Brad Warner has a provocative post up about rebirth. Or, more specifically, about literal rebirth. There is, apparently, a lot of confusion on this issue within the Internet school of Buddhism. (I should explain that the Internet school consists of people who don't know much about Buddhism getting online and explaining it to each other.)
Anyway, someone blasted Sensei Warner for being "materialist" and not accepting literal rebirth, as (the someone thought) Buddhists are supposed to. I liked the sensei's answer -- "There is no 'literal you' to get 'literally reborn.'" He also makes the point that religious authority figures don't know any more about life after death than anyone else, because they're not dead yet.
People want explanations for things they don't understand. That's human nature. Unfortunately, many of us will seize upon a fabricated or speculative answer rather than accept that a particular thing might be unknowable. And if an answer we like comes from a religious authority figure, that's gold. It doesn't matter if there's no logical reason to believe the authority figure knows any more than we do.
Most religions consist of some spiritual authority explaining something mysterious or unknowable, such as life after death. People expect religions to give them concrete answers to mystical questions. However, when people asked the Buddha such things, he'd refuse to answer or tell them it was an unskillful question.
The Buddha taught that people can realize enlightenment for themselves through practice of the Eightfold Path. But people get impatient with that; they expect answers. So many schools have strewn all manner of provisional answers along the path. And some of these "provisional" teachings are pretty far removed from what the Buddha taught. But they can be useful as entry points, or as tools a climber might use to ascend a sheer wall, so they aren't necessarily wrong if you don't cling to them.
People often do stick on one level and adopt a "literal" understanding of the teachings, of course. That's why most schools of Buddhism place great emphasis on practice. Sincere practice is the key to seeing beyond the literal.
The confusion comes in when people get their hands on provisional answers and think that's what Buddhism teaches. I run into that a lot. The Web is full of people who have read some books about Buddhism, or gone to some workshops, and they've got it all figured out. And, indeed, often they have cobbled together grand conceptual models that rationally explain all the doctrines. And oh, they are so proud of those conceptual models.
The problem is, as Zen teacher Dennis Merzel has said, "Truth is not rational. Only our minds are ... Truth is what is left when we drop all concepts." I'd add that recognizing what we don't know is the beginning of wisdom.
I’ve an open mind about literal rebirth but as you (and Brad Warner) have mentioned I don’t know anyone who has died and confirmed it. There are teachers I respect that claim to have experienced things in meditation that suggest rebirth, and I’ve had similar experience myself. I’m not qualified enough to decide if this is just a type of delusion – maybe it is the desire of the self not to die and nothing more. I certainly wouldn’t discount literal rebirth, but feel that there are more important things to worry about. Some people are more certain about the existence of a literal rebirth or convinced of the opposite – I’m not sure how they could have such firm opinions unless they have experienced it for themselves or have definite evidence that it doesn’t occur. I’m interested in what people on both sides of the argument have to say, but I don’t imagined I’ll be swayed too much one way or the other until I have some evidence from my own experience.
He also makes the point that religious authority figures don’t know any more about life after death than anyone else, because they’re not dead yet.
Of the many “near-death experiences” that have been written about, the one that, to date, I find most riveting, is that of Mellen-Thomas Benedict.
What’s interesting, and somehow very convincing, to me about this account is: (1) his body was “clinically dead” for at least an hour and a half; and (2) prior to his passing, he didn’t align with any religious/spiritual tradition.
So: who/what was it that experienced the things that “he” experienced?
That’s the real question, isn’t it?
what happens when we die? I’ve searched for the answer since at 18 yrs my best friend died of cancer. Halfway around the world I knew… I’ve found no one who honestly ‘knows’ . Wise monks counsel ‘buddhism will not answer this question and the question will not matter.” and i keep on training thinking my desire for this answer may be the impediment to my letting go. I agree with Paul and if anyone knows the answer ‘for sure’ please let me in on it.
If the Mississipi River flows in Iowa, and then in Mississipi, is it reborn? I think phenomona come and go like the scenery by the river, but the mind river flows on until it merges with the ocean. Rebirth seems impossible if the world is considered a solid entity, but if it is an illusory phenomona, like a dream or rainbow, then why not? Phenomona only arise in dependant origination with mind, and our experiences are projection of mind.
“So: who/what was it that experienced the things that ‘he’ experienced?
That’s the real question, isn’t it?”
When I first began studying about Buddhism I got very hung up on the rebirth question, in particular when hearing about such things as how a new Dalai Lama is chosen. I suppose I’m a ‘materialist’ in that I see no reason to believe that any aspect of my personality literally goes on in some other body after this one dies. I do believe in rebirth more metaphorically in that what goes around comes around. If I bring evil action into the world, it will play itself out in someone else’s life. Likewise good action. But the real point here is that it does not matter how literal rebirth is or is not. If there is no self, no permanent soul or essence, then what difference does it make? So I stopped worrying about the question, and just keep trying to remember that good old eight fold path.
So: who/what was it that experienced the things that “he” experienced?
EXCATLY! I’ve spent much time with the dead ‘literaly’ … when the senses rot away .. what is left to see, smell, etc.. is there any ‘thing’ beyond the congegating of the elements to form a sensing being (plant or animal) … how can this ‘thing’ go on? and yet
who/what was it that experienced the things that “he” experienced?
Dr. Ian Stevenson has collected a huge number of case studies of very young children who have detailed memories of past lives — which are subsequently verified. In other words, they know things that they could not have possibly known, simply based on the experiences of their current lives.
Concerning the mystical, maybe Joseph Campbell got it right when he said “Those who know, don’t know. Those who don’t know, know”. Is religion institutionalized superstition? Is life after death the ultimate ego?
I am also extremely uncomfortable with any quasi-scientific “proof” of individual reincarnation, but then I’m a Zen student. We don’t go there.
But as for your other question, about life after death and ego, the question for a Buddhist is, who dies? who is reborn? If there is no self, and the individual ego a delusion, then indeed there is no individual rebirth. There is “rebirth,” but not of an individual self.
An interesting examination of Ian Stevenson & his work:
http://www.skepdic.com/stevenson.html
The individual perception of ones reality creates ones reality (or truth). Truth (or ‘the explanation’) varies wildly from person to person. It is based on, well ones own reality, and there by verifiable only by the original One -the original perceiver. Acceptations are what we normally refer to as ‘truths’ -common knowledge, elementary ‘laws’, etc but these are not static truths.
Explanations and visualizations of everything -even death, hold a prodigious amount of meaning to the ‘truth’ of ones reality. What this says is that everyone is as correct as they are incorrect about everything (nothing is truly verifiable). I think this also shows the importance of keeping an open, non-judgmental mind towards others truths, -since there is not a single truth that can be verified. And all truths are an explanation of the One truth. This One truth (secret truth) can be experienced, using your five impressions, in everything around you..
Epi13 .. the reality ‘truth’ you refer to I would term relative truth but that is not the ‘truth’ I seek .. so what is this one truth (secret truth) that i can find using my senses?
Relative truth is the truth of the ego, and I agree that it is futile to seek out worldly acceptations. The secret truth (first mystery, or whatever one calls it) is found in everything; like a fractal prime mover. It is the enigma that explains all of this everything and nothing. It is the complete interconnectedness of Everything. This everything is the only thing that matters.. It is what creates and sustains Everything. Allowing Everything into your impressions is the only way to be in-contact with everything; sacrificing One’s Ego is the only way to be ‘here and now’. This is the state of perception and non-perception; this is the first commandment “thou shalt not have any other gods before me’; it is Om.
Everything is found ‘here’, not ‘there’ in One’s ego. Your sense’s are the gateways to ‘here’. When One is finally fully ‘here’, One will know the ‘truth’ One seeks.
“Is religion institutionalized superstition? Is life after death the ultimate ego?”
Perhaps, all “things” (”individual” and “collective”) are — from their own side — timelessly free of our conceptual designations. And — in relation to our experience — are exactly what our minds make of them — and so (thankfully!) open to an infinite creativity ….
and my question is: “how does one ‘know’ this truth. I certainly understand intellectually and even deeper than intellectually and ‘everything is found ‘here’ not ‘there’ is probably true however although training is ’simple’ my ego is wiley and saying ‘let go’ and doing it are two different things …. it’s easy to say but in practice not so easy … glimpses of truth (reality) are nice; spending long times in blissful states is nice and it all passes and duality sets in and anger rises and unless I’m willing I am once again lost in the battle of egos and greed, hate and delusion begin to reign until I become willing to go sit again. Truth may be found in everything but how does one live out that truth so as not to cause harm to self or others?
“Truth may be found in everything but how does one live out that truth so as not to cause harm to self or others?”
Well, yeah — this is of course The Big Question
And if you’re a practitioner (& it sounds like you are) then you already know that what is required is a willingness to engage in what may well be a very long-term process of becoming more and more familiar with and stable in truth/reality/Buddha-Nature/whatever — so that more and more our view and conduct come into alignment. And luckily we have all kinds of resources/teachings to help us: the Three Marks Of Existence, the Four Seals, the Four Immeasurables, the 8-Fold Path, etc. And working with a teacher is for most of us an indispensable ingredient, to catalyze the deeper aspects of the process.
with all the technological and mystical “advances” that have been made towards the “betterment” of the species, whenever faced with the question of rebirth i still find myself ROFL.