Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by tiltbillings »

alan wrote:That is a reply, not an answer.
That is a question that goes directly to the OP and to your proclaimation, which gives rise to the question: Have you carefully read through any of Dr Stevenson's research?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by alan »

Have you? If so, please tell.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by tiltbillings »

alan wrote:Have you? If so, please tell.
The question is direct to you and your proclaimation:
Alan wrote:Can children remember their past lives? I say no.
If you have not carefully read any of Stevenson's research, your dismissal of it holds no water.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by alan »

But I could say the same thing to you. Have you read him, and if so, what proves his assertions?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by tiltbillings »

alan wrote:But I could say the same thing to you.
You can but you would be inaccurate.
Have you read him, and if so, what proves his assertions?
Yes, and you are doing your best to avoid answering the question put to you by trying to counter my question with your question. Answer the question that was put to you first.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by retrofuturist »

Image

In chess and some other abstract strategy games, the threefold repetition rule (also known as repetition of position) states that a player can claim a draw if the same position occurs three times, or will occur after their next move, with the same player to move. The repeated positions need not occur in succession. The idea behind the rule is that if the position is repeated three times, no progress is being made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by alan »

I don't get you, tilt. Sometimes you seem smart. But other times you seem to pursue arguments for no good reason. Why do you do that?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Image

In chess and some other abstract strategy games, the threefold repetition rule (also known as repetition of position) states that a player can claim a draw if the same position occurs three times, or will occur after their next move, with the same player to move. The repeated positions need not occur in succession. The idea behind the rule is that if the position is repeated three times, no progress is being made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So, rather than actually engage the game, one can do a two-step side-step to avoid a loss, it gets called a draw. Fortunately there is no such rule in debate.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
DarwidHalim
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by DarwidHalim »

Hahaha. A bit funny this debate.

I read some of Ian Stevenson case study, he has a case where the child clearly remember his past lives. He trace it back to see whether the child story is same or not.

If you go to YouTube, there are also so many cases you can see the child remember their past lives.

If you have open mind and not sectarian, I recommend you to see this documentary movie called "unmistaken child". This real documentary is available in YouTube. Please search for it.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by PeterB »

Ah yes.....however having an open mind can cut one of several ways.
The statement " having an open mind means that you will respond to data in the same way as me " is at best dubious.
I was once a rebirth literalist. A position I maintained for decades. Now I am open minded.
User avatar
Alexei
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:51 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by Alexei »

cooran wrote:Scientific Proof of Reincarnation - Dr. Ian Stevenson's Life Work
As far as I know Dr. Stevenson never asserted that he had proof of reincarnation. Even in this same interview:
  • Omni: In your new book you speak reprovingly of people easily persuaded by your evidence. Is your position that reincarnation can never really be demonstrated?

    Stevenson: I don't think I rebuke anybody for being convinced by the evidence. All I say is that maybe they shouldn't believe on the basis of what's in that particular book, because the detailed case reports are in my other books. Essentially I say that the idea of reincarnation permits but doesn't compel belief. All the cases I've investigated so far have shortcomings. Even taken together, they do not offer anything like proof. But as the body of evidence accumulates, it's more likely that more and more people will see its relevance.
I just want to be honest. Sometimes he hadn't even a proper translators.
Sacha G
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 7:16 pm
Location: France

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by Sacha G »

Hi Peter
Can I ask you (sincerely), what made you change your mind?
To me it's all the more curious, as I started a sceptic, now I'm a "believer" (if one wants to call me so).
Sacha
Pali and Theravada texts:
http://dhamma.webnode.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by PeterB »

I dont know that I can point to any particular point in time Sacha. After , as I said , several decades of accepting the idea of post mortem Rebirth literally it just became less relevant. And at the same time I became more sensitive to the need of some others to insist on it. It clearly for some was an emotional need. A badge of belonging. A shibboleth. A means of separating sheep from goats.
Meanwhile the Buddhist teachers that I admired most like Ajahn Sumedho and Ajahn Munindo refused to be drawn on the issue at all either way.
Eventually I simply placed it on the back burner. ( and I mean that. I didnt have an emotional rejection thereof )
I then became more interested in supporting those who are drawn to Buddhist practice but do not identify with what is a matter of speculative belief.
I dont think anyone on DW whose opinion I would trust KNOWS the truth of the issue.
Last edited by PeterB on Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sacha G
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 7:16 pm
Location: France

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by Sacha G »

Well
Of course, one cannot say if it's 100% true or 0%.
However, between the 2, there are possibilities.
If you're above 50% of probability, you can say, you tend to believe it. If it's below 50%, you can say you tend not to believe it. For me it's above, so I say, "i believe it", which doesn't mean I'm sure of it.
I don't think anyone is precisely on 50%, though I suppose one can be some days above and some days below.
;)
Pali and Theravada texts:
http://dhamma.webnode.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Ian Stevenson, Rebirth, and the Suttas

Post by PeterB »

If it could be shown to be 100% true. Or 100% untrue it would make no difference at all to my practice.
Which is I think what lies behind the refusal of those Ajahns to comment directly on the issue...they think that the vital thing is the practice and that the rest can wait.
Post Reply