Life Before Life

[camerata]

For those seeking proof of rebirth, there's a new book out called Life Before Life : A Scientific Investigation of Children's Memories of Previous Lives.

I haven't seen it in local bookstores yet but you can read a sample on Amazon.

[sabaijai]

Without reading it I would hesitate to say it demonstrates proof, in the empirical sense, rather anecdotal evidence. Note that all of the reviewers in the Amazon slug have books of their own on reincarnation.

[camerata]

Without reading it I would hesitate to say it demonstrates proof, in the empirical sense, rather anecdotal evidence.

OK, maybe I should have said, "alleged proof of rebirth."

[sabaijai]

Without reading it I would hesitate to say it demonstrates proof, in the empirical sense, rather anecdotal evidence.

OK, maybe I should have said, "alleged proof of rebirth."

[Suthep_Steve]

What would we regard as proof of rebirth?

Personally I guess we could remain conscious through the process of death, intermediate state and rebirth. But how would we know that this was a genuine memory and not a fantasy?

Even if scientists invented a machine that could detect the mind and showed that the mind and not just the brain ended at death. How would we know that it was not just our Karma to get that result, which denied the existence of future lives due to our strong imprints of denying future lives in past lives?

What does constitute proof from a Buddhist point of view?

[sabaijai]

What would we regard as proof of rebirth?

Personally I guess we could remain conscious through the process of death, intermediate state and rebirth. But how would we know that this was a genuine memory and not a fantasy?

Even if scientists invented a machine that could detect the mind and showed that the mind and not just the brain ended at death. How would we know that it was not just our Karma to get that result, which denied the existence of future lives due to our strong imprints of denying future lives in past lives? 

What does constitute proof from a Buddhist point of view?

Well, it's beyond me, that's for certain.

I skimmed an academic study a year or so ago that said that most 'past life' memories, when followed closely, turned out to be fantasy-cum-coincidence. On the other hand, there's no reason to rule out the possibility 100%, and it's certainly an interesting conversation topic.

The question is, who is remembering? Is it something enduring, or mere vestigial memories attached to certain khandas? When a flower dies, and the constituents are aborbed into the earth, and another flower grows in its place from the seed, is it the same flower?

When the fun of speculation dims, I always think back to the Buddha's "This question tends not to edification."

[camerata]

I saw a comment on a website recently that it would change the world if rebirth were to be proved because all those Western materialists would be forced to accept the inescapable truth and start living compassionate, moral lives.

Personally, I'm not so sure. Proving that consciousness exists without electrical activity in the brain would certainly be an eye-opener but it could just as easily point to an immortal soul as to rebirth.

As for proof of remembering past lives (beyond reasonable doubt), I don't see how this would prevent the bad guys from being bad. They will just assume they have more (human) lives to do their dirty deeds in and no need to fear death at all. What's needed is proof of the he11 realms - only fire and brimstone will have any substantial effect on people.

Has anyone ever claimed to remember being in a he11 realm or being a hungry ghost? Or a deva? One would think it would be much more memorable than being Napoleon or Cleopatra.

Given that the mind is wonderfully inventive and that visions are quite common in meditation, I too am a little sceptical that reading ones past lives in the third jhana is proof of anything.

[DrBooze]

I wonder if people have remembered languages, or things like that, that they could never have picked up in their present lives.

I find it hard to believe that we simply drift from life to life like a series of Quantum Leap. It seems to contradict the idea of no-self in some way. It seems to imply that there is some kind of self which exists forever.

Is it possible that after death we're just energy? But this energy has a subtle level of existance. Like the flower mentioned above, some of it is absorbed by the flower some of it stays in the ground and is eaten by worms. But the energy still exists and is reborn.

I don't know what would happen to "us" after death. But if we somehow reach nibbana in one of these rebirths we will be conciously aware of these existences.

Who knows where these memories come from? Maybe someone really is recalling a fragment of a previous life. Maybe theyre recalling something from someone elses life.

I wonder what the Buddha said about "time"? Are all our lives one after the other? Or is time relative to the existance you are in? Could you be reborn in a time before you died? Or in the same time? Are we all the same person at different stages in our karmic lives?

When the fun of speculation dims, I always think back to the Buddha's "This question tends not to edification."

I love the speculation but that's absolutely right!

[sabaijai]

Has anyone ever claimed to remember being in a he11 realm or being a hungry ghost? Or a deva? One would think it would be much more memorable than being Napoleon or Cleopatra.

I never thought of that before, good point.

[Abandon]

As I understand it Cam, you cannot make karma in the he11 realms and can hardly make it in the Heavenly realms. Without being able to make conscious intentional acts one does not make memory.

Of course, I can't remember myself ......

It is somewhat of a tautological arguement though isn't it ... by definition you cannot remember it, so it must be true ... because you cannot remember it ...

[Suthep_Steve]

Has anyone ever claimed to remember being in a he11 realm or being a hungry ghost? Or a deva? One would think it would be much more memorable than being Napoleon or Cleopatra.

Yes I know of one a lady who used to come to a class I attended in the UK who had past life regretion with a hypnotist and got a very big shock. It was the reason she started coming to Buddhist classes.

People who remember he11 or who die and come back having seen he11 have a special name in Tibet (which escapes me at the moment). They tend to be very he11 fire and brimstone.

I also know a Western Buddhist monk who dreamt he was a porpoise which he said was very unpleasant and not as fun as you might think. He said it had quite a profound effect on him.

As I understand it Cam, you cannot make karma in the he11 realms and can hardly make it in the Heavenly realms. Without being able to make conscious intentional acts one does not make memory.

From a Mahayana point of view that is not the case. You make a lot of karma in he11 that's why you stay there so long. I remeber a friend of mine telling me how at the end of a teaching given in the UK the great Tsong Rinpoche said "I will now return to my usual address and you will return to yours, 'The lower realms'". Tsong Rinpoche was renowned for being quite wrathful.

When the fun of speculation dims, I always think back to the Buddha's "This question tends not to edification."

We in the Vajrayana don't feel that this is one of those issues but personally I feel as Dr Booze reminded me this is the only place where you find a technical explanation of what passes from life to life and how that does not contradict the doctrine of No self.

[sabaijai]

We in the Vajrayana don't feel that this is one of those issues but personally I feel as Dr Booze reminded me this is the only place where you find a technical explanation of what passes from life to life and how that does not contradict the doctrine of No self.

Steve I know Vajrayana has some very involved theories of reincarnation, but are any of these referenced in the Mahayana Sanskrit texts? My impression is that most of the lore on reincarnation, in Tibetan Buddhism, comes from pre-Buddhist Bon-po. Not that that is relevant inside the Tibetan school, but as an academic issue (and our discussion is, or has become, after all, academic) it's interesting.

[camerata]

As I understand it Cam, you cannot make karma in the he11 realms and can hardly make it in the Heavenly realms. Without being able to make conscious intentional acts one does not make memory.

Can animals make karma? I seem to recall there are animal Jataka stories, which would imply that they do make memory. Obviously carnivores have the intent to kill, but since they have no option not to kill, does it count?

I saw a comment on the web by a guy who dreamt he was a bird flying (with feathers and feeling like a bird), and this convinced him that he had been a bird in a former life and therefore rebirth must be for real.

But I'm sure many of us have dreamt of flying. I know I have. I was a human, but flying, gliding and swooping like a large bird, with convincing physical sensations like lightness of body and the wind rushing against my face. All of this was exactly how I imagine a bird would feel, but that doesn't mean it's how a bird feels. I mean, I didn't have bird thoughts. So it wasn't that convincing in relation to rebirth. However, I remember Ajahn Brahm saying in one of his talks that reading one's past lives while in a higher jhana is utterly convincing.

[Abandon]

It was interesting dong a psychology degree and studying about learning. Learning for most animals does not occur in sudden insight moments after which the new behaviour demonstrates itself. It comes slowly for most animlas. The famous experiments were done on cats which after finding out the way to escape from a cage to get to the food, did not remember the method the next time. (see Thorndike and Skinner)

Although cats can seem intelligent they do not possess insight learning. Contrast with a monkey, which, once it figures out how to use a stick to get bananas will immediately use this method at the next opportunity. All this suggests that such 'higher' animals can make an intentional action that is 'heavy' (garuka kamma) and thus learn faster.

Here then I am suggesting that 'intention' makes for faster operant learning and the skills of any animal in this kind of learning can be precisely measured and scientifically documented. Thus animals will make kamma, though not much of it since it is hardly likely to be planned, acted, and rejoiced which are the three components in Buddhist kamma.

Birds incidentally, score higher than cats in operant learning ability.

[Suthep_Steve]

We in the Vajrayana don't feel that this is one of those issues but personally I feel as Dr Booze reminded me this is the only place where you find a technical explanation of what passes from life to life and how that does not contradict the doctrine of No self.

Steve I know Vajrayana has some very involved theories of reincarnation, but are any of these referenced in the Mahayana Sanskrit texts? My impression is that most of the lore on reincarnation, in Tibetan Buddhism, comes from pre-Buddhist Bon-po. Not that that is relevant inside the Tibetan school, but as an academic issue (and our discussion is, or has become, after all, academic) it's interesting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Specifically what passes from life to life I think is only really fully explained in the Tantras, the vast majority of which are Indian in origin and all come from Buddha (from a Vajrayana point of view albeit in quite esoteric ways).

With the Bon-po influence I guess you are referring to the Tibetan book of the dead. This isn’t really part of my school so I can’t really comment although I have read it. I don't know its exact lineage or its original author.

With regard to reincarnation within the Mahayana texts I guess the closest would be in the explanations of the 12 dependent related links. Which are mentioned in many sutras maybe even Hinayana ones as well. Such as the Heart Sutra and the other Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. As far as I am aware the sutras don't talk about gross, subtle and very subtle levels of mind. This is what I was thinking about when I wrote that.

Referencing things back to the Sutras is a very hard question for a Tibetan Buddhist to answer as we mainly study commentaries to Buddha’s works written by enlightened masters. In my tradition we spend the first 5 to 10 years studying:

Commentaries on Je Tsongkhapas Lamrim Chenmo, which its self is a commentary to glorious Atishas Lamp for the path to Enlightenment.

The Heart Sutra.

Shantidevas Guide to the Bodhisattvas way of life.

A commentary to Dignagas works on Understanding the Mind.

Bodhisattva Checkawas training the mind in 8 points (Transforming adverse conditions into the path or in Tibetan Lojong)

The main emphasis in Tibetan Buddhism is finding a teacher who is part of an enlightened lineage i.e. an unbroken series of enlightened teaches who can be traced back to Buddha Shakyamuni and therefore everything they teach should be likewise traceable back to Buddha.

Complete understanding of all Buddha’s 84000 teachings via the Sutras is thought be beyond ordinary beings in degenerate times so we study condensed commentaries. Which we believe are the works of enlightened students of Buddha.

[sabaijai]

We in the Vajrayana don't feel that this is one of those issues but personally I feel as Dr Booze reminded me this is the only place where you find a technical explanation of what passes from life to life and how that does not contradict the doctrine of No self.

Steve I know Vajrayana has some very involved theories of reincarnation, but are any of these referenced in the Mahayana Sanskrit texts? My impression is that most of the lore on reincarnation, in Tibetan Buddhism, comes from pre-Buddhist Bon-po. Not that that is relevant inside the Tibetan school, but as an academic issue (and our discussion is, or has become, after all, academic) it's interesting.

Specifically what passes from life to life I think is only really fully explained in the Tantras, the vast majority of which are Indian in origin and all come from Buddha (from a Vajrayana point of view albeit in quite esoteric ways).

With the Bon-po influence I guess you are referring to the Tibetan book of the dead. This isn’t really part of my school so I can’t really comment although I have read it. I don't know its exact lineage or its original author.

With regard to reincarnation within the Mahayana texts I guess the closest would be in the explanations of the 12 dependent related links. Which are mentioned in many sutras maybe even Hinayana ones as well. Such as the Heart Sutra and the other Perfection of Wisdom Sutras. As far as I am aware the sutras don't talk about gross, subtle and very subtle levels of mind. This is what I was thinking about when I wrote that.

Referencing things back to the Sutras is a very hard question for a Tibetan Buddhist to answer as we mainly study commentaries to Buddha’s works written by enlightened masters. In my tradition we spend the first 5 to 10 years studying:

Commentaries on Je Tsongkhapas Lamrim Chenmo, which its self is a commentary to glorious Atishas Lamp for the path to Enlightenment.

The Heart Sutra.

Shantidevas Guide to the Bodhisattvas way of life.

A commentary to Dignagas works on Understanding the Mind.

Bodhisattva Checkawas training the mind in 8 points (Transforming adverse conditions into the path or in Tibetan Lojong)

The main emphasis in Tibetan Buddhism is finding a teacher who is part of an enlightened lineage i.e. an unbroken series of enlightened teaches who can be traced back to Buddha Shakyamuni and therefore everything they teach should be likewise traceable back to Buddha.

Complete understanding of all Buddha’s 84000 teachings via the Sutras is thought be beyond ordinary beings in degenerate times so we study condensed commentaries. Which we believe are the works of enlightened students of Buddha.

Thanks for the explanation, Steve, that's more or less what I thought. And yes I was thinking of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, eg, the bardos, etc.

[DrBooze]

Can animals make karma? I seem to recall there are animal Jataka stories, which would imply that they do make memory. Obviously carnivores have the intent to kill, but since they have no option not to kill, does it count?

Actually, I've got no idea... but I would have thought they must be able to. We all have to battle with our impulsive desires - but for animals this is much more difficult to resist. This is why the suffering of animals is so much worse than that of humans. For example, a lion suffers because it kills and it cannot stop killing. To some extent, that is its nature. But that is not an excuse for their actions. It is because of their karma that they are what they are - and it is only through their karma that they can escape.

I guess the lion must suddenly have an attack of the concsience, spare the poor zebra its chasing, and go hungry. I don't know if this is possible in reality - but this is why we should we should value our lives. It's been a long journey getting here.

Edited January 3, 2006 by DrBooze