Evidence for Rebirth

The Watercooler
146

There is a limit as seen by my analysis here: Evidence for Rebirth - #140 by NgXinZhao

Even if the person who got reborn doesn’t spontaneously recall past lives, he could still practise meditation and gain past life recall ability, thus information would be travelling faster than lightspeed across the galaxy, violating physics.

This is also provisionally speaking, current physics as there’s still no full theory of everything yet which might still provide a way for faster than light information travel.

Space itself is already can travel faster than light relative to each other. And warp drives is the mechanism to do FTL travel. So if physics of the future allows for FTL travel and time travel, there’s no objection to instantaneous rebirth across galaxy.

147

I dont agree with this actually, although I am with you on rebirth! My point would be that information or recall is not a physical object, so it doesnt have a location. I am here and might recall something, but the recall isn’t here, its just that I (in the physical form) am here. So, that recall isn’t “travelling” at all. Its a bit like the quantum entanglement problem: where one entangled particle being observed here to be rotating clockwise, automatically and instantly means the other entangled particle must be rotating anti-clockwise…but that is not anything physical travelling across the universe (indeed, it could be across dimensions in an altogether different multiverse) its just that the non-physical elements don’t follow space time paradigm.

148

See my comment above about information is physical.

149

WOW! My brain is swirling from all your comments. This is absolutely amazing to read all your opinions.

My parents don’t believe in anything, including rebirth. Very hard to have some discussions without “banging into a wall”.

My approach is very easy. Buddha taught how important the precepts are. The fourth is “wrong speech”. A person who teaches this over and over again and also lives by it, why would this person then lie? Why would he emphasize this and then lie about something vital like rebirth? What would be his gain?

That’s my proof. That’s why I personally follow the Dhamma, believe in Khamma and keep on investigating and sometimes “the curtain opens” and I get my “proof”.

Happy discussing everyone :grinning:

2 Likes
150

It goes both ways.

https://www.appi.org/Products/Trauma-Violence-and-PTSD/Dilemma-of-Ritual-Abuse

151

Yes, because the stream of feelings, perceptions, memories, thoughts, really has a location. It arises here connected to this body. A small change in this body and the content of the stream changes radically. Also the sutta’s teach that the stream of vinnana is dependend on the body. (MN77, DN2)

“This my body is material, made up from the four great elements, born of mother and father, fed on rice and gruel, impermanent, liable to be injured and abraded, broken and destroyed, and this is my consciousness which is bound to it and dependent on it” (DN2, Walshe)

This also shows to be true, right?

My huge theory of all is: :innocent:

There is an unborn dimension of intelligence, all pervasive mental field, the ground of all that exist, which is, at this very moment, also the ground of our existence. It cannot change. It is not arising, ceasing and changing. It is not an experience, but the ground for all experiences to arise in

Asankhata element is, for me, this element of intelligence. Non-local, beyond time and space. No experience! The ground for worlds theater. No vinnana, nor a stream of vinnana’s but the ground from which vinnana’s arise, like waves in the sea.

I believe any moment in our lifes this is most subtle and deepest nature of mind. But somehow the connection made with a body/brain is able to deceive us, and install the idea that the essence of mind is local. This is, i believe, because for long, we are obsessed by what arises and ceases and tend to see this as me, mine, my self. And what arises and ceases is locally produced. And that keeps us trapped in a vision, a perspective, that individuality, locallity, is ultimately real.

I believe the Buddha has seen and knows that a local perspective of the world is also something that arises and ceases any moment. Also this local perspective dependly arises. It does not arise at birth but any moment. Ignorance in a sense also means that one does not know and sees this but just takes if for given that there is always a local perspective of the world, a point from where one sees, hears, etc.
One does not investigate that. This is sleep.

Buddha does not teach that. He also teaches the end of the world here and now, which is, i believe, the cessation of that local perspective. If the local perspective ceases, i believe, mind reveals to be non-local and no experience, but the ground in which all experiences, all formations, merit and demerit arises. This ground is itself no sense experience, no feeling. It is not a feeling state, but pure intelligence without a center.

I like the idea that all is about perspective. And only perspectives can shift. Rebirth is just a shift of perspective from here to there. Also BDE. Perspectives can shift but mind cannot move. That is my famous gut-feeling :grinning:

There is no being, nor a stream of vinnana’s literally moving. This is magical thinking. Rebirth is, i believe, mere a shift in perspective on the unborn field of intelligence. I believe, a really skilled master can play with this. It is not that he/she literally travels from a to be, but a great master, ruler over body and mind, can shift his/her perspective immediately.

Instinctive grasping is about the instinctive arising of a perspective. But mind is not always with a perspective. I have feeling for this. It is wrong, i believe, to think about our lifes as if there is any moment a perspective in the mind, or feelings, or experiences. This is not true. All arises dependly.

Now you also know all :heart_eyes:

152

Agree

Also agree

What really ends up from moment to moment, i believe, is perspective. Like embodiment, or like coming into existence mentally, happens any moment.

Once there is a notion of “I am’” in the mind, perspective might seem given, might seem as something that does not arise, but this is because at that moment there is already identification with body and mind.

But i believe that also perspective arises and ceases. Any moment a lens on reality arises and ceases, as it were, from which the world is experienced.

It remains unseen that this also happens to arise due to causes and conditions. It is not something given but when one is not alert and mindful, one believes that there is always a perspective or a lens through which the world is experienced.

153

Not questioning for a moment that the physical and non-physical are not bound and interconnected (I think there is a reference to it being like two reeds twisted in the marsh from memory).

That doesn’t mean the other thing is here. You can remote control a toy car (or I guess drones are the current analogy to use!). If you think the mental element is within this body in a particular location, where is it? That was what I meant by my reference to hemispherectomy (surgically removing the left brain…or right brain). If you can do that, and the person is the same, where is this “mind” you think is located somewhere in the brain. Or is it in the heart? Then what happens when you have a heart transplant?

Do you mean Nibbana?

154

You label this a belief and I think rightly so. FWIW, I cannot find and pin down a single thing that ends moment to moment nor a single thing that continues. And yet this perception of moment-to-moment rebirth arises.

This seems like a great mystery how this happens and I think just as interesting as the question of rebirth life to life; nay it should be more so? Maybe the question of life-to-life only arises as interesting upon failing to appreciate the seeming great mystery of moment-to-moment? How can we understand life to life if moment to moment remains such a mystery?

Another way of talking that might get even closer to the rub… the fact that we perceive life-to-life as a greater mystery might be a good indicator of magical thinking? Perhaps the magical thinking extends as far as believing either mystery actually is a mystery and something that needs substantive explanation? Maybe there is no substantive explanation and thinking there must be one is also an indicator of magical thinking??

:pray:

155

You might not be aware, but there’s no information that can travel across just collapsing quantum entangled particles.

If we just have quantum entangled particles, we cannot send information faster than light.

We have to rely on a classical light speed signal to have quantum teleportation of quantum information.

Classical information here means bits, 0 and 1. Quantum information is in terms of qubits.

Anything which can be represented in words can be represented in bits, thus is considered information. Including past life memories.

Information can have location in the sense of needing to tell fire fighters that there is a fire at such and such a location. If the information doesn’t travel to the fire fighters, they don’t know. The whole tech of telecommunication, internet is the tech of information transmission.

156

Sounds like what Burgs call Dhammakāya. But you are conflating nibbāna with dhammakāya. Burgs say they are not the same. Read his chapter here: Dharmakaya, Parinibbana, Nibbana and Samsara — Advanced Vipassana

So Dharmakaya is the basic ground from which all formations appear, and Nibbāna is the cessation of all formations. Seeing Nibbāna is seeing the non-arising of conditioned states, saṁsāra is brought to cessation when conditioned states are brought to cessation. At that point awareness is like a mirror that has nothing reflected in it. It has no conditioned states appearing within it. At that point Dharmakaya reveals itself in its sky-like spaciousness: unexpressed potentiality, pure potentiality.

157

I understand. Some buddhist believe that there is a heart-base, hadaya vatthu, that is also somewhere at the phyiscal heart.

I tend to believe that we must first distinguish sense vinnana and the basic receptivity or sensitivity of mind. This last refers to minds basic function to detect and receive sense info, before this becomes conscious. Sense-vinnana is always a more progressed stage of cognition. This basic knowing capacity of mind is not the same as a sense vinnana. It cannot be seen as an experience, feeling, perception.
I feel it is very strange this does not appeal to any person here. I feel this makes all most sense.

I think it is best to see this as the asankhata element, and Nibbana as something that is personally attained. But one cannot personally attain the asankhata element.

158

Yeshe, i immediately respond on this.

Yyou do not investgate your own experience, i feel. You always choice for a philosophic approach. But if you resort to seeing, without thinking, you will see and find that some things you see arising and ceasing, such as emotions, thoughts, feelings, sounds, tactile sensations etc. but there is no way you can really, from experience, come to the conclusion that you see ALL arising and ceasing, right?

159

Sorry, I don’t understand the question. :pray:

160

No, i see Nibbana as something that is personally attained. The cessation of the fires is personally attained. But one cannot attain the asankhata element personally.

161

I thought only nibbāna is this unconditioned.

Anyway, do read Burgs’ whole chapter.

162

I do not know what to do about this. This is also always such a controversial issue here. For me it is very normal that i really do not see everything arising and ceasing. I see thoughts arising, plans, emotions, desires, intentions, tendencies, visuals, sounds etc, but i have never seen stillness arising, peace, dispassion, an element of emptiness or openess. There is clearly something stable, a constant element in my world. Not all i see arising and ceasing. Apparantly this is taboe here. But i cannot denie it.

I also do no understand why others do not experience this. There is always this element or aspect of arising, ceasing, changing and also that aspect of not arising, not ceasing, not changing… Both elements or aspect are part of my world, my reality, as it were.

Apparantly some believe that this means i am totally deluded, fooled, abnormal etc. Well, so be it. I cannot denie it and i am not gonna denie it. Why should I. I also do not claim any attainment. I just do not understand that, apparantly my world is so different from that of others who only seem to live in an (inner) world of arising, ceasing and changea and where nothing is stable?? I do not live in this world. I live in a world of change and no-change. That is my world. Can you relate to this?

163

Hello @Green,

I’m sorry, but I cannot know your mind and the words you use to describe your experience are not the words I would use to describe my own.

To try and find some agreement I can attempt to offer this…

While you’ve repeatedly described my predilection for a philosophical approach and criticized it, it seems to work in some respects for my personal practice. To my limited mind it seems surprising (over time it becomes less so…) and quite salient that I cannot find and pin down a single thing that ends moment to moment nor continues nor arises. This isn’t to say that I don’t have the perception of momentary arising/ceasing/changing, but rather when I investigate what it is that seems to arise/cease/change I always come up empty. At this point I’ve trained enough to have some facility for such investigation; it isn’t skin deep but rather relatively subtle or so I like to pretend :joy: But no matter how deep I go, I arrive at no satisfactory outcome with, “this is what it is that I perceive as arising/ceasing/changing!”

In the end, the predilection for analysis and investigation using logic and reasoning - along with the now familiar outcome of coming up empty - has sewn disillusionment towards a lot of the questions that at one point seemed so engrossing/curious/mysterious and in need of investigation. They don’t seem to hold the interest of the mind and desire for a definitive outcome has waned. This thread being an example.

With all that being said, as you know, I’m aware of the supposition of the limitations of conceptual/logical analysis and tend to believe those limitations are as described. However, I don’t perceive any non-changing element. That is not my world. All I can perceive is a lowly imperfect sentient being just trying to fuddle along slumming around and trying to make the best of it here in samsara. I know very little and it is probably best to ignore me or at least not to take what I think very seriously.

:pray:

164

Thanks. I read a part of it. It appeals to me but i also do not want to take this all to seriously. The goal for me is to see the unseen, to discover the yet undiscovered, to attain the yet unattained.
I do not want to intoxicate myself as if i know all. That is not true, for sure.

But, like i can see you feel it is very important that people understand parinibbana is a mere cessation, i cannot help but to see that a mere cessation cannot even happen. But i also do not want to fight/debate about this all the time and meet eachother like we are enemies.
I have seen this so often and i am tired with all this that one person acts as the one and only real Dhamma protector and sees everywhere fake buddhist, fake teachings, wrong views etc.
Sometimes it looks like war.

I may hope Burgs reAlly knows all this he says. Who is Burgs? From which tradition?

165

A person from UK, trained under Pa Auk Sayadaw himself. Also got influenced by Tibetan masters.

From the tibetan influence, he learnt the dhammakāya. Just abiding in awareness. The words he used to describe that is quite unappealing to Theravada mind, but I believe it’s due to the experience while in it.

I checked his view on this chapter with a teacher in Na Uyana and he said he is impressed that despite influence from tibetan source, he got it right for parinibbāna and nibbāna etc.

Maybe you can check if your experience corresponds with the descriptions he has on abiding in Dhammakāya A Complete Meditation on the Awakened Experience: Dependent Origination as the Creative Principle — Advanced Vipassana

When he is in the tibetan style, he uses mind to refer to the 3 mental aggregates and awareness/dhammakāya to refer to the consciousness aggregate.

But ultimately he is of the Theravada belief that all the 5 aggregates are impermanent, suffering, not self and ceases completely in parinibbāna. He also learnt Abhidhamma before, so he would know that the dhammakāya which witness nibbāna is called the lokutarra citta of path knowledge in Abhidhamma, a different consciousness from other normal consciousness and consciousness is seen as changing due to 89 or 121 different types of consciousness classified in Abhidhamma.

It is just that the practise of abiding in dhammakāya/awareness seems to just ignore this for the moment.

Also read this once you’re ready: Dissolution and Cessation – How to See Nibbāna — Advanced Vipassana