Is there any proof of reincarnation? I find it hard to believe in it.

[confusedsoso]

Is there any proof of reincarnation? I find it hard to believe in it.

[Ceisiwr]

Is there any proof of reincarnation? I find it hard to believe in it.

Ian Stevenson and his successor Jim Tucker have written books on cases suggestive of it as has Ven. Analaylo. They aren’t anything definitive though. I too initially found it hard to accept rebirth. For a lot of people these days it’s something that just comes with time and practice.

[SarathW]

What Buddhism teaches is Bhava.
You change every moment. Just see how you have changed from a child to an adult.
Also, consider that you move overseas or to a different town by yourself.
Now imagine you do not have a body too and you forgot your past.

It is complex and we will never know.
Buddha adviced us not to spend time on the past and the future.
Path opens when you are in the present moment.

[dharmacorps]

Then don't believe it. Buddhism isn't a belief contest and nobody needs to convince you if you aren't interested.

[mjaviem]

Is there any proof of reincarnation? I find it hard to believe in it.

You don't need proof of rebirth. You only need confidence in the Buddha.

For mundane people like us who still have greed and ill will within, and are delusional about what's going on, the Buddha spoke of one understanding that is correct. You must understand as follows for your own good and the good of anyone else.

... ‘There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’...

Be wise and at least, about someone who has it wrong and thus conducts himself wrongly, consider thus:

... ‘If there is no other world, then on the dissolution of the body this good person will have made himself safe enough. But if there is another world, then on the dissolution of the body, after death, he will reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell. Now whether or not the word of those good recluses and brahmins is true, let me assume that there is no other world: still this good person is here and now censured by the wise as an immoral person, one of wrong view who holds the doctrine of nihilism. But on the other hand, if there is another world, then this good person has made an unlucky throw on both counts: since he is censured by the wise here and now, and since on the dissolution of the body, after death, he will reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell. He has wrongly accepted and undertaken this incontrovertible teaching in such a way that it extends only to one side and excludes the wholesome alternative.’...

[TRobinson465]

It's not solid proof but there are records of some kids being able to recall thier past lives and people corroborating their claims (theres an item in this house that belonged to their former self, etc.)

It's pretty weak evidence but it is evidence. Other than that. The only way to prove it is by getting abhinna powers yourself or dying yourself. But if you consider the Buddha legit and considering he said rebirth is real. It's reasonable to also just take it on faith without needing Harvard graphs and peer reviewed studies for everything

[confusedsoso]

It's not solid proof but there are records of some kids being able to recall thier past lives and people corroborating their claims (theres an item in this house that belonged to their former self, etc.)

It's pretty weak evidence but it is evidence. Other than that. The only way to prove it is by getting abhinna powers yourself or dying yourself. But if you consider the Buddha legit and considering he said rebirth is real. It's reasonable to also just take it on faith without needing Harvard graphs and peer reviewed studies for everything

I find reincarnation to be like believing in an almighty god. Its just hard to believe without any proof. Maybe there is some power that we humans cant see. I dunno.

[SarathW]

In my opinion, the belief in rebirth is a mundane right view.
I wonder whether belief in rebirth is not applicable when you have the supermundane right view.
I have created a new thread to discuss this matter.

viewtopic.php?t=45495

[pegembara]

'We' were once only a sperm and an egg. That too is hard to believe, no?

[santa100]

I find reincarnation to be like believing in an almighty god. Its just hard to believe without any proof. Maybe there is some power that we humans cant see. I dunno.

Remember that smart kid back then in the same 5th grade class as you who aced all the math exams without even spending half the amount of time you and the rest of the class had to spend to prepare for them? Ever wonder why he was so smart? Well, there're pretty much just 3 possible explanations, depending on where you are in the religion spectrum:

1. If you're a follower of one of those monotheistic religions, then it must be God's will, that that kid was one of the lucky "chosen" few whom God granted them some special gift. Sorry, you and the rest aren't among God's favorite children!

2. If you're a total 100% atheist/materialist, then it's just some sheer coincidence, that that smart friend of yours was just a lucky boy while you were not. Tough luck!

3. But If you're a Buddhist, or at least having some interest in learning more about Buddhism, then you'd know that there's no such thing as sheer coincidence. Everything is dependently originated, ie. the law of causation. So the reason your smart friend being so much smarter than you was probably because he really worked his behind off building up his math skills since countless previous lives while you and the rest of your class have been slacking off on those math homework since countless previous lives.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

There is a third wrong-view — that the boy is a maths wizard due solely to previous kamma. This is a serious wrong-view because it takes no account of the present effort, skilled parental guidance, a good maths teacher, etc.

Four Points to Bear in Mind (about dependent origination).

[TRobinson465]

I find reincarnation to be like believing in an almighty god. Its just hard to believe without any proof. Maybe there is some power that we humans cant see. I dunno.

Personally it think reincarnation is significantly more logical than an almighty god and even more so than the athiestic idea that everything happened on accident with no miracle at all except the miracle of the big bang where everything came from nothing.

That said, if you dont believe it because you found find the evidence uncompelling. thats fine. put it aside as stated by some of the people above. you dont have to believe in everything to be Buddhist. I didnt believe in certain things as well like people living for 80,000 years at first. and even then i dont believe in everything now since i dont believe the texts are completely flawless records. If you find benefit in other teachings go ahead and practice according to those and simply put reincarnation aside.

Since you're into Buddhism, being here on DW, take the advice of the Buddha in MN60.

A1. "Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the next after having directly known and realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three skillful activities — good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives & brahmans do not see, in unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.

A2. "Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is no next world' is his wrong view. Because there actually is the next world, when he is resolved that 'There is no next world,' that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is the next world, when he speaks the statement, 'There is no next world,' that is his wrong speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says that 'There is no next world,' he makes himself an opponent to those arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next world, when he persuades another that 'There is no next world,' that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others. Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, exaltation of self, & disparagement of others: These many evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong view.

A3. "With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: 'If there is no next world, then — with the breakup of the body, after death — this venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is the next world, then this venerable person — on the breakup of the body, after death — will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. Even if we didn't speak of the next world, and there weren't the true statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable person is still criticized in the here-&-now by the observant as a person of bad habits & wrong view: [2] one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence.' If there really is a next world, then this venerable person has made a bad throw twice: in that he is criticized by the observant here-&-now, and in that — with the breakup of the body, after death — he will reappear in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped & poorly adopted by him, covers (only) one side, and leaves behind the possibility of the skillful.

B1. "Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view — '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 brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three unskillful activities — bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three skillful activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable contemplatives & brahmans see in unskillful activities the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; and in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.

B2. "Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is a next world' is his right view. Because there actually is the next world, when he is resolved that 'There is a next world,' that is his right resolve. Because there actually is the next world, when he speaks the statement, 'There is a next world,' that is his right speech. Because there actually is the next world, when he says that 'There is a next world,' he doesn't make himself an opponent to those arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next world, when he persuades another that 'There is a next world,' that is persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is true Dhamma, he doesn't exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever bad habituation he previously had is abandoned, while good habituation is manifested. And this right view, right resolve, right speech, non-opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma, non-exaltation of self, & non-disparagement of others: These many skillful activities come into play, in dependence on right view.

B3. "With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: 'If there is the next world, then this venerable person — on the breakup of the body, after death — will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Even if we didn't speak of the next world, and there weren't the true statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable person is still praised in the here-&-now by the observant as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence.' If there really is a next world, then this venerable person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the observant here-&-now; and in that — with the breakup of the body, after death — he will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides, and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

[Kusala]

Is there any proof of reincarnation? I find it hard to believe in it.

Here's a fascinating story of an English comedian...


@1:07 - 3:55

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Here's a fascinating story of an English comedian...

Are you referring to Rod Hull, or to Ajahn Brahmavaṃso?

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Here is another fascinating story.