No rebirth - what happens next?

Yes, the contradictions are somthing I often wonder about

This is a very interesting thought, thank you!

Alex, it’s a negative and ugly idea. This is the kind of stuff Nietzsche was so critical about when he trashed Buddhism for being pessimistic and riddled with the sad passions. I never once had a problem with rebirth being forced on me in Japan, nor among my Chinese friends who are Buddhist, so that it’s coming up here speaks very poorly of Theravada and goes to show that it really is as fundamentalist and dogmatic as so many people familiar with it say that it is.

1 Like

I remembered my interactions with you. I did not at all mentioned you or directly reply to your post to recommend you to read rebirth evidences.

This is still a Buddhist forum. I think unless the others requested me not to show them these I am not overstepping any boundaries here.

Unless you’re just telling me that a Buddhist monk can never, while you’re here, promote the right view of rebirth while in a Buddhist forum, to others (not you) who might benefit from it.

I am not at all recommending you to read it, and you can just ignore me if you wish. Or if it is not enough, feel free to block me.


Temporarily closed for moderator discussion.

This thread is open again. Thank you for your patience. It needed a major tidy up.

I have moved many of the posts discussing evidence of rebirth to a separate thread:

It is not against the rules (or indeed unexpected or unreasonable) for posters to advocate EBT-related beliefs on an EBT-related forum. However, this was off topic in the context of this thread. Please keep the discussion on-topic going forward.

Thanks for the multiple flags. As always, if you have issues with any posts, flag them to bring them to the attention of the moderators. Many of these flags were by community users on ad hominem argument, which is againt the guidelines. Please also refrain from this going forward.

Thanks again for your patience.
suaimhneas (on behalf of the moderators)


To consolidate and emphasize: the cossetting of men here as somehow authoritative over women is blatantly apparent on this discussion board. And it is profoundly unfair, ignorant and offensive.

1 Like

Dear Meggers,
I personally strongly disagree with your characterisations of my and the other moderator’s actions as being motivated by bad faith and sexism (and this reply is purely made off my own bat). I do not intend to publicly debate moderation decisions here (it’s against the guidelines also). However, after some thought, it felt fairest for me to leave your three posts here (since I was the one who tidied up the thread, it felt like a conflict of interest to do otherwise). I would suggest taking up any general concerns about moderators or moderation with the female-majority forum management committee (I’m not sure if they have a general tag, but I’ll PM you contact details). You will get a fair hearing there. I’m sure that the other moderators will be happy to also discuss your concerns via PM if you wish, but you may wish to “go upstairs”. I am not going to get into a further public discussion about all this and further such posts will be removed as off-topic here. Please instead directly take this up via PM with the forum management committee or the other moderators at @moderators.


Yes, most of us are Buddhists here so we know the advantages of being content with what we have and a simple life.

Yes, while most people are not Buddhists, they don’t see the advantages of a simple life and being content with what they have, so they constantly pursue pleasures; unless one has some view of some type of afterlife, be it heaven, hell, purgatory, rebirth, etc.

I believe it was Bhante Gunaratana in one of his books, where he described it as a movie reel, where one tries to pursue one pleasure after another and then as the reel turns, giving the illusion of a continual happiness. But as we know, this is not how it ends up being a real happiness.

I think you mean by ‘physics’( and how many free variables are there in this fantastic theory that have to be set by experiment? It all seems a bit circular to me).

Basically what you seem to be saying is ‘physics’ is a science of reality. What I don’t get is how can a physicalist claim such a thing, when all these theories in physics are abstract mathematical structures. An idealist claiming this I can understand. For me it seems what a physicalist can claim at best is that ‘physics’ is a science of measurement. Also if am not mistaken as a layman, there are competing theories. Perhaps you can shed some light on this matter for me.

1 Like

Several prior posts speak about “reality.”

“Reality” is an abstract term with many different meanings in different contexts.
So it seems reasonable to specify as best we can what we mean when we use this word and what we’re trying to point to.

Often, “reality” is used to mean the physical domain in which everything occurs, such as the universe.

Yet measuring “reality”to 12 decimal points clearly indicates that there is a significant amount of “reality“ that is left unmeasured, untested, and unknown.
And perhaps even untestable.

Science is fundamentally about statistical inferences. There are no absolute “right“ measurements or answers, even when it comes to classical Newton mechanics.

And in quantum mechanics, measurement outcomes appear to be utterly random and inherently probably probabilistic. According to Neils Bohr and a many other quantum physicists, whatever “reality” is present prior to a measurement is fundamentally beyond apprehension, experimentation, or understanding.

So, again, “reality” is a fuzzy term and, as used with respect to the “universe” as used in the materiallist/scientific sense , is not particularly germane to practicing the Dhamma…

The Buddha’s description of the world and the All is: whatever can be experienced and known via and within the six sense fields. SN35.23.

He does not specifically deny an “outside reality“ but says that with respect to the purpose of the Dhamma— the cessation of all dukkha— that what can actually be experienced via the six senses is sufficient to this practice and purpose and is all that can be directly “known“ — in this context, this is the “reality” that we can know and work with.

When it’s internalized, Dhamma practice takes place in the world of our experiences through the six senses, other aspects of the Path such as kamma and rebirth become clearer.

I wonder if you find the same difficulty in explanation for continuation in this life in the absence of any persistent entities? That is, do you take the manifest experience of continuation in this life as ruling out the complete absence of any persistent entities? Another way of stating the question is do you regard the manifest experience of continuity in this life as sufficient evidence that persistent entities of some kind must exist? :pray:


A post was merged into an existing topic: Evidence for Rebirth

I can’t discern much - if any - differences in actions (the five lay precepts) between those who profess beliefs in the after life, those who are agnostic, and those who deny such beliefs. It is not the point of the thread to suggest aspersions (hedonism) for those who do not so believe. Rather, it seems the point of the thread is inquiry into the beliefs of those who do not. :pray:

1 Like

I assume this is not directed toward me? I have not proselytized rebirth in this thread.

Yes, this is my interest in this thread too. I am okay and happy with Jayarava’s well-spoken response.

I admit that rebirth does not really play a big role in my life. I feel it is quit childish that the prospect of higher and lower rebirths must motivate people to do good. I immediately sense this has nothing to do with morals, with real ethics, with being a religious person. This is just business mentallity, impure, ego-centric. Call me naief, but i feel it is untrue to really expact that business is a noble Path.

I think buddhist doctrines like kamma and rebirth can, and probably do, lay an immense weight on the shouders of people.


Sometimes we sleep on our left side; sometimes we sleep on our right side. Sometimes we sleep in the “corpse pose.” Although the Buddha slept in the “Lion’s Posture”, it is normal for most of us to toss and turn at night. Such is our kamma.

Sorry, I think it’s a pipe dream to imagine world peace via people attaining enlightenment one by one or in mass.

To attain to enlightenment, one has to have right view. See how many of the world would be willing to convert to Buddhism.

See now many here don’t adhere to the right view of rebirth. and how hard it is to convince people to believe. and how many practicing? and how many listening to senior forest monks who are the most likely to have some attainments?

1 Like

3 posts were split to a new topic: Secularism must lead to hedonism?

What views? I am asking for the motivations of the secular buddhists. Jayavara gave a good response. And I am satisfied with his answer. I don’t know what else you are trying to read into it.