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.
Dubious Buddhist beliefs
Hello 
I've been reading a book (seeking the heart of wisdom) which contains buddhist ideas and philosophy. When I started reading, I had a good idea of what buddhist beliefs were, having read a couple of books by Mattieu Ricard. But I started getting a little disconcerted when I came to the section on karma, which mentions the six karmic realms and past lives and so on. Everything else seemed so logical and well thought out, but I can't see how there could ever be any evidence for karma affecting rebirth, or even rebirth at all. There are a few other aspects of buddhism that (from what I can see from the limited amount I know) seem to make large leaps in logic. A non-physical consciousness, separate from matter and the evolution of a brain and central nervous system, which apparently can't exist independently of a body, for example. I suppose it's really only the metaphysics I have problems with, and I suppose that you could follow buddhism's core philosophy quite happily without them. I seem to be rambling on a bit
If you do believe in rebirth and suchlike, could you attempt to explain the reasoning behind it for me? I imagine you get this question a lot, so I apologise in advance for making you repeat yourself
I've been reading a book (seeking the heart of wisdom) which contains buddhist ideas and philosophy. When I started reading, I had a good idea of what buddhist beliefs were, having read a couple of books by Mattieu Ricard. But I started getting a little disconcerted when I came to the section on karma, which mentions the six karmic realms and past lives and so on. Everything else seemed so logical and well thought out, but I can't see how there could ever be any evidence for karma affecting rebirth, or even rebirth at all. There are a few other aspects of buddhism that (from what I can see from the limited amount I know) seem to make large leaps in logic. A non-physical consciousness, separate from matter and the evolution of a brain and central nervous system, which apparently can't exist independently of a body, for example. I suppose it's really only the metaphysics I have problems with, and I suppose that you could follow buddhism's core philosophy quite happily without them. I seem to be rambling on a bit
If you do believe in rebirth and suchlike, could you attempt to explain the reasoning behind it for me? I imagine you get this question a lot, so I apologise in advance for making you repeat yourself 0
Comments
Lots of people do, and many of them will be along presently to commiserate with you. I happen to believe in rebirth, but only in a "blind faith" sort of way based on my advanced age.
The rebirth that is of concern in this life is of unwholesome mental states, moment to moment, as ignorance allows the arising of greed, hatred and delusion. That is the cycle of rebirths or samsara that we can see in the here-and-now and that we seek to end. We can't know for sure what happens when we die, but we do know for sure that we are suffering now and the Four Noble Truths + Noble Eightfold Path offer us a way to understand why and how to stop the cycle.
Many people are tangled up with thoughts of their future lives, but this consciousness is not "you" and does not belong to you. It brought about your life, and will bring about new life in the future... but it's not self. There are future rebirths, but they are not you.
A lot of westerners have issues with karma, rebirth and other metaphysical aspects of Buddhism. You can always do what a lot of them do, and just pick and choose what you want to believe and practise. That seems to be the norm amongst a lot of westerners, particularly with those who are strong atheists (not bagging out atheism, just what I've personally experienced with atheist buddhists in my part of town).
You could also try to suspend any preconceptions and just take the teachings for what they are and see if you could understand them - that's what I did and I don't have any of those issues. Then again, I'm not an atheist either so maybe I'm just more open to accepting things I can't explain down to the nth degree either.
In metta,
Raven
:bigclap:
I think he makes the case in the book that the Buddha may actually not have originally supported any of these supernatural beliefs (karma, rebirth, etc.) and that they were just part of the Hinduism tradition at the time (although im not sure on this point).
Its an interesting read and worth checking out. http://www.amazon.com/Confession-Buddhist-Atheist-Stephen-Batchelor/dp/0385527063
I think the karmic realms are not 6 worlds but within each category there are infinite worlds? The karmic states may be literal, but here and now we have attachment (human), anger (hell), greed (hungry ghost), animal (ignorance), jealousy (asura), pride (deva)...
Now is a human just attachment? Thats not fully descriptive, but I would be interested to see what the book you read made out of this stuff.
Just my thoughts based on my own readings...
Karma is the teaching that shows us how conditionality can work to our advantage; how we can apply skillful means toward the arising of wholesome states that will lead to awakening/liberation. Without this necessary teaching, the path would be incomplete and ineffective.
Again, karma itself is not a supernatural teaching. It's cause and effect for our mental states, at least as far as the cessation of suffering goes. It shows the possibility for freedom through our own efforts. The misunderstanding of karma as being somehow mystical and outside of causality is one we should address; karma is causality.
What you experience here happens to many Buddhists, myself included. When you get sidetracked by such doubts and questions, come back to the four noble truths and all they contain, for that cannot be doubted and does lead to peace and the positive.
namaste
You've helped a lot.
Me too!:)
I'm very sure about Karma, but not the magic stuff that some views seem to be. Karma is moral/mental/spiritual causation, nothing more, at least to me.
Rebirth I don't believe in, I don't believe the Buddha did either. But thats a minority view amongst Buddhists.
namaste
Within ourselves we can see -
What I thought, said, and did in the past effects how I am today. Our perceptions are conditioned by our past actions. If through ignorance I hurt someone in the past, I will feel bad when I think about it today. (It does not try to explain all occurrences of random events.)
More importantly- What I think, say, and do today will effect how I am in the future. If though wisdom and compassion I help someone today, I will feel good when I think about it in the future.
Rebirth also can be seen. Ask yourself -
Beyond illusions, concepts, and stories about past, present, and future, Who am I?
Have you had past life memories, Mountains? I know a psychologist who had a client whose little 3 or 4-year old daughter would tell her dad that, when in their previous lifetime together, she was the parent and he was the child, and he had to do whatever she said. They say little kids before the age of 6 sometimes can remember past lives. But because there's no belief system that embraces this in the West, those cases usually get ignored or chalked up to childhood imagination. In the East, many of those cases have been researched and validated.
Cloud wrote.." It brought about your life, and will bring about new life in the future... but it's not self. There are future rebirths, but they are not you."
but do not think that actions which create bad karma will be suffered by another being...it will certainly be us who suffers the consequences....even if we do not remember this life and how we caused it.
We can look further and see that the non material components of our world act according to these same principles. Energy can be transformed, but never reduced to nothing. What seems logical to me is that a consciousness must also abide by these same laws.
Some argue that consciousness is a function of the human body, if you believe that, it is not logical that rebirth would occur. If you consider consciousness as something other than the body, then it is hard to imagine that it would be extinguished when the body dies.
The consciousness that is reborn is not the I or me that I believe it to be, but it is the same consciousness that is expressing itself at this moment. It is the same consciousness in continuum.
I am an aggregate, or compounded phenomenon composed of five things, one of them being that consciousness.
Not clinging to a view that's unproven/unknowable, illuminate that place where there is neither belief nor disbelief, a state of comfortable not-knowing... focusing upon what is there in direct experience.
I agree with everything except the borrowed part. Nothing is borrowed, all is interactive.
Well said!
Nothing to cling to, but something to be aware or mindful of is that the continuum will continue and what we do now will create the circumstances of the future rebirth and life and the people (who will also not be us) will have to live in those circumstances.
The ones who come after us, whether of this particular continuum or not, will be born into a world either of wholesome or unwholesome conditions. So too it is of utmost importance to exercise great compassion toward the future state of this world and its people, by alleviating the suffering of others and helping lead others to liberation when possible.
We must combine awakening for ourselves and awakening for others, or at the least generating wholesome conditions, if we are to make a true difference.
Rebirth doesn't seem to me and many others to be a core tennet of Buddhism. Nor is it "often taught" by the Buddha; it is conspicuously absent from the four noble truths and seems to me incompatible with the three marks of existence.
I may be mistaken on this but haven't been shown so, so far.
speak only for yourself...not anonymous others whom your ego tells you must share your beliefs.
But do you see all you have done is told me what you believe rather than actually explaining why you believe that?
And then you play the dogmatic card of questioning if I am even a follower.
There are many practitioners (mainly westeners, I think) who regard rebirth only in the sense of "moment-to-moment" change during this lifetime. They don't have the confidence that rebirth is literal and karma carries over multiple lifetimes. They have their reasons...
Then there are practitioners who are confident in literal rebirth, arguing (for example): In this life, every moment we are born, we decay and we die, but we continue without a permanent, unchanging substance like Self. Similarly, when the body dies, those forces themselves can continue without a Self behind them. It is neither the same 'being' nor a different 'being' that takes rebirth. it is just the series that continues unbroken. (This is just one example I have come across). Your statement "Karma and rebirth are intertwined.....you cannot have one without the other" may possibly fit in this scenario - I'm not sure, though.
With regard to the Four Noble Truths, specifically the second regarding the cause of dukkha (suffering), Ven Walpola Rahula wrote something on these lines: Tanha or 'thirst', which includes desire, greed, and craving, manifests itself in various ways and gives rise to all forms of suffering and the continuity of 'beings'. But tanha should not be taken as the first cause, for there is no first cause possible; everything is relative and inter-dependent on the circle which is known as paticca-samuppada. So tanha is not the only cause of dukkha, although it is the most palpable and immediate cause. The other cause? The fruits of kamma may continue to manifest thenselves over multiple lifetimes. (Again, just regard this as an example - not a claim that the Buddha taught it).
Arguments about who is a Buddhist based on "karma and rebirth" is something we should aviod because it does nothing to liberate us from our present suffering. Everything in the future stems from the life in the present moment. It follows that this is where we should be directing our attention. In Buddhism, which is considered a practical religion, the real point of interest is our practical relationship towards this present life. How are we going to conduct out lives as they unfold right now? How are we to overcome dukkha in this very lifetime?
Please pardon me I have intruded in this discussion.
With metta,
S
And then there are those who think the Buddha taught that rebirth was wrong view and that attachment to the idea of their being more to life than this is itself a cause of Dukka.
Yes, I think this is true. And in addition, we can never know with anything close to certainty about these points. They may be interesting to ponder and discuss, but none of the views is worth getting dogmatic about. Unto each their own.
Agree with above statements.
And I point out that the OP has only been back once or twice to check the thread and say thanks. At first glance, this looks like yet another circular discussion about rebirth and karma, which, as you point out, are simply things we can never know for certain.
"but none of the views is worth getting dogmatic about."
For sure, but I think we have something like a duty on the beginners forum to highlight dogmatic claims, such as fred's.
namaste
Agreed. Subtle put-downs should be shown for what they are as well. I agree with you completely about that.
Not sure what the put down was, but hey ho.
The laws of nature would agree that something always remain yes, but not in the same form. It's like our corpse. It turns into dust.
Of course it does.
this statement is not accurate according to the teachings of the Buddha.... we CAN know the truth of these things for ourselves...through the practice of meditation...but they are not to be known by anyone else..... we cannot prove to others...only point them the way...as did the Buddha.
NDE and Reincarnation Research
Dr. Ian Stevenson's scientific evidence
Amber Wells and Dr. Ken Ring's research
NDE and Reincarnation Examples
Thomas Sawyer's NDE
Mellen-Thomas Benedict's NDE
Jeanie Dicus' NDE
Arthur Yensen's NDE
Reincarnation Case Studies
John Gordon -- Jeffrey Keene
Abraham Lincoln -- John Kennedy
Jesus Christ -- Melchezidek
Paul Gauguin -- Peter Teekamp
Other Reincarnation Case Studies
The Return of the Revolutionaries website
Joseph R. Myers' website
Children's Past Lives website
"How can you make denial of Allah, who made you live again when you died, will make you dead again, and then alive again, until you finally return to him {Buddha nature-Wilfred }?" - the Koran [2.28]
:rocker:
In fact, these projects (not really scientific, since all they do is collect random anecdotes) never show any evidence for literal reincarnation, and neither do the projects done by a few doctors where they claim proof of a Christian heaven and hell by recording the impressions of those who suffered a near death experience.
Scientists have examined Dr. Stevenson's work, and picked the cases that he himself declared were the best evidence for literal reincarnation, and found glaring problems such as confirmation bias, contamination by the parents, and most important, a translator that lied and simply started telling the crazy doctor what he wanted to hear.
There will never be proper scientific evidence of any form of after death existence, ghosts or heaven or hell or reincarnation, because there is no possible theory of how it could be real except for the supernatural. For centuries, people believed the proof that the Christian hell exists was obvious from the fact that it got hotter the deeper underground you went.
Buddhism is a religion for skeptics and nonbelievers like myself because it doesn't require belief in the supernatural miracles and wishful thinking about eternal reward and punishment after death that are the primary focus of the other systems. People being who they are, of course those beliefs have been woven into their Buddhist practice. But the focus remains on the 4 Noble Truths and the here-and-now.
This was said by the Exalted One, spoken by the Arahant. Thus have I heard:
“O bhikkhus (monks), I do not see any other single obstacle, hindered by which mankind for a long, long time, journeys up and down and wanders on, as this obstacle of
unknowing. Indeed, bhikkhus, it is through this obstacle of unknowing that mankind, being hindered, does journey up and down and wander on for a long time.”
> “Inconceivable, bhikkhus, is a beginning to this round of wandering on. For beings obstructed by unknowing and fettered by craving, migrating and wandering through the round of births, a starting-point is not evident.
> “There comes a time, bhikkhus, when the mighty ocean dries up, is utterly drained away and comes no more to be….there comes to be a time when the mighty earth is consumed, destroyed and comes no more to be. But for beings obstructed by unknowing and fettered by craving, migrating and wandering through the round of births, I declare there is no making an end.”
> “If a man, bhikkhus, were to cut the grasses, sticks, boughs and twigs in this Jambudipa (Indian sub-continent) and collecting them together, should make a pile laying them in a stack of squares, saying for each: ‘This is my mother, this is my mother’s mother,’ bhikkhus, the grasses, sticks, boughs and twigs in this Jambudipa would be used up, exhausted, before the mothers of that man’s mother were to come to an end.
“If a man, bhikkhus, were to make this great earth into clay balls each the size of a kola-kernel and laid them down saying: ‘This is my father, this is my father’s father,’ bhikkhus, this great earth would be used up, exhausted, before the father’s of that man’s father were to come to an end.
“Why is that? Inconceivable, bhikkhus, is a beginning to the wandering on in birth and death. For beings obstructed by unknowing and fettered by craving, migrating and wandering through the round of births, a starting-point is not evident.
Thus for a long time have you experienced dukkha (suffering), experienced pain, experienced destruction. Long enough, bhikkhus, for you to have become dispassionate towards all conditioned things, long enough to become detached, long enough to become released from them.”
There may be a "common language" or a "common set of concepts" among those who believe in life-to-life reincarnation or in the jhanas, but this is obviously not shared by all, not even all Buddhists. I have read elsewhere on this board that when HHDL was asked what happens after death, he said that he really doesn't know.
I myself prefer to believe in life-to-life reincarnation, and I prefer to believe in the bardo as described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead. I suspect that these things are experienced by people who are very adept. But because I do not share those experiences, my beliefs are based on what some would call "blind faith".
Logic cannot explain everything, but I think it is the main tool in human thought and discourse to explain things, and we cannot negatively judge people for believing only in logical explanations, and we cannot negatively judge the act itself.
For instance, the exact mechanisms of how karma works from life to life is not as important as knowing that Buddhism is about freedom from karma, no matter what your beliefs.
The KS is a monumental statement and solution to the problem of skepticism.
Logic is not there to explain anything, this is a mistaken view. It is just how it is. Law's and principles explain.
We might say that logic is to reason what interdependent causation is to dharma. They are distinct, i think. I used to think they weren't and that you could "proove" the three marks.
Rather, they are on the same level, I reckon. So:
"All things that exist are impermanent."
Is comparable with:
"No things that exist are contradictory."
Interesting stuff methinks, if your interested in this kinda stuff:)
namaste