Zen without Reincarnation

[triplew00t]

As a follow-up to my question on Taoism, I was recommended to Zen Buddhism. I, however, do not believe in reincarnation. Any resident Zen Buddhists who think that death is the final end to our existance?

Nero

[andy_d]

Why does it really matter? Whether there is another life after death or not, what difference does it make to your life you are living now?

[lugotorix]

Originally posted by triplew00t
As a follow-up to my question on Taoism, I was recommended to Zen Buddhism. I, however, do not believe in reincarnation. Any resident Zen Buddhists who think that death is the final end to our existance?

Well, I'm a Chan (Chinese Zen) Buddhist that is agnostic about it. For me this is the only position I can hold; to say either it's not possible or that it definitely happens would require proof that I don't have. There is a book by Stephen Batchelor, Buddhism without Beliefs, that deals with this subject in more depth. It presents a strongly agnostic form of Buddhism (which really pissed off a few traditionalists when it was published). According to the Pali scriptures, the Buddha himself said, in the Kalama Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-065a.html#solaces), that it is possible to follow his teaching without believing in rebirth.

In the end, though, I have to agree with andy_d. It really doesn't matter. What does matter is the life you're living now.

lugotorix

[andy_d]

Originally posted by lugotorix
For me this is the only position I can hold; to say either it's not possible or that it definitely happens would require proof that I don't have.

Me too.

Not much point in speculating about things you have no experience of. Even less point asserting that such speculation is fact.

[tribalbeeyatch]

Originally posted by triplew00t
Any resident Zen Buddhists who think that death is the final end to our existance? Ooh...me...me. I feel a little bit uncomfortable labeling myself as a Zen Buddhist yet given that I've only read a half dozen books on the subject and have never received any face-to-face 'instruction', but nothing that I've come across leads me to believe that reincarnation exists as any sort of Zen 'doctrine'. On the contrary, a dogma like reincarnation would likely interfere with one's Zen practice (or at least it would mine) because it would serve as a sort of filter through which day-to-day experiences are interpreted -- the very thing that Zen eschews.

[lugotorix]

You might be interested in an essay on this subject at the Zen Buddhist Order of Hsu-Yun website, titled Life after death and other inconveniences (http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/Literature/essays/mzs/lifeafterdeath.html) by Ming Zhen Shakya. I don't always agree with the essays on the site, but they're usually thought-provoking.


lugotorix

[Magic Primate]

Zen is not so much about belief as about bringing the present to life by being present in it.

I've specifically asked Master Gudo Nishijima this question and he for one, believes that consciousness ceases with death.

That's his personal view and probably mine too.

[triplew00t]

Primate,

You have talked to Master Gudo Nishijima? I would be quite interested in hearing more about that, as I have read of him before. If you have AIM or yahoo, my sns are on my profile. Or just post here, please.

Everyone,

Any links or other info on Taoist teaching or Zen sects or Masters that do not believe in reincarnation would be much appreciated.

Nero

[Magic Primate]

One of his students gave me his details and an introduction and we ended up having quite a long conversation. I don't know him well enough to introduce you, but his email address is on his web site and he is a very helpful man.

Gudo Nishijima (http://www.dogensangha.org/gwn.htm)

I suggest you use the email address from the site and respectfully ask for his advice ('Nishijima-sensei' is the accepted way to address him I'm told). There is no need to mention how you found the address on the site.

For anyone reading this - please use your own discretion before contacting him in this way.

Incidentally, one of his students (Brad Warner) runs my favourite Zen Website, although it does upset a lot of Buddhists apparently.

Doubtboy (http://www2.gol.com/users/doubtboy/)

Magic Primate

[triplew00t]

It's through the Doubtboy website that I first heard of Nishijma. Thanks for the information, I might just contact him.

A Much Appreciative Nero

[andy_d]

Originally posted by Magic Primate
Incidentally, one of his students (Brad Warner) runs my favourite Zen Website, although it does upset a lot of Buddhists apparently.


:D Well in that case this Buddhist thinks it must be worth a read!

I'm always up for a bit of guerrilla dharma ;)

[triplew00t]

I would be interested in hearing your opinion of the Doubtboy page, Andy. Especially the article towards the bottom on Reincarnation.

Nero

[Magic Primate]

Gautama Buddha was a man who had some insights - he was not a god or a supernatural being, so there is no reason why he might have special access to supernatural knowledge. His central insights were existential and pragmatic, not metaphysical.

[andy_d]

Nothing really surprising in that article, triplew00t. All looks pretty orthodox to me.

I like this though:

Forget about reincarnation. Look at your life as it is right now and live it.

I couldn't agree more. Thinking that reincarnation is an important concept in Buddhism is, frankly, a load of old rubbish.

[triplew00t]

I've always thought that if reincarnation of an individual existed, it was very important to know about it. But I think many modern Buddhists accept the concept of a person having a soul to be reincarnated, despite Buddha's insistance on Anatman and emptiness. As best as I can descern, we leave impressions that continue to cause effects in the world, so our imprint exists on everyone, because without any one action of any one individual the universe would have headed in a drastically different direction (ala Chaos Theory and the Tornado Causing Butterfly). But as far as us, any part of us that continues to experience or exist consciously, that ends at death when the brain dies. This, as well, is what I think Buddhism was in its original form.

Don't forget that many refute what Jesus taught as being put into his mouth because it was 50 years before anything was written down. With Gautama it was 300 years. Thats alot of time for rumors, folklore and legend to creep into his teachings. For example, the tells of his past lives, originally presented (I believe) as morality parables, were only later interpreted to be his past lives. Anyway, I simply think that the idea of reincarnation is dependent on a concept that Buddha denied - a soul to be reincarnated. Same with transmigration. Useless concept as well. I believe in rebirth, and that is what happens with every passing moment. But after my body dies, I am dead. No experiencer, no perception. Only my karma effecting others and my memory.

Nero

[andy_d]

Originally posted by triplew00t
But I think many modern Buddhists accept the concept of a person having a soul to be reincarnated, despite Buddha's insistance on Anatman and emptiness.

If they do, they're fooling themselves. Buddhism focuses on the mind. It has nothing to say about any idea of a "soul".

The reason the idea of rebirth is persistent is because the mind is held to be different from other phenomenon in that it is not composite ie: it is not formed from anything. Since the true mind is not a "thing" (and the self is definately not the mind) the mind cannot be destroyed and cannot die. It has no composite parts, cannot change, and is not relative to anything. As you say, emptiness (although note that this is not the same as nothingness) Perhaps a better term i've heard is "radiant clear space"

This is really where the idea of rebirth comes form. It's not that the individual continues beyond death, it's that at a fundamental level you are really something which was not born and cannot die. How can space die?

As you can see, there's a bit of a difference between that and saying "don't worry, you'll come back to life again after you die". You won't, but there's a big part of you that that isn't "you" as such, and therefore cannot be affected by your death.

Hope that makes some kind of sense. I'm not much more than a novice myself, but that's my understanding.

[Ramen]

triplew00t,

I’ve only read Buddhist books and posted on Buddhist forums (when they existed), but I’ve pulled myself out of a pit of depression.

The first thing you think about when Buddhism comes to mind is “no attachments”. My first inclination regarding this “no attachments” mentality was of a materialistic non-attachment. But after reading/contemplating Buddhism for a little over 3 years, I’ve come to understand that an attachment can also be to a belief. Buddha encouraged a “see for yourself” mentality, so Buddhism does NOT emphasize believing (which would include a belief in reincarnation). My advice is to let go of any obligation to believe in anything or to have any obligation of defining reality. This will be a great weight off of your shoulders.

I highly recommend books written by Pema Chodron. She is a Tibetan Buddhist nun who really gets to the point of why we suffer and makes us face the root cause of our suffering. Click here (http://www.powells.com/search/DTSearch/search?kw=pema+chodron&pokey=skeptopotamus&Search.x=54&Search.y=5) for a Powell Books listing of some of her books.

[Magic Primate]

Originally posted by andy_d
If they do, they're fooling themselves. Buddhism focuses on the mind. It has nothing to say about any idea of a "soul".

The reason the idea of rebirth is persistent is because the mind is held to be different from other phenomenon in that it is not composite ie: it is not formed from anything. Since the true mind is not a "thing" (and the self is definately not the mind) the mind cannot be destroyed and cannot die. It has no composite parts, cannot change, and is not relative to anything. As you say, emptiness (although note that this is not the same as nothingness) Perhaps a better term i've heard is "radiant clear space"

This is really where the idea of rebirth comes form. It's not that the individual continues beyond death, it's that at a fundamental level you are really something which was not born and cannot die. How can space die?

As you can see, there's a bit of a difference between that and saying "don't worry, you'll come back to life again after you die". You won't, but there's a big part of you that that isn't "you" as such, and therefore cannot be affected by your death.

Hope that makes some kind of sense. I'm not much more than a novice myself, but that's my understanding.

I agree with most of what you've said, although I would say that really 'emptiness' is not some imaginary 'Cosmic Void'. Zen is very mundane (super mundane even) and not metaphysical. D T Suzuki defined emptiness along the lines of 'your everyday mind without dualistic/categorical thinking' (or without clinging to such thinking perhaps?). Emptiness ('Mu') is a state of freedom from such clinging and categories. When you take everything away (including ideas of 'nothingness' and 'the Void'), all that's left is freedom.

[triplew00t]

Magic Primate. Are you by any chance "monkey magic" on the beliefnet.com zen forum?

Nero

[Magic Primate]

:eek:

I've been rumbled!

Do you post there?

[Magic Primate]

OK, I see ya.

(duh)

[triplew00t]

What tipped me off was what your posts were about more than the name. Only later did I notice the similarities there. Your posts about Nishijima-sensei were similar on both forums, so I put two and two together. Oh, I sent him an email btw. I am awaiting a reply, I hope he has some advice.

Nero

[Magic Primate]

I expect he will - he enjoys interesting questions.

[triplew00t]

Thank you for your replies. I tried to reason why I feared death, and this is the best I can come up with.


I fear ceasing to exist, but even more I fear not ceasing to exist. I fear leaving ones behind, and having unfinished business. I fear the process of dying. Mostly, I do not want to stop living, but even more, I would hate living without end.

And I fear that no one can die WITH me. I will be, ultimately, all alone when dying. I fear struggling, fighting death in vain. I fear grasping and clinging to life as it is ripped from me, all the while using every ounce of my strength to grasp at it, but having no control at all over it, as death is stronger than I am. All of this is bad enough assuming death is the end of consciousness, but even worse if I expected another world or life after I died.

Nero

[Vajradhara]

Originally posted by andy_d
If they do, they're fooling themselves. Buddhism focuses on the mind. It has nothing to say about any idea of a "soul".

The reason the idea of rebirth is persistent is because the mind is held to be different from other phenomenon in that it is not composite ie: it is not formed from anything. Since the true mind is not a "thing" (and the self is definately not the mind) the mind cannot be destroyed and cannot die. It has no composite parts, cannot change, and is not relative to anything. As you say, emptiness (although note that this is not the same as nothingness) Perhaps a better term i've heard is "radiant clear space"

This is really where the idea of rebirth comes form. It's not that the individual continues beyond death, it's that at a fundamental level you are really something which was not born and cannot die. How can space die?

As you can see, there's a bit of a difference between that and saying "don't worry, you'll come back to life again after you die". You won't, but there's a big part of you that that isn't "you" as such, and therefore cannot be affected by your death.

Hope that makes some kind of sense. I'm not much more than a novice myself, but that's my understanding.

Namaste andy_d,

thank you for the post.

this is a very lucid explanation of why rebirth occurs. remember that Buddhist philosophy states that there are 24 conditions that cause rebirth, karma being and important but not sole cause.

what is very difficult for westerners to comprehend is how the Buddhist view of consciousness is vastly different than the western view.

concerning the qustion of souls...

Question: On the death of a sentient being, is there a ‘soul’ that wanders about at will?

Answer: When a sentient being leaves one existence, it is reborn either as a human being, a celestial being, (Deva or Brahama), and inferior animal, or a denizen of one of the regions of hell. The sceptics and the ignorant people held that there are intermediate stages – antrabhava – between these; and that there are beings who are neither of the human, the celestial, the Deva or the Brahma worlds nor of any one of the stages of existence recognised in the scriptures – but are in an intermediate stage. Some assert that these transitional stages are possessed of the Five Skhandhas ( Five Aggregates: they are Matter (rupa); Feeling (vedana); Perception (sanna); 4. Mental-activities (sankhara); and Consciousness (vinnana).
Some assert that these beings are detached ‘souls’ or spirits with no material encasement, and some again, that they are possessed of the faculty of seeing like Devas, and further, that they have power of changing at will, at short intervals, from one to any of the existence mentioned above. Others again hold the fantastic and erroneous theory that these beings can, and so, fancy themselves to be in other than the existence they are actually in. Thus, to take for example one such of these suppositious beings. He is a poor person – and yet he fancies himself to be rich. He may be in hell – and yet he fancies himself to be in the land of the Devas, and so on. This belief in intermediate stages between existences is false, and is condemned in the Buddhist teachings. A human being in this life who, by his Karma is destined to be a human being in the next, will be reborn as such; one who by his Karma is destined to be a Deva in the next will be appear in the land of the Devas; and one whose future life is to be in Hell, will be found in one of the regions of hell in the next existence.
The idea of an entity or soul or spirit ‘going’, ‘coming’, ‘changing’ or ‘transmigrating’ from one existence to another is an idea entertained by the ignorant and materialistic, and is certainly not justified by the Dhammas that there is no such thing as ‘going’, 'coming’, ‘changing’, etc., as between existences. The conception, which is in accordance with the Dhamma, may perhaps be illustrated by the picture thrown out by a cinema projector, or the sound of emitted by the gramophone, and their relation to the film or the sound-box and records respectively. For example, a human being dies and is reborn in the land of Devas. Though these two existences are different, yet the link or continuity between the two at death is unbroken in point of time. The same is true in the case of a man whose further existence is to be in hell. The distance between Hell and the abode of man appears to be great. Yet, in point of time, the continuity of ‘passage’ from the one existence to the other is unbroken, and no intervening matter or space can interrupt the trend of a man’s Karma from the world of human beings to the regions of Hell. The ‘passage’ from one existence to another is instantaneous, and the transition is infinitely quicker than the blink of an eyelid or a lightening-flash. [this is not the view of the Mahayana Tradition, where it holds that there is an intermediate time before rebirth occurs {vajradhara}].
Karma determines the realm of rebirth and the state of existence in that realm of all transient being (in the cycle of existences, which have to be traversed till the attainment, at last, of Nibbana).
The results of Karma are manifold, and may be effected in many ways. Religious offerings (dana) may obtain for a man the privilege of rebirth as a human being, or as a deva, in one of the six deva worlds according to the degree of the merit of the deeds performed, and so with the observance of religious duties (sila). The jhanas or states of absorption, are found in the Brahma world or Brahmalokas up to the summit, the twentieth Brahma world: And so with bad deeds, the perpetrators of which are to be found , grade by grade, down to the lowest depths of Hell. Thus are Karma, past, present and future were, are, and will ever be the sum total of our deeds, good, indifferent or bad. As was seen from the foregoing, our Karma determines the changes of our existences.
"Evil spirits" are, therefore, not beings in an intermediate or transitional stages of existence, but are really very inferior beings, and they belong to one of the following five realms of existence:
1. World of Men
2. The Lowest plane of deva-world
3. The region of hell
4. Animals below men
5. Petas (ghosts).
Number 2 and 5 are very near the world of human beings. As their condition is unhappy, and they are popularly considered evil spirits. It is not true that all who die in this world are reborn as evil spirits; nor is it true that beings who die sudden or violent deaths are apt to be reborn in the lowest plane of the world of devas.

[triplew00t]

At the moment I am a follower of Soto Zen, and neither believe in an afterlife, or a life after this one.

Nero

[Vajradhara]

Namaste,

at this point in time, i am unaware of a Sutra or Mantra basis for this opinion, though i consider it a valid opinion still :)

if you do have a scriptural basis for this opinion, i would be very pleased to have a chance to study it.

[triplew00t]

There is no scriptual basis. Thats what Soto is about. If anything goes against what you feel to be true, against common sense and what we understand of reality, reject it. All these talks of heavens and hells are unneeded to explain life. They are superfluous.



If you meet the Buddha, kill him. - Zen Proverb


All the sutras of the world are but waste paper to wipe the dirt from the mind. When you are done with them, burn them.
- Zen Proverb.

The teachings are a finger pointing to the moon. Never stop at the finger.
- Zen Proverb


The teaching of the Buddha was mainly for the purpose of enlightening others. If you are dependent on any of its methods, you are naught but an ignorant insect. There are 80,000 books on Buddhism, and if you should read all of them and yet not understand your true nature, you will not understand even this letter. This is my last will and testament.
- Post Script on her last letter to her son, Ikkyu, signed "Your Mother, not born, not dead".


The master of a temple set up a challenge. Whoever could give him the best poem that shows the understanding of Zen, he would pass his position to at his death. The challenge was tacked to the wall in the kitchen and at first a student took the challenge.

"The wind of Enlightenment blows to all minds"

A second monk tried his hand.

"All minds are enlightened already. What wind?"

Finally, the cook, who have never even meditated, came out to write one more poem on the wall.

"No wind, no enlightenment. And whats all this talk about minds?"

He was given the master's postition

-Paraphrased from an old Zen story

Nero

[andy_d]

Er, Triplew00t, do you not find it ironic to refute reliance on scripture by quoting a bunch of traditional sayings? :D ;)

[andy_d]

Arse! Douple post. Ignore please!

[Vajradhara]

Originally posted by triplew00t
[B]There is no scriptual basis. Thats what Soto is about. If anything goes against what you feel to be true, against common sense and what we understand of reality, reject it. All these talks of heavens and hells are unneeded to explain life. They are superfluous.




Namaste triplewoot,

well... i'll agree with you somewhat :)

whilst it's very true that the experience we are practicing to have is beyond scritpure, it would be incorrect to say that Zen or rather Ch'an is not based on scripture. the Heart Sutra is chanted daily in Zen monastaries around the world, for example.

common sense, it seems, is not all that common :) and our undestanding of reality seems to change on a daily basis as our ability to observe the universe is increases.

when the sutras talk of heaven and hell, these are understood to be metaphors for the positive and negative mental states, though i'll agree that for some people, these are literal places that one believes they go to.

the sutras and shatras are simply vehicles, tools, to help us get to the other shore. once we understand the concept, we can forget the words... though we do need to words to grasp the concept. does that make sense?

[triplew00t]

Actually andy that thought occured to me as I was posting, but I figure I'll fight fire with fire ;)

As for why I believe as I do, its mostly that I lack any belief. I am a skeptic at heart, and Zen, to me, is very common-sense oriented. Other Zen practicioners may believe in supernaturality or reincarnation. I take what they talk about to be references to much more mundane reactions. To each his own.

Nero

[triplew00t]

I must also add something. While I deny reincarnation, it is only in the sense that it is taken by popular culture, and Hinduism. Buddha denied the concept of even a self to reincarnated. All that goes into creating you is from past actions of others. You are therefore a reincarnation of all their combined efforts and effects. All you do will effect other, infinately, forever in the most unpredictible ways (ala Chaos Theory and the Butterfly that Destroyed Oakland). In this way, your actions continue to be reborn forever.

As well, the you who got out of bed this morning is dead. The you who went to the store yesterday is dead. The you who married 2 years ago is dead, and the you who grew up in Vermont is dead. All of the past is dead, both from you and other, but all of it, every single bit, is reincarnated and reborn into the present that we currently experience. When I die, one stream of experience will have drifted back into the ocean. I never existed to begin with as a seperate entity, and I will always exist, as I always have, as part of this universe. I was created by infinite past karma, and I picked it up, carried it and left it for others.

There are 2 types of karma that I can discern. That which I reap the rewards of in my life, and that which drifts out and others experience after my life.

Nero

[Vajradhara]

Originally posted by triplew00t
I must also add something. While I deny reincarnation, it is only in the sense that it is taken by popular culture, and Hinduism. Buddha denied the concept of even a self to reincarnated. All that goes into creating you is from past actions of others. You are therefore a reincarnation of all their combined efforts and effects. All you do will effect other, infinately, forever in the most unpredictible ways (ala Chaos Theory and the Butterfly that Destroyed Oakland). In this way, your actions continue to be reborn forever.

As well, the you who got out of bed this morning is dead. The you who went to the store yesterday is dead. The you who married 2 years ago is dead, and the you who grew up in Vermont is dead. All of the past is dead, both from you and other, but all of it, every single bit, is reincarnated and reborn into the present that we currently experience. When I die, one stream of experience will have drifted back into the ocean. I never existed to begin with as a seperate entity, and I will always exist, as I always have, as part of this universe. I was created by infinite past karma, and I picked it up, carried it and left it for others.

There are 2 types of karma that I can discern. That which I reap the rewards of in my life, and that which drifts out and others experience after my life.

Nero

Namaste nero,

thank you for explaning your position on the matter, it's appreciated.

indeed... if that is your understanding of reincarnation, or rebirth (as that is the Buddhist term) i would also not subscribe to it. fortunately, that is not the Buddhist view of rebirth.. at least as far as i've been able to ascertain. i'll grant that we practice a different tradition, you a Zen practioner and myself a Vajrayana practiconer, so we're bound to have some disagreements over points of inconsequential doctrine :)

in any event, perhaps i can explain a bit more comprehensively about rebirth (what and how) and karma. as i'm sure you know, karma is not the sole cause of our rebirth, Buddhist philosophy posits 24 conditions that cause one to take rebirth, karma simply being one of those.

as i'm rather new to the board, i'm unsure of the protocol.. should i go ahead and post a long, lengthy post with sutra references and so forth?

[triplew00t]

Please, submit a long post if needed. I look forward to hearing how you view reincarnation/rebirth.

In peace, Nero

[Vajradhara]

Originally posted by triplew00t
Please, submit a long post if needed. I look forward to hearing how you view reincarnation/rebirth.

In peace, Nero

Namaste Nero,

thank you for the posting...

perhaps, before we discuss rebirth directly, it would be of some value to talk about Karma and it's implications... even though in the Theravedan tradition karma is one of the "unthinkables".

does your tradition talk about karma and it's effects? if so, that will make our conversation a bit easier.. if not, i'm happy to post what i know in regards to this subject.. though i'm happy to admit that it's not much :)