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.- questions.
Victorious
Grim Veteran
Hello everybody!
I have a few questions for those of you Buddhists that disbelieves in rebirth. I am addressing the atheists not the agnostics.
1. What is your view on Nirvana? If the life stream ends after death then why persue Nirvana at all? What is your motive to cultivate?
2. What is the cause of Birth? (I mean the womb-kind) I understand that most people who disbelive in rebirth holds to the alternative explanation of the dependent origination. So if there is no life before this one then how does the karmic flow begin? Which is the first volitional action? If I did not exist in the first place then how could I have accumalated Karma to be born at all?
3. Is there a better translation of the words rebirth so often used in the pali canon? Or do you believe that the canon is altered to encompass the notion of rebirth?
4. Does anybody know of any enlightend person that denies rebirth?
5. When you claim that rebirth belief is not essential to core buddhism then what do you mean by core buddhism?
Thanks for your time in advance
Victor
I have a few questions for those of you Buddhists that disbelieves in rebirth. I am addressing the atheists not the agnostics.
1. What is your view on Nirvana? If the life stream ends after death then why persue Nirvana at all? What is your motive to cultivate?
2. What is the cause of Birth? (I mean the womb-kind) I understand that most people who disbelive in rebirth holds to the alternative explanation of the dependent origination. So if there is no life before this one then how does the karmic flow begin? Which is the first volitional action? If I did not exist in the first place then how could I have accumalated Karma to be born at all?
3. Is there a better translation of the words rebirth so often used in the pali canon? Or do you believe that the canon is altered to encompass the notion of rebirth?
4. Does anybody know of any enlightend person that denies rebirth?
5. When you claim that rebirth belief is not essential to core buddhism then what do you mean by core buddhism?
Thanks for your time in advance
Victor
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Buddha taught Nibbana is the here & now end of greed, hatred & delusion.
There is no contraversy here.
The Buddha taught all beings are born with ignorance & craving for existence.
You need to stop studying books and, instead, study life.
Why does a children cry and get agitated? Because it cannot breathe property, it has blockages of air.
When you burp or massage the children, it stops crying.
Where did the Buddha teach volitional action in DO? You are confused. Ignorance results in non-volitional action rather than volitional.
Say a teenager entering puberty. They start to think about the opposite sex or start having wet dreams. This is not volitional but natural impingement due to physical hormonal changes.
Do you think animals and people volitionally "choose" to have children or are they driven by oppressive reproductive instinct?
The Pali Canon is full of teachings about rebirth. These are moral teachings about karma for unenlightened people (putthujanas). It is not necessary to change the translation rebirth in these mundane suttas.
I know both Theravada & Tibetan monks who have expressed their personal disbelief in rebirth. Buddhadasa, Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Sumedho, Thich Ngat Han, Nanavira. There are many. (I will not disclose the Tibetan Lama despite his public declaration).
Ending suffering. Dropping "self-view". Dispossessing life & the five aggregates. Fully accepting impermanence.
How can you do this if you believe in rebirth?
Hi DD,
Do you have a reference to where Thich Nhat Hanh expresses his personal disbelief in rebirth?
I used to follow the community of interbeing some years ago, I have read many books by TNH and been to one of his lectures. As far as I am aware, he has never expressed disbelief in rebirth, rather, he has stated that nothing dies and nothing is born (see "No Fear, No Death"), and he has also stated that rebirth should be understood in terms of no-self.
His teachings emphasise no-self and imperminance and the importance of the here and now. http://iamhome.org/articles/karma1.htm
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=8,714,0,0,1,0
Nios.
That seems neither logical nor rational. The definition of nibbana entails transcending birt,decay,aging and death, read Udana 8.1 ans 8.3. Therefore it is unlogical that parinibbaba is equal to death. If you are still going to die after attaining Nibbana my question becomes even more prominent. Why go the length of buddhist practice if you end up the same anyway?
Nibbana is also the end of all types of pleasure. So again my question still stands unreplyed. If you believe Death is going to liberate you from all pain then why give up all pleasure in this life? Who suffers so much that they will take that course of action? What is your motive to cultivate under those premises?
Volitional action is the requisite of Karma. Without it there is no Karma.
Read here about Karma. There are references on the page for futher reading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_in_Buddhism.
I see you have failed to answer my question here. Maybe I was not clear.
The question is this. Whether you believe in the three life interpretation of the Dependent Origination or the one-two or three instant/s interpretation of Dependent Origination. Karma is the prerequsite of Karma formations which is in large the world as you percieve it. So if there is only this one life then what was the first Karma that then leads to Karma formations on my part? Whose volition caused that action and why did I inherit that Karma?
Very interesting. What exactly is the division of the Pali canon into "mundane" vs the other sort? Which parts belong to one or the other?
I was asking about Prachekka Buddhas or Savaka Buddhas who deny rebirth. Are these people such Aryan Puggalas?
What does "Fully accepting impermanence" mean?
What kind of a question is that?
How can you reach Nibbana clinging to any kind of belief? Even the belief of non-rebirth?
Regards
Victor
My reply to the questions you have asked me is try the Beginners Forum for your questions.
Transcending means "unaffected by it". As the Buddha said: "When your body gets sick, do not let your mind get sick".
Your replies are irrational.
The Buddha advised the human experience of Nibbana includes pleasurable & painful feeling.
There is no need for me to waste my time quoting texts.
Karma is a teaching on the level of morality.
The Buddha on a supramundane level taught about the karma that ends karma.
I have certainly not "failed".
That is highly probable.
The Buddha did not teach 3 life.
The Buddha did not teach about karma formations, anywhere.
Karma comes from defilement. Defilement is an element in nature.
I already told you, defiled actions do not come from volition. When one meditates and cannot control their mind, obviously this is not "volitional".
:buck:
I suggested you stop reading books but instead examine life around you and within you.
I would answer if asked in the appropriate way.
More monkey chatter.
If you do not understand, then my suggestion is asking your questions at the Beginners Forum.
Having and expressing beliefs is not "clinging to belief".
Your head is full of views & opinions about theory.
Look for your entertainment elsewhere, with others.
Non-regards
DD
Most people who don't beleive rebirth just think that you die, and that's it. This is not something to be feared, but nor is it something to rush into when we have been given the wonderful gift of life. A gift, i might add, that is all the more precious if there is only one of them.
The business of being condescending? I find it strange how quickly it degraded into this kind of response. His questions appear young and aggressive, but I wonder if your reaction was really necessary? You could do better, I know it.
Victorious:
Why clean your clothes if you're just going to get them dirty? Why separate your food if you're just going to toss it all in the stomach? Why work if you're going to die?
The obvious answer to these ridiculous questions is because in the moment you have, it changes the experiences you are a part of.
Through our practices, we become more connected to each other, to the world in general and have a more resonant view. For instance, my first real, intentioned steps down the path were in an attempt to rid myself of the conditioning I had from my parents, so that I could be a better father to my son.
As we shed layers of conditioning, it becomes more and more apparent why we work to focus in this way. It has to do with developing skillful means so that we can be available to interact with the universe in a way that is compassionate, helpful. From your post, it appears that you're approaching this from a very book-read point of view. Unfortunately, until you spend more time meditating, some of the subtleties that are present in the texts might continue to confuse you.
The words you're analyzing are not doctrines to follow, but pointers to real, observable patterns in the world around you. If and when you decide to still the motions in your head, you too will be able to see them, and half of the questions you've been asking you'll be able to answer for yourself without a text at all.
Good luck,
Matt
Nirvana/Nibbana is the cessation of all mental suffering. It is the end of craving, hatred and delusion in this life. The mind is pure, undefiled, unperturbed, and tranquil. This can be described as the ultimate peace, or bliss.
We all die; whether rebirth occurs or not, the only true happiness is the state of mind attained by the systematic abandonment of all fetters and mental defilements. So the question becomes shall we live and be unhappy, die because we don't believe there's any point, or work toward the attainment of Nirvana?
That second option is based on belief or disbelief alone, as there is no direct experience; there is no way to prove or disprove "rebirth". All that we can do is to understand it as best we can on the conceptual level, and hope that it will be better understood when we "awaken". To that end, put aside such questions and speculations that have no use, and walk the path...
Oh dear DD,
You claim that TNH personally declears that rebirth is false. I ask you to give a quote, a reference, an example of where he claims this. Instead you claim I am ignorant. :nonono:
Common courtesy seems to be something you lack DD. :sadc:
Perhaps it is this way of thinking ("life is wonderful" aka "craving for existence") which caused you to be born in the first place.
Young!? Thanks! And pretty handsome too I might add. But that is beside the point.:)
It is not my intention to come across as aggressive. But I do admit I am blunt. I am not into flowery speeches. Sorry. My intention is to try and understand this new western tradition of Buddhism.
Thank you Matt.
Humor me some more. What you are saying is that you are not actually persueing the goal of Nibbana but rather practicing Buddhism for the worldly good it yields?
Btw what tradition would you say you belong to?
/Victor
But it is also in this world very easy to find other diversions that seemingly gives you happiness. It is difficult to argue the point of Nibbana when getting a yacht and staying single is what most people value as true happiness.
Here I would rather disagree to one point. There are in Buddhism practices described to directly get insight into previous lifes. One can prove it for oneself which all that actually matters. Even the Scientologists can do it so how hard can it be?
But I will agree that without direct knowledge it is best to do as you describe to embrace the agnostic view.
Then again my question was aimed at the atheists. Those who deny rebirth altogether.
Thanks again
/Victor
Why don't you just cut the BS? I have read some of your other posts in the forum and you are obviously not half as stupid as you pretend to be here. So I am not buying it thank you very much.
Oops there I go being blunt again.
If you truly deny rebirth I would really appreciate your input on this.
Thanks
Victor
PS
Singhala ne da?
DS
Generally, I do not spend my time "denying" rebirth.
Usually, I point out the meaning of certain teachings in a way that is conducive to understanding & ending suffering.
If one has never reflected upon impermanence, let alone have some direct insight of it and its effects upon the mind, why talk about it?
Impermanence is everywhere, in front of our face, everywhere we look, hear, feel & cognise.
Yet you wish to talk about something that is the realm of imagination & blind faith like it is real (and impermanence is unreal).
I hope you didn't take my "young and aggressive" words as criticism, it wasn't intended as such. I was only trying to validate DDs possible reasons for appearing to abandon loving-kindness and right speech. As you ask questions, the reason I describe it as agressive and young, it that you say "why why why why" without seeming to make any room to consider the answers. Almost as though your mind is closed, with only a little door for anything to come in, and the bouncer for that door is so crafty that only the prettiest girls come in. So all the nerdy guys are sitting outside, watching you defend that door. This is probably why DD said 'monkey chatter' a few times.
I do not practice Buddhism for the sake of attaining. I think I did once upon a time, but since discovering compassion realize that even if I had the chance to depart the cycle, I would not. There are too many friends and family, parents, children, all who twirl in self-sabotaging patterns... could I abandon them for the sake of my convenience? Not a chance. This isn't to say that I am a Bodhisattva, I don't have that clarity, but I recognize the vow they assume isn't a moral choice, its a natural expression of what their heart demands of them.
Complete cessation will happen for me when it happens, but I can tell you that the more I practice, the more open my mind is to dance with the people around me without a self-centric based version of reality that I try to force upon anyone. Subjective relating is a key component of being an effective interacter
I have two teachers, one a Tibetan Buddhist who learned under Chogam Trungpa. The other is a western eclectic psychologist. As far as book reading, I have read much of the Pali, almost every word attributed to Trungpa, a lot of Thich Nhat Hahn, some HHDL and various Zen teachers, including even some Osho. I don't really associate with any one of their views, rather hear the harmonies that are interwoven between them, and how they point to a universal understanding.
I advise you to be more patient with some of the ideas you are questioning. It would be better to ask questions like "how do I open the mind" than "what is rebirth" at the place you appear to me to be in. I don't mean this as a disservice to you, but really, trying to see the spelling of abracadabra might be unhelpful when you have yet to master the alphabet.
With warmth,
Matt
Intention however is something else.
Motivation to cultivate is to end suffering here and now, in this lifetime. Suffering springs from attachments that are caused by self identification. I don't care if the "life stream" ends after death or continues. It is not relevant to my suffering at this moment. It is not relevant to suffering at any moment. The cause of your suffering is not physical birth. The cause of your suffering is self identification and clinging to phenomena as "me and my self". The very question "why do you practice if your life stream ends after death" has self identification written all over it
Sex
Irrelevant to the cessation of suffering. Would be a hot topic of debate in some philosophical circles though. It is unskillful to speculate over this too much to the real problem you have at hand.
If you have a wound that is caused by an arrow and it is bleeding and causing you suffering, would you be worrying about where the arrow came from than worrying about how to end this bleeding?
I don't think there is anyone there receiving karmic ramifications. Who said you accumulate kamma in order to be born?
I think this explanation of kamma is good. There are 3 articles in there btw. Don't miss the other two. However, it is not relevant to worry endlessly about kamma. Kamma is a mere moral teaching of the Buddha. We do not practice sil (moral conduct) to gain anything. We practice sil in order to train the mind to let go of the ego in this lifetime.
If you do good deeds for a better rebirth or anything of the sort you are clinging to the idea of a self and your kamma will be suffering caused by this attachment. Constant worry such as "where will I be born again? Where will I go? Will I go some place good? Have I done enough good deeds? I crushed that ant but that is a mistake; I am sure it will be forgiven ... On and on". This is suffering
Once you realize not-self properly all these questions will be irrelevant to you
The pali suttas I have referred to so far do not talk about a rebirth in the core teachings like the DO. It only talks about birth and death of the ego.
Irrelevant to the cessation of suffering here in this lifetime. If you ever meet an arahant, better ask him something more relevant than rebirth
Dependent Origination.
I understand your frustration. There are times that DD can be pretty annoying but if you read what he says carefully and not take his comments too personally, you are going to get a lot out of them. Trust me on that one
DD is Australian from what I know. Btw. I am from SL
But I have reflected upon impermenace and do have had direct insight into it. I am looking for someone who has had the same and still claim that there is no rebirth. Because I find it impossible to combine the two. If you as several people on the thread has recommended to me calm my mental discord and view the patterns around us in the world it is possible to see the Cause-Effect streams unravelling. Have you ever seen such a thread (or rather web) begin/start out of nothing? Or have you seen such a thread ebb out into nothing? I have not. (But of course my insight might be limited that is why I am asking).
Past lifes are not things of imagination. You do not have to take my word for it. It is readily verifiable by (most) anyone who does jhana meditation in the, by buddhism, prescribed way. I think you know that. Have you ever tried it?
Neither am I asking anybody to believe anything on blind faith. But the standing on denying a thing totally, as I think you do with rebirth, is not rationally nor scientifically viable, because as they say in science the 101:st swan may be black. (Therefore it is not viable to say "No swan is ever Black" just because you have seen a 100 white swans).
That is why I am trying to understand what footing such a view has if there is any at all.
Do not get me wrong I am not trying to impose my views on anyone. But I do think that the agnostic view on the subject is the best one if you have not had any insight into past lifes.
/Victor
No worries mate.
I must bow to your conviction for your family and your knowleadge in Buddhism does make me look like a novice.
Me I am plain Theravada man . Of course I have come in contact with other traditions and teachers but I consider Ananda Mitreya my absolute no 1 inspiration.
As to having a open mind I try to build my faith on experience. Denying rebirth altogether is not an option I can open my mind to because it is not rational. Holding an agnostic belief on the other hand I see no problem with.
The Dhamma is, to my best underatanding, logically and rationally perfect. There are no glitches as those you may find in other major religions. Introducing total denial of rebirth introduces such glitches in Dhamma. Therefore it seems to me to be a false view. Again I am blunt.
Being a plain and simple person I do not like beating around the bush. We are all grown people and should be able to handle a simple conversation without banter or hurt feelings.
With metta
Victor
in atheist-speculology, this is a dead-end question because they missed the left turn. the sun causes birth and so do the stars. ignorance is the engine of rebirth, or maybe a simple lostness. these are interesting questions!!! that's a good question i do know some that affirm it!
good question victor!!
I wonder why you came looking for something that you already see as dissonant? You admit to being unable to open your mind to someone's view, which in itself seems dissonant from the dhamma... predisposed to labeling a person as "irrational" based on subjective perceptions of unimportant details. Were you seeking to joust?
There are so many views on rebirth, what is rebirth, what does it mean to be reborn, what part of our experiences have continuity... its best to simply let it be in my opinion... because the examination usually arises from a fear of death and transience, which of itself does not help us move into a more open space.
The idea of rebirth being objectively true doesn't really impact the faith in the moment, which is the continued perception that I offer you. It would be more disconcerting, the energy that arises in your mind when someone who does not believe in rebirth comes before you, and how you then have difficulty relating to them based on your attachments to what is 'right'...closing off the open resonance. Yes? No?
With warmth,
Matt
In this simile are you the pretty girl, Matt? and is DD the nerdy guy?
JK JK JK
Why Mr. C... are you flirtin with lil ole me?
According to the Buddha there are three ingredients...
- Rebirth - Bhikkhu Bodhi
Buddhist atheists? Trying to think of some Buddhist Atheists. I know many Buddhists but they do not call themselves Atheists, Theists, or Agnostics. Maybe "non-theist" in that Theism is irrelevant. These views are ...views, relative positions and they are provisional...maybe, but then let-go-of in the course of practice.. The focus is on experiential practice, in which such views come and go. These folks are not just without-views in the sense of being nebulous. They are very precise and sharp. Theist, Atheist, Agnostic.. these positions drop off.
There is Stephen Batchelor. have you read him?
If a "craving" consciousness is capable of physically affecting the conception process it should be observable or inferable in some way - yet it is not. Conception is perfectly well explained by sperm & egg without need of a 3rd factor, hence said factor is redundant in addition to being unobservable, ie, useless as an explanatory device of any kind.
You mean according to Bhikkhu Bodhi.
This is the same Bhikkhu Bodhi who interpreted the DO as a "conciousness landing on a mother's womb" aka conciousness is like an "entity" or a "stream" which exists without the support of a physical body aka a "soul" which goes from here and gets planted there. With all due respect but I would think twice before reading a translation from Bhikkhu Bodhi.
Sex. What is the cause of sex?
Attachment. What is the cause attachment?
Desire. What is the cause desire?
Feeling. What is the cause feeling?
Contact. What is the cause contact?
6 sense bases. What is the cause sense bases?
Name and form. What is the cause nameform?
Consciousness. What is the cause consciousness?
Volitional formations. What is the cause volitional formations?
Ignorance.
I assume this is what Bhikkhu Bodhi is talking about...
Majjhima Nikaya 38 - Mahaatanhaasankhaya Sutta
Not that i believe it, but that's what Buddhism says anyway.
It seems the confusion here is the word "descent". It implies that something is already there waiting to land on the womb. Actually the particular pali word has many meanings. Thanks to Mundus who pointed this out in another thread (I cannot find it) I had a look at the particular pali word in the dictionary and it has another meaning as "to develop" or "to grow". Thus it is reasonable to think that the Buddha was referring to the growth of the sperm if the condition is fertile not as some consciousness that lands on the womb as Bhikku Bhodi puts it.
Meaning of the pali word
Where has conciousness been interpreted as a seed? I would like to see a reference.
Conciousness in only explained in the suttas as something of six types which arises based on the six sense bases.
In my research, I understand Buddha was asked the same question which he avoided answering as he regarded it as foolish. I think this is a knowledge gap at best and a theological gap at worst.
Sammaditthi Sutta: The Discourse on Right View
Chachakka Sutta: The Six Sextets
Yeah, therefore it is better to believe conciousness lands on the womb :rolleyes:
No, practice and insight is better
Then you miss my point. :cool:
The buddha did not speak Pali. And scholars seem to agree that the first suttas were not written in pali either. So in essence, what we read in English is a translation of a translation (and possibly of a translation).
My point was, the only real way to know what the buddha said is by practice and insight, not through arguing who has the correct translation.
This comment; was not necessary, was not what I was getting at, and quite frankly, a little childish :nonono:
The forum is for conversation. That doesn't mean anyone is denying the importance of practice.
Apart from a few suttas most of the others seem fine to me and it wouldn't hurt anyone to read them as a guidance for the practice.
I also do not agree that rebirth is of any importance to the cessation of suffering. If someone brings up the point I will reply to it as per the suttas.
Oh well, my apologies for the childlish behavior
The Buddha advised all things are mind created.
This is simply blind faith & delusion. There are jhana masters that can send thought messages half way across the world that do not ascribe in rebirth.
Also, there are jhana masters like Sariputta that had/have no supernormal power whatsover.
When the mind see objects within itself, these are mental formations. The Buddha taught whatever mental formation, it should be regarded with right wisdom, namely, this is not me, this is not mine, this is not myself.
All I can recommend is to study the Khajjaniya Sutta very carefully.
Better still, know thoroughly the cessation of dukkha in the mind.
Kind regards