Fede wrote:There is already a long thread on Rebirth going on, so it is not appropriate that I potentially divert that thread with my question.
It may indeed already have been explored, but it's a long thread, and I'm having difficulty following it with the best will in the world, so I'm asking here, instead.
I once posited (on another forum) that although Buddhists do not ascribe to a concept of Reincrnation, as a fundamental Buddhist premise, some schools, such as Tibetan schools, consider Reincarnation to be a valid concept with regard to Lamas being re-born as quasi-recognisable manifestations of their former selves, as tulkus.
These are obviously not exact reincarnations, because the Tulkus are individuals in their own right, but that these tulkus are considered reincarnations of previous living Lamas.
re-birth is quite different......
well, I got slapped down for that, as being guilty of propagating misleading and inaccurate information gleaned from a dubious website. http://www.travelchinaguide.com/cityguides/tibet/reincarnation.htm Well in my ignorance of Tibetan Buddhism, it looked perfectly bona fide to me.....
So, if I am wrong, then what IS the difference between re-birth and reincarnation?
is Tibetan Buddhism the only school or tradition that ascribes to this?
Any comments observations and opinions would be most welcome!
'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell.
And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.
"Here, student, some woman or man is a killer of living beings, murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. If, on the dissolution of the body, after death, instead of his reappearing in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, he comes to the human state, he is short-lived wherever he is reborn.
Those intentions and that abiding, developed and made much, conduces to reappearing there. This is the path and method to be born there.
"Here, Punna, he develops the dog duty fully & unstintingly, he develops the dog-habit fully & unstintingly, he develops the dog mind fully & unstintingly, he develops dog behavior fully & unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs.
137. He who inflicts violence on those who are unarmed, and offends those who are inoffensive, will soon come upon one of these ten states:
138-140 Sharp pain, or disaster, bodily injury, serious illness, or derangement of mind, trouble from the government, or grave charges, loss of relatives, or loss of wealth, or houses destroyed by ravaging fire; upon dissolution of the body that ignorant man is born in hell.
(Kāyassa bhedā duppañño, nirayaṃ sopapajjati)
For the soul there is never birth nor death. Nor, having once been, does he ever cease to be. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, undying and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.
As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age,
the soul similarly passes into another body at death.
A self-realized soul is not bewildered by such a change.
jcsuperstar wrote:its only tibetan buddhism, not mahayana in general that has this reincarnation system
Individual wrote:Reincarnation: At death, self-consciousness continues, in the form of a soul.
Buddhist rebirth: There is no such thing as "self-consciousness". Consciousness ceases at death also, but it [stuka's note; CONSCIOUSNESS!!!! ] still reunites, reappears, in the form of\as the result of a new body, conditioned by the kamma of the previous life.
Then the Blessed One said: "Sati, is it true, that such an pernicious view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’?"
"Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else."
"Sati, what is that consciousness ?"
"Venerable sir, it is that which feels and experiences, that which reaps the results of good and evil actions done here and there."
"Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time."
stuka wrote:jcsuperstar wrote:its only tibetan buddhism, not mahayana in general that has this reincarnation system
It is only some of the Mahayana that does not adhere to this same reincarnation system in practice. Soto ("Go-Sit-In-The-Corner-Zen") is the only one that immediately comes to mind....of course, you know what happened to them [at another discussion forum (please re-read forum rules in the announcements section - no badmouthing other fora.. thanks, retro)]....
Don't get me wrong: I would be delighted to hear of, and discuss, other proposed examples of Mahayana exceptions.
Fede wrote:Thank you all, (and thank you Ben for moving the topic to a more suitable location.....)
Element wrote:Fede wrote:Thank you all, (and thank you Ben for moving the topic to a more suitable location.....)
My opinion is this thread has not been moved to a more suitable location.
In my opinion, discussions like this can only distract beginners.
Users browsing this forum: TRobinson465 and 4 guests