PDA

View Full Version : Anatta and Rebirth



ale84
01 September 2013, 09:36 AM
I've been reading about buddhism and I've found some aspects really hard to understand.
According to the doctrine of anatta, ¿is there something inside us that survives physical death? or ¿is death the complete annihilation of the being?
About rebirth ¿Is it the consciousness or vital force of a dead person taking birth into a new body? or ¿are just the karmas of a dead person born in a new body without any stream of consciousness or vital force from the mentioned deceased?

Jetavan
01 September 2013, 12:12 PM
I've been reading about buddhism and I've found some aspects really hard to understand.
According to the doctrine of anatta, ¿is there something inside us that survives physical death? or ¿is death the complete annihilation of the being?
About rebirth ¿Is it the consciousness or vital force of a dead person taking birth into a new body? or ¿are just the karmas of a dead person born in a new body without any stream of consciousness or vital force from the mentioned deceased?

Greetings,

From a Theravada Buddhist perspective, yes, there are many "things" (or "dhammas") that survive physical death -- like the atoms in the body, the elements of the mind, and the continuity of the actions we performed. Nothing is annihilated, and nothing is created -- all of matter (and all of mind) undergoes transformation.

There is some "thing" that is not identical to the atoms or the mind, but that some "thing" is not a "thing" (and a "vital force" would be a "thing"); rather, it is simply awareness, which is (truly) located nowhere. When awareness becomes associated with a particular body and mind, then "rebirth" has taken place. When awareness is free from all associations, that is the end of rebirth.

ale84
01 September 2013, 12:31 PM
Greetings,

From a Theravada Buddhist perspective, yes, there are many "things" (or "dhammas") that survive physical death -- like the atoms in the body, the elements of the mind, and the continuity of the actions we performed. Nothing is annihilated, and nothing is created -- all of matter (and all of mind) undergoes transformation.

There is some "thing" that is not identical to the atoms or the mind, but that some "thing" is not a "thing" (and a "vital force" would be a "thing"); rather, it is simply awareness, which is (truly) located nowhere. When awareness becomes associated with a particular body and mind, then "rebirth" has taken place. When awareness is free from all associations, that is the end of rebirth.

Thanks for your explanation!

rainycity
09 September 2013, 06:00 AM
I've been reading about buddhism and I've found some aspects really hard to understand.
According to the doctrine of anatta, ¿is there something inside us that survives physical death?
or ¿is death the complete annihilation of the being?
About rebirth ¿Is it the consciousness or vital force of a dead person taking birth into a new body? or ¿are just the karmas of a dead person born in a new body without any stream of consciousness or vital force from the mentioned deceased?

It would appear that the pali canon teaches that something you might call the vital force of the dead person takes birth into a new body. It quotes Buddha as teaching the union of three things in order for conception to take place; the union of the mother and father, the mother being in season, and something called the gandhabba, which is interpreted as the being-to-be-born.

A gandhabba (gandharva in sanskirit) is normally a male nature spirit, however in this context, it's probably referring to the being-to-be-born.
The Buddha argued with Brahmins about the doctrine of caste, one argument he used was the question of whether they knew what caste the gandhabba present at their conception belonged to. They admitted that they didn't know. Which suggests that the gandhabba present at conception is the being-to-be-born and not the common meaning of a male nature spirit.

Since its taught that conception won't take place without the presence of this being-to-be-born, it could be interpreted as the vital force of the deceased person. Whatever the case may be its kammavega (karmic energy) that transfers from one life to the next in the doctrine of rebirth, carrying the stream of consciousness.

Jetavan
09 September 2013, 12:46 PM
It would appear that the pali canon teaches that something you might call the vital force of the dead person takes birth into a new body. It quotes Buddha as teaching the union of three things in order for conception to take place; the union of the mother and father, the mother being in season, and something called the gandhabba, which is interpreted as the being-to-be-born.

A gandhabba (gandharva in sanskirit) is normally a male nature spirit, however in this context, it's probably referring to the being-to-be-born.
The Buddha argued with Brahmins about the doctrine of caste, one argument he used was the question of whether they knew what caste the gandhabba present at their conception belonged to. They admitted that they didn't know. Which suggests that the gandhabba present at conception is the being-to-be-born and not the common meaning of a male nature spirit.

Since its taught that conception won't take place without the presence of this being-to-be-born, it could be interpreted as the vital force of the deceased person. Whatever the case may be its kammavega (karmic energy) that transfers from one life to the next in the doctrine of rebirth, carrying the stream of consciousness.

Greetings,

How would you interpret the gandhabba in the context of the five koshas?

ale84
09 September 2013, 12:54 PM
Thanks! so, is Zen the only branch of Buddhism which denies reincarnation (rebirth)?

rainycity
12 September 2013, 08:56 AM
Greetings,

How would you interpret the gandhabba in the context of the five koshas?

Do you mean the yogic teaching of the five layers of the subtle body? It's not a part of buddhist doctrine, however there is reference to a "mind-made body" in the pali canon, although it is described as something that a meditator creates as an act of will, rather then something thats always there (or at least, the way it is normally translated describes it this way). But it does say that in the same way a reed is pulled out of its sheath, the mind-made body is drawn out of the physical body. Or the way that a sword is drawn from its scabbard. Which sounds a lot like the koshas. The relationship between the physical body and the mind-made body is described as the relationship between a reed and its sheath in that they are not the same, and the reed is inside the sheath.

Personally I think that the gandhabba is probably supposed to be something like the mind-made body surviving the death of the physical body. As I understand it, in yoga, karma is transferred from one life to the next by the causal body or the innermost kosha. The causal body is not a part of buddhist doctrine (it might be in vajrayana, I'm not sure) and usually buddhists, or at least, western buddhists, are weary of any ideas of something transmigrating from life to life, or anything that resembles a soul. They find it to be too much like an atman, although technically, it would be no more of an atman then the physical body. But its the post-mortem survival of something which transmigrates that many western buddhists can not reconcile in their minds with no atman. And in many cases, any sort of after life, including rebirth, they feel implies an atman, so they discard it entirely.

But I think that what is implied in the pali canon is a subtle body surviving death, continuing the karmic stream, and eventually fusing with an embryo and transferring the karmic stream to the new life. I don't think its quite the same as what is described by yogic philosophy though, with the causal body.


Thanks! so, is Zen the only branch of Buddhism which denies reincarnation (rebirth)?

I'm not sure that it does

Jeffery D. Long
12 September 2013, 01:19 PM
Thanks! so, is Zen the only branch of Buddhism which denies reincarnation (rebirth)?

I don't think this is the case. Dogen, for example, refers to the various types of rebirth in his Shobogenzo. Maybe particular Zen teachers (probably westerners) might deny it, but I do not think this is the case for traditional Zen. The emphasis is on getting enlightenment here and now, but this does not entail a denial of rebirth.

chowkit74
16 September 2013, 10:10 PM
I've been reading about buddhism and I've found some aspects really hard to understand.
According to the doctrine of anatta, ¿is there something inside us that survives physical death? or ¿is death the complete annihilation of the being?
About rebirth ¿Is it the consciousness or vital force of a dead person taking birth into a new body? or ¿are just the karmas of a dead person born in a new body without any stream of consciousness or vital force from the mentioned deceased?

The concept of anattā (non-self or absence of separate self) in Buddhism has always been the main subject of confusion among the strangers and even the followers. Now, let us analyse into it. Simply it means, ‘Now you see it, now you don't.’ This is what the concept of emptiness in Buddhism is all about – the absence of static entity. Nothing stays unchanging even for the slightest moment at all times. By the time you think who you are, you are already not the same ‘you’ seconds ago. So where are you to find the original static of ‘you’ as you assume along every passing of moments?

At the end of the day, you could only see a stream of you constantly passing by on every slightest moment. So I repeat, you could only see a stream of you - not the one stop entity of you. Just like you could not step twice into the same river; for other waters are ever flowing on to you. The stream of you would mean you are part of the becoming processes that arise in the nature. All different shapes and forms that exist in the nature or the so-called you as being are merely the momentary outcomes of the constant and the continuous becoming processes in the realms of existence. Under a balance phenomenon, one could witness shapes or forms arise; under an imbalance phenomenon, one could see no shapes or forms arise - and the cycle of conditional phenomena continues repeatedly.

Finally, the stream of you is devoid of inherent existence. It means that you do not exist independently by the definition of the physical container that you always presume to be. You are merely the results of energy or matter orientation that evolve constantly and continuously in a plane of space at all times. In other words, you are just like part of the Lego pieces or bricks that can be assembled and connected in many ways, to construct such objects as vehicles, buildings, and even working robots - anything constructed can then be taken apart again, and the pieces used to make other objects. When one is fully awakened to the principle of emptiness or non-self, the state of egolessness in oneself would arise concurrently. This realisation is part of the fundamental routes to enlightenment as prescribed by the Buddha.

In Buddhism, non-self means non-ownership of self. What we used to claim such as the ‘I’ or ‘you’ or ‘we’ is merely an expression for our mind to comprehend on the day-to-day communication with another individual. However, this expression does not grant us with an ownership of our soul or body. And it is easier to explain the non-ownership of our body than our soul because we could see the rising (birth) and the passing (death) of physical bodies every time and anywhere we go.

As for the ‘soul’ thing, Buddhism sees in the absence of eternal existence of it. Soul is just a plain description for something that arised in intelligence but without physical appearance. And the ‘something that arised in intelligence’ is also not permanent and subject to change at all times under the influence of conditional phenomena (voidness in every existence). So again, there is non-ownership of the soul-of-self.

But how do we clarify the reincarnation process in accordance with Buddhism? Actually, Buddhism sees in the rebirth but not in the reincarnation process. This is because there is no permanent grasping of soul or body during the rebirth process. It means even though the mentioned cycle of process is repeated, every cycle is different from one another, just like the saying, ‘It looks like me, sounds like me, but it is still not me.’ In other words, there are linkages between the past, the present and the future of an individual but there is no trans-migration process taking place. A clear example would be how the genetic lineage works for generations.

Let us look at the following illustration on how rebirth takes place in accordance with Buddhism: -

The Coffee in a Cup

Let say Coffee Original is one of the special brewed drinks: -

300ml hot liquid water
70% coffee powder => 100% Coffee Original in cup Jumbo
30% condensed milk

Supposedly, the cup Jumbo has broken apart by accident and the content has splattered around i.e.

30% onto the table,
40% onto the floor,
5% onto the wall,
10% onto the drain,
5% vaporised into thin air,
10% remained in the broken cup.

A cleaner took up a rag and wiped off the remaining liquid coffee in sequential order starting from the table, the floor and then the wall. In a repeated gesture, the cleaner squeezed off the wet rag and the remaining coffee liquid flowed into three separate cups i.e.

Cup 1 80% already filled with tea liquid mixture.
Cup 2 90% already filled with mocha liquid mixture.
Cup 3 55% already filled with mineral water.

Let say 300ml of properties is a benchmark for a qualified special brewed drink. The cleaner then filled up the respective cup rooms with liquids derived from the rag that are by and large the remaining of Coffee Original derived from the table, the floor and the wall.

In this case, the respective 300ml of liquids in Cup 1, Cup 2 and Cup 3 is dependent on the Coffee Original before a new special brewed drink is made possible. However, this does not mean that Coffee Original is the only dependent source or ingredient. Respectively, Cup 1, Cup 2 and Cup 3 would need to depend upon many other sustaining factors as well such as the already partially filled liquids and new cups before qualifying as special brewed drinks.

As a conclusion, the new liquid mixture arising in Cup 1, Cup 2 and Cup 3 is neither identical to, nor entirely different from, the old coffee liquid, but forms part of a causal continuum or stream with it. There is a conditioned relationship between one liquid and the next; it is not identical but neither is it completely distinct.

The beauty of the nature is that it allows all sorts of processes taking place such as aggregation, segregation, evolution, mutation, assimilation, etc. As a consequence, every existence would not be totally the same or different from each other. We are all closely inter-dependent, inter-woven and inter-related with each other since the dawn of time in a very comprehensive and complicated network of existence – just like the Christian believes that all mankind derived from Adam and Eve. Lastly, one should not confuse ‘non-self’ with ‘no-self’ and ‘non-eternal soul’ with ‘no-soul.’ Buddhism sees in the existence of self or soul but only in a non-ownership or non-permanency manner i.e. there is an influx of self or soul but not the one-off static kind of self or soul.

:)