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.
A Philosophical Question for Rebirthers
Hi Folks
ye Olde Rebirth debate wont go away in my head - or it seems many other Buddhist's.
One question I would be keen to hear answers from those who belive in litteral Rebirth is: What is it about me now that gets reborn?
For example, I am here writing this post 100% sure that I am my expeince and my expeince is me. That is all there is, in the five aggrigates or other classifications.
So what is it about me, or you, that is alive which passes on after death?
To use the candle-flame analogy, what is the flame in me, or you, now?
Peaceful philosophical answers only please!
Mat
ye Olde Rebirth debate wont go away in my head - or it seems many other Buddhist's.
One question I would be keen to hear answers from those who belive in litteral Rebirth is: What is it about me now that gets reborn?
For example, I am here writing this post 100% sure that I am my expeince and my expeince is me. That is all there is, in the five aggrigates or other classifications.
So what is it about me, or you, that is alive which passes on after death?
To use the candle-flame analogy, what is the flame in me, or you, now?
Peaceful philosophical answers only please!
Mat
0
Comments
But I also, do not clearly understand what a "Rebirther" thinks is the essecence that truly carries over to the next life. What about the next life makes it the same consciousness as we are now?
(I cant think of a more appropriate word than consciousness to describe what i mean, sorry)
This is the fundamental problem with the argument if you ask me. People think that rebirth somehow means that there is an identity that transmigrates. Rebirth is not a process of transmigration of an identity. It is persistent "awareness" (for lack of a better term) that is naturally birthless.
If you ask me it is much more closely related to ideas in physics about a quality of "awareness" that permeates the universe than it is to any concept of "reincarnation".
The driving evolutionary force in the universe is potent and pervasive.
In my opinion this is what rebirth is, and Buddhahood is full recognition and integration into this perfectly natural state. It is through that integration that the cycle of samsara is broken.
That isn't the kind of philosophical answer I was looking for:)
It isn't really an answer... And it beggs more questions and it seems completely in contradiction of Pattica Sampada(????).
Mat
Can you explain to me why you think that though?
>If you ask me it is much more closely related to ideas in physics about a quality of "awareness" that permeates the universe
I know of no such awareness?? Do you mean quantum phenomena such as wave packet collapse on observation?
>>In my opinion this is what rebirth is, and Buddhahood is full recognition and integration into this perfectly natural state.
Ya, I am pretty familiar with the option, my question is about the philosophical aspects of the issues:)
Mat
There are certain physicists that posit a notion of a quality of awareness in the universe. I dont fully agree with what they are theorizing but I do feel that what Buddhism teaches about rebirth may be related to a similar concept, and functional reality.
Whatever it may be, I find this to be much more likely than reincarnation or a single life that is extinguished at the time of physical death.
The transmigration of an identity is one extreme and absolute end at death is another extreme in my opinion.
Whatever really happens in my opinion is somewhere in the middle.
No that answers the question "Why do belive that" what are the actual reasons for thinking that? (Rebirth is not a process of transmigration of an identity. It is persistent "awareness" (for lack of a better term) that is naturally birthless.)
I agree, its certainly far from ideal!:) That doesnt mean there is more to life than this though, surely?
Could You point me in ones direction please:) The closest I know is Tippler's amazing Omega Point theory.
I guess by philosopcial question/response I mean one relying more on just what one feels/hopes/read/is told:)
I remain unsure how one can be in the middle on rebirth. Its like Ghosts, you can't get half a ghost:)
Either some part of a person continues after they die or it does not. Surely?
Mat
It's an answer to the question you asked. Wasn't that the question you meant to ask?
Paticca Samupada states explicitly that clinging is one of the steps leading to birth. If rebirth is to occur, then the conditions that lead to rebirth must be reborn. I could have picked any of the twelve steps. It's not a contradiction.
BTW, if you are familiar with Paticca Samupada, then you already know the answer to your question. What's the point of the question?
You clearly arent looking for the opinions of others or the reasons why they hold them. Sorry I tried to have a conversation with you again.
I'm out.
Doh! This is meant to be a philosophical thread!:) That is supposition not reason... hearsay not conclusion;)
But since you mention it... doesn't that seem in contradiction to The Fifth Skanda, which is merely the realisation, in any moment, of the rest of mind?
One which relies on reason:)
.
Ok, so what it is not that whill be reborth is the 12 Niddanyas. So its the causal process? Which is fine, I am happy with that in this life... but then what is the causal mechanism to take this process from this life to the next?
BTW, if you are familiar with Paticca Samupada, then you already know the answer to your question. What's the point of the question?[/QUOTE]
Can you explain gravity without relying on empirical data and on what other person said?
People claim many amazing things, they cant all be true.
I agree. Equally its unreasonable to belive in rebirth because:
a) Someone told you so
b) Someone wrote it so
c) You want it so
Without doubt! But that's not relevant to whether someone survives death or does not.
Then stay away from the philosophical threads! LOL
Leave them for the "wrong viewers" like me:P
Mat
Your analogy is false:)
Rebirth has no empirical data of any merit.
Gravity has zillions, and not just from experience but from the science of the cosmic down to the quantum.
There are equations, and predictions and theories and models.
We know its there.
Gravity is in no way comparable with Rebirth.
Am I wrong?:)
Mat
It says "pernicious view." The Buddha addressed this flawed view in the rest of that sutta.
He said it's untenable, not far from ideal.
Shenpen,
So awareness is the unconditioned?
Well, the philosophy is pretty well outlined by the Buddhist teachings themselves. Bhikkhu Bodhi gives a pretty good rundown of how this process works according to the teachings:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_46.html
Honestly, I'm not sure where you want to throw philosophy into this discussion. I have personally directly observed a lot of these ideas in my day-to-day awareness (as Richard Herman discussed as well) and that is the main reason I give post-mortem rebirth any credibility at all. I try to remain agnostic though on issues such as these that I haven't directly experienced though.
Could you be a little more explanatory as to what you actually want to discuss?
So, its actually difficult to answer. I dont think that "awareness" as we know it and think of it is unconditioned. Its something else entirely that I dont have a definition for.
As we have seen though, the argument for "rebirth" is untenable as well.
The actual process is in my opinion somewhere between these two "philosophical" extremes.
I dont think Buddha taught reincarnation or nothingness at death, I think he taught something much more sophisticated and subtle than this. And our e-debates havent really gotten us much closer to understanding it.
I started this thread to discuss Buddhsit philosophy not Buddhist doctrine:)
The suttas are irrelevant to this question.
I mean, its not ideal that this is our last life, but thats the way it is.
Where is your "proof" that "thats the way it is"? Do you "believe" this.
Seems like a pretty strong statement.
Sure:)
Forget rebirth for a moment, as in, what happens to you when you die. And ask yourself about the very moment you are in now. what possibly could it be about that moment that could be distinct from THE experince of that moment.
Something that could exist independently of the experience.
Now some may say a soul, some may say nothing, some may say there is some strange biological ego... who knows. But what does a Rebirther say?
What are their options.
That is what I would like to discuss, the options:)
Mat
It seems like you are trying to equate people who are agnostic or accept rebirth with the modern American political movement, referred to as "birthers".
For me it is a conditioned certainty that this is my last life:) It's not an absolute certainty, but its about as fundamental as I can go in beliefs about my life.
Unto each their own:)
Is your certainty based upon your opinions about life and death or is it based upon your level of "realization"?
I believe because Buddhism is based on a historical alteration of the core teachings of the Buddha into the direct opposite of what he taught in regards to Rebirth and as soon as one really starts to question rebirth in Dharma this fact and its rather unexpected inner reprocussions starts to be seen:)
Also, I guess if you have dedicated your life to preventing the eternal cycle of rebirth only to be invited to question that it doesn't exist it must be a bit of a stone in one's conceptual sandal!
Mat
I have no answer. I'm just sitting with the question.
http://explore.org/videos/player/tibet-buddhist-debate
Did you not catch the part where I said I try to remain agnostic about things I haven't directly experienced? I do not know anything beyond what I know, nor do I pretend to.
Also, I agree with Shenpen in my dislike for your coining of the 'rebirther' term.
To get to your question. No offense, but it's really poorly constructed and it's hard to tell what you are even asking me. What precisely do you mean by "what possibly could it be about that moment that could be distinct from THE experince of that moment"? What needs to be distinct? What needs to exist independently of the experience? I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at here.
<O:p</O:p
Visuddhi-Magga Chapter xvii
Its certainly not based on some deep and mysterious realisation that some people say you can have when you are the world's best mediator!:)
Its based on science and reason and experience:)
Mat
Taking into account your concern about whether or not someone survives death, the answer is "Clinging." The idea that there is a "me" that gets reborn, or that someone survives death, comes from clinging. The clinging is reborn, and thus the idea of "someone" is reborn.
So you have come to an absolute certain conclusion based upon your experience and science that you have researched that proved without a doubt that rebirth as it is taught in Buddhism is false?
It seems that you have answered the age old question.
Please do share.
I beleive there are accounts where Tibetan Buddhists have tracked rebirths, such as HHDL, throughout generations. Even the Buddha spoke of remembering all his past lives once he was enlightened. Books by Tibetan masters speak of literal rebirth all the time. They even describe what happens in the interim between physical births.
I can't understand why many have a hard time with this. Compared to the many other complexities that we could be pondering, this one seems obvious. Maybe I'm missing something.
How exactly did you come to this conclusion? What are your sources?
My! Aren't we presumptuous. I am well aware of the potentiality of rebirth not existing as are most western Buddhists. You are coming into this with quite an arrogant attitude.
No offense taken:)
There is a well known problem with rebirth that is that we are told a number of things as foundational to Dharma:
There is no soul
The mind is aggriagte
And this doesnt seem to leave any room for anything that is reborn. So people have to resort to analogies of candle flames and moral DNA etc.
My question is not looking at the problem from the "what is reborn after death" sense but rather "what is here in the moment that will be reborn."
That's what I am trying to get a handle on:)
Mat
You seemed to suggest in your response that the view presented by Sati was also being presented by certain others in this Thread. You seemed to miss the word pernicious entirely. RenGalskap didn't post it to suggest that it was his own view. The point is that you were asking the wrong questions and in the wrong line of thought. The Buddha logically refutes Sati's assertion in the sutta, and supports your own position, but given that you seem to have no peripheral vision, you failed to see this and just shout "LA LA LA DOGMA."
Check my site if genuinely interested, feel free to private message to discuss:) I have harped on about this for ages:)
Apparently I often seem to in text!
I am a very doubting Buddhist, that's all:)
To find this answer, one must determine the complexity and entirety of what makes one? When you know exactly what you are in totality, then you can determine if that entity rebirths.
I agree! Cant I just be the five aggregates? I am cool with that. It makes sense to me and it fits with science and experience. There is nothing to be reborn, I am 100% happy with that.
My question was about the philosophy of those who do believe in rebirth.
8 types of consciousnesses: 5 correlated to the 5 senses (eye consciousness, ear consciousness and so on), plus the one correlated with the mind; then comes afflicted mind (klishtamanas) and storehouse consciousness (alayavijnana, aka alaya ["resssst in the nature of alaya", that's so Pema Chodron], aka clear light mind - I think).
The afflicted mind is the go-between that mediates between the storehouse consciousness on the one hand and the six empirical consciousnesses on the other hand. We may call this afflicted mind the ego principle, the principle of individuation, or discrimination.
The storehouse consciousness is called that because it carries seeds of sense impressions and actions [karma]. Thus it is ever changing, albeit non-discriminatory. This storehouse consciousness is the basis for both samsara and nirvana. If you can eliminate the discrimination of the afflicted level [i.e. directly realize Emptiness] of consciousness you attain Nirvana.
Because of the essential emptiness and purity of the mind, all sentient beings have the potential to attain Buddhahood. That is called Buddha Nature. :P
There is a sutra, the Sandhinirmochana, where the Buddha says that the storehouse consciousness is profound and subtle, moving like a stream with all its seeds of sense impressions.
The closest Theravada thing is Bhavanga.
You love to start a bar fight Mat.
The things that you take issue with are being taken out of context and isolated from one another and this contributes to what appears to be a general misunderstanding of Buddhist principles and teachings.
Yawn. Why make it personal. I asked a question. Shrugs
It's not just about concepts.
It's about how the teachings can open the mind and heart for meditation leading to a place beyond concepts.