Buddha And Former Lives

[christiaan]

I would like to have more information about the fact Buddha, in enlightment - as I read- became aware of his former lifes.

Looking at the fact that all things are in constant movement, the fact that when life ends, to that person all ends, no self, even the soul is gone, it is difficult to understand Buddha could become aware of his former lifes.

I expect some answer would tell: when one is enlighted, one can 'see' , be aware of all, immediately, instantly, but that would be awareness of actuality, when the past has gone , is not actual anymore.

So more as the aspect of how to become aware of former lifes, as enlightment definetily would be the quality, I more like to know what to become aware of when that past, material, non self life has disapeared.

And why to become aware of this?

Maybe someone can shine a light on this?

[christiaan]

Excuse, reading back I noticed the title of the topic could be somehow confusing. I wrote Buddha and Karma, because Karma is closely connected to rebirth, and so having more lifes, By my questions the name of the Topic maybe better should have been Buddha and former lifes

[camerata]

OK, I've changed the title of the topic.

Buddhism doesn't postulate any kind of soul, of course, but what the Buddha acquired with his enlightenment was the "Three Knowledges": the ability to see his past lives, the ability to see the past lives of others as they occurred in dependence on good and bad actions (kamma), and the knowledge of the Four Noble Truths together with the knowledge of the destruction of his taints (asava).

The Buddha didn't explain the mechanism of these abilities in the suttas, and I don't think you'll find any convincing explanation in the Theravada or Mahayana Abhidamma, which talk about "linking consciousness" and "storehouse consciousness."

It's well known that meditators who attain the 4th jhana can read their past lives (see Ajahn Brahm's Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond) and some regard it as a "proof" of rebirth. Ajahn Brahm says "It's so real you have to believe it," but I wouldn't know about that. It seems to me it could just as easily be your subconscious presenting you with something you want to see.

[Brucenkhamen]

By my questions the name of the Topic maybe better should have been Buddha and former lifes

Beats me.

I've never really see it as important or relevant.

Why do you need to know?

[christiaan]

OK, I've changed the title of the topic.

Buddhism doesn't postulate any kind of soul, of course, but what the Buddha acquired with his enlightenment was the "Three Knowledges": the ability to see his past lives, the ability to see the past lives of others as they occurred in dependence on good and bad actions (kamma), and the knowledge of the Four Noble Truths together with the knowledge of the destruction of his taints (asava).

The Buddha didn't explain the mechanism of these abilities in the suttas, and I don't think you'll find any convincing explanation in the Theravada or Mahayana Abhidamma, which talk about "linking consciousness" and "storehouse consciousness."

It's well known that meditators who attain the 4th jhana can read their past lives (see Ajahn Brahm's Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond) and some regard it as a "proof" of rebirth. Ajahn Brahm says "It's so real you have to believe it," but I wouldn't know about that. It seems to me it could just as easily be your subconscious presenting you with something you want to see.

Thanks for this explanation. What strikes me is that Ajahn Brahm tells : it is so real (non material) you have to believe it.

So one could explain this to be religious in the way of "believing"?

As I wrote before I am focussed not just in what 'state' people can see this but more on: what is there to see when it is no actual presency anymore in any way?

It could mean people just see what their subconsious presents them what they want to see - also to Buddha? or : they actually see what they tell to see, - Buddha?

I like to know since a human him or her self is the tool to know and knows by his or her level of development.

Selfeducation is the key.

[rockyysdt]

By my questions the name of the Topic maybe better should have been Buddha and former lifes

Beats me.

I've never really see it as important or relevant.

Why do you need to know?

In terms of practical application of the eightfold path it would be agreed.

But I find the Buddha's teachings of his former lives or re births very interesting and a motivator for practice until it becomes self sustaining through personal experience.

Perhaps it can be said that re birth, kharma & permanent cessation from suffering complete a package called Buddhism.

Without these you could probably repackage the remaining practices into a modern new age positive living system.

The 4th jhana is a new and interesting phrase to me.

[camerata]

Without these you could probably repackage the remaining practices into a modern new age positive living system.

The 4th jhana is a new and interesting phrase to me.

The 4th jhana is not included in any modern new age positive living system that I know of.

[lungmi]

OK, I've changed the title of the topic.

Buddhism doesn't postulate any kind of soul, of course, but what the Buddha acquired with his enlightenment was the "Three Knowledges": the ability to see his past lives, the ability to see the past lives of others as they occurred in dependence on good and bad actions (kamma), and the knowledge of the Four Noble Truths together with the knowledge of the destruction of his taints (asava).

The Buddha didn't explain the mechanism of these abilities in the suttas, and I don't think you'll find any convincing explanation in the Theravada or Mahayana Abhidamma, which talk about "linking consciousness" and "storehouse consciousness."

It's well known that meditators who attain the 4th jhana can read their past lives (see Ajahn Brahm's Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond) and some regard it as a "proof" of rebirth. Ajahn Brahm says "It's so real you have to believe it," but I wouldn't know about that. It seems to me it could just as easily be your subconscious presenting you with something you want to see.

As baby monk in Wat Umong Chiang Mai (Buddhadasa branch) with no meditation practice (walking meditation excepted) I had the 3 or 4 jhanas without understanding what happens. I asked my Preceptor about this.

Yes the jhanas, but without panna (wisdom)/not important, you can be happy, continue.

////////////////////

"The Three Knowledges" are a hermeneutic dispute.

Tan Buddhadasa rejects the mainstream Buddhist interpretation, for him all is in one physical life. Tan P.A.Payutto says that the mainstream interpretation is founded by the scriptures but not relevant to be a Buddhist, the Buddhadasa Interpretation is quiet enough.

////////////////////////////////////

For hermeneutics a good link.

http://ftp.buddhism....%20Nimanong.pdf

[fabianfred]

I have read sources outside of Buddhism which state that we are only one tenth conscious and stored in our sub-conscious is much of great wonder if we are able to access it.

Theravada seems to me to imply that the link between lives and cause of rebirth is karma, and all this and memory of our countless past lives is stored there.

I have also read that normal beings can only see back about seven lives (who would want to remember lives spent in the lower realms anyway)...but perhaps when one attains to Nirvana these limits are gone.

[camerata]

What strikes me is that Ajahn Brahm tells : it is so real (non material) you have to believe it.

So one could explain this to be religious in the way of "believing"?

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

[Jawnie]

As others have said, one of the hallmarks of a Buddha or an enlightened being is that they recall, completely, all of their past lives. Unitl then or until we have our own experience, our understanding of both topics in provisional, at best.

While Buddhism discusses past lives extensively, especially the Vajrayana, it doesn't help much to "believe" in past lives or karma. I find it more immediately helpful that those teachings can inform my experience in such a way as to motivate me toward positive actions and away from negative ones. That way, if there is such a thing as karma, mine will be good, and if there are multiple lifetimes, my next one will be better. In the meantime, I'll be happier in this lifetime because I'm performing positive actions.

When discussing the topics of karma and reincarnation, it is helpful to recall the Two Truths: conventional truth and ultimate truth. Conventional truth says we are born, we live, and we die; and that much useful knowledge can be gained from the passage of this experience. Ultimate true says none of this ever happened. Part of our tasks as Buddhists and practitioners is discover the knowledge and wisdom inherit in both truths.

My general thoughts are this: everything you've ever heard or read about karma is true. Moreover, Tibetan teachings say that everything in your life is karmically determined: your family, your friends, your wealth, your status, the country and society you are born into, the physical environment you live in, even the availability and quality of food and water where you live - literally everything, is karmic.

With regard to reincarnation, unless you've had your own experience with it, it's difficult to know for sure about past lives. How many of us can remember what we were doing on this day one year ago? Five years ago? Ten, twenty or 30 years ago? In fact, huge gaps exist in our memory of our current life time, so it is little wonder we remember nothing prior to it.

[Brucenkhamen]

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

Of course he'd have to explain it in such a way as to not give the impression that he had experienced it himself, otherwise breaking the vinaya. I can see such an experience would make someone confident in the teachings on rebirth though.

[rockyysdt]

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

Memory, particularly relating to an event which happened some time ago, is very different to the actual experience.

Often a memory is enhanced or altered from the actual event, place or experience,

My wife had memories of how exciting a childhood family visit to a particular Theme Park was. Revisiting this place many years later soon dispelled her grand memories of the place.

One can also have a vivid sense of visualization, particularly in terms of empathy and imagination when it comes to the experiences of others (dogs & Russian women).

You'd have to be skeptical of any memory when it comes to evaluating it as having been an authentic experience.

Christiaan may have a point.

How do you confirm the Buddhas teaching of past lives through self experience when you are relying on memory?

[Jawnie]

Don't you think it would be important or relevant if it all were true? What if doing bad things really did send you to a tortuous and burning hell for millions of years? Or, if doing virtuous things sent you to an blissful Buddha field for just as long? If this was really true, wouldn't you then think it relevant and important?

By my questions the name of the Topic maybe better should have been Buddha and former lifes

Beats me.

I've never really see it as important or relevant.

Why do you need to know?

[lungmi]

What strikes me is that Ajahn Brahm tells : it is so real (non material) you have to believe it.

So one could explain this to be religious in the way of "believing"?

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

The explanations of the paṭiccasamuppāda (former or next lives in correlation as Kamma) in the Abidhamma are rejected as needless by Tan Buddhadasa.

P.A.Payutto par contre only says the paṭiccasamuppāda in the Abidhamma is the description of a natural mental process („dhammatā“), not a Doctrine for immediate application (patipati).

-------------

Or- if you believe in former or future lives to follow the Eightfolded Pass, you can do it. If the paṭiccasamuppāda in One Life (Buddhadasa) is enough for you, it's correct too.

[camerata]

You'd have to be skeptical of any memory when it comes to evaluating it as having been an authentic experience.

How do you confirm the Buddhas teaching of past lives through self experience when you are relying on memory?

The scriptures don't claim that past lives are memories. Note that I said, "if I experience a past life...". We don't know if "reading" past lives is dredging up buried memories or something else entirely. For all we know, past lives could involve slipping in and out of alternative universes, as postulated by String Theory.

Of course memories become distorted, but the key point here is having an experience (i.e. thinking in Russian) that you couldn't possibly have a memory of in this life, distorted or undistorted.

[camerata]

Of course he'd have to explain it in such a way as to not give the impression that he had experienced it himself, otherwise breaking the vinaya.

Right. He is very careful about that. According to Ajahn Brahm, in his tradition he can't tell the laity directly about his supramundane experiences, but he can tell a fellow monk and that fellow monk wouldn't break any precepts by telling the laity. This is how we came to know about Ajahn Man's attainments via the late Ajahn Boowa. But AFAIK, Ajahn Brahm and Ajahn Sumedho just make straight statements about nibbana etc without ever claiming that it was their own experience.

[camerata]

Tan Buddhadasa rejects the mainstream Buddhist interpretation, for him all is in one physical life.

Can you give me a specific example of Ven Buddhadasa actually rejecting the mainstream Buddhist view of multiple lives? I never found one in his books. He certainly focused on and emphasized our current life - an attitude I agree with, BTW - but AFAIK he never rejected the traditional interpretation. In any case his is a minority view in Thailand. Westerners like it because there's no supramundane belief involved. However, no matter how much we like the one-life interpretation of things, there is no support for it in the Pali Canon that I know of other than one notoriously dubious reference in the Abhidhamma that the fruit of kamma is purely mental.

[rockyysdt]

The scriptures don't claim that past lives are memories. Note that I said, "if I experience a past life...". We don't know if "reading" past lives is dredging up buried memories or something else entirely. For all we know, past lives could involve slipping in and out of alternative universes, as postulated by String Theory.

I assumed memory due to the reference of past lives.

So it seems lives may be occurring concurrently.

Of course memories become distorted, but the key point here is having an experience (i.e. thinking in Russian) that you couldn't possibly have a memory of in this life, distorted or undistorted.

If all of a sudden I could speak fluent Russian then l'd have to accept that as convincing personal experience.

[Brucenkhamen]

Of course if 4th jhana is all it's cracked up to be I'd think a little past life remembrance wouldn't be a big deal.

[camerata]

So it seems lives may be occurring concurrently.

That's just an example to show that conventional memory is not necessarily the only mechanism possible. As I recall, the texts talk about each mind-moment conditioning the next, in life and across lifetimes, and the "conditioning" contains all of our previous lifetimes' experience. If that's the official explanation in the Abhidhamma it suggests something similar to memory but not dependent on the brain or what we understand to be memory according to modern science.

[christiaan]

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

Memory, particularly relating to an event which happened some time ago, is very different to the actual experience.

Often a memory is enhanced or altered from the actual event, place or experience,

My wife had memories of how exciting a childhood family visit to a particular Theme Park was. Revisiting this place many years later soon dispelled her grand memories of the place.

One can also have a vivid sense of visualization, particularly in terms of empathy and imagination when it comes to the experiences of others (dogs & Russian women).

You'd have to be skeptical of any memory when it comes to evaluating it as having been an authentic experience.

Christiaan may have a point.

How do you confirm the Buddhas teaching of past lives through self experience when you are relying on memory?

My point is not: knowing by relying on memory

My point more is: how can you tell about former lives when in enlightment you live in actual awareness without conceptual thinking?

[christiaan]

What strikes me is that Ajahn Brahm tells : it is so real (non material) you have to believe it.

So one could explain this to be religious in the way of "believing"?

The way I understand it is he's talking about two different ways of evaluating mental phenomena. If I dream I'm a dog, but in the dream I think human thoughts and have human motivations, it's clearly a mental fabrication. But if I experience a past life in which I'm aware of having a dog's body, thinking doggy thoughts and having doggy motivations, it would be a different matter entirely. If I experienced being a Russian woman, aware of having a female body, thinking in Russian and having the memory of giving birth, it would seem very "real" and make a compelling case for rebirth or reincarnation.

The explanations of the paṭiccasamuppāda (former or next lives in correlation as Kamma) in the Abidhamma are rejected as needless by Tan Buddhadasa.

P.A.Payutto par contre only says the paṭiccasamuppāda in the Abidhamma is the description of a natural mental process („dhammatā"), not a Doctrine for immediate application (patipati).

-------------

Or- if you believe in former or future lives to follow the Eightfolded Pass, you can do it. If the paṭiccasamuppāda in One Life (Buddhadasa) is enough for you, it's correct too.

My question is not about valuating the fact Buddha could see his former lives , my question is HOW a person can see his former lifes when in pure enlightment, without conceptual thinking, being present in actual reality of the (moving) moment.

[Brucenkhamen]

how can you tell about former lives when in enlightment you live in actual awareness without conceptual thinking?

What makes you think enlightenment is living without conceptual thinking? Conceptual thinking is a necessity for interacting with our day to day world.

[lungmi]

Tan Buddhadasa rejects the mainstream Buddhist interpretation, for him all is in one physical life.

Can you give me a specific example of Ven Buddhadasa actually rejecting the mainstream Buddhist view of multiple lives? I never found one in his books. He certainly focused on and emphasized our current life - an attitude I agree with, BTW - but AFAIK he never rejected the traditional interpretation. In any case his is a minority view in Thailand. Westerners like it because there's no supramundane belief involved. However, no matter how much we like the one-life interpretation of things, there is no support for it in the Pali Canon that I know of other than one notoriously dubious reference in the Abhidhamma that the fruit of kamma is purely mental.

Ok.

The minority view in Thailand is not an argument. Thai hermeneutics and linguistics don't have International Standard. Thai Pali and the Thai Translations are full of mistakes, the Interpretations of the Pali-Canon has a Brahmanistic touch, the threes life Theory is one of this. Why buddhologues worldwide accept Buddhadasa and more P.A.Payutto as competent at the highest level, the minority?

Here the text I use as my basis to quote.. It's the PhD thesis of my student before at High School. I assisted him for hermeneutics, semiotics and modern linguistics and french passages.

5 languages / German, Thai, English,French, Pali .

http://www2.sub.uni-hamburg.de/opus/volltexte/2005/2342/pdf/Volltext.pdf

////////////

I hear the Dalai Lhama in a TV interview answering on a question if there is rebirth: Yes, I will be reborn as a bee. Because a like honey very much.

Great. Highest wisdom.

[AYJAYDEE]

are you asking unelightened people how elightenment can enable one to see past lives?? how would they possibly know?

[camerata]

Sorry, Lungmi, I had to delete your post as it was all in German and languages other than English aren't allowed under the forum rules. Also, I don't read German, so not much use as a reply to me.

[christiaan]

are you asking unelightened people how elightenment can enable one to see past lives?? how would they possibly know?

This is not what I am asking.

One could take up my question as : Is there not known more about former lifes out of the wisdom of enlightnement over the last 2500 years?.

In other words: since people do have former lifes, since enlightened people know about truth without thinking in concepts, where to find more about the truth, more pure knowledge, about former lifes? And when there is not more, why not?

I am aware people that are enlightened can deal with conceptual thinking too, but since they can 'see' in enlightenment the higher truth about all aspects of life when they point their attention to this, I would say out of this state it would be possible more knowledge with regard to former lifes could have come to known by lay people.

I know this is happening, there is a lot of information but I do not find it in Buddhism so that is why I question.

[rockyysdt]

are you asking unelightened people how elightenment can enable one to see past lives?? how would they possibly know?

This is not what I am asking.

One could take up my question as : Is there not known more about former lifes out of the wisdom of enlightnement over the last 2500 years?.

In other words: since people do have former lifes, since enlightened people know about truth without thinking in concepts, where to find more about the truth, more pure knowledge, about former lifes? And when there is not more, why not?

I am aware people that are enlightened can deal with conceptual thinking too, but since they can 'see' in enlightenment the higher truth about all aspects of life when they point their attention to this, I would say out of this state it would be possible more knowledge with regard to former lifes could have come to known by lay people.

I know this is happening, there is a lot of information but I do not find it in Buddhism so that is why I question.

Some of the others may have more information on this point, but there appears to be a Buddhist code on non disclosure of super powers, insights and the state enlightenment achieved by travelers.

I think some of the reasons given are:

• As it's a state of being not place, nothing can be proven without personal experience.
• States are beyond words and can't be conveyed through verbal communication.
• Sharing such knowledge is egocentric, a state which has become extinguished.

[Brucenkhamen]

Some of the others may have more information on this point, but there appears to be a Buddhist code on non disclosure of super powers, insights and the state enlightenment achieved by travelers.

I think some of the reasons given are:

• As it's a state of being not place, nothing can be proven without personal experience.
• States are beyond words and can't be conveyed through verbal communication.
• Sharing such knowledge is egocentric, a state which has become extinguished.

You are correct, this is a rule in the monks vinaya that they cannot disclose these kinds of things to unordained people.

In addition to the reasons you've given is that you might have noticed that asian lay people are much more keen to give donations to monks they consider accomplished, this would be greatly increased if the monks were able to confirm or deny. Also it would be an opportunity for the unscrupulous ones to exaggerate their attainments to gain fame and fortune. I think the Buddha was wise to nip the temptation in the bud from the beginning.

It all comes back to the handful of leaves, the Buddha was only interested in teaching what would lead to the end of suffering. Having more than a passing interest in past lives to me just reveals a wrong attitude towards Buddhist practise and if Buddhist practise didn't promise much more than that I for one wouldn't have bothered with it.