Rebirth/reincarnation.

So i'm wondering a lot recently about rebirth and what the Buddha actually meant by it in his teachings.

Firstly, in the west we tend to think of reincarnation as a soul or some sort of self migrating from one physical form or body to another. Now obviously this totally contradicts the notion of imperamnence and no-self and so I know this isn't what the Buddha taught or was trying to teach.

Secondly I know that perhaps this subject leans towards speculation and metaphysics and thus shouldn't be lingered over too long because it's a question that doesn't relate to the cessation of suffering...But saying that we shouldn't ever blindly accept a teaching either.

Thirdly, I know certain traditions take the matter of rebirth very seriously while others dont seem to have much emphasis or place any significance on it at all. For example the Tibetan tradition seems to place a lot of significance on death and rebirth in the Tibetan Book of the Dead. But this seems to be highly speculative with all it's talk of experience various colours upon death and the bardos of becoming and the 6 realms of existence...Where exactly was this described in the Buddha's teaching?
But then we take the Therevada traditions and they dont seem to really talk about this matter at all. Same with Zen/Chan.

I've heard various explainations of the process of rebirth from various traditions, teachers and sources but it's so incredibly vague.
Sure everything in the universe, all phenomena, is a consequence of a cause, of karma but this doesn't really seem to explain the actual process in anyway.
Ok so 'we' are a consequence and cause of many many actions, of our parents meeting, of the sperm joining the egg, but also the causes long before any of that an infinitely long time ago...But it all just seems chaotic and non-linear and suggestive of a self like that. Someone to 'own karma'.

So is rebirth something we just can't conceptually comprehend and can only find through our practices looking within?

 

Or perhaps it's like this;

Maybe there was a creator, maybe not, it's irrelevant because right now the universe is based on the law of cause and effect. Everything is a result of past action. -We- are a result of past action. Our actions now are the result of other past actions both negative and positive and will determine future actions patterns and situations. There is no self with inherent existence of it's own, we are interdependent on all the 'flux' , (the death and rebirth) of all phenomena and cause and effect for 'our' existence.
Therefore no self experiences rebirth, it's all just an interdependant ever changing phenomena?

 

It's hard for me to understand this I think perhaps because it's trying to explain something that is non-conceptual in a conceptual way.

Of course mind is seperate from matter and of course you can never create something out of nothing, that goes against the laws of the universe. So yes i'd agree with that exclaimation that mind simply must have a previous casuation or in other words must've come from something before it. But what i'm not too sure about is the statement that it must be a continuation of 'itself'. ITSELF being my main concern here because does that not suggest that the mind is something permanent? Also in my view this talk of continuation hints heavily on a permanent self too. For something to continue doesn't it have to be the same and therefore permanent?
Hmmm, perhaps it doesn't thinking about it, similar perhaps but not exactly the same.

But what is the continuation of mind? How can their be a continuation of this mind if there is no permanent entity (be it self soul or whatever)? What is it continuing? You answer mind. But what is mind? So how can 'it' be continued?

 

"In Tibetan Buddhism, there are latent propensities, or imprints called bag chags, pronounced bakchak. (I am paraphrasing again)These are stored in the mind and result from previous behavior and experiences and can come from previous lives. Bhavaviveka, an Indian Buddhist philosoper, states that a calf knows where to suckle milk as a result of knowledge from propensities carried over from previous lives. Buddhism considers this to be primarily a mental propensity as opposed to physiological in nature."

OK so basically bakchaks are tendencies? (Is this the same as 'karmic inprint'?)

So this is saying that a 'mental propensity' is basically a tendency originating (or causiating from) from past behaviour and experiences. So what is experience? The 5 aggregates, from Form to primary cosciouness to discrimination (and then a reactionary 'thought' based on that).
So mental tendencies arise because of past mental tendencies that arised from the 5 aggregates.

"However, some propensities are biological. For example humans exist in the realm of desire, due to the body, and so desire and attachment are the predominant impulses and would be considered biological."

So biological tendencies fit into a seperate discription; Perhaps we could call them 'physical tendencies' because biology is based on the phsyical workings and form. Correct?

"In addition, physical constitution plays a part. Deep tantric practice transforms the mind, but also at a subtle level, the body. If one’s parents had transformed their bodies in this way, the genetic information would be handed down to you."

Couldn't we just link this to the above 'physical tendency' discription?

"The calf's knowing where to go for milk is due to mental karma, but also other influences."

Ok, that seems acceptable.

Review:
There are stored latent propensities from previous lives, bakchak.
They can be mental.
They can be biological.
They can be external as a result of collective karma.

or perhaps;

- 'Mind tendencies'
- 'Physical tendencies'
- 'Karmic tendencies'

?

"In the Yogacara school, consciousness is one of the five Skandhas and is divided into three layers, the Citta, Manas, and Vijnana. Manas is thinking, reasoning, etc and Vijana is the reaction to input from the sense organs."

Ok so this is what I was talking about, the 5 aggregates..here is an explaination that will hopefully break it down to simplify it;

1. Form - the body (rupa Skt.)
2. Primary Consciousness or Perception- the five sense consciousnesses (smell, touch, taste, seeing and hearing) and mental consciousness, in other words, direct perception (samjna Skt.)
3. Feeling - this refers only to the mental separation of perceptions into pleasant, unpleasant and neutral (nothing more). (vedana in Skt.)
4. Recognition, Consciousness, Discrimination or Distinguishing Awareness - in many ways similar to the discriminating intellect which makes us realise the difference between a chair and a flower. (vijnana in Skt.)
5. Compositional Factors, Volition - these are all other remaining mental processes, in general "thoughts". (samskara Skt.)

This is likened to a software computer program.

"Citta is Alayavijnana. It is the repository of all of the imprints, habits, and propensities from this and all former lives. It is the ground from which all manifestations and experiences seem to arise. It can contain objects but cannot ascertain them, and so, is morally neutral. It is always present and comprises the personality of the individual."

Now this is where I really start to have a hard time comprehending all of it
.
So Citta is the underlying layer of consciosuness. But if it is ever present again we're back to the usual paradox that this implies permenance. Unless citta undergoes some sort of transformation at some point in time.

So listen to me now as I fail miserably at trying to conclude all of this!

Bakchak or tendencies can be seperated into 3 catergories;

First let's deal with the 2 that I seem to have no problem with;

- Physical/Biogological tendencies; Example; genetics, natural law, biology. Basically, effects casued by phsyical forms in physical world by phsyical phenomena; wind, sunlight, gravity etc. Non-sentients?
- Karmic tendencies; Existence of phenomena influenced by sentient beings actions.

Now the 3rd. Mind/mental tendencies; This needs to broken down into 2 categories;
- Manas; thinking, reasoning, etc and Vijana is the reaction to input from the sense organs OR simply called the 5 Aggregates.
- Citta; Where all the tendencies are stored. Thus serving as a cause for all present patterns of behaviour and tendencies.

So we drink a glass of water.

The knowledge to go through with this action comes from primarily our Citta, because Citta is the effect of past experience that came from Manas and Vijana (experience , consciousness).
The fact that we have a phsyical body , a hand and a mouth to go through with this action is a result of biological tendencies? Or of interdependence of our physical environment?
And of course karmic tendencies come into play.


Ok i'm totally beat i'm not sure if all that really resolved anything and it took me forever to work out.

I'll think more about it later.

 

Citta is the origin of this lifes tendencies but it is also impermanent because the physical world and phenomena are ever changing and thsu our experiences are ever changing. Thus citta is ever changing. Citta is in constant death and rebirth in itself. When 'we' die Citta has been reborn and died countless times.
Citta begins again with new tendencies and patterns and then dies again as quickly as it was reborn.

Thinking about it this way aren't we all dying and being reborn right now after each and every heartbeat and thought and in the gaps inbetween since we are never the same now in the present as we were in the past (even a billion'th of a second ago)?
Citta merely provides the tendency for this moment but then itself changes along with the tendency and action of the next?

 

Perhaps this is that 'subtle thread'?

 

he's not the only one

I think I really do get it though...the 'subtle thread' description. I tried to think about this doing a kind of 'mind experiment' trying to view the world for what it was, constant flux of shapes and tendencies, then think about the above and saw for a moment how it worked (conceptually I suppose) but then as soon as I thought I had it I lost it it again!
^^And I think thats given me the answer I was looking for!

If that makes sense.

 

^^I think it just explains a pattern rather than the 'subtle thread' description. That's how I think of it.

I also believe there was probably some sort of creator that must've triggered these patterns of death and rebirth and impermanence, though i'm agnostic in that I don't feel it matters because it's just speculation and will never change the the laws of karma and imperamanence and suffering that we 'see' now.

So I think the creator (or cause) of all these events (the universe) is this 'subtle thread' or pattern.

I think the only way I can describe this pattern is like this; Our karma (or actions) effect everything around us collectively. When you die the physical body gets in some part recycled back into the 'elements' of this planet and the action (karma) of your death effects people and the environment around you. So I try to view this as karma causing changes in your environment as like a ripple or wave. It causes changes in the immediate environment, on other sentient minds and physical environment. Eventually all the 'waves' caused in your life (negative, neautral, positive karma) just have to come back around and meet together to create another 'you'...They just have to because the planet we inhabit has limited amount of area and sentient minds, it's not infinite, so all actions will eventually re-acculmilate. These actions will determine the place where they initially 'roll back' on one another and join to be 'reborn'...
This is the only way I can really explain it and I know i'm failing miserably...You should probably just go on a retreat and ask a monk this one thats fluent in English!

 

Having just read 300 pages of translations based on his teachings and those of his earliest disciples (The Teaching of Buddha), I took the notion of rebirth as metaphorical. I am new to Buddhism so I think this is an important thread, because I want to stay away from supernatural speculation, and so far the Buddha's teachings have been pretty consistent and even "modern" sounding (timeless) in their reasoning.

Sounds good to me. My interest in Buddhism stems in its focus on self-discipline and control of one's own mind, in order to attain lasting happiness and tranquility. A Buddhism dwelling on the transmigration of souls would be an exotic version of Christianity to me. In that case, what's the point?

But perhaps the Buddha had a deeper meaning in discussing his Pure Land, and I will have to research further on it.

 

"A Buddhism dwelling on the transmigration of souls would be an exotic version of Christianity to me. In that case, what's the point?"

Well it would also be totally contradictory. And you're right, whats the point anyway? How is it going to help our quest towards minimalising or totally ending suffering?

I, like many others from the west, have had great trouble with the notion (of rebirth). This was especially true when I first began taking interest in practicing and the dharma...So at first I didn't really accept the notion of rebirth. But it didn't really matter, the more I have practiced over time i've accepted it. But saying that I don't think you ever need to really fully accept it. Reincarnation just doesn't work inside some peoples head, and I think that's fine, I don't think it's something to be understood through someone else's explainantion or through study of dharma, I think it's purely something you can only fully come to realise inside yourself, through your own experiences. Infact I think this is totally true for all aspects of the buddhist path and philosophy.

I was also thinking last night, the whole way we are trying to look at the subject of rebirth/reincarnation is totally flawed. Why? Because we are looking at it as if we have a self and thus we are looking at death as something that signifies the end of something or the total destruction of existence...In reality death is just a concept, it's just another transformation in this ever-changing world, not an end in itself. Rebirth is also just a concept, it suggests something is being restarted all over again, but there is nothing to be restarted, it's just a transformation of energy, just another change. Just another movement in the flux. It's continuation.

 

You might be interested in the writings of Hyakujo. His stance is that Enlightenment comes like a flash of light, that there is no cause. In the same talk he said that the Enlightened person is one with causation.

So at best it can be said that one is under the Law of Karma until one is Enlightened (not 'becomes' Enlightened.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tend to think that re-incarnation is the rebirth of an essence, like the changing of clothes while asleep, waking up in a different set of pajamas than when one went to bed; but in this case it is death which destroys the ego. But an echoe does go forward, a colouring, the basic essence of a person. Some could call it a soul. But the problem is that what they call the soul is what they are identifying with, their present body / mind; they tend to think that it is the ego which is the soul. The body itself will last forever since it is transmuted & recycled back into its constituent chemicals and copmpounds. So just like DNA being passed down generations, it is immortal. But that is the body. What animates the body, the life force, also keeps being reborn: awareness & consciousness itself.

So on one hand you have Chrisitianity which thinks that the ego survives death as the soul and you have Buddhism which says that it is the ego which dies at death. That is the difference.

 

You are putting physical law constraints upon the non-physical, the mind.

As far as the Dali's ideas go, I tend to think of it as 'an affinity'. So one is reborn but it is like a person buying the right size of pants - you know which will not fit you, you know which are too small and you won't be able to fit into because they are children sized. You'll be attracted to a certain colour and a certain fabric. When you are attracted to what you are attracted to, there is an affinity. The consciousness which happens through sex conception is one which you already have a vibration for, one that is most like your last incarnation.

When two people mate, it is like two candle flames coming together to light a third candle. Or, one has the candle wax, the second has the wick, and when they mate the light is lit. That light lit is a new consciousness being born.

When the two people mate, each has chemicals which produce an electric current, a light is given off, a vibration is resounded. Many will heed the calling, like cars on a highway all going towards an exit. Only one can make it out into the world. The rest are reset, like having a door slam in your face. They get out of the car, walk up the street and get into another car to get back on the highway. The big truck may not fit under an exit, the bus has its own lane, the motorcyclist may take any avenue but chances are that it will not take the truck route, preferring a more scenic route. etc.

 

"I tend to think that re-incarnation is the rebirth of an essence, like the changing of clothes while asleep, waking up in a different set of pajamas than when one went to bed; but in this case it is death which destroys the ego."

I dunno about this, I mean what is there to 'destroy'? Ego is illusionary. Isn't everything just transformed rather than being utterly obliterated from existence?

"You are putting physical law constraints upon the non-physical, the mind."

Well, am I? So you are denying my statement that "you can never create something out of nothing"? Everything follows cause and effect. Everything has a cause (something), this is what I meant by laws of the universe... if this wasn't the case we'd live in a reality thats in total chaos with inanimate (and animate!) objects and phenomena appearing out of nowhere for no reason!

I still stick by my explainantion of there is no self to be reborn and 'we' are literately just all the karma of our past lives that is coming back to us throughout our life (and future lives) in a physical body made up of chemicals, cells etc. When the sperm and egg meet consciousness is given a physical form.

Anyway, i've pretty much had it with talking about this subject! Someone else can take over now as i'll watch quietly from the sidelines!

G'luck!

 

"You might be interested in the writings of Hyakujo. His stance is that Enlightenment comes like a flash of light, that there is no cause. In the same talk he said that the Enlightened person is one with causation"

Sorry just had to comment on this. I don't agree this way of thought. Enlightenment doesn't come from anywhere, we all have the Buddha nature, we just don't realise it. So it 'comes from' elimination of desires.