You do what you do because life takes a bite and either makes you care and concerned, or fluffy or hardened. Most people work, and that changes peoples lives for the better mostly. That counts because that's the system. It's real, you're in it. End of story
Yes, in Right View with Effluents, you mean. Right View which is not a factor of the Path and leads to further becoming.
Kamma and rebirth do not rely on each other.
My argument isn't that you cannot be a good person and a materialist. My argument is that when you take any view it breeds paradoxes.
No view is right always. Materialism it can be seen is strange as a buddhist because you could just kill yourself and that would relieve suffering? So why do you practice?
A view that is free from extremes cant really by a view with effluents, the only right view i was referring to in a general sense was this.
to many Buddhists karma and rebirth are intimately and directly connected.
Well, regardless of whether anyone did or did not, it's not so important that it radically changes you as a person and your basic feeling and action towards living entities. I respect those who mourn and erect monuments and such; the fact that people worry about this, and I personally know people whose lives are influenced to a large degree.
I suppose I really should look more at how people grieve in different countries.
Ok, said my piece..
Sorry, I find that very difficult to swallow. Ok, maybe the people I know don't save the world but one thing I cannot say is that they are materialistic and not good.
I am happy that people experience pleasure. Likewise, people want that for me. It makes me happy. You provide a bed for someone, you give pleasure. You provide warmth or toys for children or whatever that's pleasure. We don't just all live for everyone else, otherwise we would all be running in circles.
Jeffrey said, "My argument isn't that you cannot be a good person and a materialist." Not that he was arguing that a person cannot be good and be a materialist.
Socks one part of our awareness is the sensitivity to the world. Yes we feel pleasure. That feels good. It feels right. Its the attachment that gets us. Attachment does not lead to pleasure it leads to dissapointment and frustration.
I agree there is nothing mystical about Karma, liberation.
But rebirth seems mystical to me.
And many think Enlightenment is:)
Dharma is our only refuge:)
Salome!:)
Sorry, my fault; shenpen cleared that up... I misread a word. No probs