Buddha And Former Lives

[rockyysdt]

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.

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

Edited February 6, 2011 by rockyysdt

[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.

Christiaan

Does this satisfactorily answer your question?

• Sharing such knowledge is egocentric, a state which has become extinguished.
• 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.
• It is a rule in the monks vinaya that they cannot disclose these kinds of things to un ordained people.
• Allowing Monks to disclose their experiences would be an opportunity for the unscrupulous to exaggerate attainments for gain.

Edited February 6, 2011 by rockyysdt

[Brucenkhamen]

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

If it provides something to help overcome doubt that may not be a bad thing, but I think better to learn about the nature of doubt and how it works and overcome it through wisdom.

A lot of people might have the opposite reaction to you, they might feel that now they can be confident they will have many more lives to come they can relax and take it easy this life, isn't this what feuls the make merit for a better rebirth attitude?

Hindus believe in reincarnation, Shirley Maclaine believes in reincarnation so I don't see why knowledge of past lives should strengthen ones confidence in Buddhism.

Considering this isn't supposed to happen until 4th jhana anyway surely experiencing the jhanas themselves would be more uplifting that this side affect.

[AYJAYDEE]

try that again in plain english

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.

[lungmi]

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.

Accepted, I was to lazy to translate. Accept my good intention, enough.

[lungmi]

The Buddhist legend of the village of blinds. (Copied in western literature many times

(short version)

In a village of blind people an elephant was presented by a King.

- What is this?, the King asked the blinds.

The blinds investigated the elephant everyone in a different way.

This is a column.

This is a carpet.

This is a trunk.

This is a bone.

This a brush.

And they started to fight about the "truth" of their investigations.

Everyone had a proof, could describe scientifically what an elephant is.

But where was the elephant?

Edited February 6, 2011 by lungmi

[lungmi]

Next step, Christiaan, you are the King to present us a lot of questions, but no elephant.

We try to answer, but when there is no elephant, we, the blinds, cannot answer.

[khaowong1]

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?

Yes, I think that most people would find it relevant and important.. From my perspective, I find Brucenkhamen to be a little negative in most of his posts. I would hate for him to be my abbot.

[khaowong1]

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.

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

I would have to agree with this. I find that most people/travelers need some positive feedback concerning their practice. They get a little tired of the standard "just concentrate on the here and now" statement given out by most meditation teachers and even a lot of the Buddhist monks. When I get that statement, I feel like the teacher hasn't got anything else in his bag to fall back on. The teachers that have helped me are willing and happy to talk and discuss anything that comes up. Whether it's Karma, Rebirth, Death, Past Lives, etc and etc. Because whether we like it or not, when your on the path, all kinds of questions come up and with most of us, we would like a reasonable and clear answer, rather than to be shunted off on the old, "it's not important, just concentrate on the here and now".

[khaowong1]

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.

I'll have to dig out my copy of the Vinaya again, and read it more closely, but from what I was taught, yes, monks shouldn't be disclosing these things to unordained people, but I think the rule was put into place, because there were monks pretending to have these super powers to get more and better food, robes, money, what ever.. And I know that professing to have supernormal powers when you don't is cause for dismissal from the Sangha. As for monks to discuss these things with their teacher or abbot, it is allowed. Even encourged.

[khaowong1]

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

If it provides something to help overcome doubt that may not be a bad thing, but I think better to learn about the nature of doubt and how it works and overcome it through wisdom.

A lot of people might have the opposite reaction to you, they might feel that now they can be confident they will have many more lives to come they can relax and take it easy this life, isn't this what feuls the make merit for a better rebirth attitude?

Hindus believe in reincarnation, Shirley Maclaine believes in reincarnation so I don't see why knowledge of past lives should strengthen ones confidence in Buddhism.

Considering this isn't supposed to happen until 4th jhana anyway surely experiencing the jhanas themselves would be more uplifting that this side affect.

If people knew that there were many more lives to come, but without taking the moral path, ie: the eight fold path, those lives might and could very well be spent in a hell realm or even an animal realm, wouldn't you think they would give this life a lot more thought. I had a good friend, a Christian minister, tell me this story.. If Christians REALLY believed that God was all knowing and all seeing, could hear our every word and thought, wouldn't they be much more careful what they said and what they thought. Something to think about..

[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.

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.

This is not just a Buddhist code it is a code for spiritual teachers 'worldwide' within every esoteric tradition and higher spiritual activity.

To the first point, it is correct not to inform when personal experience is not involved. In the matter of truth about former lifes is told: Buddha told he became aware of his former lifes.

So he spoke out of personal experience, I am not aware any other Buddhist did tell about knowing former lifes (wich doesnot mean there is none, I just am not aware of it), this means no experiences , nothing to tell about it?

To the second point, there is no asking for information (by me) about higher states, just about te insight gained in higher states, like Buddha informed about former lifes.

To the third point, since Buddha shared information by his life and enlightenment we can not consider this to be egocentric.

[christiaan]

Next step, Christiaan, you are the King to present us a lot of questions, but no elephant.

We try to answer, but when there is no elephant, we, the blinds, cannot answer.

Thanks for this contribution it supports what I wrote in another topic.

As the story tells , the elephant was in the village.

As the story tells, none of the blind participants continued questioning the experience, but for some - subjective reason - stopped questioning, stopped the scientific aproach - at some point.

The story in fact tells they where satisfied by what they could recognise and identify themself with, and started fights because they felt their identity was attacked and so they where afraid they could loose this. But some participants did not fight cos they were just happy by what they gained by their knowledge.

I would say it is more interesting to have a story with 'blinds' where the King presented 'The Non Material World' or 'God' and asks what is this?

Would it be possible some of the blinds have names like Christian, Muslim, Bahai, Hindu, Buddhist, Potestant, Soefi, and so on ?

[christiaan]

The Buddhist legend of the village of blinds. (Copied in western literature many times

(short version)

In a village of blind people an elephant was presented by a King.

- What is this?, the King asked the blinds.

The blinds investigated the elephant everyone in a different way.

This is a column.

This is a carpet.

This is a trunk.

This is a bone.

This a brush.

And they started to fight about the "truth" of their investigations.

Everyone had a proof, could describe scientifically what an elephant is.

But where was the elephant?

The other aproach :

For colourblind people some colours just do not exist, and so all 'stories' about colours are stories about 'non existent elephants' ???

[christiaan]

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.

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

I ofcourse completely agree with this and so I am very happy I know a lot more about Karma , former lifes and the importance to know -personal - Karma, as Buddhist teachings tell me.

(With this statement I would think anyone who tried or tries to 'enclose' me in one or another institutional christian religion is ' out of words?)

[christiaan]

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.

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

I would have to agree with this. I find that most people/travelers need some positive feedback concerning their practice. They get a little tired of the standard "just concentrate on the here and now" statement given out by most meditation teachers and even a lot of the Buddhist monks. When I get that statement, I feel like the teacher hasn't got anything else in his bag to fall back on. The teachers that have helped me are willing and happy to talk and discuss anything that comes up. Whether it's Karma, Rebirth, Death, Past Lives, etc and etc. Because whether we like it or not, when your on the path, all kinds of questions come up and with most of us, we would like a reasonable and clear answer, rather than to be shunted off on the old, "it's not important, just concentrate on the here and now".

I give you now a lot of positive feedback with this contribution :jap: :jap: :jap: thank you.

This contribution shows great wisdom.

[christiaan]

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

If it provides something to help overcome doubt that may not be a bad thing, but I think better to learn about the nature of doubt and how it works and overcome it through wisdom.

A lot of people might have the opposite reaction to you, they might feel that now they can be confident they will have many more lives to come they can relax and take it easy this life, isn't this what feuls the make merit for a better rebirth attitude?

Hindus believe in reincarnation, Shirley Maclaine believes in reincarnation so I don't see why knowledge of past lives should strengthen ones confidence in Buddhism.

Considering this isn't supposed to happen until 4th jhana anyway surely experiencing the jhanas themselves would be more uplifting that this side affect.

If people knew that there were many more lives to come, but without taking the moral path, ie: the eight fold path, those lives might and could very well be spent in a hell realm or even an animal realm, wouldn't you think they would give this life a lot more thought. I had a good friend, a Christian minister, tell me this story.. If Christians REALLY believed that God was all knowing and all seeing, could hear our every word and thought, wouldn't they be much more careful what they said and what they thought. Something to think about..

It shows probably most Christians do not think and question autonomously either.

It also shows being traditional religious and /or repeating scientific knowledge could be just a habbit, an - unaware - attitude.

[Brucenkhamen]

Yes, I think that most people would find it relevant and important.. From my perspective, I find Brucenkhamen to be a little negative in most of his posts. I would hate for him to be my abbot.

Don't worry, it's not likely to happen anytime soon, unless your monastery has a creche for my daughter.

[Brucenkhamen]

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?

Nobody is questioning whether it is true or not but whether it is relavant or important for me to know that 3 lifetimes ago I was a cobbler in a sshoestore in Brussels for example. I don't see what that would add to my present day practise and considering the Buddha didn't teach any techniques of past life regression and didn't encourage indulgence in psychic powers that's good enough for me.

[AYJAYDEE]

in fact i find him to be most sensible and positive.

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?

Yes, I think that most people would find it relevant and important.. From my perspective, I find Brucenkhamen to be a little negative in most of his posts. I would hate for him to be my abbot.

[AYJAYDEE]

if they say its not important, perhaps they are correct and teachers that take the time to answer yourr questions on unimportant things are doing you a disservice by offering opinions on subjects of which they have no actual experience but are merely repeating speculations.

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.

To me having knowledge of past lives would offer me two things.

• It would provide an impetus to regularly practice which would be far greater than mind thoughts which thwart it.
• It would provide incites into ones attachments allowing ones actions to become more skillful.

Given the right impetus I personally believe that travelers could devote more of their resources towards practice than most do.

I would have to agree with this. I find that most people/travelers need some positive feedback concerning their practice. They get a little tired of the standard "just concentrate on the here and now" statement given out by most meditation teachers and even a lot of the Buddhist monks. When I get that statement, I feel like the teacher hasn't got anything else in his bag to fall back on. The teachers that have helped me are willing and happy to talk and discuss anything that comes up. Whether it's Karma, Rebirth, Death, Past Lives, etc and etc. Because whether we like it or not, when your on the path, all kinds of questions come up and with most of us, we would like a reasonable and clear answer, rather than to be shunted off on the old, "it's not important, just concentrate on the here and now".

[rockyysdt]

if they say its not important, perhaps they are correct and teachers that take the time to answer yourr questions on unimportant things are doing you a disservice by offering opinions on subjects of which they have no actual experience but are merely repeating speculations.

Yes, but the enquirer, probably being a novice, won't know whether a question is important or not until he/she asks?

Also the enquirer might be following the Buddhas teaching:

"Brotheren, when I speak to you, don't accept it blindly, because you love and respect me. But, examine it and put it to test, as a goldsmith examines gold by cutting, heating and hammering to know whether it was genuine gold or artificial one. If you see it is acceptable, only then accept and follow it."

Edited February 7, 2011 by rockyysdt

[AYJAYDEE]

then the teacher simply explains his question is beyond him, as the buddha ofetn did. if the student is not satisfied with this, perhaps he isnt ready for the practice. giving the student what he wants just to keep him interested may not be in the students best interest

if they say its not important, perhaps they are correct and teachers that take the time to answer yourr questions on unimportant things are doing you a disservice by offering opinions on subjects of which they have no actual experience but are merely repeating speculations.

Yes, but the enquirer, probably being a novice, won't know whether a question is important or not until he/she asks?

Also the enquirer might be following the Buddhas teaching:

"Brotheren, when I speak to you, don't accept it blindly, because you love and respect me. But, examine it and put it to test, as a goldsmith examines gold by cutting, heating and hammering to know whether it was genuine gold or artificial one. If you see it is acceptable, only then accept and follow it."

[christiaan]

then the teacher simply explains his question is beyond him, as the buddha ofetn did. if the student is not satisfied with this, perhaps he isnt ready for the practice. giving the student what he wants just to keep him interested may not be in the students best interest

if they say its not important, perhaps they are correct and teachers that take the time to answer yourr questions on unimportant things are doing you a disservice by offering opinions on subjects of which they have no actual experience but are merely repeating speculations.

Yes, but the enquirer, probably being a novice, won't know whether a question is important or not until he/she asks?

Also the enquirer might be following the Buddhas teaching:

"Brotheren, when I speak to you, don't accept it blindly, because you love and respect me. But, examine it and put it to test, as a goldsmith examines gold by cutting, heating and hammering to know whether it was genuine gold or artificial one. If you see it is acceptable, only then accept and follow it."

Maybe it would be more enlightening to take this situation to the King who brought an elephant to a village of blind people and asked them: what is this?

Nowadays, in the actual modern times, within this story, I would see it as very suitable when the blind people would not stop asking questions - being individuals

That would be the same as the desire for more experience related to the " unknown" phenomenon they are confronted with.

When some blind people who found the brush would ask to find the column, and the ones who found the bones would ask to find the carpet, there is no reason to not answer their questions.

When the teacher today cannot answer those questions in any way it might be possible the teacher just is no suitable teacher.

It is too simple to have a teacher tell the question is simply beyond the student, the situation could be and in many cases also can be the question simply is beyond the teacher - who is no Buddha by wich any comparison towards the Buddha is inappropriate in this case

I do not think one can tell: " concentrate on the brush since you cannot see or experience the column".

Further on I agree it is no necessity for a teacher to 'reward' a student in any way.

Teachings are a reward for being a student.

[AYJAYDEE]

and i disagree with you. thanks for your input.

then the teacher simply explains his question is beyond him, as the buddha ofetn did. if the student is not satisfied with this, perhaps he isnt ready for the practice. giving the student what he wants just to keep him interested may not be in the students best interest

if they say its not important, perhaps they are correct and teachers that take the time to answer yourr questions on unimportant things are doing you a disservice by offering opinions on subjects of which they have no actual experience but are merely repeating speculations.

Yes, but the enquirer, probably being a novice, won't know whether a question is important or not until he/she asks?

Also the enquirer might be following the Buddhas teaching:

"Brotheren, when I speak to you, don't accept it blindly, because you love and respect me. But, examine it and put it to test, as a goldsmith examines gold by cutting, heating and hammering to know whether it was genuine gold or artificial one. If you see it is acceptable, only then accept and follow it."

Maybe it would be more enlightening to take this situation to the King who brought an elephant to a village of blind people and asked them: what is this?

Nowadays, in the actual modern times, within this story, I would see it as very suitable when the blind people would not stop asking questions - being individuals

That would be the same as the desire for more experience related to the " unknown" phenomenon they are confronted with.

When some blind people who found the brush would ask to find the column, and the ones who found the bones would ask to find the carpet, there is no reason to not answer their questions.

When the teacher today cannot answer those questions in any way it might be possible the teacher just is no suitable teacher.

It is too simple to have a teacher tell the question is simply beyond the student, the situation could be and in many cases also can be the question simply is beyond the teacher - who is no Buddha by wich any comparison towards the Buddha is inappropriate in this case

I do not think one can tell: " concentrate on the brush since you cannot see or experience the column".

Further on I agree it is no necessity for a teacher to 'reward' a student in any way.

Teachings are a reward for being a student.

[healthcaretaker]

What an anti-climax !!

I find this interesting title but as I read on and on, the the King and elephant story took over and the OP is lost.

Since I don't the best answer given to the OP, I will try to offer one here out of my knowledge in a more scientific way, as always.

Unfortunately, it's getting late. I will continue another time.....