You seem to have very good input on life, i have a question tho, there is no such thing as complete peace right? I mean where theirs good theirs also bad, one must never destroy the other. It will always be like this, so how could one achieve true divinity, would that be to have your two sides equal, being good and evil?
There has been a lot of evidence accumulating for reincarnation - from the late Dr. Stevenson, from Dr. Jim B Tucker, from Satwant Pasricha in India and from others around the world - through children's past life memories which are verified by family members and others. It may not be hard evidence, but it's close to it.
@xander7ful Stevenson's work constitutes some of the best evidence *against* reincarnation, since if his "best cases" are the best evidence there is, then the evidence is laughable. It's not even close to being hard evidence.
If a child was born with the ability to speak, say, complex, advanced German, permanently (ie, not just fleetingly), despite that they had never heard German ever before, then that might be evidence of *something*, but the kind of evidence that people offer is a joke.
@KevinSolway You have not read about Dr. Stevenson's work carefully enough. When people asked him if he believed firmly in reincarnation, he would say NO. He was aware that his work was laying the groundwork to prove reincarnation, but wasn't hard, scientific evidence.
@xander7ful If reincarnation were true then it would be obvious to everyone. The fact that people have to go to great pains to show even the possibility of the slightest hint of an effect, means to me that it isn't true.
@lookatmepleasesir I am not the same person for two consecutive moments. I don't experience the consequences of what I did five minutes ago.
Shantideva says, "It is a mistaken conception to think that I will experience the suffering of my next life, since it is another person who dies, and another who will be reborn."
@KevinSolway you can experience the consequences of what you did five minutes ago, or fifty minutes ago, two days ago or two years ago. You aren't the same person for two consecutive moments, but there is a transmission of character from moment to moment. Obviously, we experience our own suffering over the suffering of our victims. We can have empathy for a victim of our wrong doing, and we can suffer remorse, but we don't experience their suffering.
@lookatmepleasesir I experience the consequences of what someone did five minutes ago, but that person was not me. And that person of five minutes ago doesn't experience the suffering or happiness they cause me.
@KevinSolway Also, when Buddha talked about one candle lighting another, I'm fairly sure he mentioned each candle as going out as it lights the next wick.
@lookatmepleasesir Yes, but in the real world one candle can light many other candles, and one event has many, simultaneous effects. Cause and effect doesn't work in a narrow, linear manner. It is a complex, infinitely branched web.
@KevinSolway but what if I have a candle that is just about to burn out, and a row of unlit candles, and I use the candle right before it will burn out to light the next candle, and then do the same thing with the next candle, and so on? Is that linear cause and effect?
No it's not, because the candleflame has many more effects than simply lighting the next candle. For example, the flame consumes oxygen, which denies life to other organisms, and produces heat, which kills organisms, and consumes candlewax, which costs someone time and money, and produces light for reading, etc. The countless different effects of a candleflame are its future lives, and they are in countless different forms.
@KevinSolway The cause of each flame is the preceeding one which lights the wick of it's candle. Candlesflames aren't living things, they don't have lives, as that requires an appropriate body. But the closest thing a candleflame has to a body are the flame and the candle themselves. Events it causes like the death of organisms or the light used for reading don't have the continuos form of the candle and its flame. Even if, for arguments sake the candleflame has a life,
@lookatmepleasesir those events are not its future lives. You and me have lives because we have bodies which are pivotal in producing our sense of self and our experience of life. The events which happen outside the phenomena which make up our self and our lives, are not our future lives, even if we caused them.
@lookatmepleasesir Yet a candle flame need not be lit by another candle flame, or a flame of any other kind, but can be lit by some other means. The "body" of the candleflame is the candle, just as the body of our consciousness is the body. In both cases the "body" is necessary. The "sense of self" is no big deal. It doesn't make us fundamentally different to anything else in nature. It is dependently arising, the same as all other things. There is no division between "our self" and outside.
@KevinSolway The candle flame in the analogy represents the mind or the bodily core/source of the mind, and the candle represents the body. Just as the wick is about to burn all the way out, the flame is transferred to another wick on another candle. The specific details of this analogy are meant to describe the rearising of the mind in another body after the death of the previous body. There is a one-to-one correspondence each candle and the next in the sequence.
@lookatmepleasesir (continued) The body has a life but the events such as heat burning up organisms in the air or light for reading are not lives. They may be the future or current karmic effects of the candleflame, and karma is the engine of rebirth, but they are not the future lives of the candleflame (and a literal candleflame has no life current, present or future). It is the living body which causes the 5 khandas and constitutes the self. The sense of self is a big-deal because according
@lookatmepleasesir (continued) according to the buddha the sense of self is the root of all evil and contrary to reality. There is no separation between our self and outside, but there is a division or a distinction, which is the self. The sense of self comes from the living body.
@lookatmepleasesir A candle doesn't light another candle at the moment of its death, though it might light many candles whilst it is still burning. That's exactly how it is with ourselves.
@KevinSolway in the analogy the flame is being used to light another wick just as it is going out. This is alluding to the final moment of consciousness, or the moment of consciousness which connects the previous life with the next. What candles normally do is beside the point, since its an analogy. Do you actually agree with the Buddha's analogy and trying to interpret it or do you disagree with it?
@lookatmepleasesir I agree with it only to the extent that *each moment* the candle is being extinguished and is re-lighting itself, *as well* as lighting other candles, and having countless other effects, which are all part of its web of cause and effect.
There is no narrow and isolated "stream of consciousness" that would be necessary for literal rebirth to be true. That's what this video was about.
@KevinSolway What do you mean more precisely by a narrow and isolated stream of consciousness. Do you agree that we are each a stream of consciousness in just one life time?
@lookatmepleasesir "Do you agree that we are each a stream of consciousness"
Since your consciousness can affect and change my consciousness, and since my consciousness can affect and change your consciousness, it means that our consciousnesses are not separate, but are linked by cause and effect. Cause and effect is like a branched web rather than a narrow channel.
@KevinSolway are consciousnesses are not separate and are linked by cause and effect, but saying we aren't streams of consciousness because we are interconnected and effect the world and each other is like saying that there are no streams because streams have effects that branch out into the ecosystem.
@lookatmepleasesir It's okay to speak of "streams" of consciousness, so long as we keep in mind that these "streams" split up into countless other streams. One stream can turn into a thousand streams. Buddhists don't take this reality into account.
@KevinSolway I experience my memories, senses, thoughts, and other conscious experiences, never the experiences of others. How another person's consciousness effects mine depends on my conditioning.
The important thing to understand is that streams of cause and effect split up into multiple streams. It doesn't matter what you posit to exist, whether it be an "I" or whatever else. Even when your "I" is no longer generated - when it is dead - its effects will continue.
@KevinSolway I'm positing the existence of the human body and brain, with its conditions, constraints and limitations. And even though streams of cause and effect split up into multiple streams, that doesn't mean there is no linear cause and effect.
The candle anology, people left some info out even I left it out ttime to time the crucial part. He says you take one candle and you lid the other one then blow the old one out. Then you take that one and lid the other candle and then blow that one out too. The elements of the original flame remain but it lives depending on a completely new candle, new condition.
If you look at the anology of the candle and put it into real life situation. If you could remember all your dreams in one night. You will see that in each dream you play different role. One dream you might be a doctor, next a father, husband/wife etc.. If you wake up and ask yourself, "who Am I"? you will see that you are all of them but at the same time you are none of them. In multiple life time consciousness observes and if consciousness ask who am I? I'm all of them and none of them.
It is clear that we could remember many life time but only things that impact our life in such that it created footprints in the consciousness. The problem here is that the imformation is not reliable from my personal experince. This is why many people don't wat to admit that they could remember. Especially from multiple lives. Kind of like looking at a old faded photograph not really sure what's going on in the picture but you could tell that something is there, some kind of activities.
Karma doesn't determine who we going to be on our next life time, Karma transcending actions not all but the big impact one from one life to another. It doesn't determine whether we're going to be an animals or human being. Example is if you killed people, when you go to sleep in your dreams more or likely you will dream about killing too. So Karma have this kind of impact to the mind and consciousness. Karma transcend from one state of mind to another, from life time after another.
I don't know why people keep using the term reincarnation or rebirth. Again The Buddha taught Anatta, Not self. Reincarnation suggest that after one die one still continue to exist. The buddha said may not so. Rebirth suggest that if you are humen and a man then forever you will stay that way. The Buddha said may not be so. The Buddha taught that everything we consider who we are is not self.
The body is not self, the mind is not self, the consciousness is not self, the spirit is not self. The self only came into existing because of the interdepending a lot of thing. A fist only exist because of fingers folding and clinging together. Once all the fingers unfold the fist no longer came into existing. The self came into existing like the fist . The Buddha taught that there's an awareness call consciousness but the consciousness have no indentification it is selfless, so it is not self.
I was hoping that people might get from the video that there is a way to interpret the language of reincarnation that is much more useful and meaningful than the traditional way.
You might want to look to the right of the screen and think about how those people have lived through their experiences and you have only dreamed up your own.Intelligent minds do have their limits it seems.Speculation is a lot of talk to cover predudice,you know it,I know it.Let people live their own lives even the ones who believe in Santa....What is the your point of attacking buddhist?
@KevinSolway People are infected by social conditioning nothing else,most human delution takes refuge in the shadows of life in a self created belief system geared towards getting them what they want,but this delution has its limits that can only be learned through self awareness.How this fact is taught isn't as important as awareness happening in ones life,instead of being led around as a victim of circumstances.
When people say morality it reminds me of the ten commandments for some reason.
@QuestWithinLife All delusions ultimately have their causes in the environment. Delusion and ignorance are not inherent. If that's what you're saying, then I agree.
@KevinSolway If what we do is put together ideas in ways that are imperfect to the cause of self-created awareness there is no growth in real maturity.Maturity is a cultural process as well & even if many buddhist have limitations to analitical abilities coveted by modern thinkers life still imparts root lessons in & by reality as a process of inherent evolution or informational causes.
Beliefs are a process of information not yet realized,so any religious believer can't be inlightened.
@KevinSolway Belief is the crown of delusion&ignorance,caused by ego attachments,based in the fantacies caused by conditioning.Piercing the vale of all projected beliefs is the key to true knowledge,not regurgitated information for egotistical satisfaction no matter the speed or accuracy its delivered.
Also from my understanding reincarnation has been proven by many witnesses with credible testimony.If this standered is exceptible in a court of law there is enough reason for consideration.
I wanted point something out about reincarnation proof.There is plenty of evidence here on you tube of children and other people who know a great deal about past lives and remember things that have happened to them not to mention names,dates situations ect. I know what your saying is true in about being reborn every moment but the moment after death would be the next moment for the one who dies right?If a death of a body is a occurance but consciouness is a continuum reincarnation is possible.
@lookatmepleasesir It doesn't mean that the traditional Buddhist interpretation of reincarnation is the correct interpretation. It is in fact the wrong interpretation. The traditional Buddhist belief in reincarnation is also a demonstrably false belief in its own right.
@lookatmepleasesir The Buddha didn't teach the traditional interpretation. The traditional interpretation is an *interpretation* of what some people think the Buddha taught.
I am told that the Chinese don't even have the problem of having to interpret these teachings, since in their older canon the teachings on reincarnation don't even occur.
@KevinSolway do you have direct quotes from the canon on rebirth? The chinese as far as I am aware practice both mahayana and theravada. Theravada is the tradition which normally appeals to materialist, scientistic westerners, but I'm pretty sure this is the tradition that has the traditional interpretation of rebirth. Mahayana doesn't neccessarily deny literal rebirth after death, but demphasizes it.
@lookatmepleasesir I'm told that in the Chinese canon those quotes do not exist. Even in Theravada there are famous teachers who reject reincarnation - most famously, Buddhadasa from Thailand.
He interprets the rebirth doctrine *psychologically*. That is, rebirth as an fox, for example, means that a person becomes more cunning. Rebirth in hell means that a person develops a mind that suffers greatly. To him "birth" means the birth of false "I", and has nothing to do with physical birth.
Hell is a vile, abusive, disgusting concept. God buys love & loyalty with torture? A Gandhi, Teresa, Mandela would never think of torturing their enemies, whereas a Saddam, Hitler, Stalin would. This is the company that God keeps? Karma & Rebirth is the better, non-violent way. You are not punished, nor are you simply forgiven because you groveled enough. The most important aspect of Karma is that you are held accountable for your actions, you are reborn, given another chance to make amends.
In fact Teresa thought that suffering on earth was a good thing, and didn't believe in doing much to alleviate it.
See "Hell's Angel": v=9WQ0i3nCx60
The important thing about karma is not that "you" are held accountable for your actions, but that there are consequences for your actions. "You" are an illusion.
Comment on the mother doesn't make sense - she is for suffering but is helping those who are?
Also if "I" am accountable for my actions, how am "I" an illusion? Please when u read, reflect on it, does it make sense? Don't just believe something blindly.
All it took was one person - Mahatma Gandhi, to have a profound efffect on Billions of people.
I think that Teresa did not want people to suffer terribly, but she didn't mind if they suffered moderately. She wanted for others what she wanted for herself.
You are not accountable for your actions because you are not the cause of your actions, and will not experience the consequences of them.
Shantideva once said, "It is a mistaken notion that I will experience any future lives, since it is another person who dies, and another who is reborn."
That's real nice - would u like to release all criminals currently in jail since they are not the cause of their actions? I assume u have never been a victim - try imagining your kid being raped or beaten then come back & tell me if u still think this way.
Not sure who Shantideva is & i don't think he got what rebirth is all about. The body is diff, the person is diff, but the SOUL is the same - it has simply changed bodies.
We don't put people in jail because they are the cause of their actions. We do so in an attempt to modify their behaviour, and to get them off the streets, and to act as a deterrent to others.
There is not "soul". That is the point of Buddhism.
@KevinSolway "Their behaviour"? How is that? How can they take responsibility for "their behaviour" while u tell them it's not "their actions"?
If u have been paying attention with all the things that are going on in this world - God is clearly not going to interfere - it is upto us to make this a world a heaven or a hell. Just one man like Gandhi is enough to make a great change - but first we must take responsibility for our actions. Please don't live in a fairy tale world.
We call it "their behaviour" because they are doing things - even though they aren't the cause of what they do. Just like a computer does things.
"Taking responsibiliity" can realistically only mean acknowledging the causes and consequences, and acknowledging that one is a cause of whatever it has been determined that one will be a cause of.
@KevinSolway A computer can't do anything by itself - it's just a dumb machine - anything happens it is not responsible - that's the difference between people & machines. If i take a gun & shoot people, they won't put the gun in jain, they will jail me!
This conversation has become a bit silly - we are talking about things that should be common knowledge - u keep nitpicking & coming up with wierd values.
u are consistent - Rebirth is teaching us to be accountable for our actions - i guess this Shantideva guy is big on fobbing off responsibility, so doesn't want to believe in rebirth.
I like taking responsibility for my actions, When i got bad marks in school, i took responsibility, worked harder & improved. If I don't do that, i get the same marks. The world is changed by people who take responsibility, cowards usually hate responsibility.
Why don't we get out of the christian concept of being punished, shouldn't even a murderer get a chance in his next life to make it better and attain Nirvana, isn't that why he is reborn?
@TheBuddhaTv: you are right - the christian concept rose out of primitive times. In those days the only effective deterrent was a violent one - cutting off hands, stoning people to death etc. They just imposed these ideas upon their concept of God.
Karma & Rebirth is the non-violent way - you are not being punished, but you don't get to get away with it either. You are given another chance to make amends, you can't just beg & grovel you way out
I believe that the candle simile meant that a candle which was on its last flame could ignite another and so on. Also, the candle flame simile was used to illustrate the miracle of teaching transmissions, the flame being able to light (transmit to) many other candles. The same yet different simultaneously. Illustrating the need to avoid extreme opposite views of black or white, rebirth or no-rebirth, good or evil and so on.
matreyia, every single moment that a candle is alight is its "last flame". But once the flame is extinguished, it can no longer light any other candles.
In this case Kevin, the extinguished flame equals Nirvana. Whereas a dying flame may still be able to light another. Where in life is there an absolute "either/or"? You talk as if there is only one possibly situation in regards to the flame(s). Naturally, there can be a last flame which becomes extinguished - in which case as you say, no rebirth can occure. But there are also cases where one desires to keep the light from going out, so one acts to light another. This is Tanha or thirst.
The extinguished flame is just an extinguished flame. Just as with the candle, we pass-on our karmic seeds while we are alive, but cease to do so once we are dead. This is what the majority of Buddhists are failing to understand - including the teachers.
Yes Kevin, the relative "we" makes no more actions when dead. But the ingredients which were once called "we" must not perish, rather change states, perhaps one day will be part of another "we" which is not the same as the original, but must live in the new world which the original "we" contributed to.
Though no memory may occur and no apparent connection is seen, yet there exists an inextricable relationship between current organisms and actions of past organisms.
matreyia, take a candle flame for example, which is extinguished. The ingredients which went into making the flame, such as the wax, do not perish, but will reappear in some form or other. Lots of bits of left-over wax from dead candles may be remoulded into a new candle, or maybe not. They may just disintegrate into the soil. It's the same with ourselves.
Why should I be afraid? I've fulfil my religious duties, helping others while helping myself to refrain from evil. I've done my part and very happy that I read messages that I have help others to overcome their problems.
I've done what you're doing now due to my ignorant in the past. Been there, done that. . The price is heavy and I'm still licking my wound!
If one does not recall rebirth now, it may happen later. It does not mean one is stuck forever
Can we remember what exactly we did on this same day last year? The chances are, few can remember. Does that mean this day did not exist before. Even when we're asked about what we ate the day before, we might not remember. The same thing goes for rebirth.
Why are we so afraid of ghost, dying and hell? We've not been there or seen that before. It's all our past feeling that brought back the memories
impermanentoo, just because we can't remember any past lives doesn't mean that we may one day remember them. You are only speculating. You *personally* may be afraid of ghosts, and of dying, and of hell, but you are only projecting your own fears onto others.
What is so strange or unusual about dying? You just walk back out the same door you came in. Only when you came in, you had no complaints about where youd just come from.
Buddhism is about The Power of truth. I did not make that statement. It was Buddha who kept repeating that - in order to realised the truth, one has to be pure in speech, thought and actions.
Buddhism is already tested and proven. Hence, the arahat. The best proof. So long as we are not arahat, we are all regarded as impure, according to Buddha. We're regarded as pure only when we attain enligtenment. That's why we are not perfect yet.
Dalai Lama does not represents all the Buddhists. Find out from those Buddhists who can remember their past lives. Chances are, they won't tell you. Publicity is the hindrance to one's enlightenment.
One can remember past life only if the mind is pure.
Rebirth is proven by arahat who attained enlighten after Buddha had enlighten.
There's a good reason that people don't admit to remembering their past lives - because they will be proven to be liars.
So you are saying that either the Dalai lama has as very impure mind (since he can't remember anything from any past life) or that he is *lying* that he can't remember his past lives. I hope you realize what the consequences of your judgements are.
Dalai Lama said that he doesnt remember his past life NOW but he said that he used to remember it when he was younger. He said that now it is hard for him to remember what happened last week. This must be what you heard.
As far as I knew, the idea of reincarnation is that the karma (collective experience, intent and action) does not determine one's next life, but rather creates a new life in itself.
the conscious person or the idea of self (atma/n) does not exist and essentially upon death, the person ceases to exist, everything that could be considered "you" is gone.
The candle analogy is probably the best example, it was the way It was explained to me.
"Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being shared."
-Buddha-
While the Dalai Lama is a very hard working representative of peace, modern buddhism in general seems to have lost the concepts of cause and effect in the present and not just the future "lives", which was a major component of Buddha's teachings, we are as much our experiences as our actions.
Yes, universalJok3r, I think you have it about right. That which "is" creates a new "being". But this is happening *all the time*, and not just at the moment of physical death. Also, this process isn't limited to any particular physical body. For example, a teacher is reborn in the student, in the same way as a candle can be used to light another. But this simple and beautiful truth isn't satisfying to the vast majority of Buddhists, who grasp at a self which they want to persist.
For some reason this kind of thinking doesn't sit well with most western minds, probably because we are so used to the judeo-christian idea of the soul, but even buddha himself said that belief in an eternal, immutable self is the most destructive concept in life.
The concept of atma/n is essentially what buddha set out to combat, its one of the chief causes of suffering, wanting to just exist forever in one state than to just exist.
You'll find that dislike of reality is universal, and is not something peculiar to western minds. Unfortunately, that which the Buddha taught, and that which Buddhists believe, are two entirely different things. It's the same with Christianity, which has no relationship at all with the teachings of Jesus.
Reincarnation? Then to who are people praying for on the tombstone? I do not believe so. Reincarnation can not even be proven, but to only have faith in.
Sorry, but your story about the torturer immediately becoming his victim doesn't make sense. I'm not offended because I'm not a victim, but you might want consider whether your remarks are offensive. Torturers - Donald Rumsfeld for instance - get away with it, and - Donald Rumsfeld again - exhibit little remorse.
One *always* finds continuance in one's effects. This is simply a fact of life, and is not a theory or an opinion. If a person doesn't identify with their own effects, then they don't know who they are. They are simply deluded. Hitler may have thought that he was escaping something by committing suicide, but he was deluding himself. He didn't know who he was.
If we understand the Buddha, we understand the Buddha taught on two levels, the mundane and the supramundane. This the Buddha taught in places such as the Maha-cattarisaka Sutta and Kalama Sutta.
A true level and a false level? So why bother teaching the false level if it's only going to cause mass confusion, cause people to stagnate in a false understanding, and drive millions of people away from the Dharma?
IMO, Dharma rarely draws millions of people to itself. It is the opposite. Those who perceive dukkha clearly are drawn to the Dhamma. Those who are motivated to search will find the Dhamma. Buddha taught two levels. He was wiser than us (although I personally could never teach the first level).
Sorry, I don't accept that a wise person teaches things that aren't true. To do so creates terribly bad karma, which can be seen around us. Either the Buddha wasn't wise, or his teachings have been misunderstood.
This is because (respectfully) you do not understand human beings deeply enough and do not understand a Buddha enough. The teaching of reincarnation has moral benefits. Moral benefits means people to not commit "self-harm". More many people, this is the optimal teaching for them.
Hi ksol000 I find it very interesting not because of what u think but in a way I do sway towards the reincarnation as explained in this video. I guess I'm buddhist well my parents are I did wonder off though it felt dogmatic until I came to read about it. Funny thing is the more I read about it the more it didn't matter to call myself a buddhist just by being buddhist will not get you anywhere its your practice I suppose. In a way my redescovery of the teaching helped me to look pass the rituals
Actually my parents coming from Lanka believe in Therevada. There is a strong Hindu element though belief in devas but perhaps less ritualistic than Tibetan(Tantric Buddhism). There were as many as 200 schools of Buddhism within India alone but I did come across a very interesting stone carving of rebirth oneday in a Lankan temple it seems to afirm what this speaker is saying. Rebirth if you like is a state of consciences that manifest itself when certian action is taken
The stone carving or dharmic wheel was quite simple. First the idea/thought comes to our mind, we seek this thought, fuel it by our desires(Lankan translation fuel by wrong views is the more correct translation, we begin to crave, finally this thought or action manifests itself, through us. We however can master this and through practice stop the rebirth. If you have opportunity take yourself to a Thervada temple you might strike lucky and find the wheel of rebirth near the entrance usually.
Finally i may add that the reincarnation and rebirth in Sri Lankan theravadha have different meanings it may be the same with Thai. Reincarnation itself means to be born into another life rebirth from what I taught is to do with mind. Something a little interesting when a disciple of the Buddha asked Buddha if gods and births where we are born into higher realms exist the Buddha maintained silence. From my understanding we should see to it ourselves not always rely on our teacher for the answer.
Yes I always held the belief that reincarnation, as is taught by the Buddhists has no grounding in logic whatsoever, nor does any evidence back up claims of reincarnation. Even if reincarnation were to exist and lets say I am a reincarnation of another soul, what is the point if I can't even remember my past life to use the lessons if any I learned in it.
I think this video is easier to grasp than previous ones because the narration was just a touch slower. A good thing :)
I agree that the Buddhist teaching that involves some sense of transmigration is silly, which is why they offer quite desperate "reasonings" to defend it. The Buddha actually taught what is sound and obvious - that we are reborn in every moment, a consequence of our preceding thought and action. It's what we think and do NOW that will determine who and what we are in the next 5 minutes. So, be mindful of yourself - NOW.
Here's the thing. If all conciousness is one, and the illusion is of separation as documented by 0 time lag on telepathy, and quantum physics version of non-locality, then it essentially means that conciousness is only separated like waves in an ocean. Hence, we are all the same and reincarnation does make sense, but the source is ONE.
@nriab23 you don't learn lessons from the memory of past lives, you learn lessons from the conditions of this life. Buddha said if you want to know your past life, look at your present conditions
@sleeve318 Things like natural instincts are hardwired in us through our genes and the physical evolution of our species. In the case of natural instincts, they are not "lessons learned" but more a reflection of the fact that those people who weren't afraid of snakes and heights didn't live long enough to pass on their genes, and so their genetic line died out. They didn't necessarily learn anything.
@KevinSolway evolution and reincarnation goes hand in hand. reincarnation just means to be made into flesh again. every tissue on a dead being will eventually become living tissue again. passing down genetics coding is still passing down knowledge learned from our ancestors. a dead man who was bitten by a snake cannot pass down his genetic coding and therefore cannot pass on his hardwired instincts. he will not have babies who will then continue to mess with deadly snakes, lesson learned.
@sleeve318 "every tissue on a dead being will eventually become living tissue again."
What if the planet is vaporized? There is no guaranteed that dead tissue is recycled as living tissue. In any case one piece of dead tissue might go into the production of tissues for a thousand new beings, simultaneously. It's not as though one being becomes one being, which is what the monk in this video is teaching, and which most Buddhists believe.
@KevinSolway if and when the planet is vaporized, it will simply be reincarnated. matter does not get destroyed and will simply form something else. it will not be the same planet and it will have evolved into something else. but it will still exist.
@sleeve318 "if and when the planet is vaporized, it will simply be reincarnated."
It will be reincarnated as vapor. I can agree with you that far. But that's not what Buddhists believe - generally speaking. They don't believe that a person can be reborn as mere vapor, and may never again form a living being.
It *can* be the building blocks for life, or it can be the building blocks for something else entirely, and may never become life. Even if, after a trillion years of floating in space, it becomes part of another living organism, there won't be any lingering memories from the past lives when it was previously a part of a living organism. So that's not what the Buddhist teachers have in mind when they are teaching reincarnation.
@KevinSolway its irrelevant what the Buddhist teachers have in mind. the main point of their teaching is that everything works in cycles vs the mainstream view that everything is linear. we dont go to an alternate dimension where some creator has made an eternal paradise. no we just become another life form of some kind. whether or not we transfer to a single organism or a billion, it doesnt matter, we are all one and the same anyways.
Yes, but the language of rebirth is for talking about the way karma works. For example, if you do X you will experience a lower birth (eg, in hell), and if you do Y you will experience a higher birth (eg, "human"). The final goal, ideally, being to escape the cycle of ignorance and karma.
Yes, a compatriot has tried his hand. The accent, if there is one, is from the Channel Islands. As to the video's content: a proper understanding of reincarnation (rebirth) is important, if for no other reason than it causes us to more closely consider the consequences of our actions in life - and that the karma we sow isn't simply our own.
This has been flagged as spam show
While Buddha was alive, why did Buddha have experience after death as reincarnation, karma, nirvana. Those were liar, make up.
MrWrongevolution 1 month ago
tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit
spuzvica999 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You seem to have very good input on life, i have a question tho, there is no such thing as complete peace right? I mean where theirs good theirs also bad, one must never destroy the other. It will always be like this, so how could one achieve true divinity, would that be to have your two sides equal, being good and evil?
8254988 2 months ago
There has been a lot of evidence accumulating for reincarnation - from the late Dr. Stevenson, from Dr. Jim B Tucker, from Satwant Pasricha in India and from others around the world - through children's past life memories which are verified by family members and others. It may not be hard evidence, but it's close to it.
xander7ful 2 months ago
@xander7ful Stevenson's work constitutes some of the best evidence *against* reincarnation, since if his "best cases" are the best evidence there is, then the evidence is laughable. It's not even close to being hard evidence.
If a child was born with the ability to speak, say, complex, advanced German, permanently (ie, not just fleetingly), despite that they had never heard German ever before, then that might be evidence of *something*, but the kind of evidence that people offer is a joke.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway You have not read about Dr. Stevenson's work carefully enough. When people asked him if he believed firmly in reincarnation, he would say NO. He was aware that his work was laying the groundwork to prove reincarnation, but wasn't hard, scientific evidence.
xander7ful 2 months ago
@xander7ful If reincarnation were true then it would be obvious to everyone. The fact that people have to go to great pains to show even the possibility of the slightest hint of an effect, means to me that it isn't true.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
The torturer is not reborn as his suffering victim because he doesn't experience the suffering of his victim.
lookatmepleasesir 4 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir I am not the same person for two consecutive moments. I don't experience the consequences of what I did five minutes ago.
Shantideva says, "It is a mistaken conception to think that I will experience the suffering of my next life, since it is another person who dies, and another who will be reborn."
KevinSolway 4 months ago
@KevinSolway you can experience the consequences of what you did five minutes ago, or fifty minutes ago, two days ago or two years ago. You aren't the same person for two consecutive moments, but there is a transmission of character from moment to moment. Obviously, we experience our own suffering over the suffering of our victims. We can have empathy for a victim of our wrong doing, and we can suffer remorse, but we don't experience their suffering.
lookatmepleasesir 4 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir I experience the consequences of what someone did five minutes ago, but that person was not me. And that person of five minutes ago doesn't experience the suffering or happiness they cause me.
KevinSolway 4 months ago
@KevinSolway Also, when Buddha talked about one candle lighting another, I'm fairly sure he mentioned each candle as going out as it lights the next wick.
lookatmepleasesir 4 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir Yes, but in the real world one candle can light many other candles, and one event has many, simultaneous effects. Cause and effect doesn't work in a narrow, linear manner. It is a complex, infinitely branched web.
KevinSolway 4 months ago
@KevinSolway but what if I have a candle that is just about to burn out, and a row of unlit candles, and I use the candle right before it will burn out to light the next candle, and then do the same thing with the next candle, and so on? Is that linear cause and effect?
lookatmepleasesir 4 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir "Is that linear cause and effect? "
No it's not, because the candleflame has many more effects than simply lighting the next candle. For example, the flame consumes oxygen, which denies life to other organisms, and produces heat, which kills organisms, and consumes candlewax, which costs someone time and money, and produces light for reading, etc. The countless different effects of a candleflame are its future lives, and they are in countless different forms.
KevinSolway 4 months ago
@KevinSolway The cause of each flame is the preceeding one which lights the wick of it's candle. Candlesflames aren't living things, they don't have lives, as that requires an appropriate body. But the closest thing a candleflame has to a body are the flame and the candle themselves. Events it causes like the death of organisms or the light used for reading don't have the continuos form of the candle and its flame. Even if, for arguments sake the candleflame has a life,
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir those events are not its future lives. You and me have lives because we have bodies which are pivotal in producing our sense of self and our experience of life. The events which happen outside the phenomena which make up our self and our lives, are not our future lives, even if we caused them.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir Yet a candle flame need not be lit by another candle flame, or a flame of any other kind, but can be lit by some other means. The "body" of the candleflame is the candle, just as the body of our consciousness is the body. In both cases the "body" is necessary. The "sense of self" is no big deal. It doesn't make us fundamentally different to anything else in nature. It is dependently arising, the same as all other things. There is no division between "our self" and outside.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway The candle flame in the analogy represents the mind or the bodily core/source of the mind, and the candle represents the body. Just as the wick is about to burn all the way out, the flame is transferred to another wick on another candle. The specific details of this analogy are meant to describe the rearising of the mind in another body after the death of the previous body. There is a one-to-one correspondence each candle and the next in the sequence.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir (continued) The body has a life but the events such as heat burning up organisms in the air or light for reading are not lives. They may be the future or current karmic effects of the candleflame, and karma is the engine of rebirth, but they are not the future lives of the candleflame (and a literal candleflame has no life current, present or future). It is the living body which causes the 5 khandas and constitutes the self. The sense of self is a big-deal because according
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir (continued) according to the buddha the sense of self is the root of all evil and contrary to reality. There is no separation between our self and outside, but there is a division or a distinction, which is the self. The sense of self comes from the living body.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir A candle doesn't light another candle at the moment of its death, though it might light many candles whilst it is still burning. That's exactly how it is with ourselves.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway in the analogy the flame is being used to light another wick just as it is going out. This is alluding to the final moment of consciousness, or the moment of consciousness which connects the previous life with the next. What candles normally do is beside the point, since its an analogy. Do you actually agree with the Buddha's analogy and trying to interpret it or do you disagree with it?
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir I agree with it only to the extent that *each moment* the candle is being extinguished and is re-lighting itself, *as well* as lighting other candles, and having countless other effects, which are all part of its web of cause and effect.
There is no narrow and isolated "stream of consciousness" that would be necessary for literal rebirth to be true. That's what this video was about.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway What do you mean more precisely by a narrow and isolated stream of consciousness. Do you agree that we are each a stream of consciousness in just one life time?
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir "Do you agree that we are each a stream of consciousness"
Since your consciousness can affect and change my consciousness, and since my consciousness can affect and change your consciousness, it means that our consciousnesses are not separate, but are linked by cause and effect. Cause and effect is like a branched web rather than a narrow channel.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway are consciousnesses are not separate and are linked by cause and effect, but saying we aren't streams of consciousness because we are interconnected and effect the world and each other is like saying that there are no streams because streams have effects that branch out into the ecosystem.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
@lookatmepleasesir It's okay to speak of "streams" of consciousness, so long as we keep in mind that these "streams" split up into countless other streams. One stream can turn into a thousand streams. Buddhists don't take this reality into account.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway I experience my memories, senses, thoughts, and other conscious experiences, never the experiences of others. How another person's consciousness effects mine depends on my conditioning.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
The important thing to understand is that streams of cause and effect split up into multiple streams. It doesn't matter what you posit to exist, whether it be an "I" or whatever else. Even when your "I" is no longer generated - when it is dead - its effects will continue.
KevinSolway 2 months ago
@KevinSolway I'm positing the existence of the human body and brain, with its conditions, constraints and limitations. And even though streams of cause and effect split up into multiple streams, that doesn't mean there is no linear cause and effect.
lookatmepleasesir 2 months ago
The candle anology, people left some info out even I left it out ttime to time the crucial part. He says you take one candle and you lid the other one then blow the old one out. Then you take that one and lid the other candle and then blow that one out too. The elements of the original flame remain but it lives depending on a completely new candle, new condition.
Opetlao 4 months ago
If you look at the anology of the candle and put it into real life situation. If you could remember all your dreams in one night. You will see that in each dream you play different role. One dream you might be a doctor, next a father, husband/wife etc.. If you wake up and ask yourself, "who Am I"? you will see that you are all of them but at the same time you are none of them. In multiple life time consciousness observes and if consciousness ask who am I? I'm all of them and none of them.
Opetlao 4 months ago
It is clear that we could remember many life time but only things that impact our life in such that it created footprints in the consciousness. The problem here is that the imformation is not reliable from my personal experince. This is why many people don't wat to admit that they could remember. Especially from multiple lives. Kind of like looking at a old faded photograph not really sure what's going on in the picture but you could tell that something is there, some kind of activities.
Opetlao 4 months ago
Karma doesn't determine who we going to be on our next life time, Karma transcending actions not all but the big impact one from one life to another. It doesn't determine whether we're going to be an animals or human being. Example is if you killed people, when you go to sleep in your dreams more or likely you will dream about killing too. So Karma have this kind of impact to the mind and consciousness. Karma transcend from one state of mind to another, from life time after another.
Opetlao 4 months ago
I don't know why people keep using the term reincarnation or rebirth. Again The Buddha taught Anatta, Not self. Reincarnation suggest that after one die one still continue to exist. The buddha said may not so. Rebirth suggest that if you are humen and a man then forever you will stay that way. The Buddha said may not be so. The Buddha taught that everything we consider who we are is not self.
Opetlao 4 months ago
The body is not self, the mind is not self, the consciousness is not self, the spirit is not self. The self only came into existing because of the interdepending a lot of thing. A fist only exist because of fingers folding and clinging together. Once all the fingers unfold the fist no longer came into existing. The self came into existing like the fist . The Buddha taught that there's an awareness call consciousness but the consciousness have no indentification it is selfless, so it is not self.
Opetlao 4 months ago
a descent vid. way more opinionated than i would like. but still retains some facts stolidly. i feel like i learned nothing.
TheSmokeydice 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheSmokeydice " i feel like i learned nothing."
I was hoping that people might get from the video that there is a way to interpret the language of reincarnation that is much more useful and meaningful than the traditional way.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
You might want to look to the right of the screen and think about how those people have lived through their experiences and you have only dreamed up your own.Intelligent minds do have their limits it seems.Speculation is a lot of talk to cover predudice,you know it,I know it.Let people live their own lives even the ones who believe in Santa....What is the your point of attacking buddhist?
QuestWithinLife 1 year ago
@QuestWithinLife It is the duty of all moral beings to point out harmful lies and help to prevent innocent people from being infected with them.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway People are infected by social conditioning nothing else,most human delution takes refuge in the shadows of life in a self created belief system geared towards getting them what they want,but this delution has its limits that can only be learned through self awareness.How this fact is taught isn't as important as awareness happening in ones life,instead of being led around as a victim of circumstances.
When people say morality it reminds me of the ten commandments for some reason.
QuestWithinLife 1 year ago
@QuestWithinLife All delusions ultimately have their causes in the environment. Delusion and ignorance are not inherent. If that's what you're saying, then I agree.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway If what we do is put together ideas in ways that are imperfect to the cause of self-created awareness there is no growth in real maturity.Maturity is a cultural process as well & even if many buddhist have limitations to analitical abilities coveted by modern thinkers life still imparts root lessons in & by reality as a process of inherent evolution or informational causes.
Beliefs are a process of information not yet realized,so any religious believer can't be inlightened.
QuestWithinLife 1 year ago
@KevinSolway Belief is the crown of delusion&ignorance,caused by ego attachments,based in the fantacies caused by conditioning.Piercing the vale of all projected beliefs is the key to true knowledge,not regurgitated information for egotistical satisfaction no matter the speed or accuracy its delivered.
Also from my understanding reincarnation has been proven by many witnesses with credible testimony.If this standered is exceptible in a court of law there is enough reason for consideration.
QuestWithinLife 1 year ago
I wanted point something out about reincarnation proof.There is plenty of evidence here on you tube of children and other people who know a great deal about past lives and remember things that have happened to them not to mention names,dates situations ect. I know what your saying is true in about being reborn every moment but the moment after death would be the next moment for the one who dies right?If a death of a body is a occurance but consciouness is a continuum reincarnation is possible.
QuestWithinLife 1 year ago
this is reinterpretation of buddhism for western materialists. There's nothing wrong with that, but rebirth is a part of buddhist teaching.
lookatmepleasesir 1 year ago
@lookatmepleasesir It doesn't mean that the traditional Buddhist interpretation of reincarnation is the correct interpretation. It is in fact the wrong interpretation. The traditional Buddhist belief in reincarnation is also a demonstrably false belief in its own right.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway so why did the Buddha teach the traditional interpretation? how is it demonstrably false?
lookatmepleasesir 1 year ago
@lookatmepleasesir The Buddha didn't teach the traditional interpretation. The traditional interpretation is an *interpretation* of what some people think the Buddha taught.
I am told that the Chinese don't even have the problem of having to interpret these teachings, since in their older canon the teachings on reincarnation don't even occur.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway do you have direct quotes from the canon on rebirth? The chinese as far as I am aware practice both mahayana and theravada. Theravada is the tradition which normally appeals to materialist, scientistic westerners, but I'm pretty sure this is the tradition that has the traditional interpretation of rebirth. Mahayana doesn't neccessarily deny literal rebirth after death, but demphasizes it.
lookatmepleasesir 1 year ago
@lookatmepleasesir I'm told that in the Chinese canon those quotes do not exist. Even in Theravada there are famous teachers who reject reincarnation - most famously, Buddhadasa from Thailand.
He interprets the rebirth doctrine *psychologically*. That is, rebirth as an fox, for example, means that a person becomes more cunning. Rebirth in hell means that a person develops a mind that suffers greatly. To him "birth" means the birth of false "I", and has nothing to do with physical birth.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway
Thanks for pointing that out about Buddhadasa.
shunyotube 10 months ago
Look at Nature, in any balanced ecosystem(not tainted by man) you can see Reincarnation at work.
Death supports Life, all lifeforms must feed on other lifeforms...
ffs have you not seen the Lion King???
townofclaybed 1 year ago
the actual answers are inside your own mind not from any youtube video
beneethetechnokid 2 years ago
Hell is a vile, abusive, disgusting concept. God buys love & loyalty with torture? A Gandhi, Teresa, Mandela would never think of torturing their enemies, whereas a Saddam, Hitler, Stalin would. This is the company that God keeps? Karma & Rebirth is the better, non-violent way. You are not punished, nor are you simply forgiven because you groveled enough. The most important aspect of Karma is that you are held accountable for your actions, you are reborn, given another chance to make amends.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago 2
@ramaraksha01
In fact Teresa thought that suffering on earth was a good thing, and didn't believe in doing much to alleviate it.
See "Hell's Angel": v=9WQ0i3nCx60
The important thing about karma is not that "you" are held accountable for your actions, but that there are consequences for your actions. "You" are an illusion.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Comment on the mother doesn't make sense - she is for suffering but is helping those who are?
Also if "I" am accountable for my actions, how am "I" an illusion? Please when u read, reflect on it, does it make sense? Don't just believe something blindly.
All it took was one person - Mahatma Gandhi, to have a profound efffect on Billions of people.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
I think that Teresa did not want people to suffer terribly, but she didn't mind if they suffered moderately. She wanted for others what she wanted for herself.
You are not accountable for your actions because you are not the cause of your actions, and will not experience the consequences of them.
Shantideva once said, "It is a mistaken notion that I will experience any future lives, since it is another person who dies, and another who is reborn."
KevinSolway 2 years ago
That's real nice - would u like to release all criminals currently in jail since they are not the cause of their actions? I assume u have never been a victim - try imagining your kid being raped or beaten then come back & tell me if u still think this way.
Not sure who Shantideva is & i don't think he got what rebirth is all about. The body is diff, the person is diff, but the SOUL is the same - it has simply changed bodies.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
@ramaraksha01
We don't put people in jail because they are the cause of their actions. We do so in an attempt to modify their behaviour, and to get them off the streets, and to act as a deterrent to others.
There is not "soul". That is the point of Buddhism.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
@KevinSolway "Their behaviour"? How is that? How can they take responsibility for "their behaviour" while u tell them it's not "their actions"?
If u have been paying attention with all the things that are going on in this world - God is clearly not going to interfere - it is upto us to make this a world a heaven or a hell. Just one man like Gandhi is enough to make a great change - but first we must take responsibility for our actions. Please don't live in a fairy tale world.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
@ramaraksha01
We call it "their behaviour" because they are doing things - even though they aren't the cause of what they do. Just like a computer does things.
"Taking responsibiliity" can realistically only mean acknowledging the causes and consequences, and acknowledging that one is a cause of whatever it has been determined that one will be a cause of.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
@KevinSolway A computer can't do anything by itself - it's just a dumb machine - anything happens it is not responsible - that's the difference between people & machines. If i take a gun & shoot people, they won't put the gun in jain, they will jail me!
This conversation has become a bit silly - we are talking about things that should be common knowledge - u keep nitpicking & coming up with wierd values.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
u are consistent - Rebirth is teaching us to be accountable for our actions - i guess this Shantideva guy is big on fobbing off responsibility, so doesn't want to believe in rebirth.
I like taking responsibility for my actions, When i got bad marks in school, i took responsibility, worked harder & improved. If I don't do that, i get the same marks. The world is changed by people who take responsibility, cowards usually hate responsibility.
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
@ramaraksha01
*Other people* experience the consequences of our actions, and that is why we should take responsibility.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Why don't we get out of the christian concept of being punished, shouldn't even a murderer get a chance in his next life to make it better and attain Nirvana, isn't that why he is reborn?
To get another chance?
TheBuddhaTv 2 years ago
Each moment is a "new life", and each moment we get a chance to make a better life.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
@TheBuddhaTv: you are right - the christian concept rose out of primitive times. In those days the only effective deterrent was a violent one - cutting off hands, stoning people to death etc. They just imposed these ideas upon their concept of God.
Karma & Rebirth is the non-violent way - you are not being punished, but you don't get to get away with it either. You are given another chance to make amends, you can't just beg & grovel you way out
ramaraksha01 2 years ago
I suggest following video is an extension
Five Conditions or Laws of Dhamma
youtube com
watch?v=TmvTSTcdyVA
fair7deal 2 years ago
I believe that the candle simile meant that a candle which was on its last flame could ignite another and so on. Also, the candle flame simile was used to illustrate the miracle of teaching transmissions, the flame being able to light (transmit to) many other candles. The same yet different simultaneously. Illustrating the need to avoid extreme opposite views of black or white, rebirth or no-rebirth, good or evil and so on.
matreyia 2 years ago 2
matreyia, every single moment that a candle is alight is its "last flame". But once the flame is extinguished, it can no longer light any other candles.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
In this case Kevin, the extinguished flame equals Nirvana. Whereas a dying flame may still be able to light another. Where in life is there an absolute "either/or"? You talk as if there is only one possibly situation in regards to the flame(s). Naturally, there can be a last flame which becomes extinguished - in which case as you say, no rebirth can occure. But there are also cases where one desires to keep the light from going out, so one acts to light another. This is Tanha or thirst.
matreyia 2 years ago 2
The extinguished flame is just an extinguished flame. Just as with the candle, we pass-on our karmic seeds while we are alive, but cease to do so once we are dead. This is what the majority of Buddhists are failing to understand - including the teachers.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Yes Kevin, the relative "we" makes no more actions when dead. But the ingredients which were once called "we" must not perish, rather change states, perhaps one day will be part of another "we" which is not the same as the original, but must live in the new world which the original "we" contributed to.
Though no memory may occur and no apparent connection is seen, yet there exists an inextricable relationship between current organisms and actions of past organisms.
matreyia 2 years ago
matreyia, take a candle flame for example, which is extinguished. The ingredients which went into making the flame, such as the wax, do not perish, but will reappear in some form or other. Lots of bits of left-over wax from dead candles may be remoulded into a new candle, or maybe not. They may just disintegrate into the soil. It's the same with ourselves.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Why should I be afraid? I've fulfil my religious duties, helping others while helping myself to refrain from evil. I've done my part and very happy that I read messages that I have help others to overcome their problems.
I've done what you're doing now due to my ignorant in the past. Been there, done that. . The price is heavy and I'm still licking my wound!
impermanentoo 2 years ago
If one does not recall rebirth now, it may happen later. It does not mean one is stuck forever
Can we remember what exactly we did on this same day last year? The chances are, few can remember. Does that mean this day did not exist before. Even when we're asked about what we ate the day before, we might not remember. The same thing goes for rebirth.
Why are we so afraid of ghost, dying and hell? We've not been there or seen that before. It's all our past feeling that brought back the memories
impermanentoo 2 years ago
impermanentoo, just because we can't remember any past lives doesn't mean that we may one day remember them. You are only speculating. You *personally* may be afraid of ghosts, and of dying, and of hell, but you are only projecting your own fears onto others.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
What is so strange or unusual about dying? You just walk back out the same door you came in. Only when you came in, you had no complaints about where youd just come from.
General George S. Patton
Frogstomp121 2 years ago
Buddhism is about The Power of truth. I did not make that statement. It was Buddha who kept repeating that - in order to realised the truth, one has to be pure in speech, thought and actions.
Buddhism is already tested and proven. Hence, the arahat. The best proof. So long as we are not arahat, we are all regarded as impure, according to Buddha. We're regarded as pure only when we attain enligtenment. That's why we are not perfect yet.
impermanentoo 2 years ago
Dalai Lama does not represents all the Buddhists. Find out from those Buddhists who can remember their past lives. Chances are, they won't tell you. Publicity is the hindrance to one's enlightenment.
One can remember past life only if the mind is pure.
Rebirth is proven by arahat who attained enlighten after Buddha had enlighten.
impermanentoo 2 years ago
There's a good reason that people don't admit to remembering their past lives - because they will be proven to be liars.
So you are saying that either the Dalai lama has as very impure mind (since he can't remember anything from any past life) or that he is *lying* that he can't remember his past lives. I hope you realize what the consequences of your judgements are.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Dalai Lama said that he doesnt remember his past life NOW but he said that he used to remember it when he was younger. He said that now it is hard for him to remember what happened last week. This must be what you heard.
druktube 2 years ago
Actually, he says that he can't remember ever having remembered any past lives - not even as a child.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
People *tell him* that he used to remember his past lives when he was a child, but in my opinion they can't be believed.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
As far as I knew, the idea of reincarnation is that the karma (collective experience, intent and action) does not determine one's next life, but rather creates a new life in itself.
the conscious person or the idea of self (atma/n) does not exist and essentially upon death, the person ceases to exist, everything that could be considered "you" is gone.
The candle analogy is probably the best example, it was the way It was explained to me.
universalJok3r 2 years ago
quite ironically though:
"Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being shared."
-Buddha-
While the Dalai Lama is a very hard working representative of peace, modern buddhism in general seems to have lost the concepts of cause and effect in the present and not just the future "lives", which was a major component of Buddha's teachings, we are as much our experiences as our actions.
universalJok3r 2 years ago
Yes, universalJok3r, I think you have it about right. That which "is" creates a new "being". But this is happening *all the time*, and not just at the moment of physical death. Also, this process isn't limited to any particular physical body. For example, a teacher is reborn in the student, in the same way as a candle can be used to light another. But this simple and beautiful truth isn't satisfying to the vast majority of Buddhists, who grasp at a self which they want to persist.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
For some reason this kind of thinking doesn't sit well with most western minds, probably because we are so used to the judeo-christian idea of the soul, but even buddha himself said that belief in an eternal, immutable self is the most destructive concept in life.
The concept of atma/n is essentially what buddha set out to combat, its one of the chief causes of suffering, wanting to just exist forever in one state than to just exist.
universalJok3r 2 years ago 2
You'll find that dislike of reality is universal, and is not something peculiar to western minds. Unfortunately, that which the Buddha taught, and that which Buddhists believe, are two entirely different things. It's the same with Christianity, which has no relationship at all with the teachings of Jesus.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Comment removed
regmisk 2 years ago
Reincarnation? Then to who are people praying for on the tombstone? I do not believe so. Reincarnation can not even be proven, but to only have faith in.
silent561 2 years ago
Comment removed
prajna8 2 years ago
Sorry, but your story about the torturer immediately becoming his victim doesn't make sense. I'm not offended because I'm not a victim, but you might want consider whether your remarks are offensive. Torturers - Donald Rumsfeld for instance - get away with it, and - Donald Rumsfeld again - exhibit little remorse.
Porejoe 3 years ago
One *always* finds continuance in one's effects. This is simply a fact of life, and is not a theory or an opinion. If a person doesn't identify with their own effects, then they don't know who they are. They are simply deluded. Hitler may have thought that he was escaping something by committing suicide, but he was deluding himself. He didn't know who he was.
ksol000 3 years ago
You guys are awesome my thoughts exactly.
Rybot9000 3 years ago
If we understand the Buddha, we understand the Buddha taught on two levels, the mundane and the supramundane. This the Buddha taught in places such as the Maha-cattarisaka Sutta and Kalama Sutta.
BarbarraBay 3 years ago
A true level and a false level? So why bother teaching the false level if it's only going to cause mass confusion, cause people to stagnate in a false understanding, and drive millions of people away from the Dharma?
ksol000 3 years ago
IMO, Dharma rarely draws millions of people to itself. It is the opposite. Those who perceive dukkha clearly are drawn to the Dhamma. Those who are motivated to search will find the Dhamma. Buddha taught two levels. He was wiser than us (although I personally could never teach the first level).
BarbarraBay 3 years ago
Sorry, I don't accept that a wise person teaches things that aren't true. To do so creates terribly bad karma, which can be seen around us. Either the Buddha wasn't wise, or his teachings have been misunderstood.
ksol000 3 years ago
This is because (respectfully) you do not understand human beings deeply enough and do not understand a Buddha enough. The teaching of reincarnation has moral benefits. Moral benefits means people to not commit "self-harm". More many people, this is the optimal teaching for them.
BarbarraBay 3 years ago
I don't buy it. Teaching people about cause and effect is enough, and doesn't stray from the truth.
ksol000 3 years ago
Have you ever considered discussing this matter on a Buddhist chat site, such as Buddha Chat.
Also, if you want to hear the views of fundamentalists, join E-Sangha.
BarbarraBay 3 years ago
I'm on Buddha Chat as "Wanderer", and have a topic going.
ksol000 3 years ago
I have noticed. Youself and Element.
BarbarraBay 3 years ago
Barbarra, do you identify yourself specifically as a Buddhist? I ask because you seem to exhibit some religious tendencies in your mode of argument.
Naturyl 3 years ago
Hi ksol000 I find it very interesting not because of what u think but in a way I do sway towards the reincarnation as explained in this video. I guess I'm buddhist well my parents are I did wonder off though it felt dogmatic until I came to read about it. Funny thing is the more I read about it the more it didn't matter to call myself a buddhist just by being buddhist will not get you anywhere its your practice I suppose. In a way my redescovery of the teaching helped me to look pass the rituals
narlzp 3 years ago
Actually my parents coming from Lanka believe in Therevada. There is a strong Hindu element though belief in devas but perhaps less ritualistic than Tibetan(Tantric Buddhism). There were as many as 200 schools of Buddhism within India alone but I did come across a very interesting stone carving of rebirth oneday in a Lankan temple it seems to afirm what this speaker is saying. Rebirth if you like is a state of consciences that manifest itself when certian action is taken
narlzp 3 years ago
The stone carving or dharmic wheel was quite simple. First the idea/thought comes to our mind, we seek this thought, fuel it by our desires(Lankan translation fuel by wrong views is the more correct translation, we begin to crave, finally this thought or action manifests itself, through us. We however can master this and through practice stop the rebirth. If you have opportunity take yourself to a Thervada temple you might strike lucky and find the wheel of rebirth near the entrance usually.
narlzp 3 years ago
Finally i may add that the reincarnation and rebirth in Sri Lankan theravadha have different meanings it may be the same with Thai. Reincarnation itself means to be born into another life rebirth from what I taught is to do with mind. Something a little interesting when a disciple of the Buddha asked Buddha if gods and births where we are born into higher realms exist the Buddha maintained silence. From my understanding we should see to it ourselves not always rely on our teacher for the answer.
narlzp 3 years ago
Ah a very interesting take on reincarnation in a very inter-subjective social-constructionist perspective.
LordImmolation 3 years ago
Yes I always held the belief that reincarnation, as is taught by the Buddhists has no grounding in logic whatsoever, nor does any evidence back up claims of reincarnation. Even if reincarnation were to exist and lets say I am a reincarnation of another soul, what is the point if I can't even remember my past life to use the lessons if any I learned in it.
I think this video is easier to grasp than previous ones because the narration was just a touch slower. A good thing :)
nriab23 3 years ago
I agree that the Buddhist teaching that involves some sense of transmigration is silly, which is why they offer quite desperate "reasonings" to defend it. The Buddha actually taught what is sound and obvious - that we are reborn in every moment, a consequence of our preceding thought and action. It's what we think and do NOW that will determine who and what we are in the next 5 minutes. So, be mindful of yourself - NOW.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
@MenoftheInfinite that is what the doctrine of rebirth is in all traditions of buddhism, including those which emphasize rebirth after death.
lookatmepleasesir 1 year ago
@MenoftheInfinite Hi!
Here's the thing. If all conciousness is one, and the illusion is of separation as documented by 0 time lag on telepathy, and quantum physics version of non-locality, then it essentially means that conciousness is only separated like waves in an ocean. Hence, we are all the same and reincarnation does make sense, but the source is ONE.
TheAstonMartian 9 months ago
@nriab23 you don't learn lessons from the memory of past lives, you learn lessons from the conditions of this life. Buddha said if you want to know your past life, look at your present conditions
lookatmepleasesir 1 year ago
@nriab23 if there was no lessons learned from past lives, how do you explain natural instinct? or phobias of things like snakes and heights?
sleeve318 1 year ago
@sleeve318 Things like natural instincts are hardwired in us through our genes and the physical evolution of our species. In the case of natural instincts, they are not "lessons learned" but more a reflection of the fact that those people who weren't afraid of snakes and heights didn't live long enough to pass on their genes, and so their genetic line died out. They didn't necessarily learn anything.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway evolution and reincarnation goes hand in hand. reincarnation just means to be made into flesh again. every tissue on a dead being will eventually become living tissue again. passing down genetics coding is still passing down knowledge learned from our ancestors. a dead man who was bitten by a snake cannot pass down his genetic coding and therefore cannot pass on his hardwired instincts. he will not have babies who will then continue to mess with deadly snakes, lesson learned.
sleeve318 9 months ago
@sleeve318 "every tissue on a dead being will eventually become living tissue again."
What if the planet is vaporized? There is no guaranteed that dead tissue is recycled as living tissue. In any case one piece of dead tissue might go into the production of tissues for a thousand new beings, simultaneously. It's not as though one being becomes one being, which is what the monk in this video is teaching, and which most Buddhists believe.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway if and when the planet is vaporized, it will simply be reincarnated. matter does not get destroyed and will simply form something else. it will not be the same planet and it will have evolved into something else. but it will still exist.
sleeve318 9 months ago
@sleeve318 "if and when the planet is vaporized, it will simply be reincarnated."
It will be reincarnated as vapor. I can agree with you that far. But that's not what Buddhists believe - generally speaking. They don't believe that a person can be reborn as mere vapor, and may never again form a living being.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway mere vapor is the building blocks for trees and even all life. co2, o2, and h2o are all vapors that every living creature needs.
sleeve318 9 months ago
@sleeve318 "mere vapor is the building blocks"
It *can* be the building blocks for life, or it can be the building blocks for something else entirely, and may never become life. Even if, after a trillion years of floating in space, it becomes part of another living organism, there won't be any lingering memories from the past lives when it was previously a part of a living organism. So that's not what the Buddhist teachers have in mind when they are teaching reincarnation.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway its irrelevant what the Buddhist teachers have in mind. the main point of their teaching is that everything works in cycles vs the mainstream view that everything is linear. we dont go to an alternate dimension where some creator has made an eternal paradise. no we just become another life form of some kind. whether or not we transfer to a single organism or a billion, it doesnt matter, we are all one and the same anyways.
sleeve318 9 months ago
@sleeve318 "main point of their teaching is that everything works in cycles"
I disagree that that's the main point. The main point as I see it is that good actions have good effects and bad actions have bad effects.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway thats karma
sleeve318 9 months ago
@sleeve318 "thats karma"
Yes, but the language of rebirth is for talking about the way karma works. For example, if you do X you will experience a lower birth (eg, in hell), and if you do Y you will experience a higher birth (eg, "human"). The final goal, ideally, being to escape the cycle of ignorance and karma.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway our consciousness is not limited to our bodies
lookatmepleasesir 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lookatmepleasesir "our consciousness is not limited to our bodies"
Give me a logical proof. If you can't give me a logical proof then you are speaking nonsense, and so you should remain silent.
KevinSolway 4 months ago
Yes, a compatriot has tried his hand. The accent, if there is one, is from the Channel Islands. As to the video's content: a proper understanding of reincarnation (rebirth) is important, if for no other reason than it causes us to more closely consider the consequences of our actions in life - and that the karma we sow isn't simply our own.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Hmm different voice from usual, and perhaps a slight remnant childhood kiwi accent?
Interesting concept about the rebirth of the torturer's victim, particularly in the context of ongoing religious human mayhem.
mjdoyza 3 years ago