Evidence of reincarnation

[YouthThunder]

Are there any good conclusive evidence of reincarnation? Note that I am not 100% convinced on buddhism and I am researching about religions, so this isn't exactly an idle question but a serious one. I am have read some claims of reincarnation on the internet but I am not sure whether I should believe in them or not.

[lionking]

This is from Bhikkhu Samahita's YouTube channel.

phpBB .

phpBB .

[Ben]

There is no credible scientific evidence of rebirth or reincarnation. People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.
Kind regards,
Ben

[daverupa]

People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.

Or they remove views altogether...

[Ben]

People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.

Or they remove views altogether...

Well yes, eventually.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

There is no credible scientific evidence of rebirth or reincarnation. People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.
Kind regards,
Ben

I disagree. I think there is plenty of credible scientific evidence. And there are basket loads of credible scriptural evidence. When trying criminals for alleged crimes, different kinds of evidence are admissible, not only scientific (forensic) evidence: the testimony of reliable witnesses, the presence of a motive, the absence of an alibi, a confession of guilt, etc. In the absence of any scientific evidence, a good jury should be able to make a wise judgement that the defendant is guilty as charged, beyond all reasonable doubt.

From all of the evidence that I know of, rebirth is true beyond all reasonable doubt, and I see no credible evidence to disbelief it.

phpBB .

[Mr Man]

There is no credible scientific evidence of rebirth or reincarnation. People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.
Kind regards,
Ben

I disagree. I think there is plenty of credible scientific evidence. And there are basket loads of credible scriptural evidence. When trying criminals for alleged crimes, different kinds of evidence are admissible, not only scientific (forensic) evidence: the testimony of reliable witnesses, the presence of a motive, the absence of an alibi, a confession of guilt, etc. In the absence of any scientific evidence, a good jury should be able to make a wise judgement that the defendant is guilty as charged, beyond all reasonable doubt.

From all of the evidence that I know of, rebirth is true beyond all reasonable doubt, and I see no credible evidence to disbelief it.

I guess it depends what we perceive as being credible. I don't imagine there are many in the scientific community who would say that there is factual evidence.

I would say that there is much more pointing, in our experience, to death being an end without a continuation of the individual.

Bhante I would take your belief as faith.

[lionking]

There is no credible scientific evidence of rebirth or reincarnation. People either take it a metaphor or take it on faith.
Kind regards,
Ben

Rebirth is central to Buddhism. Unless there there is some sort of faith in re-birth then the whole point of being a Buddhist is lost.

BBC - Supernatural Science - Previous Lives

phpBB .

[Aloka]

Regarding the late Ian Stevenson, there's this article which concludes:

Those who want to believe in survival of a personality after death will likely ignore the weaknesses in Stevenson's methods and praise him for his meticulousness, his devotion to detail, his zeal to get every claim verified or disproved.

For my part, I have to agree with Stevenson's own assessment of his work: he's provided evidence, but no compelling evidence for reincarnation. I see no way to move forward using his methods or his data, so I see his work as a colossal waste of time. On the positive side, however, I agree with him that past life regressive therapy, which uses hypnosis, is rife with methodological problems, not the least of which is the problem with suggestion contaminating any evidence that might be uncovered for a past life.

Hence, past life regression cannot provide good evidence for reincarnation. Neither can collecting more stories from children who claim to have lived previous lives unless better methods of documentation, questioning witnesses and alleged experients, and verifying claims are developed.

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

As far as past life regression using hypnosis is concerned, I'm a qualified hypnotherapist, and my late Tibetan teacher advised me not to practice past life regression because he said that its unreliable and people can make things up. (There's also cryptomesia to be considered too)

.

[Anagarika]

As was mentioned earlier, the Buddha not only taught the truth of rebirth ( as distinct from reincarnation) but made it central to his Dhamma. Without rebirth, we have no dependent origination, we have no teaching of kamma and its results, we have no Four Noble Truths. Right view encompasses the truth of rebirth, and as stated, to hold a negative or even materialist/neutral view of rebirth is to reject the Dhamma.

Dr. Stevenson's work has been continued at UVA by Dr. Jim Tucker and his staff. http://uvamagazine.org/articles/the_sci ... ncarnation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I believe I am an evidence based person, a person that relies on science and proper methodology and evidence. I know that this approach is shared by many Buddhists. To rule out the truth of rebirth is as reckless an approach as to rule out any aspect of life and metaphysics simply because we cannot test it in a lab, or hve not experienced it ourselves. The field of quantum physics proposes aspects of reality that cannot be proven or tested, but reveal elements of life beyond our comprehension. What science can test and prove is a small fraction of what exists. I'm placing my bet with the Buddha, as I have no reason to believe that he would teach something so integral without a firm foundation in evidence. I have the faith (saddha) borne of a confidence in both the Buddha, and what science, wisdom, and experience offers.

[kirk5a]

Or they remove views altogether...

Well yes, eventually.

No they don't.

[Aloka]

As was mentioned earlier, the Buddha not only taught the truth of rebirth ( as distinct from reincarnation) but made it central to his Dhamma.

Yes, but its worth remembering that it was already a belief in Indian culture before the birth of the Buddha 2,500 years ago.

Without rebirth, we have no dependent origination, we have no teaching of kamma and its results, we have no Four Noble Truths.

There's nothing about DO with literal rebirth in Ajahn Amaro's "Theravada Buddhism in a Nutshell," have a look at what he has to say under "Dependent Origination - the source code."

https://tisarana.ca/static/books/amaro_ ... tshell.pdf

to hold a negative or even materialist/neutral view of rebirth is to reject the Dhamma.

Luckily not all Buddhist teachers share your view that if someone is uncertain or neutral about rebirth they have rejected the Dhamma, Anagarika.

[dhammacoustic]

The term 'reincarnation' does not exist in the Buddhist doctrine. The idea that beings have individual souls which incarnate/reincarnate has no place in the earlier, original Dhamma of the Buddha either. So, there is no Pagan-type reincarnation in Buddhism.

As for evidence, there cannot be an objective, scientific evidence, not possible.

So, you have 3 options:

- Take it on faith
- Philosophize about it and try to come up with a conclusion
- Learn certain meditation techniques, go deep into meditation, seek for it. If it's there you'll see it, if it's not, you won't

My advice would be to study the nikāyas first.

[lionking]

Hello Aloka,

Regarding the late Ian Stevenson, there's this article which concludes:

he's provided evidence, but no compelling evidence for reincarnation.

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

Skeptics by nature are negative and close minded. If evidence exists they will say it isn't adequate. You need to be careful siding with skeptics because they can even pull the rug under your own feet.

As far as past life regression using hypnosis is concerned, I'm a qualified hypnotherapist.

The article below from the same site you referred.

Is hypnotherapy a con?
http://skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia88.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Aloka]

Skeptics by nature are negative and close minded.

Making a judgement like that about all skeptics seems rather like a closed-minded statement in itself.

You need to be careful siding with skeptics

I don't recall saying I was "siding" with skeptics.

The article below from the same site you referred.

Is hypnotherapy a con?

Well if its true, all the more reason to ignore past-life regression hypnotherapy.