Talk:Rebirth (Buddhism)

Untitled

I'd like to add something to this page about the common western Buddhist's view of this as a metaphor, etc.

But before that... does anyone think it might be good to explain the POINT of reincarnation, rather than just the details and/or debate surrounding it? I mean, to begin the article with why it's an important teaching, regardless of whether it's believed or not?

--Jel 16:30, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, there are a number of issues here, among them being my objection to severing the discussion of reincarnation from that of "Buddhist rebirth" and your point regarding reinterpretations of it as a metaphor. Please feel free to chip away at the article, though I would caution you against identifying the metaphorical interpretation as the "common" "western" one, as I'm not sure it is.कुक्कुरोवाच 19:00, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Jel - be aware that there are many numbers of Western Buddhists who do not in any way consider rebirth to be metaphoric. There are plenty of Western Buddhists who do not consider the hell realms to be metaphoric. There are some Western Buddhists who believe that the world as a sphere is metaphoric, and that the Buddhist Kalachakra view of the world (flat, with a mountain in the middle) is the literal truth. however, if you wish to qualify your claims into a more specific group (e.g. the FWBO - not that I know what the FWBO say), then go ahead. (20040302 13:29, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC))

The "Esoteric" Interpretation

(Ksolway: 13 Nov 2006) This is the interpretation which views the language of reincarnation simply as a poetic or metaphorical means of talking about cause and effect, change, or the process of becoming.

It is not properly dealt with in this article.

"Traditional" (exoteric) reincarnation happens in a narrowly linear way. For example, it is claimed that the current Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama. Most Buddhists believe that they will have a future life *distinct* from other people. They do not believe they are reborn as their children, for example - even though cause and effect dictates it.

Cause and effect does not happen in such a narrowly linear way that is confined to a single line of individual consecutive lives.

Thus the teaching from the Bible: "One sows and another reaps", is correct, and echoes the following verse from Shantideva:

"It is a mistaken conception to think,
That I shall experience the suffering of my next life.
For it is another person who dies,
And another who will be reborn." - Shantideva ("Guide to the bodhisattva's way of life")

I propose adding an additional paragraph, or section, explaining this non-linear view that is based on the infinite workings of cause and effect.

Rejection of rebirth?

Buddhadasa

Buddhadasa's stance that the 'dogma' of rebirth is not in line with the essecne of Buddhism may be worth mentioning here. See R.S. Bucknell & M. Stuart-Fox (1983), The ‘three knowledges’ of Buddhism: Implications of Buddhadasa's interpretation of rebirth. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Copied from User talk:Joshua Jonathan#Dalai Lama and The Four Noble Truths

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The Dalai Lama wrote a book titled The Four Noble Truths. It was published by Harper Collins in 1997 ISBN 0722535503. On page 51, he wrote,

Quote: "So in Buddhism there is an understanding that so long as we are subject to the process of rebirth, all other forms of suffering are natural consequences of that initial starting point. We could characterize our life as being within the cycle of birth and death, and sandwiched in between these two, as it were, are the various sufferings related to illness and ageing."

The Dalai Lama goes on to explain that even pleasurable experiences ultimately bring suffering, all joyful experiences are tainted... as long as we are unenlightened. The premises of re-birth, re-death, samsara, dukkha and cyclic existence are central to Buddhism and other Indic theologies. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch: it's funny you bring this up now. I was about to ask if you've ever read something from Buddhadasa, a Tai monk who argued that rebirth is not Buddhistic. He argues that anatta/sunyatta is central to Buddhist thought, and incompatible with rebirth. Rebirth, in his understanding, is the constant rebirth of "I" and "mine" in this very life. I think he's got a good point, a very good point; a point which is actually understood by most Buddhists throughout the world, and which relates to the practical approach of Buddhism: self-restraint through insight, meditation, and loving-kundness. See Buddhadasa (1985a) [1961], "The essential points of the Buddhist teachings", Heart-wood from the Bo tree, and Buddhadas, Anatta and rebirth, for an introduction. It's intruguing. @JimRenge: this might be of interest to you too.

NB: I went through one previous "discussion" with Robert; his point there, which I'd already happily forgotten, was that he thought that rebirth is a western interpretation of Buddhism, which is wrong, of course. But there may be merit in the idea that rebirth is a Buddhist addition to Buddhism. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:17, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

See also T. A. P. Aryaratne, The Philosophy of Anatta: A Reconstruction of the Real Teaching of Gotama. And there is more: Lynn A. Silva (1979), The Problem of the Self in Buddhism and Christianity, aslo mentions Aryaratne (p.55), and refers (p.53-55) to J.G. Jennings (1947), The Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha, Oxford University Press. And there is I. Hattori chapter 2.pdf - Shodhganga], p.67 ff (search for link at Google; it's blacklisted):

The theory of Anatta doctrine and the doctrine of transmigration ultimately end in mutual contradiction. (p.67)

Hattori also refers to Jennings, Silva, and Aryaratne, and a T. Watuji (p.68), quoted as stating:

W e can find the theory of transmigration in the Nikayas. But we reaUze that this theory is found not in the texts which teach about anatta, skandhas, and paticcasamuppada, but in the texts which have a mythical characteristic.

Hattori then states:

He concludes that the theory of transmigration was adapted by Early Buddhism for the purpose of fighting against the hedonism, pleasure-loving people, who ignore the idea of cause and effect.
Jennings holds a somewhat similar opinion to that of Watuji. His opinion is that the traditional idea of rebirth, which is completely incompatible with the doctrine of anatta was later accommodated by Buddhists under pressure from Hinduism. He, for that reason, rejects all passages in the Nikayas referring to rebirth as later additions.

There's work to do! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Patchanee Malikhao and Jan Servaes (2015), The Journalist as Change Agent, p.52-54, in: Shelton A. Gunaratne, Mark Pearson, Sugath Senarath (2015), Mindful Journalism and News Ethics in the Digital Era: A Buddhist Approach, explain Buddhadasa, but also refer to Phra Brahmagunabhorn (aka Bhikku P.A. Payutto):

They both refuted the interpretation of the PS Model as the cycle of past, present and future life or re-becoming.

They refer to Jackson (2003), Buddhadasa. Theravada Buddhism and Modernist Reform in Thailand, p.90-91. See also Payutto and Buddhadasa themselves. @Javierfv1212: you seem to know more about this?

Ironically, RW often referred to Payutto as an author who stressed the authenticity of the Pali canon... Could it be that this is the (a) source of his ideas on Buddhism and rebirth? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

JJ: Indeed. You are touching upon what has been one of the central debates within Buddhism since ancient times, as well as one of those that has been a source of disagreements between the Buddhists, Hindus, Jains and some extinct Indic traditions from about the second half of the 1st-millennium BCE through about the 12th-century prior to the theo-political shock thereafter. One set of questions that all of them attempted to answer, rationalize and explain over 1,500 years: Is there rebirth? why (in the axiological sense, most came up with the karma theories, exception: Charvakas)? how (this is the crux of one of their disagreements)? what is reborn (another source of their disagreements)? when with timeline between death and rebirth (Jains came up with the most interesting elaborate answers)? where (leading to the samsara theories, Jains and Buddhists came up with the quite sophisticated models over time)? Buddhist answers to these questions tried to integrate in their anatta "no-self, no-soul" premise, which Jains and Hindus wholeheartedly disagreed with for they both rejected anatta and they both relied on the premise of atta/atman/jiva.

Nagasena, the 2nd-century BCE Buddhist scholar, explained how rebirth occurs using the "two candles" and "one lits up the other without ever touching" example. Those who claim rebirth is only found in mythical tales such as Jataka are mistaken or misinformed or creatively reinterpreting, per mainstream scholarly sources. Suttas do mention "repeated births and repeated deaths" and equivalent terms (punarmrtyu, punarbhava, etc). See the various interpretive translations, for example, here, here, here, here (pp 133-134, or from p 130 for context) etc.

Every few centuries, including some modern-era movements in Thailand and Japan, has revisited these questions... so obvious and forceful they are to those who reflect on the core Buddhist premises, then ponder what it implies/means. Many accept these Buddhist premises as given, internally consistent and satisfactory. Some of those Buddhists who revisit these questions bring back "self/soul" concepts, some deny rebirth or anatta or one of the central premises of Buddhism. One set of modernistic writers and interpreters of Buddhism suggest Hindus/Jains copied the Buddhists in "rebirth and ethical theories surrounding it, etc", while another set blames typically the former with statements such as "[rebirth theory was] accommodated by Buddhists under pressure from Hinduism". The direct evidence, either way, is missing or very weak, but inferentially plausible and inferentially implausible! So, the lovely arguments go, round and round. Cyclic existence of ideas, questions, answers, understanding, misunderstanding,.... pretty much everything!

I do not want to preach to the quire here, but for RW-alikes and those newbie talk page stalkers reading this I note: in wikipedia, we must stick with what the mainstream peer-reviewed scholarship state, avoid fringe views, and include a neutral mention of the minority/other sides to the extent these views have been published in a manner that meet our RS guidelines. Sorry, JJ, this answer is longer than I would like. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 09:36, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

(ps) See this, this and this too, just the foreword of the first if you are short of time. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 09:39, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Glad to see you are back Ms Sarah Welch. Joshua, I think Buddhadhasa´s view on rebirth is indeed interesting. He argues that the sutras have two levels of meaning. "While at the hermeneutic level of phasa khon [everyday language] the Buddha's words are taken literally, phasa tham phasa tham [Dhamma language], reveals the hidden meaning of the Buddha's words." (...) "The demythologized view of Buddhadasa is that birth (jati) means the moment-by moment birth or rebirth of an egoistic sense of "I" and "mine" through the twelvefold links of causation in the process of dependent coarising." (Odin, Steve (2011). Review: Buddhadāsa: Theravada Buddhism and Modernist Reform in Thailand by Peter A. Jackson, Philosophy East and West 61 (1), 221-231. See p 223-224)

Buddhadhasas view of rebirth became popular among educated Thais in the seventies.(Gosling, David (1975). The Scientific and Religious Beliefs of Thai Scientists and Their Inter-relationship, Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science 4 (1), 1-18. /p.10) I don´t think demythologized interpretations are new. Pali sutras mention six realms of rebirth. In Tiantai doctrine, these six realms, plus four higher realms, "are not courses into which one may be reborn, but realms of consciousness, all of which entail each other." (Bowring, Richard (2008). The religious traditions of Japan, 500-1600 (Paperback ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 123. ISBN 9780521851190.) JimRenge (talk) 00:26, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you! I'd also been thinking about the realms of rebirth; once and a while I meet a hungry ghost someone craving for love and affection, whose thirst is unstilable... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

• Marissa Abruzzini, Do All Zen Buddhists Believe in Rebirth?, SevenPonds (blog).
• Brad Warner, The Myth of Rebirth, Hardcore Zen (blog)

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:18, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

JJ and JimRenge: Interesting comparison of Buddhadasa to "neo-Vedantic" thought. This source (p. 230, note 3, Donald Swearer (1989)) states, "A western critic might justifiably argue that Buddhadasa's view is uniquely Buddhistic, but the Theravada criticism that Buddhadasa takes a syncretic, "neo-Vedantic" position seems to be misplaced". Swearer has studied and written much about ācariya Buddhadasa's views since about 1960 and is a reliable source (p. 2). I hesitate in adding the Vedantic comparisons, for now, because we must check how mainstream scholarly this is and then carefully reflect on the context. Interesting note there JimRenge, thank you for it. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:11, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Continuation at this page

• Stephen Batchelor, Rebirth: A Case for Buddhist Agnosticism:

Many contemporary forms of Buddhism in the West—especially Zen and vipassana—seem to pay little attention to the doctrine of rebirth, emphasizing instead the importance of living more fully and authentically in the present. Teachers in these traditions often use the idea of rebirth metaphorically to describe the moment-to-moment process of "dying" and being "reborn." However appealing, psychologically astute, and didactically skillful such interpretations may be, they can give rise to the misleading impression that in traditional Zen or Theravadan cultures the doctrine of rebirth is likewise not taken literally. Not only is belief in rebirth firmly adhered to in all Buddhist countries, from Japan to Sri Lanka, but—especially in East Asia—it has become the very basis for the livelihood of the majority of monks and nuns. A typical Zen temple in Korea or Japan spends far more time offering services to assist departed parishioners on their way to a better rebirth than on instructing the living in zazen.

• Stephen Batchelor and Robert Thurman, Reincarnation: A Debate
• Doug Smith, A Secular Evaluation of Rebirth
• buddhism.stackexchange.com, Did the Buddha mean this by “rebirth”?
• ANĀLAYO, REBIRTH AND THE GANDHABBA:

at least from the perspective of the Vibhaṅga, the term 'birth' can meaningfully be applied to the coming into being of mental states in the present moment as well as to rebirth in another life, without one of this modes of understanding contradicting the other.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Jāti (Buddhism)

What do you think of merging Jāti (Buddhism) with Rebirth (Buddhism)? JimRenge (talk) 17:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

+1. Please remove the editorialized quote farm in Jati (Buddhism) please when you merge. Reminds of Dorje108, but not for that reason. We can do better and be more balanced. This article should also have a section for the other sides, such as Zen Buddhism and Buddhadasa, summarized from peer-reviewed scholarly publications. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Might as well merge back into Twelve Nidānas. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:23, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I favor JimRenge's proposal slightly more. Jati could just be a section here. But, there is no harm in keeping a separate article, after the cleanup you two did in last few days in the Jati(Buddhism) article... to improve it further, maybe we can add a bit more about the Suttas and other texts where the term appears, the link between the words Jati (birth) and Jataka (= birth stories), etc. I just checked three encyclopedias on Buddhism and none have an article on Jati, but as we might expect the Pali-English dictionary does have a good discussion on it:

Quote: Jāti (f.) 1. birth, rebirth, possibility of rebirth, "future life" as disposition to be born again, "former life" as cause of this life. Defined (cp. the corresp. expln of jarā) as: yā tesaŋ tesaŋ sattanaŋ tamhi tamhi satta -- nikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti abhinibbatti khandhānaŋ pātubhāvo āyataṇānaŋ paṭilābho D ii.305 =S ii.3=Nd2 257. -- Jāti is a condition precedent of age, sickness & death, and is fraught with sorrow, pain & disappointment. It is itself the final outcome of a kamma, resting on avijjā, performed in anterior births; & forms thus the concluding link in the chain of the Paṭicca -- samuppāda. Under the first aspect it is enumd in various formulae, either in full or abbreviated (see Nd2 258), viz, (a) as (1) jāti, (2) jarā, (3) vyādhi, (4) maraṇa, (5) sokaparidevadukkhadomanass' upāyāsa in the dukkhaŋ ariyasaccaŋ (the noble truth of what is misfortune) Vin i.10; A i.176; iii.416; ˚dhamma destined to be born, etc. M i.161 sq., 173; -- A v.216; Nd2 258, 304, 630, etc., in var. connections

Some of the old stuff in the 12 Nidana article, added by IPs related to Jati etc, does not reflect mainstream scholarship... it too needs source checks and a scrub. If we decide to merge the Jati(B) article here, we could use copious refn notes to explain the context/usage etc, as JJ has done in other articles. I have no strong feelings with merge or no merge, here or elsewhere, am fine with whatever you two decide. The term should at least be mentioned somewhere in this article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the Pali-English dictionary quote, I have found an entry in Buswell´s dictionary of Buddhism, p.382: "Jati: In Sanskrit and Pāli, “birth,” “origination.” Birth is one of the varieties of the suffering (DUHkKHA) that is inherent in the conditioned realm of existence and the eleventh of the twelve links in the chain of dependent origination (PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA)." ... etc. The term does not appear to be identical with rebirth although there is some overlap. A merge may be possible but we might as well keep the improved article. JimRenge (talk) 20:44, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Rosalinda Pajares megenio

Who is rosalinda Pajares Megenio, base of her reincarnation life 124.105.49.191 (talk) 12:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)