No reason to practice Buddhism without rebirth

[not myself today]

Immerse yourself in the Buddha’s teaching for a while, then step back and take a big-picture view of what you’ve encountered and you cannot but see that the Buddha may be trusted as one trusts one’s own mother, or father, or whoever one might have known whose word one has trusted implicitly. Because what would have been his motivation to deceive everyone who has encountered his teaching since he first set turning the wheel of the Dhamma? And how could he have deceived anyone by teaching them to take nothing, not even what he himself taught, on blind faith, but to test every assertion for oneself, accepting it as truth only when one has seen for oneself that it is so?

On this basis I myself consider the Buddha supremely trustworthy. So if he taught a doctrine of rebirth (as indeed he did), then for my part I am quite satisfied that there is rebirth.

And yes, there is also the option of practicing so diligently as to attain Nibbana in this very life. It’s a lofty goal, but not unattainable.

Just my $0.02...

[StrivingforMonkhood]

Immerse yourself in the Buddha’s teaching for a while, then step back and take a big-picture view of what you’ve encountered and you cannot but see that the Buddha may be trusted as one trusts one’s own mother, or father, or whoever one might have known whose word one has trusted implicitly. Because what would have been his motivation to deceive everyone who has encountered his teaching since he first set turning the wheel of the Dhamma? And how could he have deceived anyone by teaching them to take nothing, not even what he himself taught, on blind faith, but to test every assertion for oneself, accepting it as truth only when one has seen for oneself that it is so?

On this basis I myself consider the Buddha supremely trustworthy. So if he taught a doctrine of rebirth (as indeed he did), then for my part I am quite satisfied that there is rebirth.

And yes, there is also the option of practicing so diligently as to attain Nibbana in this very life. It’s a lofty goal, but not unattainable.

Just my $0.02...

Hello, dear friend.

You have brought tears to my eyes. What you say is so, so true.

Much love to you.

Peace and enlightenment.

[not myself today]

Hello, dear friend.

You have brought tears to my eyes. What you say is so, so true.

Much love to you.

Peace and enlightenment.

And thank *you*, friend. Your response assures me that I have done well.

[not myself today]

Time to see for myself. The Four Noble Truths felt like coming home for the first time in my life and I knew it then. I'm a Buddhist.

very nice words. Dhamma is a like true home, no more absolute alone

And your own words, zerotime. Very lovely. =) Thank you.

[moraceae]

It is my understanding that there is value in the Noble Eightfold Path regardless of whether you accept the doctrine of rebirth or reject it.
The Buddha essentially provided "tools" to diminish suffering. As such, practicing the Path, even if you don't believe in rebirth, is still a good idea insofar as it will alleviate your suffering and lead to a happier life.

Of course, someone who thinks that the sensual pleasures of conditioned existence are worth suffering for will see no value in the Dhamma. Some people will understand the philosophy of Buddhism and might even agree with the Four Noble Truths, yet find they are currently "satisfied" with samsara and therefore not seek to apply the Dhamma to their lives.

So in my opinion, the reason to practice Buddhism has nothing to do with rebirth. Buddhism is worth practicing if you think that putting an end to suffering is the most worthwhile endeavor — the only goal worth pursuing.

Yes, believing in Rebirth is mundane right view which is required for developing supermundane right view.

Could you please elaborate on this? Which supermundane right view are you referring to?

[sphairos]

Hi everyone,

I've recently read "What the Buddha taught" and I've been having a few doubts about the four noble truths, so I thought I'd just ask here to see if anyone can clarify.

I was thinking about the first noble truth and I think it kind of loses it's sting when you don't believe in literal rebirth.
If you believe in literal rebirth and you never attain nibbana, you're in for eternal suffering, a pretty good argument to start practicing to get out of that.
But if you do not believe in literal rebirth and you just believe that death is the end, I'm just looking at maybe 50 more years of suffering and afterwards it doesn't matter whether or not I attained nibbana or not.
50 years is not that much, and we can use things like modern medicine and psychology to reduce suffering to a managable amount.

The first noble truth says that there is dukkha, but what the truths also imply is that we really need to get rid of dukkha. Without rebirth, death does that job for us at some point. So it seems to me, that without rebirth, there is no compelling reason to practice Buddhism.

I'm interested to hear some opinions of people who know more about Buddhism than me.

thank you,
pelican

1) the very process of birth is a tremendous trauma, which is not overcome by most throughout their whole lives.

See

Trauma of birth

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... orn-trauma

2) the first truth of the nobles ("noble truth") boils down to "connection with unpleasant, dissociation with pleasant, not getting what one wants, the five aggregates of grasping - that is dukkha (suffering)". All that makes very good sense in this very life.

3) the truths of the noble ones are formulated "impersonally" -- they are true both for an individual and society. They are about bringing true, lasting happiness to the constantly changing world.

4) You don't know what comes after death. Maybe, it's nothing. But maybe not. It's just our guessings and conjectures. You simply don't know.

5) all materialist/physicalist theories of reality are incomplete or absurd: they are internally contradictory, full of paradoxes, can't account/explain the simple existence of space and time, motion, consciousness, can't account for religious, mystical and psychedelic experience (which reality is true -- in our typical states of minds, or in altered states of mind?)

[coconut]

Could you please elaborate on this? Which supermundane right view are you referring to?

Mundane right view is morality, being good over being bad. Supermundane right view is about stopping all together. First one becomes good, then one fades/stops. Supermundane view specifically is the four noble truths and dependent origination. The same mechanism that allows one to full stop, is the same mechanism that allows one to maintain the 5 precepts, that is sati-sampajanna, which means knowing when something unwholesome has arisen and putting a stop to it before it develops.

If rebirth was not true, one could just end suffering by committing suicide or getting high on drugs and sensuality to numb out pain. This is a strategy many lay people do. They don't care to live, so they "burn the candle on both ends" and go crazy with drugs, sex, crime, violence, etc.. thinking there is no repercussion.

If there is no rebirth, then karma and morality are irrelevant, one can treat life like a video game like Grand Theft Auto, become a sociopath and do whatever one wants with no repercussions. If they get killed along the way, it's no big deal, as they're going out with a bang.

However, if rebirth is true, then karma matters and what you do matters as now it's in your self-interest to not have a terrible experience in the next life. If you knew that your actions would result in even more suffering, then you would not be heedless.

If you knew that suicide doesn't solve your problem and you'll be back but in a worse position, then suicide is not a logical choice. Most people commit suicide because they have the wrong view that there is annihilationism after death. However, if they knew for certain that they'd be alive again after suicide, but this time with even MORE suffering, then they'd rethink their actions and take a more logical and reasonable course of action, an actual solution to suffering, like the Buddha Dhamma.

[DooDoot]

1) the very process of birth is a tremendous trauma, which is not overcome by most throughout their whole lives.

See

Trauma of birth

lol sphairos

the word "jati" and the verb form "jayati" does not necessarily mean birth from a womb; as shown in many sutta examples. "Jati" is defined as a "category of beings" ("sattanikaye"; SN 12.2). "A being" is defined as a view (SN 5.10) or strong clinging (visatta; SN 23.2)

the first truth of the nobles ("noble truth") boils down to "connection with unpleasant, dissociation with pleasant, not getting what one wants, the five aggregates of grasping - that is dukkha (suffering)". All that makes very good sense in this very life.

The 1st noble truth appears to summarized all dukkha as upadana. It appears "birth" as another type of upadana, as explained in SN 12.66.

all materialist/physicalist theories of reality are incomplete or absurd: they are internally contradictory, full of paradoxes, can't account/explain the simple existence of space and time, motion, consciousness, can't account for religious, mystical and psychedelic experience (which reality is true -- in our typical states of minds, or in altered states of mind?)

Lol -

[Jeroen]

Hellow all,

Can you experience birth?
I can not, and yet i was born. So i cant experience birth right now, but i know i am alive and thus birth. Without birth i would not been writing this.

Can you experience death?
I can not.
But i know i will die some day.

So here i see my life is entangled with birth and death.

Birth and death are of the same spectrum.

In that spectrum birth (life) chances in to death (not life).
Why?
Well to put it simply; it is the cause of nature (a dhamma)
Things arise, and cease, and stay while changing.
Things chance because of being depedent.
Just as a front ddepent on its back.
The front can not exciist without the back and versa versa.

So too, life can not stand on its own.
Death can not stand on its own.

So if there is life, there is death (on the other end of that spectrum)
If there is death, there is life (birth), on the other side of that spectrum.

With ignorance, inclination.
With cesation, cesation.

[SteRo]

But if you do not believe in literal rebirth and you just believe that death is the end, I'm just looking at maybe 50 more years of suffering and afterwards it doesn't matter whether or not I attained nibbana or not.
50 years is not that much, and we can use things like modern medicine and psychology to reduce suffering to a managable amount.

The first noble truth says that there is dukkha, but what the truths also imply is that we really need to get rid of dukkha. Without rebirth, death does that job for us at some point. So it seems to me, that without rebirth, there is no compelling reason to practice Buddhism.

I'm interested to hear some opinions of people who know more about Buddhism than me.

thank you,
pelican

Buddhism does not say that you can attain nibbana in this life and I'd prefer 50 years of easy living over 50 years of unease which is why some practice might be advisable independent of belief in rebirth.

[not myself today]

Buddhism does not say that you can attain nibbana in this life and I'd prefer 50 years of easy living over 50 years of unease which is why some practice might be advisable independent of belief in rebirth.

Of course one can attain Nibbana in this life, if the conditions are ripe for it - otherwise no one would ever attain it or would ever have attained it in the past. And as I've said before, I don't buy the notion that the Buddha would spend 45 years of his life sending humanity on an elaborate wild goose chase.

[not myself today]

Buddhism does not say that you can attain nibbana in this life and I'd prefer 50 years of easy living over 50 years of unease which is why some practice might be advisable independent of belief in rebirth.

"Nibbana is a state to be attained here and now in this very life and not a state to be attained only after death."

- Lily de Silva, Nibbana as Living Experience/The Buddha and the Arahant: Two Studies from the Pali Canon

..but that said, I also agree that, independent of belief in rebirth, the possibility of attaining Nibbana in this life, or any other point of doctrine, there are enough mundane benefits to be gained from the practice to justify engaging in it even if the mundane benefits are all you're after. And who knows? Once you've done that for some time, it's possible that you'll start to see for yourself the veracity of those points of doctrine you questioned previously. The Buddhist path is a path, after all...

[StrivingforMonkhood]

Of course one can attain Nibbana in this life, if the conditions are ripe for it - otherwise no one would ever attain it or would ever have attained it in the past. And as I've said before, I don't buy the notion that the Buddha would spend 45 years of his life sending humanity on an elaborate wild goose chase.

Absolutely, dear friend.

The Holy Buddha would have never deceived us.

Peace and enlightenment.

[johnsmitty]

Buddhism does not say that you can attain nibbana in this life and I'd prefer 50 years of easy living over 50 years of unease which is why some practice might be advisable independent of belief in rebirth.

Of course one can attain Nibbana in this life, if the conditions are ripe for it - otherwise no one would ever attain it or would ever have attained it in the past.

"Nibbana is a state to be attained here and now in this very life and not a state to be attained only after death."

- Lily de Silva

In other words nibbana is not a state one exists in in this life but one obtains (while alive in this life) merely the ability to enter after death.

[not myself today]

Yes. Once attained, one can abide in Nibbana during this lifetime while in meditation, as I understand it, but sort of “taking up residence there” and “staying there” - such as one can be said to do such things after one’s paranibbana - only take place after one’s paranibbana. That’s how I understand the teachings I’ve encountered on the subject.

And I found a relevant quote for the OP (which I’ve opted to leave in the speaker’s slightly broken English):

“If you understand this dependent origination, by your direct knowledge, at that time only, you can become real Buddhist…

Why? You cannot change, because you understand kamma; you understand kamma produce kamma: materiality and mentality. At that time you will not accept ‘There is a creator...’ ‘There is no kamma…’ or ‘There is no future existence...’, ‘There is no past existence...’ - such type of wrong views will never arise to your mind.”

- The Pa-Auk Tawya Sayadaw, “Sketch of an Excellent Man”