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.
Question about Nirvana (Theravada tradition)!
Hello everybody, I'm new here, and also kinda new to Buddhism. I'm mostly interested in the Theravada tradition. 
I have a question regarding Nirvana, which is, what actually reaches Nirvana(?), if there is no soul and what happens to me when I die and I don't reach Nirvana in this lifetime. Let's pretend I reach Nirvana in my next lifetime, but since there is no Self, that next lifetime would not be me, it would be a different person, right? So what happens to me in this lifetime where I don't reach Nirvana?? It sounds so complicated. I hope you get what I mean.
Is it true that only my karmic tendencies create a new body and so to speak 'survive', but that next body would not be me, why should I then practice buddhism, if I die everything will be over for 'me' anyways (of course that sounds very egoistical).
I tried googling answer to my question, but I honestly couldn't find anything. I hope you can help me. And excuse my bad English.
Thanks alot
I have a question regarding Nirvana, which is, what actually reaches Nirvana(?), if there is no soul and what happens to me when I die and I don't reach Nirvana in this lifetime. Let's pretend I reach Nirvana in my next lifetime, but since there is no Self, that next lifetime would not be me, it would be a different person, right? So what happens to me in this lifetime where I don't reach Nirvana?? It sounds so complicated. I hope you get what I mean.
Is it true that only my karmic tendencies create a new body and so to speak 'survive', but that next body would not be me, why should I then practice buddhism, if I die everything will be over for 'me' anyways (of course that sounds very egoistical).
I tried googling answer to my question, but I honestly couldn't find anything. I hope you can help me
. And excuse my bad English.Thanks alot
0
Comments
Let's start off with what there is now before talking about next lives. What's here now? You say there is a 'me' here, that would be a different person in next life. But is that 'me' here? Can you point to it, really? Because if it isn't here now, it also wouldn't make sense to talk about a different person in a next life.. I guess you can agree on that.
Turns out there is no 'me' here, that's the teaching of no-self, or selflessness. All experience is without a core, without a center, without a solid 'person'. So the next life is not the same person, but it also is not a different person. But the same is true for when you wake up after a night sleep. The body may be sort of the same as yesterday, but the mind is totally different. Actually this happens every moment. There is no self now and there is no self never.
So all questions with 'what happens to me?' or 'why should I practice?' don't really make sense if seen in that light.
But it's true, that once I die, it's basically game over for me, isn't it? Thank you
You're thinking from the perspective of a film playing. From our perspective we think the image displays continuous motion, events etc because we're standing away from it: the rest of the scene outside the frame contrasts with the movie screen, giving us relative motion.
But in real life, there is no one standing apart from the screen, and nothing relative to it, therefore no motion.
There is no such thing as absolute motion, only relative motion. And since there are not two phenomena in awareness, there can be no relative motion either.
Your question is impossible to answer because again you ask about this 'me'.
So question yourself what is 'me' instead of what will happen to 'it' after death.
With kindness!
Sabre
I have a last question, I wanted to practice Theravada buddhism instead Vajrayana Buddhism because I've read that a teacher is absolutely necessary for Vajrayana. Is that really true?? I mean I get it that I need a Guru for special meditation practices that require a lot of effort, but what about normal meditation like vipassana(is there sth like that in Vajrayana?). If it's really not possible I'm gonna stick to Theravada, because I really cannot go see a teacher at the moment, maybe in the future!
Thank you, I know this question is kinda Off Topic but I couldn't edit my post anymore and I really don't want to start a new thread! ^^
Thx.
Don't know about Vajrayana, though.
Moderator Edit: This material is inappropriate and incorrect for a Theravada perspective.
But, sometimes we have to unlearn our progress, even things like hope.
All the picking up is for letting go in the end.
This sounds comforting
Without causes and conditions, the notion of consciousness, and the behaviour that follows never arises.
'Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"
"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."
"Sati, what is that consciousness?"
"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."
"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."'
http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm
Well, yes, we're talking about the samsaric vinnana because the nibbanic vinnana you're talking about isn't vinnana. It looks, smells, feels, cognates, tastes, sounds like vinnana, but it isn't.
Conscious means a being who is conscious of phenomena. That isn't the case. There are just phenomena. And since phenomena are codependent on conscious beings to perceive them, what are we left with?
Don't you understand that I'm asking that question because there is no answer? The deepest sigh of the ocean couldn't answer it. We live the answer.
and my ability to say here i am a part of a greater conciousness so to me being satisfyed
with the now gives me a strong vision of nervana
The teacher gives the method. The method is:
Overcome attachment to pleasure by understanding suffering
Overcome attachment to life by understanding impermanence
Overcome attachment to peace by loving kindness
The teacher points out the method. If you don't have a teacher that is ok as much can be accomplished without one. You can even take refuge without a teacher as shown in the kagyupa text the Jewel Ornament of Liberation.
In the next life the desire to be happy and loving and so forth is like a new player going onto the team of awakening. I am not sure how the 'tendencies' migrate, but the mind need not be the same as the body (which turns to dust).
Surely that must be imprinted in my Karma, right??
Life isn't a game of snakes and ladders, no god or force of nature is conspiring to reset your progress. Everything's on your side and nothing's futile.
I mean what if I progress in this life but in the next life the opposite happens
But, and this is important, progress is not towards something to grab. Progress is letting go. Progress is being less instead of being more. If you want something to contain in the next life, to keep with you, that's still clinging, so that's not nirvana.
So if you can let go of things now, in the future (whether it is a new life or not) you will benefit.
That is a great being to even be a hearer let alone a bodhisattva. So yes, you can regress. No coasting, it's time to get comfortable being uncomfortable.
You should read the suttas for information on what Buddha said, and you should work it out for yourself.
Of course no one knows if the suttas are genuine, and of course we are here to help. But I'm not going to respond to that quote, though others may.
thanks for the link
p.s. I have studied a good portion of the Theravadin Canon, and read a lot by Theravadin authors, if that helps. I'm not orthodox, but in my experience, there are orthodox Theravadin Buddhists who see things similarly to me.