I may have misunderstood the concept of rebirth. Reincarnation definitely requires a soul as far as I can tell; that’s a different story.
1 Like
From another angle…
Itivuttaka # 73. More Peaceful
This was said by the Lord…
“Bhikkhus, the formless is more peaceful than the form realm, and cessation is more peaceful than the formless.”
Those beings who reach the form realm
And those established in the formless,
If they do not know cessation
Come back to renewal of being.Those who fully understand forms
Without getting stuck in the formless,
Are released into cessation
And leave Death far behind them.Having touched with his own person
The deathless element free from clinging,
Having realized the relinquishment of clinging,
His taints all gone,
The Fully Enlightened One proclaims
The sorrowless state that is void of stain.
3 Likes
The difference between rebirth and reincarnation isn’t explained in the EBT.
Actually rebirth isn’t explained in the EBT.
Chopping against a sense of self argues against rebirth, surely, since there is nothing to be reborn?
I still haven’t seen a coherent explanation of how anatta is combatible with “rebirth”.
Isn’t this differentiation a later, post-buddhist thing?
A post-EBT thing possibly. Like store-house consciousness.
I’m pretty sure there is nothing in the EBT which explains rebirth.
sigh
rolls up sleeves
4 Likes
Good luck with that. 
1 Like
So anyway. If you want to believe in rebirth, you probably need to believe in a “soul” of some sort. If you believe in anatta, then rebirth doesnt work.
It is what is it.
The talk I linked to argues that rebirth works more coherently in the context of anatta, because, to totally oversimplify, there is just arising due to causes and conditions (including subsequent lives), not some self that endures. I’m currently re-listening to it, and I’ll try to make some more coherent notes later, but really, the Buddha makes this point to Sati in MN38:
"… As I understand the Buddha’s teachings, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another.”
“Sāti, what is that consciousness?”
“Sir, it is he who speaks and feels and experiences the results of good and bad deeds in all the different realms.”
“Silly man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way? Haven’t I said in many ways that consciousness is dependently originated, since consciousness does not arise without a cause? But still you misrepresent me by your wrong grasp, harm yourself, and make much bad karma. This will be for your lasting harm and suffering.”
1 Like
For those interested in this topic, I highly recommend Bhikkhu Analayo’s “Rebirth in Early Buddhism and Current Research” if you haven’t read it already. The second chapter, “Debates on Rebirth” is especially relevant to this thread. I would love to share it, but its not allowed under copyright. It is available on Perlego, which has a free trial.
4 Likes
It seems to me that you have provided the answer yourself:
Could it be that this changing soul is the non-self that gets reborn?
7 Likes
I’d just like to make a minor note about terminology.
We should avoid the temptation to reify ideas into words.
There’s nothing about the word “reincarnation” that makes it un-Buddhist or incompatible with the the normal teaching of dependent origination. It just means “going into another body” which is pretty much how it’s described in the suttas. Historically, in the early 20th century, European writers tended to use it for the Hindu atman theory, so Buddhists preferred to use “rebirth” to distinguish the Buddhist view. But this is really just a rhetorical strategy.
Generally speaking, the Indic languages do not make this kind of distinction. The general words used to talk about rebirth are the same. The differences are in the philosophical explanations, which is where they belong.
Some people have expressed that they don’t think that there’s a satisfactory explanation for rebirth in Buddhism. Fair point! Looking for better answers is always good.
In the same spirit, @mikenz66 you’re a physicist. Would you like to explain to us how time works?
11 Likes
So what you’re saying is, physicists don’t understand time, so my approach to scheduling and meetings is fully supported by quantum theory. Excellent!
8 Likes
I’m going to freestyle a bit here so fair warning. I remember a talk from Ven Bodhi about a candle. The flame on the one candle lights the next candle, and the question is: is it the same flame or a different flame on the new candle? It’s kind of like looking at oneself as if there is this essence, and this essence doesn’t belong to oneself. If there is rebirth, this essence must cycle on in samsara.
Long story short…I understand the dilemma 
Sweet Dharma is not a physicist, but a buddha-being: a cat. What about this answer about the understanding of time?
6 Likes
Wow, didn’t expect this to be such a new invention. Thanks for this comment!
I haven’t really looked into the details much, but i suspect we’ll find that this, as so many things, goes back to the Theosophists. I’m guessing the Buddhists of the time wanted to make their ideas sound more respectable. But like I said, just suspicions.
1 Like
I have actually feebly argued (in a friendly way) this with others on the grounds that they are different so this is helpful thank you.
I just always assumed reincarnation was a Dalai Lama kinda thing and rebirth was for us commoners.
1 Like