Buddhism and afterlife

[luk AJ]

Why would somebody believe in afterlife? Suppose afterlife does not exist and suppose people wouldn't believe in afterlife, would this not make our actual existence more valuable?

[VincentRJ]

Only1 gives the impression, in my opinion, that he falls into this latter category of having an actual belief there is no God because he thinks science, reason and logic have debunked the concept of a Creator God.

Vincent RJ,

I think I have enough replies to you to show why I think you are not very honest.

Fair enough! If that's what you think, it's what you think. Whether or not what you think is correct, is another matter. You might have written enough replies to show to others why you think I'm dishonest. I cannot speak for others, but I can assure you, with complete honesty that you have not written anything that shows me how I've been dishonest. I value honesty greatly, and if you were to point out where I'd been dishonest, I would take note and give it consideration.

I think I even asked you whether you believed in Christianity or the Christianity God but you did not reply.

I can't remember your asking me that, or even understand why you might think it likely that I could believe in the Christian God, in view of what I've written, but if you go back to post #23 in this thread, you will come across the following comment of mine which should answer your question clearly.

"I prefer to describe myself as an atheist rather than an agnostic because it feels like a clearer and more precise position to be in."

Okay? Have a nice day!

[only1]

Only1 gives the impression, in my opinion, that he falls into this latter category of having an actual belief there is no God because he thinks science, reason and logic have debunked the concept of a Creator God.

Here, I just caught you again.

I showed you this words of yours in my comments an hour ago as an example. I asked you whether you realise or admit your flaws and self-conflicting opinion on me but you do not answer it, why ? Because you knew what you wrote and you know I have caught you. If you are confident that you have no ill-intentions in those words, why don't you ask me what's wrong with those words ? It's certainly not in consistency with your personality where I have seen you trying to nitpick on any possible ways you could whenever you disagree with other's opinion on Buddhism.

Edited January 9, 2016 by only1

[only1]

Why would somebody believe in afterlife? Suppose afterlife does not exist and suppose people wouldn't believe in afterlife, would this not make our actual existence more valuable?

Why ? Because people are ignorant and fear death, those bad religions are using it as a scam and fear for their followers to believe in them. See the world how lucrative is Christianity business, all the most costly historical buildings and collections are cathedrals and churches. Have you read about the Pastor Kong Hee who is jailed for 8 years in Singapore ? Where did those money comes from ?

[VincentRJ]

Only1 gives the impression, in my opinion, that he falls into this latter category of having an actual belief there is no God because he thinks science, reason and logic have debunked the concept of a Creator God.

Here, I just caught you again.

I showed you this words of yours in my comments an hour ago as an example. I asked you whether you realise or admit your flaws and self-conflicting opinion on me but you do not answer it, why ? Because you knew what you wrote and you know I have caught you. If you are confident that you have no ill-intentions in those words, why don't you ask me what's wrong with those words ? It's certainly not in consistency with your personality where I have seen you trying to nitpick on any possible ways you could whenever you disagree with other's opinion on Buddhism.

Only1,

I assure you, if I don't answer a point you've made it is not because I think I might have been caught out, but because I don't have the time to wade through what I sometimes see as great confusion in some of your views.

The terms 'agnosticism' and 'atheism' refer to a 'lack of knowledge', and a 'lack of belief' in the existence of all types of gods, whether the god is claimed to be a monotheistic, creator God, an omnipotent God, or any number of polytheistic gods of a lesser order, as found in Hinduism.

Your immediate reply to my comment at the top of the page was as follows:

I SAID I don't believe in a god that could be omnipotent and I don't believe that Christianity God is the Creator because their religion existed much later(a creator God religion should be the first and oldest).

This statement implies that you do believe in a God or Gods of some description, in which case you are neither an agnostic nor an atheist. If my impression is correct on this point, please advise us all which God or Gods you believe in, so that we might be less confused about your views.

　

　

[only1]

Your immediate reply to my comment at the top of the page was as follows:

I SAID I don't believe in a god that could be omnipotent and I don't believe that Christianity God is the Creator because their religion existed much later(a creator God religion should be the first and oldest).

This statement implies that you do believe in a God or Gods of some description, in which case you are neither an agnostic nor an atheist. If my impression is correct on this point, please advise us all which God or Gods you believe in, so that we might be less confused about your views.

　

　

VincentRJ,

You are just trying to spin further by creating more questions in order to avoid answering my repeated question. You are trying to cover up your own hole by using a cover from another hole, you don't have enough covers for too many holes. By spinning, you exposed more holes.

When someone said "I don't believe in my uncle Sam", it doesn't mean that he believed in his other uncles.

In another comment, you clearly stated that I don't believe there is any God.

Your comments are full of inconsistencies.

Edited January 10, 2016 by only1

[camerata]

I'd like to remind everyone that personal attacks on other members are against the ThaiVisa forum rules. Posts containing such attacks will be deleted.

Also, from the Buddhist forum rules: "Posts about other religions, eg, Christianity, Islam, etc, or about the existence of God, intelligent design, New Age philosophy and practices, Western philosophy, science, creation, etc are allowable only when expressly discussed in the context of Buddhism." This does not mean we can disparage other religions at every opportunity. Insulting any religion is illegal in Thailand. Posts slagging off other religions or sects will be deleted.

Thanks for your understanding.

[rockyysdt]

Only1,

It's a pity you cannot clearly identify and explain my contradictions or dishonesty so I might learn something, because I'm certainly not aware of any dishonesty or contradictions on my part. However, I do see lots of contradictions in your posts, some of which I will attempt to explain for your benefit, hoping you might understand what I'm talking about, despite the fact that English is not your native language.

Let's take the following comment you made.

I find many contradictions, splitting of hairs, and illogical positions, probably due to a language barrier.

It's a pity, we cannot use technology allowing those of non English speaking background, to be able to post in their own language, and have this translated digitally.

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Especially, that, although they can potentially be verified in this life, the teaching suggests many (quite a lot) lives must first occur before the entity has enough positive kharma and abilities to enable them to overcome Delusion, Greed, & Aversion.

If you read some of the posts you will see very little Karuna, Metta, Upekkha, or nor Mudita, attributes which come about through practice.

This suggests that Buddhism is a practice. Simply knowing about Buddhism and believing it is meaningless without practice.

Think of the many hours of lost opportunity to practice, spending it on espousing beliefs.

Finally "Believe", or "I believe" does not equal "fact".

I often read posts which include, "I believe this, therefore this is the correct way".

Could this be another incidence of Ego?

After years of Buddhist study and debate I have stumbled across the secret.

Overcome your negative conditioning which inhibits regular practice and you are well on your way to Awakening.

Edited January 10, 2016 by rockyysdt

[only1]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why some people who have so much disagreements with Buddhism but yet like to hang around in a Buddhism forum. I wonder what's their intention, ok blame me for being suspicious.

I only said some religions are debunked or proven wrong by science but not Buddhism. I did not say Buddhism was proven right by science. I don't believe you could misunderstand or misinterprete it.

So NO, it has nothing to do different level or standard of English in any disagreements here, stop using such an excuse.

Edited January 10, 2016 by only1

[rockyysdt]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why are

Perhaps you can list the reasons why you feel my reasoning is the same style as VincentRJ?

[rockyysdt]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why are

Be honest with yourself Only.

You regularly indicate that science has not de bunked Buddhism, but fail to show how science can prove Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States .

Are you being dishonest?

Edited January 10, 2016 by rockyysdt

[only1]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why are

Be honest with yourself Only.

You regularly indicate that science has not de bunked Buddhism, but fail to show how science can prove Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States .

Are you being dishonest?

Moderator,

Please advise whether I can reply this Rockyst. He implied that I or Buddhism said Rebirth is proven by science, which obviously not.

Can I ask him back if he is dishonest ?

Edited January 10, 2016 by only1

[only1]

rockyysdt,

You asked me why I feel you have the same style as VincentRJ ?

Same style and method in misquoting and tried to get away from thread topic into discussing other things eg using English and language excuse, which no one else did.

[only1]

For those who think that Rebirth lacked logic or if it has no relationship or consistency with science:

Life must have energy and energy cannot be destroyed or created but it can be transformed.

[rockyysdt]

For those who think that Rebirth lacked logic or if it has no relationship or consistency with science:

Life must have energy and energy cannot be destroyed or created but it can be transformed.

Your one liner is no proof at all of the validity of Re Birth.

Call me Devils Advocate (Buddhism is my chosen path), as I like to put forward my concerns about the teaching.

Any debate on "Buddhism and After life" should include the validity of Buddhism itself, and in fact, this is critical.

If Buddhism was found to be invalid (de bunked), then it would then be pointless to then talk about an afterlife associated with it.

Going by your posts, in this thread and others, you firmly ascribe to Buddhism and have claimed you have the knowledge to support this.

Quote:

only1 Posted 2016-01-06 13:04:36

If I can follow a religion(which is not debunked by science or logic) that leads me to heavenly bliss and peace right in my present life through living right but not on placebo effects, why not ?

only1 Posted 2016-01-07 17:21:28

Buddhism have all the answers to evetything(and never debunked by science or logic).

only1, posted 2015-09-01 16:21

the beliefs of Buddhism remain unchanged and undisputed by both science and logic after over 2500 years.

only1 Posted 2015-09-06 15:31:56

Who cares ?

Those who follows Buddhism go for the teachings, not a god or an idol. They don't care when it was written or who wrote it. If Jesus gave the same teachings but without those God, Adam and eve, resurrection craps, I may follow his teachings too.

only1 Posted 2015-09-16 00:16:22

I believe in karma and even if I don't, I will be living with guilt and against my own conscience for doing nothing or hiding the truth.

only1 Posted 2015-09-22 14:17:31

I am currently doing research work to help promote Buddhism as well as to find out the truth behind all major religions

only1 Posted 2015-09-23 12:12:30

Maybe 50 years to achieve full enlightenment.

This is a Buddhism forum and I am promoting Buddhism

rockyysdt Posted 2015-08-13 18:36:27

Can you elaborate on how you find the "karma and rebirth part of Buddhism compatible and coherent with science"?

only1 Posted 2015-08-15 15:33:53

Yes, I will share my knowledge but later because I wish to know first what others think of Buddhism relationships with science.

If you re read your posts, you will find a firm commitment by you to the belief in the Buddhas teachings, including Re Birth, Kharma, and Awakening.

Your proof for this is that science has not yet de bunked any of it, and that it is coherent and compatible with science and the truth.

On being asked to elaborate on your proof, after initially agreeing to reveal your evidence, there has not been any follow through.

I [...] ask that you reveal your evidence which is crucial to the topic at hand.

It might be the case that many Westerners, needing to hold a belief beyond their mundane lives, have abandoned de bunked traditional religions, and have adopted ones remaining un de bunked.

One needs to acknowledge that the former religions also enjoyed a period, earlier in time, when they had also not yet been de bunked.

Not having been de bunked does not confirm truth, but rather reflects the difficulty for science to test such a belief or hypothesis.

In terms of being coherant and compatible with science, sure Mindfulness and Concentration practice and living ethically will imporve ones life, but Re Birth, Awakeing, and Kharma, where is your coherent proof?

Edited January 10, 2016 by camerata
To conform to my recent request

[camerata]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why are

Be honest with yourself Only.

You regularly indicate that science has not de bunked Buddhism, but fail to show how science can prove Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States .

Are you being dishonest?

Moderator,

Please advise whether I can reply this Rockyst. He implied that I or Buddhism said Rebirth is proven by science, which obviously not.

Can I ask him back if he is dishonest ?

No more discussion about the honesty of posters or their motivations. We are not here to brow-beat other posters.

[rockyysdt]

For those who think that Rebirth lacked logic or if it has no relationship or consistency with science:

Life must have energy and energy cannot be destroyed or created but it can be transformed.

Energy cannot be destroyed, but humans can.

Humans are of the impermanent and conditioned.

[camerata]

In any discussion like this I think we should make a clear distinction between verifiable science and "logic," "common sense" or "consistency." They are not the same.

[rockyysdt]

Those who oppose some Religions because they believe these have been scientifically debunked, and use this to support their chosen religion (such as Buddhism), need to show how Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States have been proven by science or are in any way logical.

Your style of reasoning and conversation is the same as VincentRJ. I wonder why are

Be honest with yourself Only.

You regularly indicate that science has not de bunked Buddhism, but fail to show how science can prove Re Birth into future lives in different Relms of Existence, and Permanent, Unconditioned, Formless, and Timeless States .

Are you being dishonest?

Moderator,

Please advise whether I can reply this Rockyst. He implied that I or Buddhism said Rebirth is proven by science, which obviously not.

Can I ask him back if he is dishonest ?

Hi only1.

Where did I imply that you said that Re Birth is proven by science??

Quote:

rockyysdt Posted 2015-08-13 18:36:27 Can you elaborate on how you find the "karma and rebirth part of Buddhism compatible and coherent with science"?

only1 Posted 2015-08-15 15:33:53 Yes, I will share my knowledge but later because I wish to know first what others think of Buddhism relationships with science.

Can I ask you again, how you find Karma and Re Birth compatible and coherent with science?

Coherant: logical interconnection, congruity; consistency

Compatible: capable of existing or living together in harmony

Edited January 10, 2016 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

I wonder why some people who have so much disagreements with Buddhism but yet like to hang around in a Buddhism forum. I wonder what's their intention, ok blame me for being suspicious.

I don't believe you could misunderstand or misinterprete it.

So NO, it has nothing to do different level or standard of English in any disagreements here, stop using such an excuse.

Question 1: Could it be that until awakened, I live with my conditioning and its doubts?

Statement 2: Belief is subjective. How can you know what I interpret and what I don't interpret? I thought you had a scientific background. You may not perceive interpretive issues, but I sometimes have difficulty following your logic.

[camerata]

Probably the most standard, related to rebirth, doesn't have us coming back in a similar enough fashion to remember it all, although that's not necessarily a given; all those Tibetan kids really do, the former lamas.

There doesn't seem to be a satisfying answer to the first point. The scriptures mention seeing one's former lives while meditating (as i recall, it occurs after the 3rd jhana) but they don't give a hint as to how this happens. Mahayana came up with the concept of "store consciousness" to explain it, but again there is no detailed explanation as to how it works. Some monks say that the trauma of birth destroys all previous memories!Lama Govinda recounts several stories of kids remembering details of former lives that they couldn't possibly have learned elsewhere - and the accounts seem genuine - yet these stories never take place in a controlled environment of the kind required for scientific verification.

[VincentRJ]

Probably the most standard, related to rebirth, doesn't have us coming back in a similar enough fashion to remember it all, although that's not necessarily a given; all those Tibetan kids really do, the former lamas.

There doesn't seem to be a satisfying answer to the first point. The scriptures mention seeing one's former lives while meditating (as i recall, it occurs after the 3rd jhana) but they don't give a hint as to how this happens. Mahayana came up with the concept of "store consciousness" to explain it, but again there is no detailed explanation as to how it works. Some monks say that the trauma of birth destroys all previous memories!Lama Govinda recounts several stories of kids remembering details of former lives that they couldn't possibly have learned elsewhere - and the accounts seem genuine - yet these stories never take place in a controlled environment of the kind required for scientific verification.

I agree, Camerata. This is the problem, and is yet another an example of the limitations of science when dealing with complex issues which have with many unknown variables.

The following article, which is an interview with Dr Ian Stevenson, is well worth reading, for those interested in the evidence for rebirth. Dr Stevenson appears to have specialised in this subject and accumulated thousands of case-studies of young children who had recounted stories of previous lives.

http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm

One of the questions the 'Omni magazine' interviewer asked Dr Stevenson was, "What criticism is most frequently levelled at your work?"

Dr Stevenson's reply was as follows:

"That the cases occur most where people already believe in reincarnation. If a child seems to refer to a previous life, it's argued that his parents encourage him and may unwittingly feed the child information about a deceased person. I call this the sociopsychological interpretation of the cases. It is said that despite all my efforts, I have not eliminated the possibility that the subject of a case learned everything he knew through normal channels. Once a child comes to believe he or she was a particular person in a previous life, the argument goes, the other elements follow naturally. If you believe you had been stabbed to death in a previous life, you might have a phobia, for example, of knives.

While this is a valid argument for a small number of cases, especially those occurring in the same family or village, it's inapplicable for long-distance cases where a child shows a detailed knowledge about a family his parents have never heard of, let alone met. But my critics say I must have overlooked something, that the child must have learned about the deceased."

This highlights the problem. Dr Stevenson attached more weight to the evidence from those young children who lived a significant distance from the dwelling places of the deceased people who had apparently been reincarnated.

However, there can always be doubt about such matters even in those long-distance cases. Who knows whether or not the 4-year-old child, whilst playing outside the house one day, happened to overhear a couple of visitors from that distant village discussing the death and circumstances of a particular person in such a way that it left an imprint on the young child who was listening with fascination.

[only1]

Mahayana came up with the concept of "store consciousness" to explain it, but again there is no detailed explanation as to how it works. Some monks say that the trauma of birth destroys all previous memories!Lama Govinda recounts several stories of kids remembering details of former lives that they couldn't possibly have learned elsewhere - and the accounts seem genuine - yet these stories never take place in a controlled environment of the kind required for scientific verification.

I don't know how Mahayana explain rebirth but it makes sense that usually kids will be able to remember their past lives, but still very rare. They will not be any scientific verifications because science just cannot accept, believe or prove it yet. Neither are they interested to research it. There was a big news in China around a year ago where a small village in Hunan have around 10 or 100 cases(i forgot, deleted my video already) of people who remembered their past lives. The news media and government finally send people over to find out and many of them are so convincing the news was reported in tv news.

Kids have a better chance of remembering because their lives are short. For eg a 16 years old may be able to remember something about his 6 years old time but when he reached 60, he probably remember nothing. So even unlikely that he could remember anything after death and reborn into another life.

[camerata]

But what you are saying implies that the mechanism of memory between the age of 6 and 60 is the same as between this and a previous life. If indeed memory can be passed from one life to another, the mechanism is unknown. Obviously it can't be the same as memory in living brain cells.

Another point is that people seem to assume we go from one human life to another, but according to the scriptures this is not the case at all:

“Monks, suppose that this great earth were totally covered with water and a man were to toss a yoke with a single hole into the water.
A wind from the West would push it East; a wind from the East would push it West; a wind from the North would push it South; a
wind from the South would push it North. And suppose a blind sea turtle were there. It would come to the surface only once every 100 years.

Now what do you suppose the chances would be that a blind turtle, coming
once to the surface every 100 years, would stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole?”

“It would be very unusual, Sir, that a blind turtle coming to the surface once every
hundred years would stick his neck into the yoke.”

“And just so, it is very, very rare that one attains the human state.”

One never hears of people remembering their previous life in a hell realm, suffering ghost realm, animal realm or deva realm - all of which would surely be more memorable!

[only1]

I never say the mechanism is the same, even scientists cannot prove or study it's mechanism yet. I am just using some logic to why kids can have a better chance of remembering their past lives, although rare. As for why people cannot recall any past live of a different realm, maybe being a different realm, the energy wavelength or mechanism is so different that humans can never remember it ?

The facts remain that there are true cases of people who recalled their past lives. What scientists cannot prove do not necessarily mean that they don't exist. Let me give you 2 stories here(i will continue later if I cannot complete):

1) 2 school boys returning home in the afternoon pass by someone's house and saw an old man friend as usual sitting on,his chair outside his house. Later they found out that the man passed away in the morning.

2) A man caught a rare crab with only 1 claw in front of a shrine, eaten it, and strike first prize in a 4 digits lottery gamble with the number 1000(000 representative seafood in their game). Next day, while driving in his car, the whole piece of metal antenna on a high rice building fell, hit his car and the car and the driver disappeared into the ground and his car and the body was never found.

Will you believe these 2 stories ?

Edited January 14, 2016 by only1

[only1]

There are many happenings in this world that cannot be explained today. On my 2 stories above, let's see how people will response. They could:

1) Don't believe that they are true.

2) Believe the 2 boys lied and made up the story or someone made up the whole story.

3) Believe the car accident incident really happened but the details are not exactly as I described.

4) Believed the boys story but don't prove the old man they saw is his soul or spirit, maybe a Satan or someone else's soul or spirit in disguise or something else that humans have not given it a name yet.

5) Believe the car incident happened but it's a coincidental accident which has nothing to do with any spirit or soul.

Now, which will you choose before I continue.

I hope the others can reply too.

P.S. although these 2 stories are not about Buddhism or rebirth, I use them to relate that many happenings cannot be explained but good for research.

Edited January 14, 2016 by only1

[only1]

Only1 gives the impression, in my opinion, that he falls into this latter category of having an actual belief there is no God because he thinks science, reason and logic have debunked the concept of a Creator God.

VincentRJ,

Here is my explanation you asked for. The reason is the message you put up saying I think there is no God because I think science, reason and logic debunked the concept of a creator God. Some flaws and inconsistency in your thinking on that comment alone:

1) Science debunked concept of a creator God is not just my "thinking". It's an accepted fact Adam and Eve is debunked by science with evolution. Unless you claim now that the Creator God concept you refers to is God Brahma and not those under Abrahamic religions(Abraham sounds so close to Brahma, their wives names even closer :-)

2) Not believing in a Creator God do not necessarily disbelief in other god(s).

3) Your sentence implied that you believe God(if any) is the Creator God; maybe this explains why you have so much to disagree with Buddhism ?

Edited January 14, 2016 by only1

[camerata]

I never say the mechanism is the same, even scientists cannot prove or study it's mechanism yet. I am just using some logic to why kids can have a better chance of remembering their past lives, although rare. As for why people cannot recall any past live of a different realm, maybe being a different realm, the energy wavelength or mechanism is so different that humans can never remember it ?

The facts remain that there are true cases of people who recalled their past lives. What scientists cannot prove do not necessarily mean that they don't exist. Let me give you 2 stories here(i will continue later if I cannot complete):

1) 2 school boys returning home in the afternoon pass by someone's house and saw an old man friend as usual sitting on,his chair outside his house. Later they found out that the man passed away in the morning.

2) A man caught a rare crab with only 1 claw in front of a shrine, eaten it, and strike first prize in a 4 digits lottery gamble with the number 1000(000 representative seafood in their game). Next day, while driving in his car, the whole piece of metal antenna on a high rice building fell, hit his car and the car and the driver disappeared into the ground and his car and the body was never found.

Will you believe these 2 stories ?

They are not "true" and they are not facts because they didn't occur in a controlled environment and can't be independently verified, for the reasons given by Vincent in another post. There is always another explanation.

To take story No.1, which is basically a ghost story not related to Buddhist rebirth... sometimes we see things that we want to see but are not real. Often we have "false memories" after an event. Often unusual events are mentally enhanced by those involved or embellished in the subsequent recounting of the events. Even when there is a lot of "anecdotal evidence" it is not solid evidence.

For a full explanation of how these stories can occur, I'd suggest reading The Demon-Haunted World : Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan.

[only1]

Your reply is not clear.

In other words, on story (1) you think the 2 boys lied, or this whole story is just a story but never happened ?

On story (2) What you think ? All made up, entirely false or partly true, party false or totally true but all nothing to do with anything supernatural.(hint: you can still google and find this incident news that happened in Pinang island over 2 years ago). If anyone tell this story 50 years later, I am sure no one will even believe it's a true incident.

I have more to share on these 2 incidents but after I know how people respond at this stage.

[camerata]

I think there are many other explanations than that the boys saw a ghost/spirit. And what is a ghost/spirit other than a cultural belief?

The same applies to story 2. The man eats a crab and wins the lottery. Perhaps coincidence. He is killed the next day. Why is this significant? He had good luck one day, why should he have bad luck the next day. Why would the body never be found? What's the point of the story? We don't know the circumstances of the story. Did it happen during an earthquake or hurricane, for example.

If one is to believe any story without an obvious explanation, we might as well believe in God and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. At least the metaphysical side of Buddhism exists within a structure that supports the core teachings.