the great rebirth debate

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Alex123 »

I want to believe in rebirth. How can one argue for it?

Maybe if idealism was true, then kamma and rebirth would be less problematic. For example: new life is continuation of one long dream. Good kamma creates good dream while negative kamma creates nightmare, and if one doesn't intend - then eventually the dream will end. Just like the dream can be somewhat uncontrollable (these are results of previous done kamma), with illusion of objects and beings, maybe so is the world. But, how can we prove this?


Another idea is to posit some sort of new type of dualism where there are two distinct phenomenon:
a) awareness
and
b) phenomena which includes body, brain and mental states.

It means that there is passive awareness (a) observing mental and physical states (b). The difficulty is in what can awareness control and how? Is it eternal slave to (b) and can never separate from it? How would the path be possible then?

Some thoughts.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10171
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote:I want to believe in rebirth.
Have a look at the natural world. See how trees and plants lose their leaves each winter, see how they are "reborn" in the spring.

Spend more time looking and less time thinking... ;)
Buddha save me from new-agers!
5heaps
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by 5heaps »

Alex123 wrote:Prove that there is some sort of (consciousness, subconsciousness, ālayavijñāna, etc) that survives death.
the experience of a colour, a sound, etc, is nonphysical. you cannot break them with a hammer or physically obstruct them with a particle. you cannot shift awareness 10mm to the west by making it occupy a different space.

since the mind is a primary factor of existence just as energy is, it is contradictory to say that something exists yet a mind does not, just as it is contradictory to say that something exists and yet energy does not exist. at the final moment of death, the final moment acts as a material cause for the next moment mind. since mind is a functioning nonphysical thing, its activity is dictated primarily by mental factors such as kammas which move the mind, as well as former moments of mind which act as the material cause for another moment of mind, the same way clay acts as a material cause for a clay pot.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by binocular »

Alex123 wrote:I want to believe in rebirth. How can one argue for it?
First, ask yourself if arguments have it in them to instill belief in you.
In my experience, arguments have a very weak power.


If you're familiar with Kohlberg's theory of the stages of moral reasoning, you've probably heard that a person who is on one stage of moral reasoning will not move to a higher one simply by reflecting on arguments from that higher stage; in fact, the person may even reject them as inferior.
I don't know so much about research done in other areas of congition, but it may be worth rethinking what power an argument can have at all.


Another thing you might do is give a studious look to William James' Will to believe (I've already linked ot it earlier).
Especially consider his criteria for what makes a genuine choice:

Next, let us call the decision between two hypotheses an option. Options may be of several kinds. They may be:

1. living or dead;
2. forced or avoidable;
3. momentous or trivial;
and for our purpose we may call an option a genuine option when it of the forced, living, and momentous kind.

1. A living option is one in which both hypotheses are live ones. If I say to you: "Be a theosophist or be a Mohammedan," it is probably a dead option, because for you neither hypothesis is likely to be alive. But if I say: " Be an agnostic or be Christian," it is otherwise: trained as you are, each hypothesis makes some appeal, however small, to your belief.

2. Next, if I say to you: " Choose between going out with your umbrella or without it," I do not offer you a genuine option, for it is not forced. You can easily avoid it by not going out at all. Similarly, if I say, " Either love me or hate me," " Either call my theory true or call it false," your option is avoidable. You may remain indifferent to me, neither loving nor hating, and you may decline to offer any judgment as to my theory. But if I say, " Either accept this truth or go without it," I put on you a forced option, for there is no standing place outside of the alternative. Every dilemma based on a complete logical disjunction, with no possibility of not choosing, is an option of this forced kind.

3. Finally, if I were Dr. Nansen and proposed to you to join my North Pole expedition, your option would be momentous; for this would probably be your only similar opportunity, and your choice now would either exclude you from the North Pole sort of immortality altogether or put at least the chance of it into your hands. He who refuses to embrace a unique opportunity loses the prize as surely as if he tried and failed. Per contra, the option is trivial when the opportunity is not unique, when the stake is insignificant, or when the decision is reversible if it later prove unwise. Such trivial options abound in the scientific life. A chemist finds an hypothesis live enongh to spend a year in its verification: he believes in it to that extent. But if his experiments prove inconclusive either way, he is quit for his loss of time, no vital harm being done.

It will facilitate our discussion if we keep all these distinctions well in mind.


I think James offers a very useful heuristics here for figuring out what or how to believe.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka »

Alex123 wrote: I want to believe in rebirth. How can one argue for it?
What's the point in arguing ? We all go round and round in circles in these threads, sometimes giving dodgy ''evidence'', sometimes plunging into this or that form of intellectual proliferation, and nobody seems much wiser on the subject.

I recall Ajahn Sumedho saying in a talk at Amaravati Monastery: "What's reality ? Any opinion about reality is not reality, its an opinion"

So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.

The Buddha said :
the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

:)
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Ben »

Aloka wrote:
Alex123 wrote: I want to believe in rebirth. How can one argue for it?
What's the point in arguing ? We all go round and round in circles in these threads, sometimes giving dodgy ''evidence'', sometimes plunging into this or that form of intellectual proliferation, and nobody seems much wiser on the subject.

I recall Ajahn Sumedho saying in a talk at Amaravati Monastery: "What's reality ? Any opinion about reality is not reality, its an opinion"

So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.

The Buddha said :
the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

:)
Thank you, Aloka, for one of the most sensible and pertinent posts on this thread.
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by kirk5a »

Aloka wrote:So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.
So then, what does your post have to do with that, exactly? "What is the point" - as you ask us.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10171
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Aloka wrote: So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.
Practising Dhamma in the here and now is good - of course. But clearly some people have difficulty with the teachings on rebirth and how they relate to practice - are you saying it isn't valid to discuss these issues?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka »

porpoise wrote:
Aloka wrote: So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.
Practising Dhamma in the here and now is good - of course. But clearly some people have difficulty with the teachings on rebirth and how they relate to practice - are you saying it isn't valid to discuss these issues?

No, other people must do as they please -I was speaking about my own experience of finding its better not to get distracted by rebirth issues. [assuming that I'm allowed to do that in this predominantly men's world, of course! :D ]
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by kirk5a »

Aloka wrote:
porpoise wrote:
Aloka wrote: So for me its better to just relax, meditate, and focus on practising Dhamma in the here and now.
Practising Dhamma in the here and now is good - of course. But clearly some people have difficulty with the teachings on rebirth and how they relate to practice - are you saying it isn't valid to discuss these issues?

No, other people must do as they please -I was speaking about my own experience of finding its better not to get distracted by rebirth issues. [assuming that I'm allowed to do that in this predominantly men's world, of course! :D ]
You appear to be voicing opinions about the rest of us talking about the subject. Rather disparaging ones. That it is "arguing" "pointless" "circular" dodgy" "intellectual proliferation" and non-productive of wisdom.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka »

kirk5a wrote: You appear to be voicing opinions about the rest of us talking about the subject. Rather disparaging ones. That it is "arguing" "pointless" "circular" dodgy" "intellectual proliferation" and non-productive of wisdom.
I was responding with my personal experience to Alex saying " How can one argue for it?" Now, somehow that's got blown out of all proportion into me making disparaging comments about "the rest of us talking about the subject" !

I really don't have time for this at the moment Kirk5a, I have an evening meal to cook.
Have a lovely peaceful, happy day ..and enjoy your discussions

:hello:
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by chownah »

kirk5a wrote: You appear to be voicing opinions about the rest of us talking about the subject. Rather disparaging ones. That it is "arguing" "pointless" "circular" dodgy" "intellectual proliferation" and non-productive of wisdom.
Seems like Aloka was expressing some valid opinions about what happens on this thread. Can you paraphrase what Aloka said in terms you find less objectionable and which still convey the intended meaning?
chownah
5heaps
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by 5heaps »

chownah wrote:
kirk5a wrote:You appear to be voicing opinions about the rest of us talking about the subject. Rather disparaging ones. That it is "arguing" "pointless" "circular" dodgy" "intellectual proliferation" and non-productive of wisdom.
Seems like Aloka was expressing some valid opinions about what happens on this thread.
"rebirth" "issues". hilarious.

hes not talking about this thread, hes talking about discussing rebirth in general. and hes wrong because in buddhism inference is a type of valid cognizer.

there are two antidotes to faulty ideas and doubt:
1) a reasoning that is capable of constructing an incontrovertible inference 2) a direct perception which brings about a cessation of false superimpositions ie. false concepts
unless youre going to reach the 4th jhana any time soon (noone is), a buddhist has to rely utterly on good study and lesser direct perceptions of the mind to build their own personal case for rebirth.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Aloka »

5heaps wrote: hes not talking about this thread
If that's a reference to me, 5heaps, I'm a "she" not a "he", thanks.

:)
Zakattack
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:07 am

Re: the great rebirth debate

Post by Zakattack »

5heaps wrote:this nonsense about the mind being conditioned by the brain etc is completely meaningless.
brain injury can result in loss of mental faculties, including consciousness. physical medicine can render the mind unconsciousness
5heaps wrote:...does not establish that the brain produced the mind.
brain injury can result in loss of mental faculties, including consciousness. physical medicine can render the mind unconsciousness
5heaps wrote:the experience of a colour, a sound, etc, is nonphysical. you cannot break them with a hammer or physically obstruct them with a particle..
colour can be bleached using bleach. sounds can be broken with silencing the source, such as destroying the brain of a frog or removing its physical vocal chords
5heaps wrote:since the mind is a primary factor of existence just as energy is

there is great energy in the sun. energy is the primary factor of the sun's existence, just as energy is a primary factor in a nuclear explosion or mechanical engine combustion. mind is not a primary factor in the existence of these things
5heaps wrote:it is contradictory to say that something exists yet a mind does not

many things have existed before being 'discovered by mind'. America did not exist to Europeans before Columbus discovered it by mind. in psychology, there is a basic experiment performed on children of a certain age about the perception of 'object permanence'. here, an object is shown to a child. then the object is hidden by a cloth. at a certain age, the child does not understand the object exists under the cloth when the object is not in its field of consciousness. at a later age, the child will regard the object to continue to exist despite being out of its consciousness & the child will lift the cloth to uncover the object. (enlightenment is like this, when the cloth of the five hindrance is lifted, to perceived the inherently existent true nature of things)
5heaps wrote:just as it is contradictory to say that something exists and yet energy does not exist.

where in the scriptures does Buddha equate mind with energy? when the living cessation of mind is described, the scriptures say:
In the case of the one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily fabrications [breathing in & out] have ceased & subsided, his verbal fabrications ... his mental fabrications have ceased & subsided, his vitality is exhausted, his heat subsided, & his faculties are scattered.

But in the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, his bodily fabrications have ceased & subsided, his verbal fabrications ... his mental fabrications have ceased & subsided, his vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not subsided, & his [sense organ] faculties are exceptionally clear. This is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
5heaps wrote:since mind is a functioning nonphysical thing, its activity is dictated primarily by mental factors such as kammas which move the mind, as well as former moments of mind which act as the material cause for another moment of mind, the same way clay acts as a material cause for a clay pot.
when the physical body of a human being is old & decaying, is there evidence the former mental tendencies (kammas) remain? for example, does an old man, with frail physical body, on his death bed, have a mind that still has the same sexual drive of his youth? does a small child, before the physical & hormonal changes of puberty, have the sexual drives as a teenager (and the associated emotions of vanity, frustration, anger, etc)?

:alien:
Post Reply