Buddha, Buddhadhasa And Rebirth

[Xangsamhua]

Reading through the Ratcliffs' 1993 book Understanding Zen, I noted in the authors' discussion of the Buddha's empiricism and "radical skepticism" their claim that, "in limiting his attention to the realm of experience, [the Buddha] implicitly argued that reincarnation, guided by the principle of karma, be discarded." Rather, "rebirth occurs from moment to moment in the form of the continuous ego." (p. 95)

I had an idea that this was also a teaching of Ven. Buddhadasa and that it was regarded as rather unorthodox.

From D.R.V. Acharya's blog I got the summary below. (http://drvasu.wordpr...kku-buddhadasa/) My question is: Is this a fair summation of Buddhadasa's teaching on the relationship between dependent origination, karma and rebirth? And, to follow on, was Buddhadasa challenged by the official Sangha for his teaching on these matters?

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu cuts across the doctrine of rebirth and strongly focuses the doctrine of dependent origination to the present moment to provide an explanation for the cause and cessation of suffering right in the present moment itself. Buddhadasa argues that If the causes of suffering exist in the previous life, as Buddhaghosa said, then freeing oneself from suffering in this life is impossible because the cause of suffering is inaccessible.

Buddhadasa's teachings to put it very grossly is similar to the modern new age teaching of 'Living in the moment'. And since there is no empirical evidence for rebirth, Buddhadasa finds it very difficult to accept the teachings of Vishuddhimagga. He goes back to the tripitaka pali canon and picks up teachings of the no-self to attack Buddhagosha's teachings of rebirth in Vishuddhimagga. Buddhadasa also claims that the doctrine of rebirth was introduced much later by the Brahmins scholars like Buddhagosha into Buddhism.

Bhikku Buddhadasa towards the end of his life embraced a world view which rejected belief in any religion as he mentioned that those who have penetrated to the highest understanding have no use for any religion.

[fabianfred]

"Bhikku Buddhadasa towards the end of his life embraced a world view which rejected belief in any religion as he mentioned that those who have penetrated to the highest understanding have no use for any religion."

of course...those who have crossed over have no need for the raft anymore....

[camerata]

their claim that, "in limiting his attention to the realm of experience, [the Buddha] implicitly argued that reincarnation, guided by the principle of karma, be discarded." Rather, "rebirth occurs from moment to moment in the form of the continuous ego."

Well, it's a claim not supported in the Pali Canon, which of course is chock full of stuff about rebirth. This whole idea that the Buddha had hidden/implicit teachings or "higher" teachings is much favoured by Mahayana for obvious reasons. But the Buddha said quite clearly in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta: "I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back."

From Ven Buddhadasa's books I get the impression he didn't really believe in literal rebirth although he couldn't, or perhaps wouldn't, say so outright as a monastic. Focusing on the here and now fitted his agenda of making Buddhism relevant to the common man in this life very well. He was asked by the Sangha not to teach about sunyata, but I don't know about the rest of it. This is Sabaijai's area of expertise.

[sabaijai]

It's true that Aj Buddhadasa favoured suttanta over commentary. His quibble with the Vishuddhimagga pertained to the example given for dependent origination across three lives, which he said was not borne out by the suttas. He didn't condemn the entire Visuddhimagga outright as far as I know. I never heard him condemn that text during the time I studied with him at Suanmokh in the early 1980s, and there was a copy of the Visuddhimagga in the wat library. In fact it was there that I read it for the first time. I'm no big fan of that text either

The fact that Buddhadasa didn't think the three-lives example for Paticca Samuppada was correct didn't mean he did not believe in rebirth. There is plenty of material on rebirth in the suttas, for example in the Saleyyaka Sutta:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.041.nymo.html

If he rejected life-to-life rebirth, he would have to reject this sutta (and many more) as well. And he knew the suttas better than most Pali scholars.

I wouldn't presume to say what Aj Buddhadasa's opinions or intentions were, but I think his point on moment-to-moment rebirth is observable and can be found in the Pali canon, especially in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. (He wasn't such a big fan of Abhidhamma either, even though it supported his momentariness theory.)

I don't see that it has to be only one way or the other. If the theory of dependent origination applies moment-to-moment and those moments continue after the re-assembly of the khandas, then it applies life to life as well.

In his talks, Aj Buddhadasa was fond of taking ghosts and hell-states associated with Buddhism and identifying them with human mental states and characteristics. Thus naraka (hell) was anxiety, and preta (hungry ghost) were people whose carnal appetites exceeded their capacity for satisfaction.

I don't believe he meant this as a denial of their existence independent of human birth but I could be wrong (either way is fine with me, and in the meantime I'll focus on matters at hand, so to speak). I think his attitude was more along the lines of "These things are difficult to verify or observe directly, but they have existence in the present, and the meaning is more powerful in the present, so that's what we'll talk about."

"Hell is anxiety" is a powerful rhetorical device, and something we can verify and understand right now, without a lot of speculation.

Buddhadasa wrote brilliantly on Paticca Samuppada:

http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books6/Bhikkhu_Buddhadasa_Paticcasamuppada.htm

Bhikkhu Bodhi fills in the gaps with direct reference to the suttas:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_06.htm

Are the views of these two figures in opposition to one another or complementary? I vote for complementary. Buddhadasa's teachings on this are far more practise-oriented, but if you're going to read suttas for yourself, having Bhikkhu Bodhi's caveats in the back of your mind will help you keep your wits about you, I think.

As far as being asked not to teach about sunyata, one book I translated was entirely devoted to the subject. He didn't use the term so much, rather the Thai terms khwaam waang (emptiness) and jit wang (empty mind).

[Xangsamhua]

Many thanks for your replies, Camerata and Sabaijai.

Buddhadasa wrote brilliantly on Paticca Samuppada:

http://www.what-budd...casamuppada.htm

Bhikkhu Bodhi fills in the gaps with direct reference to the suttas:

http://www.accesstoi...ps-essay_06.htm

Are the views of these two figures in opposition to one another or complementary? I vote for complementary. Buddhadasa's teachings on this are far more practise-oriented, but if you're going to read suttas for yourself, having Bhikkhu Bodhi's caveats in the back of your mind will help you keep your wits about you, I think.

I'm about to embark on the Digha Nikaya, but will look at Sabaijai's references first, and have another look at the Saleyyaka Sutta.

Metta. :jap:

Xangsamhua

[Xangsamhua]

PS Thanks to Fred, too.

[Joop50]

Excuse me but what is the importance for you to know there is such thing as reincarnation, rebirth, karma etc.

Suppose you find out there is rebith or not, would it change anything for you now?

Isn't it all mind stuff and increases suffering? There is only Now and only Now you can be happy.

Mindfullness is nothing else as live in the Now, live in attention. Isn't it this what is basic in Bhuddism?

[fabianfred]

Excuse me but what is the importance for you to know there is such thing as reincarnation, rebirth, karma etc.

Suppose you find out there is rebith or not, would it change anything for you now?

Isn't it all mind stuff and increases suffering? There is only Now and only Now you can be happy.

Mindfullness is nothing else as live in the Now, live in attention. Isn't it this what is basic in Bhuddism?

I consider that rebirth and karma are inextricably intertwinned and you cannot have one without the other.

Certainly a belief in the Buddha's countless past lives whilst training himself as a Boddhisattva gives us great respect for his sacrifice and helps us to understand how rare and precious are buddhas and the chance to meet their teachings....so that we shall not waste the golden opportunity we have right now.

[Joop50]

Dear Fabianfred, I consider when people come to me and talk about karma, they have a certain fear.

People are often affraid not to be as good as they are allready right now for several reasons.

One of these fears is not living by the tools based on Buddhism so you can't be enlightend.

How do you know karma and rebirth exist exept from texts?

It has all to do with believes indeed.

What the Buddha teach us is that Buddha lives in ourself, in our Heart.

Isn't that a golden opportunity to awake right now?

[Xangsamhua]

Excuse me but what is the importance for you to know there is such thing as reincarnation, rebirth, karma etc.

Suppose you find out there is rebith or not, would it change anything for you now?

I guess this question is directed toward anyone who wants to know, not just to me.

I think people ask questions on forums because <a> they are curious about something for whatever reason and/or <b> a question serves as a platform from which to make declarations about something (i.e. the question is a tactical rather than a strategic device).

My question about Buddhadasa's views on rebirth relates to <a> rather than <b>, though I may in general terms have a sub-text of doubt about the consistency of Buddhist teachers' views on rebirth and, possibly, of the Buddha's own views, but my question was not a platform from which I intended to make assertions on those matters. Why waste the opportunity to learn by obstructing the path with one's own views all the time? (Sometimes is fine. )

Isn't it all mind stuff and increases suffering? There is only Now and only Now you can be happy.

Mindfullness is nothing else as live in the Now, live in attention. Isn't it this what is basic in Bhuddism?

I'm not sure that being fully aware precludes curiosity. If you mean we should not be bound and deluded by concepts and abstractions I would not argue. I've still got a way to go before I can overcome categories, but can see the point in doing so - at least seeing through and beyond them. In the meantime, lots of things arouse my curiosity.

Edited September 16, 2010 by camerata
Fixed mangled quotes.

[Joop50]

Yes that is true of course, I do not mean to criticize, just offer another view.

Sometimes I (deliberately) forget Buddhism is more a religion and lifestyle instead of a way to enlightenment.

I read about Buddhadasa by the way, an interesting person who has my attention.