Welcome admin !

It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:14 pm
Pathway:  Board index General Buddhist Discussion General Buddha Dharma

Re: Afterlife

For discussion of Buddha Dharma, including teachings common to all Buddhist schools, such as the Four Noble Truths, Dependent Origination, etc., that is not specific to Mahayana or Therevada

Re: Afterlife

Postby Boatman Bodhisattva on Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:34 am

Caodemarte wrote:Be advised that many people will just dismiss an argument or explanation that cities sources such as the well known [i]Zennist[i].


The Buddha speaks for himself:

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:
“… There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks, there were no unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned.” (Ud 8:3;80-81) [Note that the Buddha never taught Nibanna to be nothingness, for if it were so, he would simply define it as so. Instead, he defines Nibbana in an elaborate manner, to emphasise that it transcends the limitations of mind and matter.]
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/0 ... nd-matter/
I mean no disrespect to forum members on my ignore list. Gassho. __/\__

"Reciting the name of the Buddha constantly... His own body is the limitless body of Amida, the treasure trees of seven precious gems, the pond of the eight virtues." - Hakuin Ekaku

https://matthewsatori.tumblr.com/
Boatman Bodhisattva
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:39 am

Re: Afterlife

Postby Avisitor on Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:42 am

After my sister died from Cancer, I thought about death a lot.
Then my friend from school died. It made me wonder some more about death.

The thing I realized is that death doesn't care whether you can or cannot accept it.
It has happened. It is happening now. It will happen.
It doesn't argue or debate or negotiate.

After life is what comes after this life.
Nothing more.
Hoping or dreaming or wishing ... means nothing

Buddha didn't talk about life and/or death
It makes for too much speculation
Which in turn prevents the mind from focusing

So, don't dream your dream and fight the good fight
Don't go into that dark night
Whatever!!!!

Good practice
Disclaimer: There is no intent to be offensive in my posts. None was intended and none should be interpreted as such.
User avatar
Avisitor
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby Boatman Bodhisattva on Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:13 am

Avisitor wrote:Buddha didn't talk about life and/or death
It makes for too much speculation

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:The Buddha speaks for himself:

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:
“… There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks, there were no unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned.” (Ud 8:3;80-81) [Note that the Buddha never taught Nibanna to be nothingness, for if it were so, he would simply define it as so. Instead, he defines Nibbana in an elaborate manner, to emphasise that it transcends the limitations of mind and matter.]
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/0 ... nd-matter/


I'm sorry about the tragedies you've had in your life. As the Buddha taught, Nirvana is a transcendent reality, beyond birth and death, instead of merely a state of mind:

The Buddha refers to Nibbana as a 'dhamma'. For example, he says "of all dhammas, conditioned or unconditioned, the most excellent dhamma, the supreme dhamma is, Nibbana". 'Dhamma' signifies actual realities, the existing realities as opposed to conceptual things. Dhammas are of two types, conditioned and unconditioned. A conditioned dhamma is an actuality which has come into being through causes or conditions, something which arises through the workings of various conditions. The conditioned dhammas are the five aggregates: material form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness. The conditioned dhammas, do not remain static. They go through a ceaseless process of becoming. They arise, undergo transformation and fall away due to its conditionality.

However, the unconditioned dhamma is not produced by causes and conditions. It has the opposite characteristics from the conditioned: it has no arising, no falling away and it undergoes no transformation. Nevertheless, it is an actuality, and the Buddha refers to Nibbana as an unconditioned Dhamma.

The Buddha also refers to Nibbana as an 'ayatana'. This means realm, plane or sphere. It is a sphere where there is nothing at all that correspond to our mundane experience, and therefore it has to be described by way of negations as the negation of all the limited and determinate qualities of conditioned things.

The Buddha also refers to Nibbana as a, 'Dhatu' an element, the 'deathless element'. He compares the element of Nibbana to an ocean. He says that just as the great ocean remains at the same level no matter how much water pours into it from the rivers, without increase or decrease, so the Nibbana element remains the same, no matter whether many or few people attain Nibbana.

He also speaks of Nibbana as something that can be experienced by the body, an experience that is so vivid, so powerful, that it can be described as "touching the deathless element with one's own body."

The Buddha also refers to Nibbana as a 'state' ('pada') as 'amatapada' - the deathless state - or accutapada, the imperishable state.

Another word used by the Buddha to refer to Nibbana is 'Sacca', which means 'truth', an existing reality. This refers to Nibbana as the truth, a reality that the Noble ones have known through direct experience.

So all these terms, considered as a whole, clearly establish that Nibbana is an actual reality and not the mere destruction of defilements or the cessation of existence. Nibbana is unconditioned, without any origination and is timeless.
http://www.beyondthenet.net/dhamma/nibbanaReal.htm
I mean no disrespect to forum members on my ignore list. Gassho. __/\__

"Reciting the name of the Buddha constantly... His own body is the limitless body of Amida, the treasure trees of seven precious gems, the pond of the eight virtues." - Hakuin Ekaku

https://matthewsatori.tumblr.com/
Boatman Bodhisattva
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:39 am

Re: Afterlife

Postby desert_woodworker on Tue Aug 15, 2017 3:30 am

BB,

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:As the Buddha taught, Nirvana is a transcendent reality, beyond birth and death, instead of merely a state of mind:

I'd say nirvana is a state of no mind. Some say no-mind, and that's alright, too, although infers a bit more on the substantive side.

In Zen Buddhist practice circles, enjoying nirvana takes a back-seat to saving beings. But the awakened bodhisattva, being awake, participates in no-mind, or no mind. This is where the "power" (miraculous functioning ability) to save comes from, because only when there is no mind, or only when there is no-mind, and nothing else (not more, on top of "it"), can true Wisdom and true Compassion arise, as it arose in the Buddha and in countless other awakened people since.

Nobody knows (nor can know) what "transcendent" means, so let's not use it. I'd say nirvana is the mind of the awakened person, which is no mind.

And the Buddha, really, is the mind of the sentient being (as Ashvaghosha clearly writes early-on in The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana). While, the true mind of the sentient being is ...no mind.

I wouldn't say it's circular, but it's all of a piece :lol2: (and of a peace).

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Afterlife

Postby Boatman Bodhisattva on Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:17 am

desert_woodworker wrote:Nobody knows (nor can know) what "transcendent" means...


The Buddha knew. After all, he was the Supremely Awakened One:

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:“… There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks, there were no unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, become, made, conditioned.” (Ud 8:3;80-81) [Note that the Buddha never taught Nibanna to be nothingness, for if it were so, he would simply define it as so. Instead, he defines Nibbana in an elaborate manner, to emphasise that it transcends the limitations of mind and matter.]
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/0 ... nd-matter/

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:
The Buddha refers to Nibbana as a 'dhamma'...

However, the unconditioned dhamma is not produced by causes and conditions. It has the opposite characteristics from the conditioned: it has no arising, no falling away and it undergoes no transformation. Nevertheless, it is an actuality, and the Buddha refers to Nibbana as an unconditioned Dhamma.

The Buddha also refers to Nibbana as an 'ayatana'. This means realm, plane or sphere. It is a sphere where there is nothing at all that correspond to our mundane experience, and therefore it has to be described by way of negations as the negation of all the limited and determinate qualities of conditioned things.
http://www.beyondthenet.net/dhamma/nibbanaReal.htm


From here on out, I will not entertain any posts that contradict or confuse what the Buddha taught on this topic.
I mean no disrespect to forum members on my ignore list. Gassho. __/\__

"Reciting the name of the Buddha constantly... His own body is the limitless body of Amida, the treasure trees of seven precious gems, the pond of the eight virtues." - Hakuin Ekaku

https://matthewsatori.tumblr.com/
Boatman Bodhisattva
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:39 am

Re: Afterlife

Postby desert_woodworker on Tue Aug 15, 2017 3:38 pm

BB, et al.,

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:
desert_woodworker wrote:Nobody knows (nor can know) what "transcendent" means...

The Buddha knew. After all, he was the Supremely Awakened One:

Yes, a cute and trite re-mouthing of the empty honorific. But the slugger Buddha is not here to defend his title.

Let's be a little logical. If one experiences (knows) "the transcendent", it is not transcendent: it is in the realm of experience.

Surely, regardless of the doubtful historicity of an Historical Buddha, awakening transcends nothing. The mind of no-mind transcends nothing. It's just that the mind of no-mind (or original mind; or Buddha mind) is at the bottom of everything. Already. That's not high, that's low. Like the ground state of an atom. Not excited. That's not "transcendence": that's Original Nature. Before anything was painted over it. Before anything can lodge in a habitually-grasped, stuck-way, and occlude the no-mind's original functioning ("talents" ;) ). Always been there. But in awakening it's just that an eye is open to it, at and after awakening. The overburden has simply been removed (dissolved, shattered suddenly) to expose the original vein of clear colorless Diamond.

The condition of no-overburden can be returned-to, and then one can use everything, every conventional thing and skill, freely, without sticking anywhere, and without being used by them. Nothing transcendent about this. It's here, now. Just covered-up (in most beings).

Well, practice can clarify all. Let it be so for All.

rgds,

--Joe
Last edited by desert_woodworker on Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Afterlife

Postby fukasetsu on Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:51 pm

desert_woodworker wrote:Nobody knows (nor can know) what "transcendent" means, so let's not use it. I'd say nirvana is the mind of the awakened person, which is no mind.


Interpretation upon perception
-"Absolute", "God", "Self", etc...
Further fantastical creative superimposition
-"Transcendental"

Since mind cannot grasp itself, it is said "it" cannot be known, which is true to the extent then it is none other then itself, just like a knife can't cut itself. The gift of forgetting is part of the humour! :daisy:

3d.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Everyone for President!
User avatar
fukasetsu
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:17 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Afterlife

Postby Avisitor on Tue Aug 15, 2017 8:37 pm

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:From here on out, I will not entertain any posts that contradict or confuse what the Buddha taught on this topic.

What the Buddha taught and what you choose to interpret seem to be two different things.
But, have it your way. You can choose to swim upstream and fight the flow.
And although, it may seem you have made great progress. You are still at the same shore.

This is not to be disrespectful or to criticize.
There is no offense intended. Just the statement of opinion.
Whether you agree or not
Whether you are amused or not
There is no judgement made upon you
Only opinion stated
Just learn and grow from your own place and at your own pace

Well, might as well end the topic or thread here
No more discussion or posts will be entertained that differ from the OP (original poster)
Disclaimer: There is no intent to be offensive in my posts. None was intended and none should be interpreted as such.
User avatar
Avisitor
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby fukasetsu on Sat Aug 19, 2017 3:45 pm

Avisitor wrote:Well, might as well end the topic or thread here


You make a good point Avi.
Image
Who knows what's after the final credit? Not even Buddha knows for Buddha is part of the production :PP:

No mind, no Buddha(dharma) :daisy:
Everyone for President!
User avatar
fukasetsu
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:17 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Afterlife

Postby Avisitor on Sun Aug 20, 2017 2:06 pm

fukasetsu wrote:
Avisitor wrote:Well, might as well end the topic or thread here


You make a good point Avi.

Who knows what's after the final credit? Not even Buddha knows for Buddha is part of the production :PP:

No mind, no Buddha(dharma) :daisy:

My point, which I never seem to get across because of my lack of communication skills,
is everyone has an opinion and interpretation about life after death or just death.
And, that should be okay. Everyone should be able to speak their mind about what they believe.
And, shutting oneself off from this .. closes the mind to possibilities.
Disclaimer: There is no intent to be offensive in my posts. None was intended and none should be interpreted as such.
User avatar
Avisitor
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby fukasetsu on Sun Aug 20, 2017 3:40 pm

Avisitor wrote:My point, which I never seem to get across because of my lack of communication skills,
is everyone has an opinion and interpretation about life after death or just death.
And, that should be okay. Everyone should be able to speak their mind about what they believe.
And, shutting oneself off from this .. closes the mind to possibilities.


:lol2:

I got your point avi, was just using your point as a liftoff to make a new point.
I sometimes take a 7 year old to a trampoline hall in town here
Image
point, point, point, point, nothing fixed, it's all infinity air,
like magical beings never being anywhere or anyone :daisy:
Everyone for President!
User avatar
fukasetsu
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:17 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Afterlife

Postby Avisitor on Mon Aug 21, 2017 4:38 am

The ocean is filled with water
When the water splashes and drops appear
Each drop of water takes flight with its own path

They come into existence
Lift off and grow into shapes and follow their own paths
Live a life of their own

Then, they fall
They return to the ocean, the beginning
To start anew

This is the cycle
Disclaimer: There is no intent to be offensive in my posts. None was intended and none should be interpreted as such.
User avatar
Avisitor
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby fukasetsu on Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:59 pm

"The ocean moves, not because it chooses to move, not because it knows that it is wise or good to move; it moves involuntarily, unconscious of movement. Thus will you also return to Tao, and when you are returned you will know it not, for you yourself will be Tao."
~Wei Wu Wei

But this is not enough, we must inquire, the mind hates inquiry.

What is this?

No place to start, no place to return.
Nothing or no one to be,
No one or nowhere to be not.
:daisy:
Everyone for President!
User avatar
fukasetsu
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:17 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Afterlife

Postby Avisitor on Thu Aug 24, 2017 2:58 am

fukasetsu wrote:"The ocean moves, not because it chooses to move, not because it knows that it is wise or good to move; it moves involuntarily, unconscious of movement. Thus will you also return to Tao, and when you are returned you will know it not, for you yourself will be Tao."
~Wei Wu Wei

That is good to hear

fukasetsu wrote:But this is not enough, we must inquire, the mind hates inquiry.

The mind is also wild and lazy ... in the beginning

fukasetsu wrote:What is this?

What are you looking at?
The stick in the hand or the hand holding the stick.

fukasetsu wrote:No place to start, no place to return.
Nothing or no one to be,
No one or nowhere to be not.
:daisy:

When I first moved from NYC to Albany, I wondered how I would feel about moving away from all I knew
After a short while, I find it is all the same .. just a different location ... lol
Disclaimer: There is no intent to be offensive in my posts. None was intended and none should be interpreted as such.
User avatar
Avisitor
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby Anders on Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:13 am

desert_woodworker wrote:ps Is it clear to anyone else that holding-out for some kind of rebirth in another body after the death of the present one is a kind of "spiritual materialism", the term devised by Tibetan Lama Chogyam Trungpa? It's an attachment that I think badly flavors and disables this present life. Granted, "rebirth" may be an accretion from earlier Hinduism into "Buddhism", and that's understandable and forgivable. But does the awakened person have any intimation of an afterlife? No; I'd say absolutely no. Not that it doesn't make for some nicely creative stories, through Hinduism, and through some Buddhism. Hail!, human creativity and imagination! :Namaste: :tongueincheek:


There are other perspectives on rebirth than 'holding out for another life' though.

If you are trying to say the Buddha and many other greats didn't unequivocally state that literal rebirth is the case, then the most samsaric debate of all is ready to be reborn. :PP:
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra
User avatar
Anders
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:58 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby Anders on Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:37 am

Boatman Bodhisattva wrote:One of the most basic elements of the Buddha's teachings is the transcendent nature of Nirvana, transcending birth and death. I am not going to, on a Buddhist forum of all places, justify the Buddha's teachings.


I hear ya. I am sympathetic to the point people are trying to make here, but taking one's starting premise as "This is a zen buddhist forum, so don't listen to the Buddha on this" is to my mind not the best way of going about these things.

From the realised pov, growing old is no different then growing another life after death - they are both in the future. I don't think referencing the former gets as many "ultimately, there is no past mind, present mind or future mind" rebukes or implications that the poor poster is holding to a psychological crutch in immediate need of being rectified by concepts of suchness online though (sorry guys, but am I seeing more you in these responses than the needs of the poster on this topic).

So let's talk about the future. I think it makes sense to be able to. Here is my idea of what the future might hold in store: " All living beings born from eggs, wombs, humidity or by transformation, with or without form, either thoughtful or thoughtless, and neither thoughtful nor thoughtless are all led by me to the final nirvana for the extinction of reincarnation. "

What can I say, I don't mind thinking big, and I am on board with the possibility that this might take more lifetimes than I can count. I make no apologies for it and respectfully disregard those who claim that such aspirations do not accord with ultimate reality.

With that being said, the diamond sutra does offer a corollary to the above: "Although immeasurable, uncountable and unlimitable numbers of living beings are thus led to (the final nirvana for) the extinction of reincarnation, it is true that not a living being is led there. Why so, Subhuti? (Because) if a Bodhisattva (still) clings to the false notion (laksana) of an ego, a personality, a being and a life, he is not ( a true) Bodhisattva."

I'd say the diamond sutra would be only half a sutra if it only included, or only esteemed, the second passage though. And likewise for the first passage.
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra
User avatar
Anders
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:58 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby desert_woodworker on Thu Aug 24, 2017 3:46 pm

hiya, Anders,

Anders wrote:
desert_woodworker wrote:ps Is it clear to anyone else that holding-out for some kind of rebirth in another body after the death of the present one is a kind of "spiritual materialism", the term devised by Tibetan Lama Chogyam Trungpa? It's an attachment that I think badly flavors and disables this present life. Granted, "rebirth" may be an accretion from earlier Hinduism into "Buddhism", and that's understandable and forgivable. But does the awakened person have any intimation of an afterlife? No; I'd say absolutely no. Not that it doesn't make for some nicely creative stories, through Hinduism, and through some Buddhism. Hail!, human creativity and imagination! :Namaste: :tongueincheek:

There are other perspectives on rebirth than 'holding out for another life' though.

If you are trying to say the Buddha and many other greats didn't unequivocally state that literal rebirth is the case, then the most samsaric debate of all is ready to be reborn. :PP:

Right, and yes, of course there are other views of rebirth besides waiting for a more favorable life to enjoy, or in which to practice.

"Views", yes. But I note that there is no evidence for any such thing.

Right, it's presumed that "Buddha" taught things about this, but the "teachings" are written-down only 500 years and more after his presumed death.

I'm dubious about the veracity or historicity of those supposed teachings. I suspect "they" are actually an accretion from earlier Hinduism.

Now, how "Hinduism" came to include them, we do not know. Were they ever anyone's experience? I doubt it. And I doubt it because there's no evidence. There may be writings, but no evidence.

I don't call this kind of reasonable-doubt "samsaric"!

Granted, Reason is not the only faculty of Mind, and experience is the Gold-Standard, if there ever was one. And experience, even in the awakened person, "says" nothing about "afterlife". Just saying... .

If we can take any of the writings literally or as actually historical, "The Buddha" kept a "Noble Silence" when the question of whether or not -- or neither, or both -- the Tatahagatha has any existence after death. Silence is not assertion. Nor denial. Nor neither. Nor both. :PP:

:Namaste:

--Joe
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Afterlife

Postby Anders on Thu Aug 24, 2017 4:20 pm

desert_woodworker wrote:hiya, Anders,

Anders wrote:There are other perspectives on rebirth than 'holding out for another life' though.

If you are trying to say the Buddha and many other greats didn't unequivocally state that literal rebirth is the case, then the most samsaric debate of all is ready to be reborn. :PP:

Right, and yes, of course there are other views of rebirth besides waiting for a more favorable life to enjoy, or in which to practice.

"Views", yes. But I note that there is no evidence for any such thing.

Right, it's presumed that "Buddha" taught things about this, but the "teachings" are written-down only 500 years and more after his presumed death.

I'm dubious about the veracity or historicity of those supposed teachings. I suspect "they" are actually an accretion from earlier Hinduism.

Now, how "Hinduism" came to include them, we do not know. Were they ever anyone's experience? I doubt it. And I doubt it because there's no evidence. There may be writings, but no evidence.

I don't call this kind of reasonable-doubt "samsaric"!

Granted, Reason is not the only faculty of Mind, and experience is the Gold-Standard, if there ever was one. And experience, even in the awakened person, "says" nothing about "afterlife". Just saying... .

If we can take any of the writings literally or as actually historical, "The Buddha" kept a "Noble Silence" when the question of whether or not -- or neither, or both -- the Tatahagatha has any existence after death. Silence is not assertion. Nor denial. Nor neither. Nor both. :PP:

:Namaste:

--Joe


Well, I don't think you can find a single scholar of note who would question that the buddha taught literal rebirth. Stephen Batchelor may be well known, but his academic credentials are not reputable and he would never pass peer review. I haven't seen any thesis or paper showing evidence, or even suggestions, that this is a result of accretion. This is the internet of course, where anyone can say anything without a thought for peer review - but I don't think there is much basis for for calling this doubt reasonable.

The Buddha taught rebirth bases on his own personal experience - It has the same veracity as "awakening", "liberation" and "realisation". That is to say, no evidence other than witness reports from yogins, such as the Buddha et al. And the offer that you can find out for yourself through the practise of meditation.

The Buddha's noble silence here does not concern rebirth in general, but rather the state of the tathagata - Ie, what is the state of a person who does not get reborn. And this he did not comment on.

As for everyone else, it was in fact common practise for many decades during the buddha's life for disciples to ask him what was the next destination of recently deceased bhikshus and bhikshunis. And he would give quite plain answers: "so and and so has been reborn in this or that heaven. So and so was an arhat and has taken no further rebirth" etc.

Besides this, we have many explicit assertions on his personal recollection of many lives, his discussions on how other teachers understood rebirth and how their understanding was incomplete (usually due to lack of meditative skill), the thousands of mentions of past lives, future lives and the karma stemming from or creating both, the role of liberation in this cycle etc - All scattered across generously across all the different nikayas - Meaning it would have been virtually impossible for such a doctrine to just 'sneak' in across multitudes of communities so uniformly over the centuries before written standardisation. A plausible case for accretion would be something that has snuck into a few early sutras and later sutras then running with this. But rebirth id nowhere near that scenario. It's just too much everywhere in the earliest teachings (all teachings really) for that to be the case.

There are parts of the Buddha's teaching that are so widespread and uniform in presentation across all nikayas, estimated time periods, various collection and languages that we can say with pretty strong certainty that it would simply not have been possible, by accident or design, for these to be later additions barring an immensely powerful, highly coordinated and wholly secret India-wide conspiracy. These are the teachings of dependent origination, the three marks, the four noble truths, the noble eightfold path, Nirvana, karma and literal rebirth.

The Buddha taught literal rebirth and meant it. Everyone is free to their own opinion on whether he was right or not (last I checked, Jundo just plain disagreed with him. fair enough - Last I checked on 'atheist buddhist' sites on this, it also amounted to the Buddha's experiences being unreliable rather than questioning whether he had them at all). But I don't think it is responsible to spread unfounded innuendo or false information about what the Buddha taught on a public Buddhist meesage board.

I don't mean to be rude, but given that this is the internet and misinformation abounds, I really think you must provide some more solid academic basis for your textual and historical analysis beyond "it is presumed", "I suspect" and "I'm dubious" - we get enough of these kind of innuendo assertions in politics. Doesn't make it anymore valid elsewhere. Because from where I am sitting, you question it on no stronger grounds than "that's my belief and I prefer to believe the Buddha agreed with me."
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra
User avatar
Anders
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:58 pm

Re: Afterlife

Postby desert_woodworker on Thu Aug 24, 2017 5:54 pm

Anders, thanks for the well-considered and kind reply.

I don't base any of my doubts on Batchelor. I wish him well in life (and after?). :tongueincheek:

But I have faith that, as Shakyamuni (if he is/was indeed historical) was steeped in the Hinduism of his time and milieu, I take it that "afterlife" is also "baked-into" Shakyamuni. And thus it's not hard to believe that it may also have inhered in the Buddha that he became, and easily or by default came to lodge in early Buddhist writings (begun to be written half-a-millennium afterwards by an even larger committee than the committee who wrote and edited the Bible).

When I look around for evidence of afterlife, I don't see it. It's not present in reports of moderns or contemporaries, nor in my experience. Thus I am dubious about it entirely. I began to study it in the Greeks through Plato, beginning in earnest with the Phaedo. Then of course in Hinduism and Buddhism. Nothing convincing. And again, no experience of it, here, through practice. I note that faith in it, however, seems easy (or compulsory?) for some to muster.

Like you, I make no academic or scholarly claims at ZFI, nor elsewhere on the internet (or maybe you do elsewhere, I dunno). I'm a practitioner. I'm interested and enriched, in any case, by and about what my tradition claims, and broadly holds. But this does not mean that I am not also agnostic about claims of objects or phenomena that I have no experience of, and can see no way of having experience of them (and when no one else presents evidence of them). I am not solely a hard-headed scientist (although I am a hard scientist); I am a yogi. With no experience or evidence of "afterlife". That is my up-to-date report.

--Joe
Last edited by desert_woodworker on Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
desert_woodworker
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:09 am
Location: southern Arizona, USA

Re: Afterlife

Postby fukasetsu on Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:18 pm

Thank you Joe. This is what I appreciate about "Zen" it doesn't matter what the "Buddha" taught (apart from that which is related to practise) I have no clue whether there is rebirth or not (or a reasonable combination of the two) :lol2:

Scripture are just human stories, and no doubt do some ppl need to hold onto something as rebirth to give their live some meaning (which to me is a superimposition) I think being convinced that there either is or is no rebirth is what the crux is, for such dwellings belong to a scattered mind, I prefer to give my life to the Unknown instead of being sure about things I have no proof of, and even then such proof would be valid on the level of mind only or dreams, if there is rebirth its in dreams and believing or not believing in it is part of the dream as far as I see it.

speaking of "hinduism" what sri niz says about it makes sense;

M: The memory of the past unfulfilled desires traps energy, which manifests itself as a person. When its charge gets exhausted, the person dies. Unfulfilled desires are carried over into the next birth. Self-identification with the body creates ever fresh desires and there is no end to them, unless this mechanism of bondage is clearly seen. It is clarity that is liberating, for you cannot abandon desire, unless its causes and effects are clearly seen. I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for a new person. The real takes no part in it, but makes it possible by giving it, the light.

But it are still his words and I cannot say it is so or not so, so I forget about all the Buddha or any other tradition ever said and return to not knowing, in full attention.
Everyone for President!
User avatar
fukasetsu
 
Posts: 7259
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:17 am
Location: The Netherlands

PreviousNext

Return to General Buddha Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
RocketTheme Joomla Templates

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 157 on Mon Sep 19, 2016 8:44 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest