Karma and reincarnation

[cavalier]

I might be going off on a bit of a tangent but here goes,

years ago, I read in a book or someone told me that, in a sense, rebirth is constantly taking place and that the different forms you can take when you are reborn (hungry ghost, animal, i forget the rest, perhaps you can fill me in) are metaphorical and only describe your state of mind or personality as a human.

What's your take on this?

Thanks
Andy

[samabudhi]

State of mind, not being exclusive to the critical thinking, sensory perceiving, conscious, memory accumulating mind - Tib 'nams' (I think?); but to Mind / ground luminosity / alaya vijnana - Tib 'yeshe'.
All experience is a continuum. This human body, with the ordinary mind will pass away as all compounded things do, and only one's karma will continue, not any inherently existing 'self'.

The experiences that one's karma will bring into effect might be extremely painful, tasting primarily of the suffering of pain. This would be hell, the animal realm, or the realm of hungry shades.
If one's karma is more positive, one will experience primarily the suffering of change (loss), and that of conditionality, compulsive behaviour (never being satisfied with what one has.) This would be a human birth, a demi-god, or a god.
If one has gone beyond karma however...

Taking the Buddha's words too literally, we lose the meaning behind them. But it's a bit deeper than just a metaphor for states of this human mind. It goes way beyond that, otherwise, when the body dies, the ordinary mind, which is supported by the body, will die too. The Buddha Mind however is beyond karma, beyond birth and death. That's where we want to be, utterly free from the shackles of cyclic existence.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Cavalier,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by cavalier

years ago, I read in a book or someone told me that, in a sense, rebirth is constantly taking place

this is a correct view. each moment of consciousness arises conditioned by the previous moment of consicousness. in this manner, rebirth of the being is a continual process.

and that the different forms you can take when you are reborn (hungry ghost, animal, i forget the rest, perhaps you can fill me in) are metaphorical and only describe your state of mind or personality as a human.

this is a bit more tricky. whislt is it certainly correct that various mental states will be exhibited in beings and said mental states will arise from preceeding moments of consciousness, it is not correct to say that this only applies to the present beings state of mind.

in Buddhist thought, there are 31 planes of existence. however, beings typically take rebirth in one of 6 of them simplistically; heavenly realms, deva realms, human, animal, hungry ghost and hell realms.

for instance, the hungry ghost realm are beings which have gaping maws and ravenous hunger and thirst, however, their necks are so narrow that they cannot swallow anything. whilst this certain describes some of the beings which we may all know, it would be a mistake to think that this is not being meant as it is taught, in my view.

i suppose that, in some ways, it really depends on where a being is with the overall praxis. for many beings, especially non-Buddhists, the idea of a literal rebirth seems a bit far-fetched and, as such, many modern interperters will tend to gloss over or even ignore the teachings that explicitly talk about these realms as actual destinations for a beings rebirth. in the mistaken view, in my opinion, that such a presentation would be more palatable to the modern being.

this is, in my estimation, a legacy of the initial spreading of the Dharma in the West where much of the religious aspects of the path were not taught, in the attempt to appeal to the Enlightenment reader.

so, to sum up, yes, that is a valid view and the view of it being a real process which happens upon the dissolution of the aggregates is also a valid cognition and it depends on where a being is on the path on how much they can accept of these teachings.

metta,

~v

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

..

As it is ones own deluded mind that makes rebirth necessary, it is, in essence, you who chooses your next form.

I see it as a sort of character building. Just as in this life, all of your experiences determine how you will react to any situation; in all your lives, all of your accumulated Karma will determine how you react to your next rebirth.

This is where I get confused..this all sounds like reincarnation, not rebirth. If I am choosing my next form, if my next life is determined by my previous lives, then surely there must be something continuous about me that survives death and goes on to experience the consequences of my actions..something to which Karma attaches..yet, I thought that Buddhism denies the idea of the self surviving death..??

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by Nick

This is where I get confused..this all sounds like reincarnation, not rebirth. If I am choosing my next form, if my next life is determined by my previous lives, then surely there must be something continuous about me that survives death and goes on to experience the consequences of my actions..something to which Karma attaches..yet, I thought that Buddhism denies the idea of the self surviving death..??

I think this is a good point. There would have to be a "self" that made the choice or was under dellusion, or could make mistakes. In light of the teaching of the Five Skanhas, where upon death the "heaps" go back to the basic elements from which they came, what is it that enlivens these aggregates in the first place?
If we attend to the ideas about rebirth then we may well attend to what Bodhidharma taught about our true self nature is Buddha, and to look outside of this is the great illusion. If Mind manifests itself using the five aggregates and leaves them behind after a while (upon conventional death) don't we then get very close to the western idea of first cause?

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Nick,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Nick

This is where I get confused..this all sounds like reincarnation, not rebirth.

this is a nuanced distinction, to be sure. frankly, there is little wonder to me why beings can be confused on this point since to really have a firm understanding requires some knowledge of the Buddhadharmas philosophical underpininings.

let's parse the words for a moment. re-incarnation and re-birth seem like sort of the same thing, however, there is a salient difference here and, perhaps, we'll be able to bring it out through conversation.

the first thing to consider is that, within the Buddhadharma, there is no teaching that there is anything which is incarnated, i.e. created. moreover, of the phenomena which do arise, none of them have any permenant essence, no self-existent nature which can be found.

when we view external phenomena, this teaching is called Impermenance (i'm going to try to skip many of the Pali and Sanskrit names, we can do that later, if necessary). when we view this teaching in with regards to sentient beings, we call it No Self or Selflessness.

If I am choosing my next form, if my next life is determined by my previous lives, then surely there must be something continuous about me that survives death and goes on to experience the consequences of my actions..

it is not that one chooses ones next life, per se. however, that is a bit of a side point at this junction. it is not ones previous lives that are unalterable, if one could not change ones karma then Awakening would not be possible. ones previous existence conditions the arising of the current existence. the current existence conditions the arising of the next existence. in each existence, a sentient being generates karma. the fruit of karma can be positive or negative and it is this fruit which, ultimately, conditions the arisings.

in Buddhism, the consciouness is understood to be a many layered sort of thing, ultimately having 10 progressively subtle layers. the aspect of human consciousness which views the aggregates as "I" and "me" is the ego and its fundamental clinging to a sense of existence.

the ego lays at the 6th level of the consciousness, as such, when a being is able to access the 7th level, the entire idea of self is uprooted and we expose the Alaya Consciousness, the Ground. at this point, there is nothing which could be considered to be a self remaining, there is the Alaya Consciousness where the fruit of karma ripens and the more subtle stages of the 9th and 10th, where one is called an Effect Stage Buddha, the technical Vajrayana literature, at any rate.

so, to sum up, what experiences rebirth and the workings of karma is the conditioned aspects of consciousness, the I Consciousness (7th) as conditioned by the fruit of the Alaya Consciousness.

something to which Karma attaches.

it is not Karma, per se, that is responsible, it is the fruit of Karma which is the action item here.

the fruit of karma mainfests in the Alaya Consciousness, which is just slightly above what is conventionally labled as "I" by the mind.

.yet, I thought that Buddhism denies the idea of the self surviving death..??

that is correct. not only that, there isn't a real self which is existing now. this is a product of ego clinging and, though quite real to us, is not ultimately existing.

metta,

~v

[Paladin]

Thanks Vajradhara,
I understand a little better now.

Peace

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Paladin,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Paladin

I think this is a good point. There would have to be a "self" that made the choice or was under dellusion, or could make mistakes.

in a certain sense, there is. this is the ego which is deluded. the ego, however, is a product of a fundamental delusion of consciousness. until such a time as the being is able to unravel the skein of ignorance, the ego will continue to manifest and the process of rebirth will continue.

in the Buddhadharma, there is a teaching we have called the Two Truths. that is, there is a Realtive Truth such as "i exist" and an Absolute Truth such as "there is no l". what we normally are experienced with and working with is the Relative truth and our language is rooted in the relative experience, however, through this linguistic convention we are able to speak of Absolute truth in metaphor and allegory, to a certain extent.

In light of the teaching of the Five Skanhas, where upon death the "heaps" go back to the basic elements from which they came, what is it that enlivens these aggregates in the first place?

Interdependent Co-Arising. the Aggregates arise in conjunction with the arising deluded consciousness and the deluded consciousness arises in conjunction with the aggregates.

If we attend to the ideas about rebirth then we may well attend to what Bodhidharma taught about our true self nature is Buddha, and to look outside of this is the great illusion.

did you know that Buddha is a title not a name of a being? it is an interesting word in Sanskrit, from the root "budh" which means 'to illume'. in this parsing, it means The Awakened One, which is one of many titles that Buddhas have. another is Tathagata, which is also quite interesting. depending on how it is parsed, Tatha-gata, it means "Thus Gone One" and if it is Tath-agata, it means "Thus Come One".

however, the discussion of true selves in Buddhism tends to remind me of a rather famous and a less famous koan.

when asked of dogs have Buddha nature, the master said "MU"! (which means "no")

(that one has stuck with Western beings, for some reason)

on a different occassion, when asked if dogs have Buddhanature, the master said "yes".

(that one hasn't stuck.)

If Mind manifests itself using the five aggregates and leaves them behind after a while (upon conventional death) don't we then get very close to the western idea of first cause?

however, that is not what Buddhadharma is teaching. mind is a many layered thing, like an onion. what is conventionally labled as "self" and "i" ceases at the physical forms death.

in any event, there is a Sutta called the Root Sequence Sutta wherein Buddha Shakyamuni teaches that there is nothing which can rightly be regarded as the "ground of phenomena" not even nirvana or buddhanature.

the idea of a first cause is not rejected in religious terms by Buddha Shakyamuni it is, rather, a philsophical refutation as such a view is grounded in a radically different ontological view that what Buddhism presents.

the sort of first cause or supernatural being that is rejected is described thus:

"That Worshipful Brahma, the Great God, the Omnipotent, the
Omniscient, the Organizer, the Protection, the Creator, the Most
Perfect Ruler, the Designer and Orderer, the Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be, He by Whom we were created, He is permanent, Constant, Eternal, Unchanging, and He will remain so for ever and ever."

DN 24

metta,

~v

[Paladin]

Thanks Vajradhara,

Our resident teacher here in Colorado springs tells me my biggest mistake is asking : "Why?" I must say that Vernerable Tenzin is very patient, and being of the Tibetan Gelugpa lineage doesn't resort to beating the student when they ask something dumb.

I remember the Tathagata from the long mantra as the "thus gone foe destroyer" or simply the one thus gone. I am very grateful for your instruction here Vajradhara,because after reading so many books on Buddhism and meditating every day for the past seven years, I think I have educated myself to a near perfect level of ignorance(not yet a perfect idiot but I'm working on it)

Sometimes it helps to have an elder brother explain things ;0)

Peace

Mark

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Interdependent Co-Arising. the Aggregates arise in conjunction with the arising deluded consciousness and the deluded consciousness arises in conjunction with the aggregates.

If the Aggregates are based upon desire, which feeds delusion, then does this not mean that {improper?} "free-will" is the "Root Cause?" {Or could this be yet another product of my delusion?} {I guess I'll just have to be patient, and wait, and see or not see...}

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Paladin,

thank you for the post and the kind words.

if you gain anything from them it is due to your own good karma ripening.

i always benefit from the discussions that we have here and i thank you all for your contributions!

metta,

~v

Originally Posted by Paladin

Thanks Vajradhara,

Our resident teacher here in Colorado springs tells me my biggest mistake is asking : "Why?" I must say that Vernerable Tenzin is very patient, and being of the Tibetan Gelugpa lineage doesn't resort to beating the student when they ask something dumb.

I remember the Tathagata from the long mantra as the "thus gone foe destroyer" or simply the one thus gone. I am very grateful for your instruction here Vajradhara,because after reading so many books on Buddhism and meditating every day for the past seven years, I think I have educated myself to a near perfect level of ignorance(not yet a perfect idiot but I'm working on it)

Sometimes it helps to have an elder brother explain things ;0)

Peace

Mark

[Vajradhara]

Namaste seattlegal,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by seattlegal

If the Aggregates are based upon desire,

this is a bit problematic for it is not desire, per se, which is the issue. having desire for an outcome and so forth is not, necessairly what we are talking about. we are talking about a particular form of desire, called Tanha, in Sanskrit. Tanha means, literally, "intense craving" and this is the sort of desire we are speaking of, intense craving.

however, the aggregates are not based upon desire or tanha, they arise in conjunction with the arising of deluded consciousness. so, what we would more accurately say is that the aggregates arise in conjuction with a consciousness deluded by ignorance.

which feeds delusion,

desire does not, in an of itself, enable delusive thought.

then does this not mean that {improper?} "free-will" is the "Root Cause?" {Or could this be yet another product of my delusion?} {I guess I'll just have to be patient, and wait, and see or not see...}

perhaps the thread on the 12 Linked Chain of Causation may help your understanding of this. we have a discussion of it here:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=528

excerpt:

Ignorance conditions volitional actions. Volitional actions condition consciousness. Consciousness conditions mind/body. And so on. As soon as ignorance is present, all the other links -- volitional actions, consciousness, mind/body, and so on -- are already there. Each link contains all the other links. Because there is ignorance, there are volitional actions. Because there are volitional actions, there is consciousness. Because there is consciousness there is mind/body, and so on.


metta,

~v

[seattlegal]

Thank you for your reply, Vajradhara, and thank you for the link to the 12 Linked Chain of Causation. I've been comparing it to the Mula Sutta, and it has been most interesting:

"'All phenomena are rooted in desire.

"'All phenomena come into play through attention.

"'All phenomena have contact as their origination.

"'All phenomena have feeling as their meeting place.

"'All phenomena have concentration as their presiding state.

"'All phenomena have mindfulness as their governing principle.

"'All phenomena have discernment as their surpassing state.

"'All phenomena have release as their heartwood.

"'All phenomena gain their footing in the deathless.

"'All phenomena have Unbinding as their final end.'

"On being asked this by those who have gone forth in other sects, this is how you should answer."

If you compare the above with the 12 links, you will see some interesting entanglements:

ignorance

volitional action

consciousness

mind/body, or name and form

the six sense organs, accompained by their objects

contact (sparsha) between sense organ, sense object, and sense consciousness

feelings

grasping or attachment

"coming to be"

birth

old age (or decay) and death (jaramarana)

Thank you!

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

Vajradhara's explanations are always accurate but, I think, a little heavy.

If I may offer my own humble and fallable opinion.

As it is ones own deluded mind that makes rebirth necessary, it is, in essence, you who chooses your next form.

I read the OP, and I read Vaj's response, which was pretty noncommital. So I have this question: Is reincarnation, in the pedestrian sense, a reality? Re-birth...in every moment we a reborn in the image of our thoughts and deeds. This I can accept, but reincarnation... I'm wondering if buddhism just let's people get away with this because that's what they want.

Chris

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

This I can accept, but reincarnation... I'm wondering if buddhism just let's people get away with this because that's what they want.

Chris

Exactly!

"'All phenomena are rooted in desire.