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.
>He had countless tries, so he should have been able to do it if it is possible at all.
He had countless tries in which he wasn't even trying.
haha! And that's why he didn't succeed--"he had countless tries in which he wasn't even trying"! Only when he tries, will he find the Path, and then it may take many more rebirths to reach Enlightenment.
According to TB teachings (I can't speak to other traditions), to find the Dharma is a tremendous blessing. It can take an uncountable number of human rebirths to find the Dharma and begin practicing. So this seems to be the answer to the OP. Look at all the humans on Earth who still haven't found the Dharma, and consider how many human rebirths they may already have had.
If he wasn't trying an infinite number of times, why is he trying now? Again, replace "achieved liberation" with "tried to achieve liberation" in my initial post, and we are back to where we started.
Can't we just look at the present to see that it hasn't happened. Why it hasn't happened is hard or impossible to discern. Many explanations but no way to determine validity. We only have limited knowledge and knowledge affects reasoning.
He's trying now, because after many human rebirths, he's evolved.
Why didn't he evolve before? He had infinite time. Infinity minus any finite number is still infinity.
Can't we just look at the present to see that it hasn't happened. Why it hasn't happened is hard or impossible to discern. Many explanations but no way to determine validity. We only have limited knowledge and knowledge affects reasoning.
Well, we still have to accept that it is possible for it to happen now or in the future. This is a pretty big leap of faith, and such unresolved questions complicate it, as I explained earlier.
"You're right. We should all have achieved enlightenment." It doesn't seem like anybody can dissuade your position. So, now what?
Now it seems that I have failed to find a solution to this difficulty. Too bad.
Too bad. The logical fallacy drops away when you see enlightenment as impermanent. That seems to be what the logical person would then accept. You can't say that all Buddhist teachers would scorn that idea because there are also some that would agree. Why must we know the nature of enlightenment (a place, a state of being?, a different realm, etc.)? Do you need enlightenment to be permanent? Why can it not be impermanent?
Can you tell me why I don't make any logical sense?
Too bad. The logical fallacy drops away when you see enlightenment as impermanent. That seems to be what the logical person would then accept. You can't say that all Buddhist teachers would scorn that idea because there are also some that would agree. Why must we know the nature of enlightenment (a place, a state of being?, a different realm, etc.)? Do you need enlightenment to be permanent? Why can it not be impermanent?
Can you tell me why I don't make any logical sense?
Wel, I can tell you what problem I personally see with this idea. It does not really fit the whole definition of enlightenment as liberation from sansara, because we are not really liberated from sansara - after some time passes, we once again return to the cycle of death and rebirth. Nirvana becomes not very different from a rebirth as a god: they live for a really long time, and they do not suffer until the very end. Still, in Buddhism this rebirth is considered to be less favourable than the human one, precisely because it is impermanent and does not allow one to reach true (permanent) liberation.
My question is: if somebody has existed for eternity, and thus had been reborn in all possible lives already, why haven't he already achieved liberation in one of those lifetimes?
Nobody has existed for eternity. Buddhist rebirth is not reincarnation, where you are the same essence from the beginning to end. There is a lot of writing on this subject, both on this site and elsewhere.
Really though, if you are going to search through Buddhist philosophy to find something to disagree with, you will succeed. Buddhist thought is so wide and encompassing there are bound to be disagreements within it.
The important thing to remember, I believe, is that Buddhism is a practice and not a philosophy. The Buddha did not spend his time crafting philosophical arguments, he spent it teaching people how to live so that they would be free from suffering.
The only way to understand Buddhism is to live like the Buddha suggested. It won't harm you. If you live with a Buddhist practice for a while, and your suffering is not reduced, by all means give it up. Unfortunately, a practice won't work unless you commit to doing it.
Nobody has existed for eternity. Buddhist rebirth is not reincarnation, where you are the same essence from the beginning to end. There is a lot of writing on this subject, both on this site and elsewhere.
When I say that somebody has existed for eternity, I refer to the mindstream, not to some permanent soul. I am pretty sure that mindstream is eternal, and I even have quotes from His Holiness Dalai Lama to prove it. But this is not really the point, because the chain of rebirths does extend into infinite past, regardless of our views on "who" is actually being reborn.
Regarding the rest of your post, there is a difference between disagreement and finding an (apparent) logical inconsistency. If other people can commit themselves to their practice in spite of such things, then I am glad for them. I am just trying to find a solution to my personal problem here.
Why didn't he evolve before? He had infinite time. Infinity minus any finite number is still infinity.
Why haven't you evolved? These things take time, eons, sometimes. This is an imponderable. If you require answers to all your questions, you may not like Buddhism.
Can't we just look at the present to see that it hasn't happened. Why it hasn't happened is hard or impossible to discern. Many explanations but no way to determine validity. We only have limited knowledge and knowledge affects reasoning.
Agreed. This is how the Buddha defined an "imponderable".
Well, we still have to accept that it is possible for it to happen now or in the future. This is a pretty big leap of faith, and such unresolved questions complicate it, as I explained earlier.
It is, indeed, a leap of faith. That''s why teachers talk about having faith in the Dharma. Faith that the method, as outlined by the Buddha, works. But you can also test the method for yourself. When you practice and study regularly, and apply the teachings to practice, does your life improve? That would give you encouraging feedback. It's really not complicated. Humans have a way of complicating even the simplest things. :-/
Why haven't you evolved? These things take time, eons, sometimes. This is an imponderable. If you require answers to all your questions, you may not like Buddhism.
Well, it does not matter how many eons does it take - there can be no longer time than eternity, and we already had that much time. Eternity is, by definition, always sufficient time for something to happen, unless it is completely impossible.
It is, indeed, a leap of faith. That''s why teachers talk about having faith in the Dharma. Faith that the method, as outlined by the Buddha, works. But you can also test the method for yourself. When you practice and study regularly, and apply the teachings to practice, does your life improve? That would give you encouraging feedback. It's really not complicated. Humans have a way of complicating even the simplest things. :-/
Yes, maybe I just had a wrong set of expectations when I approached Buddhism. Most of philosophy made so much sense, that I began to think that I have finally found a teaching which I can be more or less sure about. That would help my practice tremendously. Well, I guess in the end you can't have a religion without somee illogical elements and leaps of faith. In my opinion, Buddhism is still far better than other major religions in this aspect.
Do you need enlightenment to be permanent? Why can it not be impermanent? Can you tell me why I don't make any logical sense?
In what way would Enlightenment be permanent, or impermanent? Do you mean, over lifetimes? In Theravada, an Enlightened being, a Buddha, doesn't return for any more lifetimes, so the question is moot. In Mahayana, a Buddha can choose to return. But being a Buddha, or a bodhisattva in the chosen rebirth, he would behave in a way that wouldn't generate negative karma, wouldn't he? So one would expect the enlightened state to be permanent, in that sense. Unlelss for some reason, the bodhisattva slipped up and broke a precept or made some type of karmic error. (I'm not arguing, Yishai, just trying to understand your perspective. I think this is a good question for a new thread.)
When I say that somebody has existed for eternity, I refer to the mindstream, not to some permanent soul. I am pretty sure that mindstream is eternal, and I even have quotes from His Holiness Dalai Lama to prove it.
I would agree that many Tibetan Buddhists believe that there is a permanent mindstream. I know it is not a belief held by all Buddhists, and I am not certain that it is even a majority view.
How do you know that there is a chain of rebirths? Is death and rebirth a one-to-one relationship? When life began, didn't it start with one organism? How could we go from one organism to numbers of organisms beyond imagining if there is a continual chain?
I believe that you see a logical inconsistency because your premises are wrong.
Why haven't you evolved? These things take time, eons, sometimes. This is an imponderable. If you require answers to all your questions, you may not like Buddhism.
Well, it does not matter how many eons does it take - there can be no longer time than eternity, and we already had that much time. Eternity is, by definition, always sufficient time for something to happen, unless it is completely impossible.
Right, it doesn't matter how long it takes, we already have eternity to work with. So here we are, following the Dharma and advancing ourselves. Isn't the question of how long "eternity" was prior to where we are now irrelevant?
It is, indeed, a leap of faith. That''s why teachers talk about having faith in the Dharma. Faith that the method, as outlined by the Buddha, works. But you can also test the method for yourself. When you practice and study regularly, and apply the teachings to practice, does your life improve? That would give you encouraging feedback. It's really not complicated. Humans have a way of complicating even the simplest things. :-/
Yes, maybe I just had a wrong set of expectations when I approached Buddhism. Most of philosophy made so much sense, that I began to think that I have finally found a teaching which I can be more or less sure about. That would help my practice tremendously. Well, I guess in the end you can't have a religion without somee illogical elements and leaps of faith. In my opinion, Buddhism is still far better than other major religions in this aspect.
Yes, Buddhism is the most logical, I think, that's why many of us are here. It's logical if you ignore the religious elements that have blended in due to the influence of different cultures, and if you ignore the mythology that has grown up around the Buddha and his teachings (that his was a virgin birth, for example), and if you ignore the few teachings that seem really speculative, like the existence of 31 realms in the universe inhabited by different beings, and so forth. Some practitioners explain the 31 realms as being purely symbolic of states of mind, but many Asian Buddhists take those teachings literally. I believed Buddhism was very logical and a science of the mind, like psychology, but my eyes were opened to other not-so-logical aspects of it after I joined this forum.
Some of the questions coming up here would be good to ask a teacher. Sometimes there do seem to be inconsistencies in Mahayana, but that may be due to an incorrect or incomplete understanding.
How do you know that there is a chain of rebirths? Is death and rebirth a one-to-one relationship? When life began, didn't it start with one organism? How could we go from one organism to numbers of organisms beyond imagining if there is a continual chain?
I believe that you see a logical inconsistency because your premises are wrong.
I do not know anything about a chain of rebirths, I am taking what I understand to be a Buddhist position as a starting point. I can find some quotes if you insist (but I'd rather not, because it is really easy to find anyway). Maybe life started from one organism on Earth, but from a Buddhist viewpoint there are countless other worlds on which sentient beings are reborn, so no problem here.
Maybe life started from one organism on Earth, but from a Buddhist viewpoint there are countless other worlds on which sentient beings are reborn, so no problem here.
This makes sense (is logical) if you accept unquestioningly that there are countless other worlds on which sentient beings are being reborn, and have been reborn for aeons. Is that a logical teaching? That there are countless invisible (to us) worlds full of sentient beings? If so, where are they? Where are those worlds? In other dimensions? Does this relate to string theory in quantum physics? I'm just looking for the logic.
Right, it doesn't matter how long it takes, we already have eternity to work with. So here we are, following the Dharma and advancing ourselves. Isn't the question of how long "eternity" was prior to where we are now irrelevant?
Well, for me it is not irrelevant. If we failed to reach enlightenment during an eternity of trying, then it may mean that reaching it is impossible. This solves the paradox. Or it may mean that the whole system is wrong, there is no rebirth, etc.
Yes, Buddhism is the most logical, I think, that's why many of us are here. It's logical if you ignore the religious elements that have blended in due to the influence of different cultures, and if you ignore the mythology that has grown up around the Buddha and his teachings (that his was a virgin birth, for example), and if you ignore the few teachings that seem really speculative, like the existence of 31 realms in the universe inhabited by different beings, and so forth. Some practitioners explain the 31 realms as being purely symbolic of states of mind, but many Asian Buddhists take those teachings literally. I believed Buddhism was very logical and a science of the mind, like psychology, but my eyes were opened to other not-so-logical aspects of it after I joined this forum.
Funny, but I do not have any problems with the existence of deities, ghosts, hells and heavens, etc. Sure, I have never seen anything like this, so what? This stuff may contradict the established scientific worldview, but this is not a logical contradiction, because science is just a set of empirical conclusions. If believing in gods will help me to achieve liberation, no problem. But stuff we talk about in this thread is different - it is an internal contradiction in the system.
This makes sense (is logical) if you accept unquestioningly that there are countless other worlds on which sentient beings are being reborn, and have been reborn for aeons. Is that a logical teaching? That there are countless invisible (to us) worlds full of sentient beings? If so, where are they? Where are those worlds? In other dimensions? Does this relate to string theory in quantum physics? I'm just looking for the logic.
As I said, this does not have anything to do with logic. Maybe they exist, maybe they do not exist. If the logic of our system forces us to assume that they exist, we are free to do so.
Let me give you an example. Here are two statements: 1)Queen Victoria was abducted by an UFO when she was ten years old. 2)2*2=5. We probably think that both are false. Still, we cannot prove that 1 is false. For all I know, it may even be true - it would change our worldview a bit, but there would be no inherent paradox in it, no logical inconsistency. 2, on the other hand, is inherently false, and we can see it without needing any empirical evidence.
Well, for me it is not irrelevant. If we failed to reach enlightenment during an eternity of trying
You're assuming that we were trying, see? If this is the first lifetime in which we've encountered the Dharma (it may not be; it may be our second or third), then we have a ways to go, yet. Unless we're really dedicated practitioners, and maybe if we choose the tantric "short cut" path, we can reach Enlightenment in this lifetime. Maybe you found the Dharma 3 lifetimes ago, but only now you've chosen Vajrayana, and have a hope of reaching Enlightenment in this lifetime.
Funny, but I do not have any problems with the existence of deities, ghosts, hells and heavens, etc. Sure, I have never seen anything like this, so what? This stuff may contradict the established scientific worldview, but this is not a logical contradiction, because science is just a set of empirical conclusions. If believing in gods will help me to achieve liberation, no problem. But stuff we talk about in this thread is different - it is an internal contradiction in the system.
Yeah, it is funny, for someone who said Buddhism is logical, and who gets all tangled up in trying to ponder the imponderable of eternity and rebirth as they relate to advancement on the path. But maybe you mean that the metaphysical aspects are logical within the entire system of teachings and beliefs, so it poses no problem for you? That I can understand, I suppose.
(Enjoying this conversation, by the way.)
edit: ok, I understand your view of the realms, etc.
I am saying that your understanding of Buddhism seems to be limited. There is a Buddhist position that is as you state. However, there is more than one position on a great number of subjects in Buddhism.
You say you don't want to be a Buddhist, because Buddhists believe X, and you disagree with X.
I also disagree with X, but I am a Buddhist. How can I be a Buddhist, if I don't believe in X? It turns out that a lot of Buddhists don't believe X. X isn't really important to maintining a Buddhist practice.
X could be any one of a huge number of beliefs. Buddhism is a very broad umbrella. It has mixed with the native religions of China, Thailand, Tibet, Japan, and a host of other places.
There is no one person that speaks for all Buddhists. You can't quote anyone and say "That's Buddhism." A Tibetan Buddhist is a particularly poor choice, because Tibetan Buddhists have a lot of beliefs that are different from most other places. Are they any less Buddhist than anyone else? Of course not.
All I am really trying to say is that whatever you believe, you can start a Buddhist practice. You don't have to call yourself a Buddhist. You don't have to tell anyone you are a Buddhist. You don't have to accept any illogical arguments.
All you have to do is choose to follow the four noble truths and the eightfold path. And they are way too vague to corner you into a logical corner.
Well, for me it is not irrelevant. If we failed to reach enlightenment during an eternity of tryingYou're assuming that we were trying, see? If this is the first lifetime in which we've encountered the Dharma (it may not be it may be our second or third), then we have a ways to go, yet. Unless we're really dedicated practitioners, and maybe if we choose the tantric "short cut" path, we can reach Enlightenment in this lifetime. Maybe you found the Dharma 3 lifetimes ago, but only now you've chosen Vajrayana, and have a hope of reaching Enlightenment in this lifetime.
We are kind of going in circles here. I am trying to say that if we have already existed for an eternity, then _nothing can happen to us for the first time_. Ever. Every possible thing has already happened to us infinite number of times. And impossible things never happened, and never will. Eternity is this kind of thing.
That's a big assumption, that every possible thing has already happened to us an infinite number of times. Also, bear in mind that not everyone is reborn at the same pace. For example, one person may have 5 past lives as a human, and all those lives may have happened in the same century. Someone else may have 5 past lives that occurred over 5 centuries. We're not all charging through eternity at the same pace. Also, how do you know this isn't your first rebirth as a human? You see, there are so many variables...
You could have had a couple of human rebirths long ago, really made a mess of them, and been reborn in the animal realm, and over time, worked your way back up to human. This is why rebirth and related questions are "imponderable". We have no way of knowing what came before, over the millenia, and eons.
I am saying that your understanding of Buddhism seems to be limited. There is a Buddhist position that is as you state. However, there is more than one position on a great number of subjects in Buddhism.
I guess you are right. But are there actually any Buddhists that do not believe in a beginningless universe/mindstream/chain of rebirths/whatever? How do they get around the problem of cause and result?
That's a big assumption, that every possible thing has already happened to us an infinite number of times. Also, bear in mind that not everyone is reborn at the same pace. For example, one person may have 5 past lives as a human, and all those lives may have happened in the same century. Someone else may have 5 past lives that occurred over 5 centuries. We're not all charging through eternity at the same pace. Also, how do you know this isn't your first rebirth as a human? You see, there are so many variables...
What is a "possible thing" anyway? A possible thing is a thing that has a chance to happen, and that chance is greater than zero (otherwise, it would be an impossible thing). For example, if we roll a six-sided die, a chance of getting 6 is 1/6. If we roll it several times, the chance gets greater. If we roll it an infinite number of times, we can be 100% sure that we will get 6. We will get it an infinite number of times, in fact.
So, suppose we have been rolling dice since beginningless time. We get a 6. Is it possible for this 6 to be our first 6, ever? The answer is no. It is not possible. We have already gotten 6 countless times before.
Back when you were an amoeba, and later, a jellyfish, then later a shark, and later, a frog, and later, maybe a dog or a porpoise, you weren't rolling any dice. Only when you gained a precious human rebirth were you able to throw the die. If you've only had 5 human rebirths the chances of rolling a 6 are a bit slimmer. And you may not roll a 6 at all on your first 6 tries.
A human rebirth was possible. If it was possible, I have already had an infinite number of human rebirths. It does not matter if I had other rebirths too.
That's a very big assumption, that you've had an infinite number of human rebirths. And even if you had, you may have been too busy hunting mammoth or bison to keep yourself fed. You may have spent lifetimes cheating people, and not advancing spiritually. You're making a lot of assumptions about those human rebirths, if they existed at all in significant number, another big assumption. You're taking human rebirth for granted. No teacher I know of would agree with you on that point. Just because time is infinite doesn't mean that rebirths are infinite. In all of infinite time, you may have had only 100 rebirths, most of them non-human.
And how do you know that there aren't people around you who are Enlightened beings? People quietly living lives dedicated to ending suffering. We have no way of knowing.
There are many. For me, the question really begins with what is a self and how can you have a mindstream. But one of the big problems with Buddhism for people new to it is that there is no 'sound bite' answer for almost any question. From the very beginnings of Buddhism, questions like yours have been asked and answered. Now we have 2000 years of answers, and no clear path to which answer is right. For a lot of questions, the Buddha basically answered "Don't worry about it." Many do not find that satisfying.
Cause and result is a particularly complicated issue. I don't think I am capable of explaining the views on it in an online forum.
I'm sorry, but I have to get some sleep now. Everyone, thank you for taking your time to answer my questions. It was very interesting Maybe tomorrow I will be able to think about some answers to my problem.
I think we need a source quotation of some sort to clarify the OP's question. If the actual statement is "countless", that's a whole lot different from "infinite". That needs to be clarified. Countless is not infinite.
In the end, does it matter? Am I missing something? I still don't see how the infinity/countless thing matters. Can you explain this, SherabDorje?
It doesn't, unless it's a direct realization for you in order to help you self transcend in all the nuances or the dimensions that this manifests as. What truly matters are the methods that lead to direct realization, instead of blind faith in any sort of cosmology.
I am very interested in Buddhism, and one question is really bothering me lately. According to Buddhism, every sentient being was reborn countless times already, and this chain of rebirths has no beginning. My question is: if somebody has existed for eternity, and thus had been reborn in all possible lives already, why haven't he already achieved liberation in one of those lifetimes? He had countless tries, so he should have been able to do it if it is possible at all.
I would be very grateful if somebody could explain this point to me.
Finding the Dharma is rare. It is so very precious and finding it is likened to a Blind turtle surfacing in a vast ocean once every thousand years with which to find a golden yoke that floats upon the surface around its neck. Ignorance is deeply rooted in our mind this is why we are not liberated now, but if we make the effort we can be.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
If there's no first cause then you can't logically posit a beginning. No beginning seems to be the same as infinity. In infinity anything that is possible to happen would have happened simply because of the infinite amount of time involved, not only would it have happened it would have happened an infinite amount of times. Infinity is more than just a very large number.
@Festin Having thought about this for a while today the only way I could think of as a possiblity for resolving this is if time isn't looked at in a linear way of some sort. Thats as much as I got, but if time isn't linear then ignorance and enlightenment would both exist at once and to say we haven't reached enlightenment yet doesn't make any sense. I don't know why some would reach enlightenment before others though. Like I said non linear time is as good a guess as I could come up with.
In the end, does it matter? Am I missing something? I still don't see how the infinity/countless thing matters. Can you explain this, SherabDorje?
Infinity is just that, infinity. So in terms of mathematical infinity Festin's question is valid. Countless just means more than we can count, but it's not mathematical infinity and therefore would place a limit on the equation.
If a prisoner or convicted person asks themselves "I have lived countless lives before, why have I not learned how to avoid being imprisoned from other lives", does this question make sense? I'm not making fun of the question, I just don't think there's any answer. It falls down to why did they get imprisoned in the first place.
The truth is that we are the slow learners of this universe, but we are indeed very slowly learning, and helping one another to learn, sometimes for better, and sometimes for worse. As I have said elsewhere on this site:
Oh yes, the tears... the tears of all the joys and sorrows and trials of a thousand lifetimes! when we learned to fight and kill one another when we learned to exploit one another when we learned to argue one another when we learned to communicate with one another when we learned to work with one another when we learned to share with one another when we learned to understand one another when we learned to nurture and support one another when we learned to love one another! They were my enemies They were my rulers They were my slaves They were my rivals They were my neighbors They were my friends They were my parents They were my sisters and brothers They were my dearest loves They were my beloved children Where are they now? Look, they are here, all around... Who are they now? See how all have changed and grown from what we once... See how all have learned, and changed, and grown through it all!
They were once me, and so I have come to understand... and I was once them, and so I have come to understand... how from the swamp blooms the lotus Om Mani Padme Hum
-Aura Waters
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Let me try to explain in another way. Time is illusiory as well so to think of all our rebirths happening before ultimatly isn't logical? IDK, I've heard it said somewhere that from the enlightened perspective all events happen simultaneously. If you read some peoples accounts of their NDE's they talk about a life review where they relive the moments of their life but no time seems to have passed. I can't really make any sense of what I'm talking about, just an idea I had and am throwing it out there to see if anyone can take it from there.
But no one knows how many times in this infinite time anyone has been reborn. Could be 10 times, 100 times, 1000 times or a million times for some. And most of those rebirths likely were non-human. Mathematical probability doesn't apply, because we don't know the pace of anyone's rebirth. Maybe once every 10,000 years for some, probably at a variable rate for others. (Think of the infants that die, and may be reborn 5 years later.) What's the point of counting infinite rebirths as a one-celled organism, a nematode, an insect, and so forth, anyway? We can't assume that after a million rebirths as animals, you're automatically entitled to a human rebirth, and from then on it's human rebirths only. That's not how it works. It's too complex to get our minds around, there are so many variables. How do we know that rebirth works by the laws of chance, anyway? There could be other principles at work that mere mortals can't conceive of.
Yes, person, I've also heard that past, future and present are simultaneous.
Infinity is just that, infinity. So in terms of mathematical infinity Festin's question is valid. Countless just means more than we can count, but it's not mathematical infinity and therefore would place a limit on the equation.
Thanks, but I mean why does the question matter in the first place, if we can't assume that rebirths happen with any regularity at all within infinite time, and we can't assume that there have been very many human lives, or human lives that have been spiritually productive? Rebirth works by its own unfathomable principles, not by rolls of the dice. Why are people assuming it does work by mathematical probability? :scratch:
I agree, it's complex and non-linear. The Buddha describes this as well, that progression is non-linear, so one should take advantage of the human life while one has it, as one doesn't know what sort of causes and conditions for a rebirth of lower capacity lay lurking in ones unconscious. So, it's best to illumine ones unconscious while in a physical apparatus that has that capacity, and for us on Earth, that's mostly the Human capacity.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
But no one knows how many times in this infinite time anyone has been reborn. Could be 10 times, 100 times, 1000 times or a million times for some. And most of those rebirths likely were non-human. Mathematical probability doesn't apply, because we don't know the pace of anyone's rebirth. Maybe once every 10,000 years for some, probably at a variable rate for others. (Think of the infants that die, and may be reborn 5 years later.) What's the point of counting infinite rebirths as a one-celled organism, a nematode, an insect, and so forth, anyway? We can't assume that after a million rebirths as animals, you're automatically entitled to a human rebirth, and from then on it's human rebirths only. That's not how it works. It's too complex to get our minds around, there are so many variables. How do we know that rebirth works by the laws of chance, anyway? There could be other principles at work that mere mortals can't conceive of.
Yes, person, I've also heard that past, future and present are simultaneous.
How many times and rate don't really apply in infinity. Mathmatical probability does apply because even though we don't know the pace of someone's rebirth we know the amount of time they've had to be reborn, infinity. Even if someone is reborn as a human only one every million times, one million divided by infinity is still infinity.
Let me try to explain in another way. Time is illusiory as well so to think of all our rebirths happening before ultimatly isn't logical? IDK, I've heard it said somewhere that from the enlightened perspective all events happen simultaneously. If you read some peoples accounts of their NDE's they talk about a life review where they relive the moments of their life but no time seems to have passed. I can't really make any sense of what I'm talking about, just an idea I had and am throwing it out there to see if anyone can take it from there.
So time is empty of real existence. Clinging to memories even back to previous lives, as though they were real events which happened to a real and permanent self creates the illusion of the passage of time. It perpetuates delusion if used to attempt to draw valid conclusions about an ultimate truth. In a relative sense very useful for planning your day or your life. Trying to come to a conclusion or a fixed view about beginningless births or the circumstances of imagined previous lives is likely not helpful for realizing ultimate truth or emptiness. It promotes the view of a permanent self. Realization of emptiness is an immediate, timeless, selfless, awareness of now. Crystal clear and without doubt or explanations. It does not include daydreaming about past and future lives. My experience anyhow.
Comments
Can you tell me why I don't make any logical sense?
Really though, if you are going to search through Buddhist philosophy to find something to disagree with, you will succeed. Buddhist thought is so wide and encompassing there are bound to be disagreements within it.
The important thing to remember, I believe, is that Buddhism is a practice and not a philosophy. The Buddha did not spend his time crafting philosophical arguments, he spent it teaching people how to live so that they would be free from suffering.
The only way to understand Buddhism is to live like the Buddha suggested. It won't harm you. If you live with a Buddhist practice for a while, and your suffering is not reduced, by all means give it up. Unfortunately, a practice won't work unless you commit to doing it.
Regarding the rest of your post, there is a difference between disagreement and finding an (apparent) logical inconsistency. If other people can commit themselves to their practice in spite of such things, then I am glad for them. I am just trying to find a solution to my personal problem here.
(I'm not arguing, Yishai, just trying to understand your perspective. I think this is a good question for a new thread.)
How do you know that there is a chain of rebirths? Is death and rebirth a one-to-one relationship? When life began, didn't it start with one organism? How could we go from one organism to numbers of organisms beyond imagining if there is a continual chain?
I believe that you see a logical inconsistency because your premises are wrong.
Some of the questions coming up here would be good to ask a teacher. Sometimes there do seem to be inconsistencies in Mahayana, but that may be due to an incorrect or incomplete understanding.
Maybe life started from one organism on Earth, but from a Buddhist viewpoint there are countless other worlds on which sentient beings are reborn, so no problem here.
other planets.
Let me give you an example. Here are two statements:
1)Queen Victoria was abducted by an UFO when she was ten years old.
2)2*2=5.
We probably think that both are false. Still, we cannot prove that 1 is false. For all I know, it may even be true - it would change our worldview a bit, but there would be no inherent paradox in it, no logical inconsistency.
2, on the other hand, is inherently false, and we can see it without needing any empirical evidence.
(Enjoying this conversation, by the way.)
edit: ok, I understand your view of the realms, etc.
You say you don't want to be a Buddhist, because Buddhists believe X, and you disagree with X.
I also disagree with X, but I am a Buddhist. How can I be a Buddhist, if I don't believe in X? It turns out that a lot of Buddhists don't believe X. X isn't really important to maintining a Buddhist practice.
X could be any one of a huge number of beliefs. Buddhism is a very broad umbrella. It has mixed with the native religions of China, Thailand, Tibet, Japan, and a host of other places.
There is no one person that speaks for all Buddhists. You can't quote anyone and say "That's Buddhism." A Tibetan Buddhist is a particularly poor choice, because Tibetan Buddhists have a lot of beliefs that are different from most other places. Are they any less Buddhist than anyone else? Of course not.
All I am really trying to say is that whatever you believe, you can start a Buddhist practice. You don't have to call yourself a Buddhist. You don't have to tell anyone you are a Buddhist. You don't have to accept any illogical arguments.
All you have to do is choose to follow the four noble truths and the eightfold path. And they are way too vague to corner you into a logical corner.
Also, bear in mind that not everyone is reborn at the same pace. For example, one person may have 5 past lives as a human, and all those lives may have happened in the same century. Someone else may have 5 past lives that occurred over 5 centuries. We're not all charging through eternity at the same pace. Also, how do you know this isn't your first rebirth as a human? You see, there are so many variables...
You could have had a couple of human rebirths long ago, really made a mess of them, and been reborn in the animal realm, and over time, worked your way back up to human. This is why rebirth and related questions are "imponderable". We have no way of knowing what came before, over the millenia, and eons.
So, suppose we have been rolling dice since beginningless time. We get a 6. Is it possible for this 6 to be our first 6, ever? The answer is no. It is not possible. We have already gotten 6 countless times before.
And how do you know that there aren't people around you who are Enlightened beings? People quietly living lives dedicated to ending suffering. We have no way of knowing.
Cause and result is a particularly complicated issue. I don't think I am capable of explaining the views on it in an online forum.
Maybe tomorrow I will be able to think about some answers to my problem.
So Festin, can you quote your source?
@Festin Having thought about this for a while today the only way I could think of as a possiblity for resolving this is if time isn't looked at in a linear way of some sort. Thats as much as I got, but if time isn't linear then ignorance and enlightenment would both exist at once and to say we haven't reached enlightenment yet doesn't make any sense. I don't know why some would reach enlightenment before others though. Like I said non linear time is as good a guess as I could come up with.
but we are indeed very slowly learning, and helping one another to learn,
sometimes for better, and sometimes for worse.
As I have said elsewhere on this site:
Oh yes, the tears...
the tears of all the joys and sorrows and trials of a thousand lifetimes!
when we learned to fight and kill one another
when we learned to exploit one another
when we learned to argue one another
when we learned to communicate with one another
when we learned to work with one another
when we learned to share with one another
when we learned to understand one another
when we learned to nurture and support one another
when we learned to love one another!
They were my enemies
They were my rulers
They were my slaves
They were my rivals
They were my neighbors
They were my friends
They were my parents
They were my sisters and brothers
They were my dearest loves
They were my beloved children
Where are they now?
Look, they are here, all around...
Who are they now?
See how all have changed and grown from what we once...
See how all have learned, and changed, and grown through it all!
They were once me, and so I have come to understand...
and I was once them, and so I have come to understand...
how from the swamp
blooms the lotus
Om Mani Padme Hum
-Aura Waters
Only growth is measured as a sequential event in the cosmos.
Yes, person, I've also heard that past, future and present are simultaneous.
I agree, it's complex and non-linear. The Buddha describes this as well, that progression is non-linear, so one should take advantage of the human life while one has it, as one doesn't know what sort of causes and conditions for a rebirth of lower capacity lay lurking in ones unconscious. So, it's best to illumine ones unconscious while in a physical apparatus that has that capacity, and for us on Earth, that's mostly the Human capacity.