Belief in Reincarnation Tied to Memory Errors
-
Hi guys... I'm having a discussion with january, forum owner of Atheist Unite on the topic of reincarnation/rebirth... I hope knowledgeable Buddhists can join in the discussion too as my knowledge is very limited. I'm here to learn too.
Thanks.
URL: http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=247006 -
Just an opinion...
Most people are wholly engaged in symbols and concepts. Atheists are also engaged in the symbolisms associated with 'prove' , 'evidence', 'science' and so on and so forth. I believe January is an engineering or science students if i am not wrong.
The problem is... when we engage in discussions, we also need to use symbols and concepts. So what happened is that, symbolism is actually re-inforced in the discusssion process. Therefore, it is very difficult to convince another.... because the conceptual/symbolic realm is not the place to find the answer. -
I see... Quite trueOriginally posted by longchen:Just an opinion...
Most people are wholly engaged in symbols and concepts. Atheists are also engaged in the symbolisms associated with 'prove' , 'evidence', 'science' and so on and so forth. I believe January is an engineering or science students if i am not wrong.
The problem is... when we engage in discussions, we also need to use symbols and concepts. So what happened is that, symbolism is actually re-inforced in the discusssion process. Therefore, it is very difficult to convince another.... because the conceptual/symbolic realm is not the place to find the answer.
-
There is no need to fight the fire on their side
you can always fight his fire on our side
got it ?
-
Originally posted by bohiruci:There is no need to fight the fire on their side
you can always fight his fire on our side
got it ? 
-
Totally agreed with longchen and bohiruchi.
When confronted with such a kind of situation, I always see it as similar to explaining to a person who is visually- impaired since birth the concepts of colors. Its extremely tough for both sides.
We know of different colors becos we can see, but to a visually-impaired person he/she must be very special to be able to understand the diffference of red , yellow or blue without tangible terms. They can feel the tangibles, but must be highly enlighten enough to feel "colors".
So, yeah, for normal sentient beings like us, can only have constructive arguements when both sides have equal "weapons": Eyes.
I've posted the quote below in " Daily Buddhism Verses", but would like to post it here again as a closing.Do your best each of you; go wherever circumtances lead you.
With those who are sympathetic
You have discussion about Buddhism.
As to those whose point of view differs from ours,
Treat them politely and try to make them happy.
Disputes are alien to our school,
They are incompatible with its spirit.
~ Hui neng -
True..Originally posted by cycle:Totally agreed with longchen and bohiruchi.
When confronted with such a kind of situation, I always see it as similar to explaining to a person who is visually- impaired since birth the concepts of colors. Its extremely tough for both sides.
We know of different colors becos we can see, but to a visually-impaired person he/she must be very special to be able to understand the diffference of red , yellow or blue without tangible terms. They can feel the tangibles, but must be highly enlighten enough to feel "colors".
So, yeah, for normal sentient beings like us, can only have constructive arguements when both sides have equal "weapons": Eyes.
I've posted the quote below in " Daily Buddhism Verses", but would like to post it here again as a closing. -
The Atheism forum by 'january' has started a new topic: what is buddhism evidence of reincarnation?
As I am very very busy these days, I aint got time to do the explanation and discuss... what's more, there are already several topics in his forum and my forum discussing/debating about this which I think is quite sufficient.
Nevertheless, I would like to invite all knowledgeable Buddhists to take part in this discussion. I will join in when I have the time... which will probably not be until the end of this week... -
I think this chap at Atheism forum is wasting everybody's time.......Originally posted by An Eternal Now:The Atheism forum by 'january' has started a new topic: what is buddhism evidence of reincarnation?
As I am very very busy these days, I aint got time to do the explanation and discuss... what's more, there are already several topics in his forum and my forum discussing/debating about this which I think is quite sufficient.
Nevertheless, I would like to invite all knowledgeable Buddhists to take part in this discussion. I will join in when I have the time... which will probably not be until the end of this week... -
Same as us trying to tell Buddhist that rebirth doesn't occur.Originally posted by cycle:Totally agreed with longchen and bohiruchi.
When confronted with such a kind of situation, I always see it as similar to explaining to a person who is visually- impaired since birth the concepts of colors. Its extremely tough for both sides.
We know of different colors becos we can see, but to a visually-impaired person he/she must be very special to be able to understand the diffference of red , yellow or blue without tangible terms. They can feel the tangibles, but must be highly enlighten enough to feel "colors".
So, yeah, for normal sentient beings like us, can only have constructive arguements when both sides have equal "weapons": Eyes.
I've posted the quote below in " Daily Buddhism Verses", but would like to post it here again as a closing.
-
But buddhists are not encouraged to dwell too much into rebirth?Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Same as us trying to tell Buddhist that rebirth doesn't occur. -
Agree with laoda99.Originally posted by laoda99:I think this chap at Atheism forum is wasting everybody's time.......
I believe there are a few threads showing the scientific evidence of rebirth, although I don't agree to all of those.
However I believe Lord Buddha would rather us spending time in comprehending His words and living it.
And yes, Omniknight is right that we shouldn't dwell too much in rebirth. It's our actions, speech and thoughts that in the present and now matters the most.
Personally I think Lord Buddha would like people to believe in His teachings as in a way to improve one's quality of life and one's spirituality, rather than debating over the credibility of the scientific evidence on rebirth. -
These are the smart people that confronts and looks at the issue fearlessly.Originally posted by longchen:Just an opinion...
Most people are wholly engaged in symbols and concepts. Atheists are also engaged in the symbolisms associated with 'prove' , 'evidence', 'science' and so on and so forth. I believe January is an engineering or science students if i am not wrong.
The problem is... when we engage in discussions, we also need to use symbols and concepts. So what happened is that, symbolism is actually re-inforced in the discusssion process. Therefore, it is very difficult to convince another.... because the conceptual/symbolic realm is not the place to find the answer.
Some people that prefer to live in delusion and illusions and dare not even confront issues that others have brought up. They simply attack the "messenger" and avoid the issue altogether. More likely they are just blur and do not know where to start to "criticize" a proposition.Originally posted by cycle:Totally agreed with longchen and bohiruchi.
When confronted with such a kind of situation, I always see it as similar to explaining to a person who is visually- impaired since birth the concepts of colors. Its extremely tough for both sides.
We know of different colors becos we can see, but to a visually-impaired person he/she must be very special to be able to understand the diffference of red , yellow or blue without tangible terms. They can feel the tangibles, but must be highly enlighten enough to feel "colors".
So, yeah, for normal sentient beings like us, can only have constructive arguements when both sides have equal "weapons": Eyes.
I've posted the quote below in " Daily Buddhism Verses", but would like to post it here again as a closing.
Like those that do not know the "what and why" of any issue but try to look smart by doing:
or making meaningless statements like:
Ask them why and do not know where to begin or come up up nonsensical logic.Originally posted by laoda99:I think this chap at Atheism forum is wasting everybody's time....... -
Buddha asked you not to "believe" his words but "accept" them after much consideration and debate. This is the only way that you do not fall prey to "false beliefs".Originally posted by yamizi:Agree with laoda99.
I believe there are a few threads showing the scientific evidence of rebirth, although I don't agree to all of those.
However I believe Lord Buddha would rather us spending time in comprehending His words and living it.
And yes, Omniknight is right that we shouldn't dwell too much in rebirth. It's our actions, speech and thoughts that in the present and now matters the most.
Personally I think Lord Buddha would like people to believe in His teachings as in a way to improve one's quality of life and one's spirituality, rather than debating over the credibility of the scientific evidence on rebirth.
How can you "comprehend and live" his words without thinking and questioning it? -
I do agree, however I think that it will still be rather helpful for people to at least keep an open minded outlook on Buddha's teachings on rebirth...Originally posted by yamizi:Agree with laoda99.
I believe there are a few threads showing the scientific evidence of rebirth, although I don't agree to all of those.
However I believe Lord Buddha would rather us spending time in comprehending His words and living it.
And yes, Omniknight is right that we shouldn't dwell too much in rebirth. It's our actions, speech and thoughts that in the present and now matters the most.
Personally I think Lord Buddha would like people to believe in His teachings as in a way to improve one's quality of life and one's spirituality, rather than debating over the credibility of the scientific evidence on rebirth. -
In fact one shouldn't use scientific understanding as a basis in spirituality, not even arguments and debates (not saying we must avoid them)Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Buddha asked you not to "believe" his words but "accept" them after much consideration and debate. This is the only way that you do not fall prey to "false beliefs".
How can you "comprehend and live" his words without thinking and questioning it?
One should be thoroughly authenticated with the teachings through one's experiences (i.e life/meditative experience), not just about rebirth (i think to recall your past lives isn't that important), but about the spiritual truths that Buddha taught, about the nature of reality, about the virtuous qualities of the mind, and so on.
As Thusness said,
The path of spirituality in buddhism is a slow and steady one. It is based on firm establishment and thorough testing of all our life experiences. Arguments cannot move a practitioner that is fully authenticated. -
You must understanding scientific principles and philosophy because they is also reality. Once you separate "science" and "spirituality" you are dualistic.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:In fact one shouldn't use scientific understanding as a basis in spirituality, not even arguments and debates (not saying we must avoid them)
One should be thoroughly authenticated with the teachings through one's experiences (i.e life/meditative experience), not just about rebirth (i think to recall your past lives isn't that important), but about the spiritual truths that Buddha taught, about the nature of reality, about the virtuous qualities of the mind, and so on.
As Thusness said,
The path of spirituality in buddhism is a slow and steady one. It is based on firm establishment and thorough testing of all our life experiences. Arguments cannot move a practitioner that is fully authenticated.
If you dismiss science without first understanding it and simply cling on to "spiritual" truths... you are delusional in the sense that you do not have all the facts and information.
Those that cling on to science without considering the spiritual aspects of life is similarly delusional but at the other opposite end.
If you take the attitude that "January" and his atheism forum is a waste of time without the ability to say why it is a waste of time... you are just delusional.
If you can say why and how it is a waste of time, then you do not need to make the statements "It is a waste of time"
You will be able to simply say what and why you disagree without using the words "A waste of time."
Like Christianity. If you can say why you do not believe and you understand why Christians believe, then it shows that you have a clear understanding.
If Buddhist are going to simply say things like: "this is nonsense" or "this is truth" without being able to explain why; they are no better than those dogmatic people that simply cling on to whatever their pastors or priests or cleric or imans say with no understanding. -
I'm not saying january and his forum is a waste of time, and I did say I did not imply avoiding debate and science altogether (I think Buddhism and Science complements very well), but what I am saying is you can't use science to touch on spirituality -- science can study the phenomena of spiritual but cannot touch the essence of the spiritual.. something like that. It's like you can't use your physics knowledge to be creative in art. It's the same thing as what I said previously, true spiritually is neither irrational/pre-rational nor limited to rational, it is transrational.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:You must understanding scientific principles and philosophy because they is also reality. Once you separate "science" and "spirituality" you are dualistic.
If you dismiss science without first understanding it and simply cling on to "spiritual" truths... you are delusional in the sense that you do not have all the facts and information.
Those that cling on to science without considering the spiritual aspects of life is similarly delusional but at the other opposite end.
If you take the attitude that "January" and his atheism forum is a waste of time without the ability to say why it is a waste of time... you are just delusional.
If you can say why and how it is a waste of time, then you do not need to make the statements "It is a waste of time"
You will be able to simply say what and why you disagree without using the words "A waste of time."
Like Christianity. If you can say why you do not believe and you understand why Christians believe, then it shows that you have a clear understanding.
If Buddhist are going to simply say things like: "this is nonsense" or "this is truth" without being able to explain why; they are no better than those dogmatic people that simply cling on to whatever their pastors or priests or cleric or imans say with no understanding. -
See Longchen's article, The Limitation of science in dealing with Reality
The Limitation of science in dealing with Reality
As Beings, the conventional mind only sees interpretations of Reality.
Why is this so? This is because, firstly Sensory data are interpretations(manifested form) of reality. Why are they interpretations and are not the direct experiencing of it (Reality)? To illustrate this point...lets consider the perception of 2 person: a color-blind person and one with normal vision. The color-blind person may sees images differently from one who is not. So... who is seeing the truth?...none. Both are seeing interpretations(manifested form) of the Truth. Likewise animals may see and sense things differently from humans.
Sensory datas that are being percieved are in turn cognated by the conventional mind. Again, the conventional mind sees interpretations collected by sensory perception. From the sensory datas, the conventional mind conceive the informations into things, environments and people... A simplified example is that by differentiating the changes in colours on the vision sight, the conventional mind cognate edges... with the edges connected... the enclosed area become percieved as objects, things, entities...
The conventional mind can only theorizes from its interpretations. Science is based on the theory and concepts derived from the conventional mind.
Science is just that... conceptual framework for understanding the dynamics of Reality... But it can only theorizes using concepts.
To truly experience Reality...one must go beyond thinking (which is theorising) about Reality. We must experience it directly.
PS: From the way that I have written... some people might have the misconceptions that the Source(Reality) is separated from us. This is clearly not so. It is the conventional discriminating mind that think in terms of separation and duality. However, the conventional discriminating mind itself is not an entity, but is just the dualistic function of cognition. -
Science is like a map. You can look at a map of America and you can tour America.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:I'm not saying january and his forum is a waste of time, and I did say I did not imply avoiding debate and science altogether (I think Buddhism and Science complements very well), but what I am saying is you can't use science to touch on spirituality -- science can study the phenomena of spiritual but cannot touch the essence of the spiritual.. something like that. It's like you can't use your physics knowledge to be creative in art.
Obviously looking at a map and touring America are two completely different experiences and no amount of map studying can replace actually visiting the country.
On the other hand, you cannot dismiss the map or you will be wandering round and round without knowing that you are wandering round and round pointlessly.
Therefore, before you can make the statement that says" Science cannot replace reality, you must first understand what science is all about and what science says.
Otherwise, you might be wandering in Australia and you think that you are in America.
Spirituality is transcendental and enlightenment is trans-logic.
It does not replace physical reality and logic.
Otherwise, you make stupid logical errors and think you are very smart.... hahaha that is so common in this forum.
This biggest culprits are those that says things like "I think this chap at Atheism forum is wasting everybody's time......."
They have know idea what errors are in their heads.
I hate to see Buddhists falling into the same trap as dogmatic religious people.
I hope that the Buddhists here show the workings as well as the conclusions... and in doing that you clarify your own mind and crystallize your own thoughts. -
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
However, your analogy is irrelevant here.
Science is like a map. You can look at a map of America and you can tour America.
Obviously looking at a map and touring America are two completely different experiences and no amount of map studying can replace actually visiting the country.
On the other hand, you cannot dismiss the map or you will be wandering round and round without knowing that you are wandering round and round pointlessly.
Therefore, before you can make the statement that says" Science cannot replace reality, you must first understand what science is all about and what science says.
Otherwise, you might be wandering in Australia and you think that you are in America.
The map of spirituality must come from someone's own spiritual experiences, not through theorising and conceptualising. Only an enlightened person such as the Buddha has the wisdom to guide other sentient beings -- he gave us the 'map' that leads to Nirvana. Science of course cannot produce such maps. It deals with other aspects of things. If you mix them up you are only confused.Spirituality is transcendental and enlightenment is trans-logic.
Yes. And I added that part before you posted
It does not replace physical reality and logic. -
be careful.
u all got to differentiate reincarnation and rebirth. reincarnation is taught as Hinduism started it few thousand years before Buddhism. rebirth is what Buddha had rediscovered. or a better translation is birth and death(sheng1 si3). it's more than reincarnation of life. it involve philosophy, changes in life; day and night; 4 seasons of nature; dying of stars and forming of new stars, rise and fall of existences; cycle of life, cycle of energy; EVEN birth and death of cells, feelings, thought process.
in a way reincarnation got contradictions with the idea of Not-self in Buddhism, while rebirth do not.
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
Yes thanks for this timely reminder, I think many people still never get this part
be careful.
u all got to differentiate reincarnation and rebirth. reincarnation is taught as Hinduism started it few thousand years before Buddhism. rebirth is what Buddha had rediscovered. or a better translation is birth and death(sheng1 si3). it's more than reincarnation of life. it involve philosophy, changes in life; day and night; 4 seasons of nature; dying of stars and forming of new stars, rise and fall of existences; cycle of life, cycle of energy; EVEN birth and death of cells, feelings, thought process.
in a way reincarnation got contradictions with the idea of [b]Not-self in Buddhism, while rebirth do not.
/\
[/b]
Consciousness is a process, it is wave-like, like radio waves, and it arises and ceases instantaneously and conditions another moment of consciousness.
It is not an entity nor a self. -
You have a dualistic mind and so it is very hard to talk to you... anyway the point I want to make is... do not simply agree when people come with rubbish likeOriginally posted by An Eternal Now:However, your analogy is irrelevant here.
The map of spirituality must come from someone's own spiritual experiences, not through theorising and conceptualising. Only an enlightened person such as the Buddha has the wisdom to guide other sentient beings -- he gave us the 'map' that leads to Nirvana. Science of course cannot produce such maps. It deals with other aspects of things. If you mix them up you are only confused.
orOriginally posted by laoda99:I think this chap at Atheism forum is wasting everybody's time.......
or even if it comes from a venerable or pastor or priest...Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Same as us trying to tell Buddhist that rebirth doesn't occur.
You must always see how they come to the conclusion and if they do not support their statements, just understand that it is hot air.
You can ask them, "why do you say that?" and see if it is logical.
Similarly in your own mind... you cannot accept anything unless there is good basis for it.
If people come and tell you that something is the truth and they cannot explain it.... you have to be careful and do not accept it.... you need not reject it... but do not accept it until you have experienced it for yourself... especially if they tell you that you must experience it to know it.
So until you experience it, do not accept it even if you do not reject it. -
You have a dualistic mind and so it is very hard to talk to you... anyway the point I want to make is... do not simply agree when people come with rubbish like
Non dualistic is neither two nor one. Although there isn't two, they are not the same either (one).If people come and tell you that something is the truth and they cannot explain it.... you have to be careful and do not accept it.... you need not reject it... but do not accept it until you have experienced it for yourself... especially if they tell you that you must experience it to know it.
Yes... of course.. Buddhism does not teach blind faith.