s

14/10/2558 Dharma Wheel • View topic Are Karma and Rebirth Real?

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=5678&start=520 1/11

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana BuddhismSearch… SearchAdvanced search

Are Karma and Rebirth Real?Forum rulesPost a replySearch this topic… Search773 posts • Page 27 of 39 • 1 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 ... 39Report this post (./report.php?f=66&p=76125)Reply with quote (./posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76125)

Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76125)by Beatzen » Mon Jan 02, 2012 4:58 pm

I don't think of myself as defective. But feel free to do so yourself. I'm simply open about thefact that I haven't had an insight into it's reality while in meditation, which is the way toinvestigate it, is it not? From one buddhist practitioner to another, I wasn't expecting to bejudged like that. I think it is better if we support eachother towards realization thancharacterize eachother as defective.

This has nothing to do with my question.

TopReport this post (./report.php?f=66&p=76126)Reply with quote (./posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76126)

Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76126)by Sönam » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:02 pm

So if you cannot base your faith on Buddhists scriptures, if you think re‐incarnation is not avalid concept ... on what is based your behavior ? are you somehow related to Buddhism?

Namdrol wrote:

Beatzen wrote:If you do not accept rebirth, this simply represents a defect in yourpresent understanding of Buddhadharma.

Beatzen wrote:As I alluded to earlier, one cannot base faith in an idea on scripture. Scripturethat was not penned but 3 to 500 years after Buddha's death.

I said, if I have a meditative insight into the reality of rebirth, I will gladlychange my position. I will not argue this. Please don't stray from the topic,which was generally "how is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from ZazenSamadhi"

http://dharmawheel.net/search.php

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=5678&start=520

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=109&t=12768#p166491

http://dharmawheel.net/posting.php?mode=reply&f=66&t=5678

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=5678








http://dharmawheel.net/report.php?f=66&p=76125

http://dharmawheel.net/posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76125

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=76125#p76125

http://dharmawheel.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1694







Sönam


Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76127)by Sönam » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:06 pm

That suppose you know how to meditate, or that your practice is valid ...


Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76128)by Malcolm » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:12 pm

Beatzen wrote:

I'm simply open about the fact that I haven't had an insight into it's reality whilein meditation, which is the way to investigate it, is it not?

Namdrol wrote:

Beatzen wrote:If you do not accept rebirth, this simply represents adefect in your present understanding of Buddhadharma.

Beatzen wrote:

I don't think of myself as defective. But feel free to do so yourself. I'm simplyopen about the fact that I haven't had an insight into it's reality while inmeditation, which is the way to investigate it, is it not? From one buddhistpractitioner to another, I wasn't expecting to be judged like that. I think it isbetter if we support eachother towards realization than characterize eachotheras defective.

This has nothing to do with my question.

Namdrol wrote:

Beatzen wrote:If you do not accept rebirth, this simply represents adefect in your present understanding of Buddhadharma.











I did not say you were defective, I said your understanding was. You are not yourunderstanding, no? It can change, correct?

The state of non‐arising and rebirth are not contradictory. In fact, the former makes thelatter possible.


Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76129)by AlexanderS » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:17 pm

Doens't the story go that the Buddha recollected all his former lives when he progressedthrough the Jhana's?

Without out literal rebirth, Samsara isn't really Samsara, and Nirvana is not unconditionedand therefore not Nirvana. Only as I understand it though. Karma wouldn't really applywithout rebirth either. But that is only my limited understanding.

Also it seems the ability to recollect former lifes and perceive future ones usually require avery high level of realisation. So to gain experiental knowledge of this, would require a damnlot of practice on your part I think


Re: Reincarnation, Zen, etc. (#p76130)by LastLegend » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:22 pm

You are correct sir.

Without Samsara (cycle of death and rebirth), there is no Nirvana. What is the point of practicing Buddhism then?

TopReport this post (./report.php?f=66&p=76145)

Reply with quote (./posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76145)

AlexanderS wrote:Doens't the story go that the Buddha recollected all his former lives when heprogressed through the Jhana's?

Without out literal rebirth, Samsara isn't really Samsara, and Nirvana is notunconditioned and therefore not Nirvana. Only as I understand it though. Karmawouldn't really apply without rebirth either. But that is only my limitedunderstanding.

Also it seems the ability to recollect former lifes and perceive future onesusually require a very high level of realisation. So to gain experiental

knowledge of this, would require a damn lot of practice on your part I think













Reply with quote (./posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76145)

Re: Karma & Rebirth are Real (#p76145)by Nicholas Weeks » Mon Jan 02, 2012 6:12 pm

No wonder Zen is looked at askance... How bizarre that "one cannot base faith in an idea onscripture". So sutras & shastras that recorded Buddha's teachings are not a basis becausethey were written down a few hundred years after Buddha, yet your "meditative insight",(fully separated from faith in the written buddhadharma), will qualify, even though you live

2500+ years after Buddha.


Re: are karma and rebirth for real? (#p76162)by Beatzen » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:10 pm

Let's see. Someone asked upon what do I base my behavior. I base my behavior on a desire toend my suffering. I could elaborate, but, what's the point?

I think the most enlightening response I've received here so far was the question of howconsciousness arises to begin with, if there is no rebirth. That, to me, is worth questioning.

My understanding will change, and I may come to trust in the reality of rebirth for myself. Idon't see how admitting that I don't understand it yet makes me a heretic.

But I don't think you can derive faith from scripture, straight up. You derive it from personallyinvestigating the meaning of the teachings, not the teachings themselves.


Re: How is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from Zazen Samadhi(#p76163)by LhugPa » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:13 pm

To clarify something about my earlier post, Beatzen, I should have realized that yourpersonal non‐belief in transmigration does not necessarily reflect the Zen teachings that youbase your meditation on (although maybe it does in your sect?). Either way, the reality (orlack thereof) of transmigration is something that should be experienced, rather than believedin. Nevertheless, most traditions (Buddhist and 'non‐Buddhist') are unanimous in their

Beatzen wrote:As I alluded to earlier, one cannot base faith in an idea on scripture. Scripturethat was not penned but 3 to 500 years after Buddha's death.

I said, if I have a meditative insight into the reality of rebirth, I will gladlychange my position. I will not argue this. Please don't stray from the topic,which was generally "how is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from ZazenSamadhi"














affirmation of the 'existence' of transmigration.


Re: are karma and rebirth for real? (#p76164)by Mr. G » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:15 pm

Stop right there. You did not say you didn't understand it. You said:

Not understanding (which common people can't) is very different from denying it. So youshould amend your statement in denying literal rebirth in addition to stating you don'tunderstand it.


Re: are karma and rebirth for real? (#p76166)by Virgo » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:17 pm

Forgive me if I have missed a post or two that might contain the answer, but, do you believethat nothing happens at death? It's just "black"? or do you believe in some form of permanentafterlife (perm heaven or hells)?

Either way, there is no point in spiritual (Buddhist) practice if you believe either of those.

Kevin


Re: How is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from Zazen Samadhi

(#p76168)

Beatzen wrote:I don't see how admitting that I don't understand it yet makes me a heretic.

Beatzen wrote:But I don't think that reincarnation is literal. I don't think the buddha taughtcontinuity of consciousness as we are referring to it as literal transmigrationafter death.

Beatzen wrote:My understanding will change, and I may come to trust in the reality of rebirthfor myself. I don't see how admitting that I don't understand it yet makes me aheretic.













(#p76168)by Beatzen » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:19 pm

Precisely. I don't speak for the sect that I take refuge with when I say I haven't experiencedthe reality of this phenomenon in meditation. I am not satisfied with just accepting affirmingthoughts about the subject of transmigration. I want certainty. Reading all the sutras in theworld won't do the meditative work to explore the possibility of such a realization. I have tosay, I've got a lot of flak, particularly from the tibetan people on this board, for saying this.



There's a difference between thinking and trusting in the reality of something. Don't be sohasty.

TopReport this post (./report.php?f=66&p=76171)

Lhug‐Pa wrote:To clarify something about my earlier post, Beatzen, I should have realized thatyour personal non‐belief in transmigration does not necessarily reflect the Zenteachings that you base your meditation on (although maybe it does in yoursect?). Either way, the reality (or lack thereof) of transmigration is somethingthat should be experienced, rather than believed in. Nevertheless, mosttraditions (Buddhist and 'non‐Buddhist') are unanimous in their affirmation ofthe 'existence' of transmigration.

Mr. G wrote:

Stop right there. You did not say you didn't understand it. You said:

Not understanding (which common people can't) is very different from denyingit. So you should amend your statement in denying literal rebirth in addition tostating you don't understand it.

Beatzen wrote:I don't see how admitting that I don't understand it yet makes me aheretic.

Beatzen wrote:But I don't think that reincarnation is literal. I don't think the buddhataught continuity of consciousness as we are referring to it as literaltransmigration after death.










Report this post (./report.php?f=66&p=76171)Reply with quote (./posting.php?mode=quote&f=66&p=76171)


I haven't made up my mind. I was hoping that I would gain a meditative insight. I won't sharemy thoughts on the subject, first of all because I take my thoughts with a grain of salt, andsecondly because I don't want to get flamed for expressing "un‐buddhist" views.


Re: are karma and rebirth for real? (#p76173)by Malcolm » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:30 pm

Virgo wrote:

Forgive me if I have missed a post or two that might contain the answer, but,do you believe that nothing happens at death? It's just "black"? or do you believein some form of permanent afterlife (perm heaven or hells)?

Either way, there is no point in spiritual (Buddhist) practice if you believeeither of those.

Kevin

Beatzen wrote:My understanding will change, and I may come to trust in the reality ofrebirth for myself. I don't see how admitting that I don't understand ityet makes me a heretic.

Beatzen wrote:

I haven't made up my mind. I was hoping that I would gain a meditative insight. I

Virgo wrote:

Forgive me if I have missed a post or two that might contain the answer,but, do you believe that nothing happens at death? It's just "black"? or doyou believe in some form of permanent afterlife (perm heaven or hells)?

Either way, there is no point in spiritual (Buddhist) practice if youbelieve either of those.

Kevin

Beatzen wrote:My understanding will change, and I may come to trust inthe reality of rebirth for myself. I don't see how admittingthat I don't understand it yet makes me a heretic.











Listen ‐‐ you will have to forgive us. These endless discussions about rebirth are tiresome. Wedon't care. Either you accept it or you don't. If you don't fine. But there is no doubt thatrebirth was the Buddha's teaching. People who cannot accept that, cannot accept must ofthe other teachings of the Buddha.

And please spare us the "buddhas teachings were not written down until..."First of all, this isfalse. Worst case scenario, Buddha's teachings were written down 150 years after hisparinirvana (dates of Asokha pillars), which best scholarship places 407‐400 BCE. But it is verylikely that the earliest sutras were being written down within 50 years.

Mahayana sutras were almost certainly later compositions.

Tantras later than that.

But the one thing all these teachings share is a common thread of rebirth, karma, anddependent origination which are the cause of samsara, and the breaking of rebirth and karmathrough understanding dependent origination, which gauranteed freedom from rebirth in thisor at most seven rebirths.

All those people who think they will attain awakening withotu understanding Buddha's actualteachings on this subject are deluded.



How about karma. Do you believe in cause?

Kevin


Re: How is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from Zazen Samadhi(#p76175)

by LhugPa » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:32 pm

won't share my thoughts on the subject, first of all because I take my thoughtswith a grain of salt, and secondly because I don't want to get flamed forexpressing "un‐buddhist" views.

Beatzen wrote:I haven't made up my mind. I was hoping that I would gain a meditative insight. Iwon't share my thoughts on the subject, first of all because I take my thoughtswith a grain of salt, and secondly because I don't want to get flamed forexpressing "un‐buddhist" views.











by LhugPa » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:32 pm

Well if anything, Vajrayana methods (particularly Dzog‐rim (Completion Stage) and Dzogchenpractices) would be more expedient to realizing the possible experience of the said truthregarding transmigration.

It is said that some Zen schools do teach some authentic Tantra methods; nonetheless,Zen/Chan is primarily Sutra. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just that Sutramethods by themselves are slower, and there doesn't seem to be much time left.



yes.


Re: How is Dzogchen/Mahamudra different from Zazen Samadhi(#p76178)by Beatzen » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:40 pm

Beatzen wrote:Precisely. I don't speak for the sect that I take refuge with when I say I haven'texperienced the reality of this phenomenon in meditation. I am not satisfiedwith just accepting affirming thoughts about the subject of transmigration. Iwant certainty. Reading all the sutras in the world won't do the meditative workto explore the possibility of such a realization. I have to say, I've got a lot offlak, particularly from the tibetan people on this board, for saying this.

Virgo wrote:

How about karma. Do you believe in cause?

Kevin

Beatzen wrote:I haven't made up my mind. I was hoping that I would gain a meditativeinsight. I won't share my thoughts on the subject, first of all because Itake my thoughts with a grain of salt, and secondly because I don't wantto get flamed for expressing "un‐buddhist" views.

Lhug‐Pa wrote:













What do you mean there's not much time left?



So let me present you with a scenario. Two girls are born. One is impoverished, and one has avery good and happy life. The impoverished girl is unhappy because she has no resources. Therich girl has a great life in a good area, good education and so on. These are just two people.If things arise because of causes, why should one have to suffer and why should one have anadvantage if causes put down in past lives were not having their effects in these girls livesnow. Surely, the young girl who is poor, did not steal or rob from people, etc. as a baby andhave to suffer for it now. So what is the reasoning behind the difference of events thathappen in their lives?

Kevin

Top

Well if anything, Vajrayana methods (particularly Dzog‐rim (Completion Stage)and Dzogchen practices) would be more expedient to realizing the possibleexperience of the said truth regarding transmigration.

It is said that some Zen schools do teach some authentic Tantra methods;nonetheless, Zen/Chan is primarily Sutra. Not that there's anything wrong withthat, it's just that Sutra methods by themselves are slower, and there doesn'tseem to be much time left.

Beatzen wrote:Precisely. I don't speak for the sect that I take refuge with when I say Ihaven't experienced the reality of this phenomenon in meditation. I amnot satisfied with just accepting affirming thoughts about the subject oftransmigration. I want certainty. Reading all the sutras in the worldwon't do the meditative work to explore the possibility of such arealization. I have to say, I've got a lot of flak, particularly from thetibetan people on this board, for saying this.

Beatzen wrote:

yes.

Kevin wrote:How about karma. Do you believe in cause?

Kevin







PreviousNext Display posts from previous: All posts Sort by Post time Ascending GoPost a reply773 posts • Page 27 of 39 • 1 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 ... 39Return to Open DharmaJump to: Open Dharma Go

Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Lazy_eye, websat11 and 1 guest©2015 David N. Snyder, Ph.D., Vipassana Foundation in association with The Dhamma Encyclopedia

Dharma Wheel is associated with DhammaWheel.com, DhammaWiki.com, and TheDhamma.com..

Chat room>



http://dharmawheel.net/posting.php?mode=reply&f=66&t=5678

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=5678








http://dharmawheel.net/viewforum.php?f=66

http://dharmawheel.net/viewonline.php



http://www.thedhamma.com/

http://www.dhammawiki.com/

http://www.dhammawheel.com/

http://dhammawiki.com/

http://thedhamma.com/

http://dharmawheel.net/chat/index.php

s

Documents

Transcript of s