Your concept of Rebirth

[average]

What exactly comes to your mind when you think of rebirth? Do you subscribe to any sort of idea like rebirth?

To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever. But in a sense I see the self (subjective experiencer) as pure conscious awareness that doesn't come or go, has no absolute beginning and no absolute end, it just is.

[ChochemV2]

We are a consequence of biology and when we die we disappear.

[average]

We are a consequence of biology and when we die we disappear.

and in your mind, what is it that we actually 'are' ?
What does biology cause and what is its nature?

[ChochemV2]

I believe humans are they personification of boredom. Unlike every other life form on this planet we don't have to spend 99% of our lives looking for food, hunting for mates, and fending off aggressors. I don't see that there need be an afterlife or continuation of my consciousness after I die because I don't consider myself all that special. Why give only humans the capacity to understand enlightenment, why re-use souls in a never ending cycle, why should a heaven or hell exist, why do we need to go on?

[Alex Jacob]

I found this forum quite by accident. Allow me first to say hello. I am writing from the US but actually live in Colombia.

The way I came to find this place seems a bit odd: I was examining some information about brain difference between human males and females, and one link led to another.

The question of rebirth interests me greatly, as do all questions having to do with spirituality, religion, the nature of this existence, consciousness, ethics, art----well, so many interesting things to consider, if we have an open mind, if we wish to have an open mind. I am reading works on feminism right now, and also female biology (a book by Desmond Morris called The Naked Women).

(Before I got sidetracked I was reading Korolenko, Hesse and Antonio Machado (a Spanish poet). I became interested in these female-male questions for a number of reasons, some of them contradictory and even a little suspect, and might go into that in some other place. I am also reading Female Chuavinist Pig by Ariel Levy, and find it quite interesting.)

I don't believe (obviously) that anyone can offer any sort of concrete evidence of any sort about 'rebirth'---indeed all questions that have to do with the existence of a supreme spirit, an originating spirit (God), etc. It is all deeply subjective and anecdotal. One might be convinced by some reasoning that sounds good, or reverberates in some 'intuitive' sense, and one might also have had some sort of psychic experience, epiphany, dream---or delusion.

With that said, I personally can refer to experiences of a psychic sort (visions and dreams) which have indicated to me that rebirth is a 'real thing', but the nature of the experience is so outlandish, so arational, that to describe it is to describe...a fantasy, a dream, a poem even: an allusion to something seemingly beyond words. But that is also how, in my more profound moments, I perceive life: something far, far beyond words. The fact that we are 'here' and we are aware of it is inexplicable, deeply weird, outrageously mysterious.

average wrote:

"To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever."

I wouldn't have put it in these words but I think I get what you are saying. I have perceived this as 'sat-chit-ananda' (being-knowledge-bliss) as something fundamental in the creation, of which we are somehow a part. I don't know if perhaps we are 'hardwired' to perceive in such grand terms (as some brain scientists propose) or if it is a 'fact'.

Ah 'facts'! I wish sometimes I had more of them, but with the big questions they seem darned hard to come by...

[San Bao]

"Rebirth", it seems to me, is a metaphor for the moment-to-moment arising and passing away of consciousness (as average has already mentioned). I think that the "six realms" of Mahayana Buddhism are ultimately modes of consciousness, which one may be "reborn" into at any moment. Hakuin's teaching on heaven and hell seems to support this understanding:

A soldier named Nobushige came to Hakuin, and asked, "Is there really a paradise and a hell?"

"Who are you?" inquired Hakuin.

"I am a samurai," the warrior replied. "You, a soldier!" exclaimed Hakuin. "What kind of ruler would have you as his guard? Your face looks like that of a beggar." Nobushige became so angry that he began to draw his sword.

But Hakuin continued, "So you have a sword! Your weapon is probably much too dull to cut off my head."

As Nobushige drew his sword Hakuin remarked, "Here open the gates of hell!"

At these words the samurai, perceiving the master's discipline, sheathed his sword and bowed. "Here open the gates of paradise," said Hakuin.

[/quote]

I would go further and say that "rebirth" is also a poetic understanding of the arising of manifestation and the passing away of manifestation within the greater context of a single reality----not unlike the rising and falling of waves in an ocean. Ultimately, "no one is born, no one dies, and no one lives" although many people do not understand this and construe it as some sort of mindless nihlism.

[Dan Rowden]

What exactly comes to your mind when you think of rebirth?

An hour ago when I felt a pang of anger at something I read.

Do you subscribe to any sort of idea like rebirth?

I subscribe to what the Buddha taught.

To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever.

Or until Nirvana which by definition is the cessation of rebirth of self.

But in a sense I see the self (subjective experiencer) as pure conscious awareness that doesn't come or go, has no absolute beginning and no absolute end, it just is.

Isn't this an eternal soul concept? Where is this subjective experiencer?

[Carl G]

I'm cool with that moment to moment rebirth concept, it's really a no-brainer, and I'm also open to the idea that at least the potential exists for human physical rebirth, that is to say, for a transference of individual essence from one physical form to another.

[Sapius]

Dan wrote;

Where is this subjective experiencer?

Dan for example. No?

[average]

To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever.

Or until Nirvana which by definition is the cessation of rebirth of self.

In a sense, yes.
When identification happens, then there is a relative-self, when people identify with their jobs or their bodies or personalities, then there is a relative-self (this relative-self is what Nirvana cures).

Isn't this an eternal soul concept? Where is this subjective experiencer?

I'm not sure what the eternal soul concept is.

"where" happens within the subjective experiencer. But the subjective experiencer has no locality.

[Dan Rowden]

Ok, let me change the "where" to "what". What is this subjective experiencer?

[Sapius]

Avarage;

But the subjective experiencer itself has no locality

So should I consider differentiations invalid?

Again, I am simply trying to see if consciousness has a valid basis that depends on differentiations based on individuality.

[Sapius]

Dan wrote;

Where is this subjective experiencer?

Dan for example. No?

Dan: Ok, let me change the "where" to "what". What is this subjective experiencer?

Same, conscious self-identity through differentiation. (A=A)

[Jamesh]

To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever.

I only half agree with this. The term "rebirth" does not really apply to something continuous, and the self will definately NOT continue forever. In relation to the self, I'm more likely to consider going to dreamless sleep an ending and waking up a beginning, though the gap between each conscious thought may be viewed the same way.

I also half reject the general idea of the QRS that things do not have beginnings and endings. When your body forms you've begun and when you die you will end. That the universe has universal constants is a clear indication that things have beginnings and endings, that are partly in the causal basket, not just the effect based beginnings and endings that we all can observe. I'm referring to constants like "an atom or star can only be so big". When opposing causal forces are in balance, when they are somewhat static as a whole, this more or less creates a slowing down or cessation of this units time relative to that which surrounds it -this situation, as exists in all things, can be referred to as a non-absolute cuasal beginning and when the balance is broken it is an non-absolute ending.

I also believe that The Totality is in a constant state of beginning/ending, but that this process occurs outside of our concept of time, and the closest we can get to defining it would be to call it something like "causal instantaneousness".

[Sapius]

Average: To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever.

To me that sound more of a poetic expression of desire.

[Sapius]

James: When your body forms you've begun and when you die you will end.

I have reason to believe that end comes with the end of subjective identity, but that is not the end of existence itself.

[average]

Ok, let me change the "where" to "what". What is this subjective experiencer?

Who you are.

[ChochemV2]

In the absence of evidence I generally try my best to shy away from mysticism. For me to believe that there is rebirth or an afterlife I'd have to believe that what I am is something separate from my body. Everything I know is in relation to my body, everything I am is tied to my body and, as far as I can tell, everything I will be is determined by how long my body lasts. For something to be reborn there would have to be some part of my consciousness which survives my death and I simply don't see any reason for there to be something like that to exist.

What the Buddha teaches seems like a pleasant fiction which gives human motive to something we don't understand, much like every other faith does. After all, why would the universe create something as amazing as humanity? Why should we die forever since, as far as we know, we are they only thing which can appreciate this universe? I just don't see reason why we should live in anything but a universe which doesn't care (and isn't even animate).

It eases people's fear to believe there is something beyond death which is why it is always the center piece of any religion. Any philosophy which gives people a purpose, explains the unexplainable or tells us death isn't final will survive because we want to believe in something like that so strongly. I believe the first step to true understanding is giving up any hope of rebirth and any philosophy which clings to such a hope is ultimately a shallow and selfish one.

[clyde]

I subscribe to what the Buddha taught.

Dan, people seem to hold quite varying notions of "what the Buddha taught", so what is it that you believe the Buddha taught regarding rebirth?

clyde

[Dan Rowden]

Clyde,

Dan, people seem to hold quite varying notions of "what the Buddha taught",

I agree, driven by the strongest of their emotional and egotistical desires.

so what is it that you believe the Buddha taught regarding rebirth?

See below

What the Buddha teaches seems like a pleasant fiction which gives human motive to something we don't understand, much like every other faith does. After all, why would the universe create something as amazing as humanity? Why should we die forever since, as far as we know, we are they only thing which can appreciate this universe? I just don't see reason why we should live in anything but a universe which doesn't care (and isn't even animate).

The Buddha didn't teach literal reincarnation; he actually taught against it. His teaching was that reincarnation is a product of ignorance. It is the ignorant self that is reincarnated in each moment and thereby trapped in Samsara. Desire (egotism) is the force that pushes this karmic wheel along. Those Buddhist traditions that do tend to push a literal idea of reincarnation (and sometimes it is only a school within a tradition) always have the constant problem of reconciling the idea of "no self" and some kind of "quasi-self" that reincarnates. The modern Buddhist notions of reincarnation ought be consigned to the flames of standard religious babble.

[ChochemV2]

The Buddha didn't teach literal reincarnation; he actually taught against it. His teaching was that reincarnation is a product of ignorance. It is the ignorant self that is reincarnated in each moment and thereby trapped in Samsara. Desire (egotism) is the force that pushes this karmic wheel along. Those Buddhist traditions that do tend to push a literal idea of reincarnation (and sometimes it is only a school within a tradition) always have the constant problem of reconciling the idea of "no self" and some kind of "quasi-self" that reincarnates. The modern Buddhist notions of reincarnation ought be consigned to the flames of standard religious babble.

The way I see it Buddha did teach literal reincarnation. Maybe it wasn't universal, however, he is saying that if you don't embrace wisdom and enlightenment you will be trapped in a cycle of reincarnation. Any kind of reincarnation, especially that of punishment, seems ridiculous to me.

It seems convenient that someone who measures up to the Buddha's standards would be capable of breaking this cycle (viewed as a negative in Buddhist tradition though a positive in others). As much as I agree with much of what Buddhism says and feel more can be taken from it than any other belief system it has the same earmarks of so many other beliefs systems namely: separating people into specific groups, telling them how to act, and explaining death in a comforting way which also inspires them to act in the way their deity asks them to. I find Buddhism to be a wonderful source of wisdom but you would never find me among organized Buddhists.

[clyde]

To me, rebirth is the constant recreation of self that goes on moment to moment, and will continue like this forever. But in a sense I see the self (subjective experiencer) as pure conscious awareness that doesn't come or go, has no absolute beginning and no absolute end, it just is. [emphasis added]

average;

Your statement does seem to imply an eternal entity. Is this your intended meaning or have I misunderstood your meaning?
While I experience 'rebirth' from moment to moment, I have no reason to believe that it is any more beginningless or endless than any other thing, though like any other thing, I cannot find its beginning or end.

Also, your statement seems to raise "pure conscious awareness" above all else (or alternatively, as the foundation of all else). Is this your intended meaning or have I misunderstood your meaning?
While awareness is part of my nature and I hold awareness in great value, I have no reason to believe that reality is awareness.

Do no harm,
clyde

[Alex Jacob]

ChochemV2 wrote:

"It eases people's fear to believe there is something beyond death which is why it is always the center piece of any religion. Any philosophy which gives people a purpose, explains the unexplainable or tells us death isn't final will survive because we want to believe in something like that so strongly. I believe the first step to true understanding is giving up any hope of rebirth and any philosophy which clings to such a hope is ultimately a shallow and selfish one."

(You could argue that, for example, the idea of a rebirth...in a hell-realm...is anything but comforting. It would be more comforting in comparison if everything just ended. A great part of traditional Christian belief always seemed to me...very conducive to extreme anxiety).

This seems like a sort of standard argument against having such a belief, or against the perception or proposition that there is never an end to consciousness. There is something reductive in the above, in my opinion, and I am not sure either that I agree that 'any philosophy which clings to such a hope is ultimately a shallow and selfish one'. Any philosophy or series of constructs or establsihed, rigid doctrines seem to have the same effect, overall, especially if it curtails thought.

The belief in an 'afterlife', even if it is false, has many positive features, speaking ethically and philosophically.

It seems to me that all we really have, and all we can ever have, is some subjective feelings about what is or what might be. I know there are all sorts of established doctrines---I don't know a great deal about Buddhism but it has doctrinal aspects just like any religion---that give the mind things to think about, which may be right or wrong or simply misperceived: allusions or metaphors for things difficult to express, I am supposing. I have noted that Buddhist-inspired doctrine, in the hands of some, becomes similarly rigid as any of the classically rigid schools of thought, and it seems to dictate thought, to guide it along certain channels, or to keep it in certain channels. I find that each and every 'school of thought' (religious tradition, etc.) always have their True Believers and they always seem to handle and weild a doctrine, which is just a group of ideas presented to the mind.

Personally, I am more interested in the personal story, the intuition, even the 'fantasy' about what is and what might be. But I don't have too much hope at arriving at any defined and definite understanding of...anything.

Post-modern state of ruin, I reckon...

:-)

[average]

average;

Your statement does seem to imply an eternal entity. Is this your intended meaning or have I misunderstood your meaning?

While I experience 'rebirth' from moment to moment, I have no reason to believe that it is any more beginningless or endless than any other thing, though like any other thing, I cannot find its beginning or end.

Yes in the ultimate sense it is the infinite entity.

In the relative sense it is a personality that becomes reconstructed, and changes moment-to-moment. This relative sense only arises if you identify with certain transient phenomena. Like your career, now you are a cook next you will be a lawyer. Or your body, now you are a baby, later you will be an adult. Now you feel pleasure, later you feel pain.

By not identifying with any thing, in the ultimate sense, you become what you are, you destroy rebirth (although it will still happen forever - nothing begins or ends).

The illusion will still persist, the magician will still do his show! But you will see it for what it is. And this will be forever.

Also, your statement seems to raise "pure conscious awareness" above all else (or alternatively, as the foundation of all else). Is this your intended meaning or have I misunderstood your meaning?
While awareness is part of my nature and I hold awareness in great value, I have no reason to believe that reality is awareness.

Do no harm,
clyde

Reality is an appearance that comes and goes, pure consciousness is that which witnesses this coming and going, while itself remains constant.
Things don't really have beginnings and endings, certainly not absolute ones. They do transform though but ultimately they stay the same. Look at matter it comes and goes, it transforms, but essentially it remains the same. Same for emotions, greed turns to jealousy, which can turn to anger, and then it might turn to forgiveness and love and then complacency..or whatever. But things don't just disappear. The same is true for consciousness, it might go through different stages, baby consciousness, dog consciousness, your current consciousness, but essentially it is the same.

So rebirth happens on a relative level, while ultimately you reside in pure consciousness, pure nirvana. This is why they say nirvana is not something you attain, or you have, its not an event, its what you are.

[Sapius]

Average,

By not identifying with any thing, in the ultimate sense, you become what you are, you destroy rebirth, much like nirvana.

Yes, one can mentally conceive of that, while thinking from an identifiably continued identity however; the “I” of an individual mind that is, other wise, there is nothing to be reborn from to begin with.

Reality is an appearance that comes and goes, pure consciousness is that which witnesses this coming and going, while itself remains constant.

You mean like what we know as energy?