Conflicts
-
Good evening dudes and dudettes, I am not a buddhist, some consider me atheist, some consider me deist. Im not sure myself and i am seeking the answer. In my quest for knowledge, i have already dismissed christianity and islam as mere false religions, as conversations with their religious leaders on forums can only lead nowhere, due to them avoiding questions or answering in a roundabout and vague way. Buddhism catches my attention as it is a peaceful religion, where killing is almost impossible, or impossible to justify. Whereas in other religions, "In the name of God" blah blah, people commit atrocities. The abrahamic religions, (i've not sure abt judaism, as i have not studied it) are detrimental to our rational mind, they are anti-intellectual and force unnecessary restrictions on us, brainwash us to pester others into joining for salvation. (referring to those who don't practice religion in moderation, yet in a way, those who practice in moderation are "wrong" in the context of their religion) But i believe even in moderation, such religions provide a breeding ground for bad idealogy. I don't think there are any cases of buddhists who go crazy just like the people i mentioned above, and with regards to christianity being speculated to be the second largest religion in singapore after buddhism, im abit worried for our future. I would like to have a better understanding on the basics of buddhism, and are there any claims which contradict scientific findings. I ask for the comparison, with skepticism on both the teachings as well as the findings. btw, a quick search on google did not answer my question, so i hope some masters here have the ability to.
-
Welcome to the forum. First of all I don't think there are Buddhist monks or masters here, but still I think some of us might be able to answer the doubts and questions you have.
You can refer to http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/basic-guide.htm for a basic understanding of the teachings of Buddhism. You can also read the articles at http://www.jenchen.org.sg/ which are practical and easy to understand. You can also get some introductory books, like:
6.
Awakening the Buddha Within: Tibetan Wisdom for the Western World by Lama Surya Das (Paperback - Jun 15, 1998)---------------------------For practice and meditation (not confined to sitting meditation) you can refer to books like 'Mindfulness in Plain English'. I often quote from a chapter here, http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe13.htmlThese are all good. I have read books by Thich Nhat Hanh, Steve Hagen and Lama Surya Das and can recommend their books, the one by Thubten Chodron should also be good and I've heard about them.There's something that I often quote here,
No fanaticism
“Of Buddhism alone can it be affirmed it is free from all fanaticism. Its aim being to produce in every man a thorough internal transforming by self-conquest, how can it have recourse to might or money or even persuasion for effecting conversion? The Buddha has only shown the way to salvation, and it is left to each individual to decide for himself if he would follow it.”
Prof. Lakshmi Narasu, "The Essence of Buddhism"There's another quote attributed to Albert Einstein,
“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description.”
Albert EinsteinHence, as being said here, Buddhism differs from many other religions because of Buddha's rejection of the theory of a personal Creator. Instead he taught how everything in our experience is dependently originated, inseparable from the manifold of conditions. He taught us the deepest insights into the nature of reality that can put an end to all our sufferings and attain the highest bliss and liberation.
Everything that the Buddha taught stems not from theory but from his realisation and observation -- and he taught that whatever he realised, we too, can realise for ourselves (which many did, even today) -- if he can attain enlightenment and liberation, everyone too can realise that (and there are no lack of people who achieves enlightenment and liberation, even today, even in this forum but not me). Our Buddha-nature is already complete, but temporarily obscured like clouds (representing our delusion, ignorance) obscuring the sun (the ever-present shining pure awareness which is our buddha-nature) -- even though it is already present. Buddha teaches us to awaken to that awakeness ourselves.
Buddhism does not teach anything that contradicts scientific findings, on the other hand many things that were taught long ago has only been found out recently. In some ways it is a form of advanced psychology, and also transpersonal psychology. So far nobody has developed such a successful 'program' as by Buddha that allows us to achieve deep insights into the nature of ourselves and the universe (which are not separated), gain clarity and awareness, and allows us to experience the profound bliss and liberation of nirvana.
There are also aspects that as Buddhist practitioners we know are true, but may not yet be recognised by the majority -- even though there are evidence supporting them.
For example, 'rebirth' is one of them. We know (through experience) that consciousness, especially sensory awareness, though inter-related with the body, our mind is not 'created' or 'caused' by the material body. This also explains why there are innumerable out-of-body experiences and near-death experiences reported by subjects who 'flew' out of their body, witnessed their body from a distance, and can even describe the exact medical procedures that took place during their supposed 'unconsciousness'. Many such experiences have been described by meditators (it is a common side-effect phenomenon, even this is not a goal of our practice)
In Buddhism consciousness, not caused by body, is not limited to the death of the body and that process of consciousness is re-born according to conditions again to another life. Many Buddhists, including some in this forum, have clear memories of their past lives through meditation practice.
It should be noted that the Buddhist view of consciousness is not the same as some other religions such as Hinduism -- we do not view Consciousness as an atomistic 'self' or 'soul', or an entity that passes on and 'reincarnates' into another body -- nothing like that.
In Buddhism, there is no 'self'. Consciousness is a process that is dependently originated -- according to conditions, it arises, and it ceases... and it arises again. Like there is no permanent, fixed, unchanging self -- but Self1, Self2, Self3, Self4, arising and ceasing according to various conditions (such as karmic conditions and more)... and it ceases as it arises, momentarily. No-self and impermanence is the nature of all our experiences (made of the five sensory awareness + thoughts), which are all changing forms of consciousness.
With regards to teachings on rebirth, there might be questions such as... is this scientifically acceptable? I would certainly say yes because there are much scientific research being done.
I posted before:
http://www.sgforums.com/forums/2621/topics/247006
In deep meditation you can enter deeper levels of your consciousness in such depths that you when penetrate deeply into the subconscious, it is even possible to 're-live' the entire scene in the past life, as if you are totally present there with your body, conscious, not like a dream.. it is clearer than our usual recalling of past events and leaves no doubts in one's mind. In some cases it can be even traumatic because you 'relive' a traumatic part of past life.. such as fighting in the war. Then you are really physically there - fighting the war, not vague like in dreams but as if you are watching a movie with your entire body present there... as real as it can be. One of my highly enlightened friends (longchen.. he talked to you in my forum before) had such a recalling of fighting war in WW1 in France.
As for how to prove they are true.. simple.. like I said there are many cases which are proven to be true, by tracing what you recalled about the past life to the source.. like for example, you remember worked in a company called "X" in Germany, your name was Rainald von Dassel, you lived in a terrace house at Z Street. Then, you do a search and found out there really was a company in Germany called "X", there really was a worker there called "Rainald von Dassel" who died in 1970, he lived in a terrace house at Z Street, your ex family members etc, etc etc, that leaves no doubt.
There are many many such accounts. One guy who researched into such accounts was Ian Stevensons, who died a few months ago. But he was not the only one and more and more people in many countries even in the Western countries like United States where the concept of rebirth and reincarnation is not part of their judeo christian traditions, are starting to believe in rebirth and reincarnation because of what they've seen... and these guys aren't Buddhists or Hindus or what. (Also see http://www.ial.goldthread.com/) Another thing is sometimes you recall your past life and realise many things you never knew before, and when you check it out, it turns out all that you remembered is true. Anyway I posted this news article before about a boy who fought in world war.. which I will post subsequently.
Anyway here's some more to read...
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/qanda05.htmQuestion:
You have talked a lot about rebirth but is there any proof that we are reborn when we die?
Answer:
Not only is there scientific evidence to support the Buddhist belief in rebirth, it is the only after-life theory that has any evidence to support it. There is not a scrap of evidence to prove the existence of heaven and of course evidence of annihilation at death must be lacking. But during the last 30 years parapsychologists have been studying reports that some people have vivid memories of their former lives. For example, in England, a 5 year-old girl said she could remember her "other mother and father" and she talked vividly about what sounded like the events in the life of another person. Parapsychologists were called in and they asked her hundreds of questions to which she gave answers. She spoke of living in a particular village in what appeared to be Spain, she gave the name of the village, the name of the street she lived in, her neighbors' names and details about her everyday life there. She also fearfully spoke of how she had been struck by a car and died of her injuries two days later. When these details were checked, they were found to be accurate. There was a village in Spain with the name the five-year-old girl had given. There was a house of the type she had described in the street she had named. What is more, it was found that a 23-year-old woman living in the house had been killed in a car accident five years before. Now how is it possible for a five year- old girl living in England and who had never been to Spain to know all these details? And of course, this is not the only case of this type. Professor Ian Stevenson of the University of Virginia's Department of Psychology has described dozens of cases of this type in his books. He is an accredited scientist whose 25 year study of people who remember former lives is very strong evidence for the Buddhist teaching of rebirth.Question:
Well, have there been any scientists who believe in rebirth?
Answer:
Yes. Thomas Huxley, who was responsible for having science introduced into the 19th century British school system and who was the first scientist to defend Darwin's theories, believed that reincarnation was a very plausible idea. In his famous book 'Evolution and Ethics and other Essays', he says:
In the doctrine of transmigration, whatever its origin, Brahmanical and Buddhist speculation found, ready to hand, the means of constructing a plausible vindication of the ways of the Cosmos to man... Yet this plea of justification is not less plausible than others; and none but very hasty thinkers will reject it on the ground of inherent absurdity. Like the doctrine of evolution itself, that of transmigration has its roots in the world of reality; and it may claim such support as the great argument from analogy is capable of supplying.
Then, Professor Gustaf Stromberg, the famous Swedish astronomer, physicist and friend of Einstein also found the idea of rebirth appealing. Opinions differ whether human souls can be reincarnated on the earth or not. In 1936 a very interesting case was thoroughly investigated and reported by the government authorities in India. A girl (Shanti Devi from Delhi) could accurately describe her previous life (at Muttra, five hundred miles from Delhi) which ended about a year before her "second birth." She gave the name of her husband and child and described her home and life history. The investigating commission brought her to her former relatives, who verified all her statements. Among the people of India reincarnations are regarded as commonplace; the astonishing thing for them in this case was the great number of facts the girl remembered. This and similar cases can be regarded as additional evidence for the theory of the indestructibility of memory. Professor Julian Huxley, the distinguished British scientist who was Director General of UNESCO believed that rebirth was quite in harmony with scientific thinking. There is nothing against a permanently surviving spirit-individuality being in some way given off at death, as a definite wireless message is given off by a sending apparatus working in a particular way. But it must be remembered that the wireless message only becomes a message again when it comes in contact with a new, material structure - the receiver. So with our possible spirit-emanation. It... would never think or feel unless again 'embodied' in some way. Our per venalities are so based on body that it is really impossible to think of survival which would be in any true sense personal without a body of sorts... I can think of something being given off which would bear the same relation to men and women as a wireless message to the transmitting apparatus; but in that case 'the dead' would, so far as one can see, be nothing but disturbances of different patterns wandering through the universe until... they... came back to actuality of consciousness by making contact with something which could work as a receiving apparatus for mind. Even very practical and down-to-earth people like the American industrialist Henry Ford found the idea or rebirth acceptable. Ford was attracted to the idea of rebirth because, unlike the theistic idea or the materialistic idea, rebirth gives you a second chance to develop yourself. Henry Ford says: I adopted the theory of Reincarnation when I was twenty-six. Religion offered nothing to the point.. Even work could not give me complete satisfaction. Work is fume if we cannot utilize the experience we collect in one life in the next. When I discovered Reincarnation it was as if I had found a universal plan. I realized that there was a chance to work out my ideas. Time was no longer limited. I was no longer a slave to the hands of the clock...(continued in next post)(continued from previous post) Genius is experience. Some seem to think that it is a gift or talent, but it is the fruit of long experience in many lives. Some are older souls than others, and so they know more... The discovery of Reincarnation put my mind at ease... If you preserve a record of this conversation, write it so that it puts men's minds at ease. I would like to communicate to others the calmness that the long view of life gives to us.
So the Buddhist teachings of rebirth does have some scientific evidence to support it. It is logically consistent and it goes a long way to answering questions that theistic and the materialistic theories fail to do. But it is also very comforting. What can be worse than a theory of life that gives you no second chance, no opportunity to amend the mistakes you have made in this life and no time to further develop the skills and abilities you have nurtured in this life. But according to the Buddha, if you fail to attain Nirvana in this life, you will have the opportunity to try again next time. If you have made mistakes in this life, you will be able to correct yourself in the next life. You will truly be able to learn from your mistakes. Things you were unable to do or achieve in this life may well become possible in the next life. What a wonderful teaching! -
(continued)
Anyway here's the boy's story.. Boy remembers Past Life Being Shot in WWII
About past lives ... Uniontown WW II flyer's memories in Louisiana boy
By Judy Kroeger
DAILY COURIER
Thursday, April 15, 2004
James Leininger, 6, of Lafayette, La., loves airplanes.
"He has always been extraordinarily interested in airplanes," said James' mother, Andrea Leininger, by telephone from their Louisiana home.
Lots of kids love airplanes, but James' story is unique. He has memories of being a World War II fighter pilot from Uniontown -- Lt. James McCready Huston, shot down near Iwo Jima in 1945.
At 18 months old, his father, Bruce Leininger, took James to the Kavanaugh Flight Museum in Dallas, Texas, where the toddler remained transfixed by World War II aircraft.
A few months later, the nightmares began.
"They were terrible, terrible," Andrea said. "He would scream, 'airplane crash, on fire, little man can't get out!' He'd be kicking, with his hands pointing up at the ceiling."
When James was 2 1/2 years old, he and Andrea were shopping and he wanted a toy airplane. "I said to him, 'Look, it has a bomb on the bottom' and he told me, 'That's not a bomb, it's a drop tank.' I had no idea what a drop tank was."
Neither of the Leiningers have ever served in the military, nor are they involved with aviation. Until James began showing an interest in planes, they had nothing aviation-related in their home.
Andrea's mother sent her a book by Pennsylvania author Carol Bowman, called "Children's Past Lives." The Leiningers started using Bowman's techniques of affirming James' nightmares and assuring him that the experiences happened to a different person, not the person he was now. "It helped. The nightmares stopped almost immediately,"; Andrea said.
However, the memories did not stop, but they do not come up all the time.
"I was reading him a story and he got a faraway look," she recalled. "I asked what happened to your plane? 'Got shot,' he said. Where? 'Engine.' Where did it crash? 'Water.' When I asked him who shot the plane, he gave me a look like a teenager, rolling his eyes, 'the Japanese,' like who else could it have been?
"What little kid knows about the Japanese," she asked. "He said he knew it was a Japanese plane because of the red sun. My husband and I were shell-shocked."
James provided other information. He said his earlier name was James, he flew a Corsair and took off on a boat called the Natoma, and he remembered a fellow flyer named Jack Larson.
Foods can set James' memories off, too.
"I hadn't made meatloaf in 10 years, so James had never had it," Andrea said. "When he sat down, he said, 'Meatloaf! I haven't had that since I was on the Natoma.' When we were getting ice cream one day, he told me that they could have ice cream every day on the Natoma."
Bruce began researching his son's memories and discovered a small escort carrier called the Natoma Bay, which was present at the Battle of Iwo Jima. Twenty-one of its crew perished. Bruce also discovered that only one of the Natoma's crew was named James, James Huston.
James Huston's plane was hit in the engine by Japanese fire on March 3, 1945, went down in flames and sank immediately. Flyer Jack Larson witnessed the crash.(continued from previous post)
James Huston was born Oct. 22, 1923, in South Bend, Ind., and lived in Uniontown during the 1930s. His father was James McCready Huston Sr., of Brownsville, and Daryl Green Huston, who was born in New Geneva and grew up in Uniontown. James was the only son.
According to Lt. Huston's cousin, Bob Huston of Flatwoods, the elder Huston started several newspapers and published 13 books. He was living in Brownsville when two Navy officers informed Huston of his son's death.
"I didn't know James," Bob Huston said. His parents were divorced, "but I knew his father. He stayed with us in Brownsville. James was on his 50th mission and would have come home if he'd lived another five minutes."
The Leiningers have been in touch with Bob Huston.
"I knew what happened to James (Huston)," he said. "I was excited to hear from them (the Leiningers). The boy's mother was flabbergasted when all this happened."
Andrea believes that her son is the reincarnation of Lt. James Huston. "There are so many little things. I believe in reincarnation now."
Her husband, Bruce, remains skeptical. "He started researching to disprove what James was telling us, and ended up proving it all," he said. "I think he believes that James Huston's spirit has manifested itself in our son somehow."
The Leiningers have been in touch with Natoma Bay veterans, too.
"We didn't tell the veterans for a long time," Andrea said, "but everyone has a story about having had a spirit visit them. James' sister, Anne Barron, was in California talking to him the day he was killed. Anne believes James' story, because he has provided so much information that only her brother could have known.
"Families of the 21 men who were killed are talking to each other," continued Andrea. "It's brought them together."
The Leiningers plan to attend this year's Natoma Bay reunion and bring their son, James.
Andrea doesn't know why this has happened.
"If he did come back, why? Maybe it was so my husband could write the book about the Natoma Bay," she said. "It helped turn the tide of the war in the Pacific and was one of the most highly decorated carriers, but it hasn't received much recognition.";
She said her husband has been working on a chronology of what's happened to James and is researching the book. "He has flight plans from the missions and has spent a year and a half on research. In the introduction, he's writing about how he found out about the ship."
That discovery, through a toddler's fascination with airplanes and nightmares, has led to a segment on national television.
ABC contacted Carol Bowman about her work on children's past lives and James Leininger's experience was the most verifiable, Andrea said. "And we agreed to share his story."
Chris Cuomo will host the segment, which airs tonight at 10.
Judy Kroeger can be reached at [email protected] or (724) 626-3538.
------------------------
From : [email protected]
Sent : Friday, July 01, 2005 1:12:03 AM
Subject : ABC Primetime Special
Check your local listings for ABC --- Primetime - Thursday, June 30 at 10 p.m.
ET:
"Primetime Live" takes a look at "The Unexplainable":
ABC Primetime television will be rebroadcasting the story of James Leininger,
age 6, of Lafayette, La. James remembers a life as a?World War II fighter pilot
from Uniontown -- Lt. James McCready Huston, shot down near Iwo Jima in 1945.
For more information about this fascinating case, click on the following link
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/news/s_189477.html
Have a WONDERFUL DAY
Children's Past Lives
Forum Staff---------------
And here's an interesting video:
---------
Dear Friends,
You should watch this 46 minute video. It is very
interesting. This is a case of a child in Scotland who
speaks of a previous life lived by him, which was
investigated and video-taped as the study progressed.
The url which gives access to the video in UTube is
given below:
http://www.guba.com/watch/2000869810
There have been thousands of such cases that have
been reported and verified by independent researchers
in Sri Lanka, India and eastern countries, where the
adherents of Buddhism and Hinduism find it acceptable
based on their teachings. Hindus believe in Reincarnation
whilst Buddhists believe in Rebirth.
With Mettha,
Shan
http://www.guba.com/watch/2000869810
Update: links updated.---------------
Also see, Buddhism and Science by Ajahn Brahmavamso:
-
On the Buddhist perspective of Creator/God and the teaching of Dependent Origination:
--------------------
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Slightly edited from the first topic in our forum regarding Creationism: How the Brahma believed He was God?
In Buddha's days there were many many different teachings, one popular one was Brahmanism. In fact the Brahma was still worshipped nowadays. Brahma was known to be "The Supreme One, the All-mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All".
In Buddhism, the Mahabrahma resides in the 1st Jhana plane, the first plane among the 8 jhanic planes. There were higher realms above where he lives that he was unaware of, and above it all, transcending and liberation from the 8 Jhanic planes and all Samsaric planes, is Nirvana. Nevertheless all the devas below the 1st Jhana planes considered him as the Creator God. Buddha did not subscribe to the belief of such a notion that the Universe and its Inhabitants were the Creation of the Mahabrahma. He met with the Brahma, asked him questions which he could not answer. Eventually he has taken refuge in the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.
The Buddha was also known to have said this,
If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why does he order such misfortune
If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why prevail deceit, lies and ignorance
And he such inequity and injustice create?
If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Then an evil master is he, (O Aritta)
Knowing what's right did let wrong prevail!
When the previous universe was destroyed and this universe was formed, the Mahabrahma was first to be reborn. Other subsequent brahmas/devas were to be reborn.
'On this, brethren, the one who was first reborn thinks thus to himself: " I am Brahmà, the Great Brahmà, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days the Father of all that are and are to be. 'These other beings are of my creation. And why is that so? A while ago I thought, 'Would that they might come!' And on my mental aspiration, behold the beings came." DN 1 2:5
In reality, the universe works by the law of Karma and he has no control over the system of karma.
The Venerable Ledi Sayadaw, a highly renowned Myanmar scholar-monk of the first part of this century, gave a careful analysis of the powers of Maha Brahma in his Niyama Dipani (MB pp. 138-39). He states that although Maha Brahma can perform all sorts of transformations, he cannot actually create independent creatures, change the kammic law of cause and effect, or keep anyone from growing old or dying. Brahma can use his special powers to transport a man to the brahma plane for a short visit, but he cannot ensure that someone will be reborn there.
from http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol5no3f.htm:
When he came to know about Sakyamuni Buddha in the human world who speaks of the universal truth, he was curious and arrived at the human world with the intention to debate with the Buddha. The Buddha, with his ability to know another's mind, knew his intention and asked, "You claim to be the creator of the human race and all things in the universe, is this a fact?"
The king replied, "Yes, it is."
Buddha continued to question him, "Since you created life, why did you also create death? Is death created by you too?"
The king paused for while, and thinking that everyone loves life and nobody welcomes death, he replied, "I did not create death."
Buddha asked him again, "All human beings experience sickness, did you create sickness also?" The king knew that nobody likes to be ill, and he replied, "I did not create illness."
Buddha asked many questions in succession, but the king denied that he created them. Eventually, he admitted that he did not create the universe and all things in it, and certainly not the human race. The king of heavens was full of regrets and he felt ashamed. Finally, he accepted Buddha as his teacher and invited Him to spread the Dharma in the heavens.(continued below)
http://www.mahindarama.com/e-library/whybuddhism2.html
"To those who talked about the first cause of this world, the Buddha responded by saying that it is impossible to find a first cause since everything is changing, interdependent and conditioned by other things. Something that acts as the cause in the present may become the effect in the future. Later that same effect may again become the cause. Such phenomenon continues ad infinitum. It is called the universal law of Anicca or impermanency.”-----
http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/dharmajim/analysis.html
The question is whether or not the view of pratityasamutpada (Dependent Origination), the General Theory I am discussing, infers a final cause, or source, either logically or temporally, or both, from which emerge all phenomena. If the General Theory does infer this, then rendering the General Theory with the term “dependent” would be accurate. I say this because in the monotheistic traditions, as well as in the platonic traditions, all things exist dependently; but what the monotheistic tradition means by this is that all things exist by the grace of an ultimate source, and that source is God.
On the other hand, if the General Theory does not infer such a final source or ground, then I need to ask the location of that which brings forth the appearances of this world. When I contemplate the General Theory I do not observe any inference for a final cause or source of existing things, and to which existing things return. The General Theory simply points to other things as the source for any particular thing. “When this exists, that comes to be,” draws our attention to other existing things. Once again, I see no reason, given the General Theory, to infer that the Buddha meant to imply the existence of a final source.
In addition, there exist very good historical reasons for rejecting the idea, in a Buddhist context, for an ultimate source interpretation of the General Theory. For example, Buddhism never developed a creation myth or story. Instead, Buddhism frequently refers to existence as beginningless and endless. This lack of a creation mythos, from the perspective of the various monotheisms, is quite distinctive. But this lack of a creation mythos in Buddhism is consistent with the view of the General Theory; I think I can infer that the lack of a creation mythos in Buddhism is directly derived from the central role of the General Theory.
The lack of a creation mythos in Buddhism reflects the General Theory’s focus on the appearance of things due to the existence of other things. Those other things, in turn, exist due to the appearance of other things, which are also existing due to other things, etc. This generates an infinite regress, which is logically self-referentially consistent, and has no beginning and no end. Notice also that the General Theory does not require the intercession of an ouside agency in order for this river of relationships to begin. Because the Buddha considered the General Theory as an elucidation of the very nature of things and existence as such, no special catalyst for this onward flowing is necessary. The location, therefore, of the source for the appearance of things is simply other things, spread out over all of existence, both in time and in space. In some of the ancient Indian exegeses they refer to this as “unlocated nirvana”; unlocated because this ultimate nature does not confine itself to any particular thing or corner of existence, nirvana because it is precisely this ultimate nature and its realization which brings about the peace of the cessation of all sorrow.
-----
http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/dharmajim/DharmaView.html
The principle here, derived from the core insight of Interdependent Transformation, is that all things appear from a causal base. This understanding is extended to the existence of entire universes or world systems. The Dalai Lama makes this same point in his commentary on Shantideva’s Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life, the Ninth Chapter on Wisdom. Verse 124 speaks directly to this discussion:
124. ... [I]f Creation were dependent upon conditions, the complete collection of those causal circumstances would be the cause, and not Ishvara [Note: Ishvara was a common name for God in ancient India, similar to Yahweh.] If the complete conditions were assembled, Ishvara would be powerless not to create; and if they were absent, there would be no creation.
The Dalai Lama’s Comment:
If creation and destruction are dependent upon a collection of causal conditions, the totality of those conditions would be the cause, and not a God who is independent of and uninfluenced by events. If the causal conditions were assembled, Ishvara would be powerless not to create the resultant phenomena; and if they were not assembled, those phenomena would not be produced.
( Transcendent Wisdom, the Dalai Lama, translated by B. Alan Wallace, Snow Lion, Ithaca, New York, 1998, page 93.)
-----
In Visuddhimagga XIX:
Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple
sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the
concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the
volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no
recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is
well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language,
when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or
with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the
result.
No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits;
Empty phenomena roll on:
This only is the correct view.
And while the deeds and their results
Roll on and on, conditioned all,
There is no first beginning found,
Just as it is with seed and tree. ...
No god, no Brahma, can be called
The maker of this wheel of life:
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all.
In Buddhism, we believe that pondering over theories of Creation brings no benefits at all to our spiritual practice, enlightenment, and liberation from samsara.
Kinds of speech to be avoided by contemplatives
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these -- talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not -- he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to debates such as these -- 'You understand this doctrine and discipline? I'm the one who understands this doctrine and discipline. How could you understand this doctrine and discipline? You're practicing wrongly. I'm practicing rightly. I'm being consistent. You're not. What should be said first you said last. What should be said last you said first. What you took so long to think out has been refuted. Your doctrine has been overthrown. You're defeated. Go and try to salvage your doctrine; extricate yourself if you can!' -- he abstains from debates such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue."
-- DN 2
Ten wholesome topics of conversation
"There are these ten topics of [proper] conversation. Which ten? Talk on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge & vision of release. These are the ten topics of conversation. If you were to engage repeatedly in these ten topics of conversation, you would outshine even the sun & moon, so mighty, so powerful -- to say nothing of the wanderers of other sects."
-- AN X.69
-------
"Malunkhyaputta Sutta stresses that whether the universe was created or uncreated, finite or infinite, is irrelevant to our main spiritual concerns: the cause and cessation of suffering:
"Therefore Malunkhyaputta, bear the undeclared as undeclared. Malunkhyaputta, what are the not declared? The world is eternal, is not declared by me. The world is not eternal, is not declared by me. They are not essential for the principles of the holy life, they do not lead to turning away, to detachment, to cessation, to appeasement, to realisation, to enlightenment and to extinction. Malunkhyaputta, what are the declared by me? This, is unpleasant, is declared. This, is its arising, is declared. This, is its cessation is declared. This is the path to its cessation, is declared. Malunkhyaputta, why are these declared by me? These are the essentials for the principles of the holy life; they lead to turning away, to detachment, to cessation, to appeasement, to realisation, to enlightenment and to extinction. Malunkhyaputta, I declare them." MN 64"Therefore in Buddhism, these kind of speculations about a Creator is useless. Instead, like a scientist, the Buddha encouraged the Buddhist practitioners to find out for themselves the truths that the Buddha said, to put it to test, and to see for ourselves, and to get enlightened. Buddhism does not encourage any blind belief and dogmas (see Kalama Sutra), and also encourages analytical questioning -- whether this teaching actually helps us. If it does, then we should put it to practice.
When we truly realise the truth of Dependent Origination, the question of Creator/Creation will no longer arise, because we understood the principle in which everything arises and pass away -- which is by conditioned 'genesis'. By realising the nature of reality (empty of self and phenomena, dependent arising) we will also be liberated from all sufferings of samsara and the cycle of rebirth.
Kalama Sutra
"Rely not on the teacher/person, but on the teaching. Rely not on the words of the teaching, but on the
spirit of the words. Rely not on theory, but on experience.Do not believe in anything simply because you
have heard it. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. Do
not believe anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is
written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and
elders. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is
conducive to the good and the benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."
- the Buddha
Note: this is just a summary, please read the entire sutra here: http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/resources/kalama_sutra.html -
Hmm, thats a big chunk of information to digest. After reading about rebirth, these thoughts came to mind: 1) Do humans always rebirth as humans? 2) What about animals? Can they rebirth? 3) Can one life form, after rebirth, appear as another life form? (bacteria => chicken maybe)?
-
Originally posted by dAiyAm0nd0:
Hmm, thats a big chunk of information to digest.
After reading about rebirth, these thoughts came to mind:
1) Do humans always rebirth as humans?
2) What about animals? Can they rebirth?
3) Can one life form, after rebirth, appear as another life form? (bacteria => chicken maybe)?Take your time to read them... hehe...
1) No, it is possible to reborn in other realms according to conditions, specifically karmic conditions. There are 6 realms in general (which are then split up into more categories such as the 31 planes of existence) -- hell, ghost, animal (three lower realms) and human, asuras, celestial beings/heaven (three higher realms).
2) Yes they are also reborn and are fully conscious beings. So we should have compassion for them and not treat as 'soulless creatures' -- actually we are all 'soulless' (no atman, atomistic self, as explained earlier) but we are 'conscious' and can feel pain, have feelings and emotions, etc.
3) Bacteria and viruses are mostly unconscious beings and do not take rebirth. Being made up single or few cells, they do not have the complicated mechanism/ability to have conscious cognition and intellect, and hence it is OK to take your medicine or antibiotics. They are purely biological functionings, and are without minds.
But to answer your question -- different realm beings can end up in another realm after life.
-
One more thing - it should be noted that in Buddhism, we do not treat any realm as permanent/eternal. We do not believe in eternal hell or eternal paradise, even though their lifespan in these realms are very long. Eventually they will be reborn again. Hence, even heaven is not ultimate in Buddhism. We do not seek for rebirth in heaven but complete enlightenment and liberation.
