To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
I think that rebirth is more in keeping than not with human religious origins in "prehistory" and any early presently cogently accountable religious history. It is older than any monotheism by a long shot.
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
I answered yes, if Ajahn Chah was still here, he would have voted "Not Sure!".
But seriously, kamma and rebirth is the cornerstone of Dhamma.
Checkout this youtube series on children who remember previous lives -
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_t ... efore&aq=f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_t ... tion+&aq=f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And of course, there are works of Dr Ian Stevenson and Dr. Jim Tucker widely available off amazon.com
What I mean to say, is that accepting the belief or view of 'beings spontaneously reborn according to their kamma' is not something you have to believe to be Buddhist, but it is something that is happening here and now
Believe it or not?
But seriously, kamma and rebirth is the cornerstone of Dhamma.
Checkout this youtube series on children who remember previous lives -
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_t ... efore&aq=f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_t ... tion+&aq=f" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And of course, there are works of Dr Ian Stevenson and Dr. Jim Tucker widely available off amazon.com
What I mean to say, is that accepting the belief or view of 'beings spontaneously reborn according to their kamma' is not something you have to believe to be Buddhist, but it is something that is happening here and now
Believe it or not?
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
I suggest looking into it directly in your own body and mind. Find out exactly what that is about. That is the route to seeing it clearly in any ways beyond that. Touch what you touch. See what you see. Hear what you hear. Acknowledge it. Not, have it told or proven to you. Find out personally. Start looking at it now. Carry on and good luck. Nothing else will help, take my word for it you can imagine anything you like, but all of that represents nothing at all. We all have to take it as it comes for what it actually is for us. That could be very good or very bad depending on who you are and have been so far. But that appears to be the only way towards actually 'knowing' anything. Use your own body, mind and senses, that is all any of us get. All the rest has been told to us. See what is true. No point in arguing after that.
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
- pink_trike
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
- Contact:
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
fijiNut wrote:but it is something that is happening here and now
I agree. Spontaneous re-creation is constantly taking place at the base of each mind-moment. With practice, we can experience this directly as it happens.nathan wrote:Use your own body, mind and senses, that is all any of us get. All the rest has been told to us. See what is true.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss
- Dawa Gyaltsen
---
Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss
- Dawa Gyaltsen
---
Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
- Bhikkhu Pesala
- Posts: 4647
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
The Buddha said that there are three kinds of individuals: the blind, the one-eyed, and the two-eyed.
9. Andhasuttaṃ
29. “Tayome, bhikkhave, puggalā santo saṃvijjamānā lokasmiṃ. Katame tayo? Andho, ekacakkhu, dvicakkhu.
- The blind cannot even see their own benefit in this life.
- The one-eyed knows how to acquire wealth.
- The two-eyed also knows how to acquire merit
Blog • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
When I see one, I'll register a vote to a poll with one option along these lines:
A buddhist's doctrine details ongoing cyclic existence in terms of kamma and an inescapable bondage to suffering until decisive meritorious action effects the path leading to full awakening to nibbana and full emancipation.
1. Yes
A buddhist's doctrine details ongoing cyclic existence in terms of kamma and an inescapable bondage to suffering until decisive meritorious action effects the path leading to full awakening to nibbana and full emancipation.
1. Yes
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
Why does a Buddhist have to accept anything without verifying its validity? Didn't Buddha tell us not do so?
Cause and effect is a fact, stretching the same principle into moral sphere, or non-material reality is not inconceivable. Even rebirth can be roughly understood, as everyhing in nature we know of gets recycled, why would we be any different? I don't see how taking something on a face value is necessary.
I really don't see how a mind free from beliefs, and attachment to rituals can be an impediment to walking The Path.
Cause and effect is a fact, stretching the same principle into moral sphere, or non-material reality is not inconceivable. Even rebirth can be roughly understood, as everyhing in nature we know of gets recycled, why would we be any different? I don't see how taking something on a face value is necessary.
I really don't see how a mind free from beliefs, and attachment to rituals can be an impediment to walking The Path.
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
lonewolf wrote:Why does a Buddhist have to accept anything without verifying its validity? Didn't Buddha tell us not do so?
Cause and effect is a fact, stretching the same principle into moral sphere, or non-material reality is not inconceivable. Even rebirth can be roughly understood, as everyhing in nature we know of gets recycled, why would we be any different? I don't see how taking something on a face value is necessary.
I really don't see how a mind free from beliefs, and attachment to rituals can be an impediment to walking The Path.
It isnt
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- dhammacoustic
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:30 am
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
I call myself a buddhist and I don't accept anything, I just try to see things as they truely are, see the streams, tendencies and their natural destinations. I believe it's the only way I'll become a rocking buddha one day.
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 6:43 pm
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
I don't call myself a Buddhist and I don't accept anything that I have not experienced for myself. The use of labels is just so.. imperfect. There are tons of people who consider themselves Buddhists; they proselytize, donate to their local temples, believe in karma/rebirth, and have altars with Buddha statues in their homes... yet they don't practice any of his teachings. And then there are people who put real effort into the practice and teachings of mindfulness and uprooting fetters, yet they don't even consider themselves Buddhists.silver surfer wrote:I call myself a buddhist and I don't accept anything, I just try to see things as they truely are, see the streams, tendencies and their natural destinations. I believe it's the only way I'll become a rocking buddha one day.
I think the ultimate answer to this post is that it doesn't really matter, since everyone has their own definition of what being a Buddhist means.
- dhammacoustic
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:30 am
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
MisterRunon wrote:I don't call myself a Buddhist and I don't accept anything that I have not experienced for myself. The use of labels is just so.. imperfect. There are tons of people who consider themselves Buddhists; they proselytize, donate to their local temples, believe in karma/rebirth, and have altars with Buddha statues in their homes... yet they don't practice any of his teachings. And then there are people who put real effort into the practice and teachings of mindfulness and uprooting fetters, yet they don't even consider themselves Buddhists.silver surfer wrote:I call myself a buddhist and I don't accept anything, I just try to see things as they truely are, see the streams, tendencies and their natural destinations. I believe it's the only way I'll become a rocking buddha one day.
I think the ultimate answer to this post is that it doesn't really matter, since everyone has their own definition of what being a Buddhist means.
May I ask you a personal question then? Do you accept kamma and rebirth?
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
Donating and karma/rebirth are integral parts of his teachings. So, by donating and believing in karma/rebirth they are still practicing his teachings. But it does not mean that if you do not donate or do not believe in karma/rebirth you are not a Buddhist. Accepting kamma and rebirth is not a requirement to be a Buddhist.MisterRunon wrote:I don't call myself a Buddhist and I don't accept anything that I have not experienced for myself. The use of labels is just so.. imperfect. There are tons of people who consider themselves Buddhists; they proselytize, donate to their local temples, believe in karma/rebirth, and have altars with Buddha statues in their homes... yet they don't practice any of his teachings. And then there are people who put real effort into the practice and teachings of mindfulness and uprooting fetters, yet they don't even consider themselves Buddhists.silver surfer wrote:I call myself a buddhist and I don't accept anything, I just try to see things as they truely are, see the streams, tendencies and their natural destinations. I believe it's the only way I'll become a rocking buddha one day.
- dhammacoustic
- Posts: 954
- Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:30 am
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
How is that so? Unless "you're a buddhist with wrong views"SamKR wrote:Accepting kamma and rebirth is not a requirement to be a Buddhist.
You don't accept kamma, means you don't see the reality of kamma/you deny kamma. Denying kamma, means you don't feel the need to classify actions, which means you accept that there is no conditionality. So why would it matter whether you practice or not, if you think that there is no re-action to a specific action? Or that seeds don't sprout at all? Isn't it like saying, "this stream is headed towards that ocean, but it could also fall another"
Am out of line here?
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
silver surfer wrote:How is that so? Unless "you're a buddhist with wrong views"SamKR wrote:Accepting kamma and rebirth is not a requirement to be a Buddhist.
You don't accept kamma, means you don't see the reality of kamma/you deny kamma. Denying kamma, means you don't feel the need to classify actions, which means you accept that there is no conditionality. So why would it matter whether you practice or not, if you think that there is no re-action to a specific action? Or that seeds don't sprout at all? Isn't it like saying, "this stream is headed towards that ocean, but it could also fall another"
Am out of line here?
It wouldn't necessarily mean that someone holds a wrong view by not accepting kamma or rebirth (I don't even see that these concepts have to go hand in hand), they may just be saying "don't know" and put them to one side.
To take "rebirth" as an example, if someone says that they don't hold to a view of rebirth, it doesn't follow that they must hold to a view of no rebirth (annihilationism). It's a false dichotomy.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 6:43 pm
Re: To be Buddhist you must accept kamma and rebirth?
Maybe, maybe not. Everyone has their own personal definition of what Buddhism means - that was my whole point.SamKR wrote:Donating and karma/rebirth are integral parts of his teachings. So, by donating and believing in karma/rebirth they are still practicing his teachings. But it does not mean that if you do not donate or do not believe in karma/rebirth you are not a Buddhist. Accepting kamma and rebirth is not a requirement to be a Buddhist.MisterRunon wrote:I don't call myself a Buddhist and I don't accept anything that I have not experienced for myself. The use of labels is just so.. imperfect. There are tons of people who consider themselves Buddhists; they proselytize, donate to their local temples, believe in karma/rebirth, and have altars with Buddha statues in their homes... yet they don't practice any of his teachings. And then there are people who put real effort into the practice and teachings of mindfulness and uprooting fetters, yet they don't even consider themselves Buddhists.silver surfer wrote:I call myself a buddhist and I don't accept anything, I just try to see things as they truely are, see the streams, tendencies and their natural destinations. I believe it's the only way I'll become a rocking buddha one day.
Yes, I believe there are 3 positions to take, and people often confuse the "I am not sure" with "you don't believe in it." It's Yes, No, and Maybe (which means either yes or no).clw_uk wrote:silver surfer wrote:How is that so? Unless "you're a buddhist with wrong views"SamKR wrote:Accepting kamma and rebirth is not a requirement to be a Buddhist.
You don't accept kamma, means you don't see the reality of kamma/you deny kamma. Denying kamma, means you don't feel the need to classify actions, which means you accept that there is no conditionality. So why would it matter whether you practice or not, if you think that there is no re-action to a specific action? Or that seeds don't sprout at all? Isn't it like saying, "this stream is headed towards that ocean, but it could also fall another"
Am out of line here?
It wouldn't necessarily mean that someone holds a wrong view by not accepting kamma or rebirth (I don't even see that these concepts have to go hand in hand), they may just be saying "don't know" and put them to one side.
To take "rebirth" as an example, if someone says that they don't hold to a view of rebirth, it doesn't follow that they must hold to a view of no rebirth (annihilationism). It's a false dichotomy.