Ling's Post


    If there is no-self, how to explain rebirth?

    Comments


  • Punna Wong
    Simple!
    Understand that the Buddha did not teach "Rebirth" But Repeated Birth.


    Yin Ling
    Punna Wong you cannot answer!


  • Yin Ling
    Punna Wong but why repeated birth 😝?




  • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
    Bhavapaccaya jati.

      • Reply
      • See translation
      • 4d
      • Edited







  • André A. Pais
    If there is no self, how to explain digestion? Or waking up from sleep?
    (Do mean "there is no-self," or "there is no self"? The former is an affirmation, the latter a negation.)


    Yin Ling
    No-self as a doctrine, or no self as a description, whichever makes more sense.
    Not quite the answer with ur first two counter questions?😝


  • John Tan
    André A. Pais other than complying with conventionality, y is “self” needed for digestion and waking up?


  • André A. Pais
    It's not. That's my point. Likewise with rebirth. If a (truly existing) self was required for rebirth, there wouldn't be rebirth. Thus, that a 'self goes through rebirth' is a mere convention. Rebirth itself is a mere convention.
    In a way, the same analysis that refutes the self also refutes rebirth (just like shunyata is an extension of anatta). So, the idea of rebirth without a self seems to be a kind of semi-analysis (deep enough to refute self, but shallow enough to leave rebirth untouched).

    • Reply
    • 4d
    • Edited

  • John Tan
    André A. Pais do u also negate what that is vividly happening, the occurrence?


  • André A. Pais
    How could one negate what is vividly happening?


  • John Tan
    Next, in hunger, we eat. Do u deny the "hunger" and the "eating"? If "negating" does not equate "denying", then what is being negated and what is not being negated?
    If negating equals denying, then why "eat"?

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • André A. Pais
    I can respond to your questions on different levels. Hunger is unfinfable, eating is unfindable, etc. Conventionally, those labels were created and we all agree on their meaning. In that sense, even a conventional self exists, feels hunger and then eats.


  • André A. Pais
    Ultimately, all words and meanings are being negated. Conventionally, everything and anything can make sense and become undeniable, as long as sufficient consensus is gathered.


  • John Tan
    If one is free from words and meanings, do we stop eating when hungry and stop waking up from sleep?


  • André A. Pais
    I'm not free of words and meanings, but I'm guessing "enlightened folk" don't go starving! 🤣








  • Attempt
    Rebirth might not refer to a continuation or perpetuation of an unwholesome 'self', but rather the 'Outcome' of the continued unfolding of karmic causal-relation link generated by anything including thoughts and deeds of a 'self'.
    I suppose rebirth can be understood without invoking a permanent self or soul, but seen as a consequence of the impermanent and interdependent nature of existence.

    • Reply
    • 4d
    • Edited

  • Jean-Sebastien Thorn
    I would say that it’s not a “self” or essence/core that is being born or reborn.
    Like in daily life, the seeming “continuity” seems to be that same birth/rebirth every “instant” by D.O. How come an instant flows into the next ?
    It seems it is only our delusion; tendency to grasp that reify a solidity and continuity of a solid thing, be it mind or body that calls it a rebirth or a self.
    I think the same coreless “process” is happening on its own; is the digestion, is the waking up, is the transitions from one instant to the next, is the repeated births…
    (Please help me clarify if necessary ! )
    Ok too much words, better go take my coffee 😝

    • Reply
    • 4d
    • Edited

    Yin Ling
    Jean-Sebastien Thorn this is really good I like this haha.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited



  • John Tan
    Jean-Sebastien Thorn yes. There is no denial of what that is happening and taking place that we conventionally designate as "rebirth", "digestion" or "waking up", they are as valid as it can be.
    A mind that thinks a "self" is needed to take "rebirth" or initiates action also implies that a self can be dis-associated and stand apart from the action taking place because they come from the same pattern of thoughts.
    So there is no escape from the action of body, speech and mind.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Jean-Sebastien Thorn
    John Tan yes ! Thanks! 🙏🏼
    I absolutely see the validity of the conventional as well !
    I don’t have a “prefered” view but I do tend to look for clarity without denying any standpoints or their seeming absence.








  • Tyler Jones
    Like Jean-Sebastien said, the real question is how can their be continuity at all without an essence. If you accept it as a conventionally valid cognition to identify the person you were yesterday and the person you are today, even without an underlying essence, and if you believe in yogic perception that transcends the physical senses, it is not at all unreasonable that yogic perception could produce a conventionally valid cognition that identifies some person now with some person a long time ago.


  • Oskar Melkeraaen Aas
    Due to karma, if there is ignorance there is one kinds of causation. Its just cause and effect self or no self does not matter, except the kinds of karma that is generated, be it based on ignorance or not.


    Yin Ling
    Why does self and no self don’t matter?
    What do you mean by karma based on ignorance or not?
    If an enlightened one has wisdom of emptiness and completely eradicate ignorance, is there still karma?

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Oskar Melkeraaen Aas
    It matters on what kind of karmas, but l think the cause and effect applies as before nevertheless.
    Karma - Rigpa Wiki
    RIGPAWIKI.ORG
    Karma - Rigpa Wiki
    Karma - Rigpa Wiki








  • No photo description available.


    William Albert
    I really like this description, but it may not really be something we can "know for sure" from direct experience in this life. More like an intuition that feels true, perhaps.








  • Sim Pern Chong
    Hmm...could it be that perhaps there was no birth, death, rebirth...but when viewed from certain conditions/obscuration appeared so.
    And that the appearing and experiencing of the apparent (compulsive) rebirths were due to misinterpretation of reality.
    Seem strange coming from someone who has 'remembered' previous existences. 😄

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

    John Tan
    Sim Pern Chong better to accept rebirth and ur remembrance of
    ur past life is precious in my opnion. It is not like how the inherent pattern negates "rebirth", that is jumping too fast into conclusion. That is y it is extremely crucial to understand dependent arising first. Then the logic of how the extremes of coming and going, life and death, production and cessation are realized to be invalid and at the same time the validity of the conventional remains.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Sim Pern Chong
    John Tan I see.. thanks John 😁








  • Mike Scarf
    The law of conservation of energy


    Yin Ling
    Mike Scarf what do you mean?
    Functioning as no-self conserve energy, or vice Versa lol


  • Mike Scarf
    Yin Ling The law of conservation of energy states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another. Self or no self, energy will transform (would be interpreted as rebirth from false self perspective).








  • Bliss Rizal
    My thoughts base on my learnings.....
    When I fully awaken from the explanation of Heart Sutra by Dr Punna Wong And GRATEFUL for others authors, speakers, commentaries from fb like this.... Too many to mentions...
    I perceived RE-BIRTH now as when awaken every morning, it's a NEW day.... I don't cling with the yesterday nor I CLING for tomorow, but TREAsure the moments of today.... For I am conscious and control.
    I try my best to be 'Sync' with what it's happening, obviously, I am very very HUMAN and still very very affected by 8 winds but I'm somehow Conscious.... and try best to live within the 5 precept except the lying part for I am still into 'business', this is an honest revelation and sadly it's not intentional but necessary, now, I'm trying my best to be as honest in dealing with 'agency', it requires wisdom and patience to know how to talk to them.
    Going back to Re-Birth, I always have this qs in my mind long before I am serious in my buddhist practice : where am I during my sleep? Well, my body was in the bed.... Lately, my dream are vivid and somehow, I feel the fruition of my practice for I am able to be aware when I'm in 'there'.... When I'm in dreams, its seems REAL TIME there, like I went into a Time portal and the scene, situation are somehow familiar, I am able to converse, I know whom I'm talking , what about , where I am when I'm in there..... but when I'm AWAKEN from the sleep and dreams, I sometimes remember but mostly I forgot but the sensation from it, either Happy or exhausted..... For me, its a proof that If conscious are working, the body is still working and not benefiting from sleep. The Anatta or non-self is there..... I... Can.... Sense... Like... I... am... An invisible energy cruising from moment to moment..... No form....
    Sometimes when I'm in deep... I try to move my body and pretty amaze how fast the body moves like I'm typing these messages.... I know this can be explain by biologist but amazing the fastness of it.... I have only GRATEFUL for doing its function.
    From that on, I treasure each day, I try to be mindful.... Due to open worlds now, everything that pandemic puts on hold was beginning to take a lots of my time now, I joke myself for those 'PATIENCE' I save during pandemic practice was now seeing bottom and I know where I am.
    Maybe some of you here may not agree, after REALIZING that moment is the reality.... I decided to focus now on my FAMILY, before my heart was into practice.... Now I think that's secondary for me, I CHOSE to do my duties first wholeheartedly then after when Im really done with it, the next is my practice. No worry Coz I can INCORPORATE now my practice with my duty.... Proof? My Mother in law was a typical traditional Chinese wife and she is a very controlled person, yet she is now WILLING to come to temple with me, I am able to penetrate her heart..... Guess, she saw something in me and I can only assume that she sense something wonderful in me. Its not easy to talk to her so I have yet to know what is that.
    Sorry for the long messages, i try my best to narrate to you all: my teachers and co-practioners for this. In reality, I am still very very FAr from each of your level, my cup are empty for all of you to fill in, with this, I stand corrected.
    With respects to all of you, Namste 😊🙏🙏🙏


    Yin Ling
    Bliss Rizal it’s all great what you have just said, but you didn’t answer the question! 😝








  • Yin Ling
    IMO,
    Fundamental ignorance is the key driver of birth/rebirth(both are similar in nature).
    Fundamental ignorance is the cause of our mistake when viewing reality, it’s there since we are born, carried along from past lives to this life, the powerful grasping energy that propels cyclic existence, for eons and eons, beginningless.
    This ignorance is a perception that sees Inherency or solidity when there is none.
    This ignorance sees “self” over here and another “self” over there when there is none.
    This ignorance separates and grasp on to “me”, “things” and then create the chasm that allows pushing and pulling (attraction and aversion), create karma, and propel cyclic existence.
    That’s it.
    Ignorance is the engine of the 12 links of rebirth / birth/death cycle.
    That is the engine we need to remove.
    When a person realized self-less-ness, at the deepest level, they see reality as they are.
    This whole structure built up by fundamental ignorance will collapse, and rebirth stops.
    No-self is how things have always been, regardless of rebirth, birth, death, enlightenment.
    rebirth or birth happens without a self any way. It’s not like if there is rebirth then there is a self. Nope. It’s because the person have ignorance thinking that there is a self, and grasp onto some phantom energy that this whole rebirth cycle cannot be stopped or slowed down.
    There is no a thread of self, not an atom anywhere in our reality.
    Reality is self-less, empty, and dependently originated before, now, and forever.
    Ignorance is the error in our mind. A flaw in perception.
    Imo.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

    Bliss Rizal
    Yin Ling you answer it. 😉


  • Yin Ling
    Bliss Rizal actually don’t even need to wait till death.
    This rebirth /birth is moment to moment.
    Right at this moment we can see whether we are rebirthing or not.
    If there is a sense of self, we are gonna come back for sure, which realm only . 😵‍💫😵


  • Bliss Rizal
    Yin Ling agree on this. 😉








  • Robert Dominik Tkanka
    If there was a self then no rebirth would be possible. Not only that: no change of psychophysical constituents of person in this life would be possible. You would be stuck with the same self all the time.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    Robert Dominik Tkanka that is true. If anything really exist, nothing would appear.
    But what’s about the flip side ? What is this rebirth thing. Who is being rebirthed?


  • Robert Dominik Tkanka
    Yin Ling who is being rebirthed doesn't apply. Its a leading question. The question already makes an assumption about "Who" being rebirthed.
    If I were to express an answer in words, which is always a limited endeavor, then Id say that the karmic movements maintain their momentums. But momentum is not an object or a self. I think that the examples of continuity I had provided below illustrate this point.
    Lets take game of pool 🎱. One ball hits another one. Direction, speed etc are somewhat maintained even though another ball and the previous one are not the same self.
    Other, so called secondary factors, modify the movement so its non linear.
    Balls will stop without the case such as hitting to move them.
    What is the primary cause of maintaining karmic momentum?
    As You guys have already established in this thread: ignorance


  • Yin Ling
    Robert Dominik Tkanka that’s nice. There has never been a self anywhere. Rebirth is conventional when one grasp on to an inherent existence of a person.


  • Robert Dominik Tkanka
    Yin Ling according to the Pali Canon when the ignorance is uprooted and the 12fold chain stopped then whole mechanism is extuinguished (nibbana). Like putting out a fire or rather it being extinguished due to eliminating factors that kept it burning.
    Mahayana however says a Buddha maintains their continuum after awakening.
    Ive never encountered a sound explanation in Mahayana literature nor from any teacher which would explain why there is such continuity in absence of separate, inherent self. Id go as far as to say it sounds like Mahayana Buddhism's Achilles' heel and "mystery of faith" cause from my limited experience the tradition seems to avoid this issue, or just make assumpions (alaya gets transformed into englitened stream, thanks bye) and when I presented this question to people more knowledegeable than me, their answers sounded more like cop outs lol.
    If we'd say it goes out we are back to Pali Canon's notion of arahathood. If we say it melts and blends with everything else then were back to brahman lalaland.
    One could say its all of that or neither of that or its inexpressible but:
    - all are extreme positions still
    - we are talking about relative things like karma and consciousness continuums
    - validity of these relative explanations is unfortunately related to them being sound explanations
    And then we have explanations about multiple emanations and multiple tulkus in Tibetan Buddhism which muddy the water even further. If You ask anybody theyll just say something about one moon being reflected in several buckets of water. Thats all fine and dandy but how does it fit with and resolve the issue above? Havent heard a convincing explanation.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    From my limited understanding is. There is no “continuum” per se. That’s an inherent view, still holding onto a self, the self disguise behind a continuum.
    The only sound explanation for myself is from the Gelug school of thoughts of “mere I”.
    The dalai lama goes onto say that the basis of designation of this “mere I “ - an I imputed on with no referent / no Inherent existence at the highest yoga tantra level is the clear light mind. And that too is not inherent.
    For my own insight and experience and making sense of things this is tenable. Mind is not inherent or singular. Only with dependence to other conditions any world come to be.
    But I of course cannot explain or describe what is being seen by a Buddha - one who has rid off all obscurations. Even 1st to 8th ground bodhisattva view I cannot imagine. Only practice probably will take me there one day? Lol
    For the flame analogy in the Pali sutra. My understanding is, even the flame did not arise in the first place. Can we say it’s extinguish? Is there really anything out there or in here that truly exist? Are you really talking to yin ling?🤪😝

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • André A. Pais
    Nafis Rahman may also have something to contribute in here.


  • André A. Pais
    I think there is a continuum of experience, appearances or clarity. I prefer not talking much about 'mind' at a more fundamental level. When there is delusion, appearances are called mind, people, phenomena, etc.; when enlightened, appearances are called kayas and wisdoms. Same thing fundamentally though: experience, appearances or clarity.
    Such a continuum coming to a sudden stop at enlightenment would be both illogical and unattractive. So, the burden is more on the side of the proponents of cessation, than on the proponents of continuity.
    Conventionally, things arise and cease. Ultimately, there is nothing to cease, because nothing has arisen. And "non-existence" is not a thing or place or state that one could go to or change into. Conventionally, a fire is extinguished when the conditions supporting it are removed, but nothing significant happens to experience as a whole - it merely changes its appearance.
    When we see someone dying, it looks like something has become non-existent, even if the body is still there. But subjectively, from the pov of the deceased, it's illogical to posit that the last moment of experience suddenly vanished into nothingness. How could something existent become non-existent? How does something "enter" non-existence? Where's the doorway? Is non-existence a place one can go into? Does non-existence exist, after all?
    So, the cutting off of the continuity of experience is illogical. Whatever happens after full enlightenment is beyond reference points, as is everything before enlightenment, ultimately speaking. The difference is that, even conventionally, Buddhahood is indescribable, because words have their meaning rooted in experience, and we haven't had such experience yet. Besides, enlightenment having dissolved notions such as conventional and ultimate, it probably means that conventions and ordinary terms just have no footing in such an experience.
    Also, notions of time, space and continuity are probably moot at the stage of Buddhahood, so questions pertaining continuity in time or location in space (including any distinction between or unity of mindstreams) are not applicable. Thus, the question of going out of existence (arhathood) or continuing on in supreme unity (Brahman lala land) probably becomes irrelevant.


  • André A. Pais
    Concerning cessation and continuity, when causes cease, effects follow suit. So, with the end of ignorance, follows the end of deluded experience. But why can't experience go on qualified by wisdom and insight?
    If only ignorance, karma and kleshas are able to sustain experience and appearances, one would be led to think that ignorance is more powerful and functional than wisdom.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

  • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
    I have lots I could write about this--and already have, all over the place--but what about this: Nagarjuna gave advice on how to understand the continuum of the aggregates in his Pratītyasamutpāda Hṛdaya Kārikā:
    5
    Like a recitation, a candle, a mirror, a seal,
    A magnifying glass, a seed, sourness, or a sound,
    So also with the continuation of the aggregates—
    The wise should know they are not transferred.


  • André A. Pais
    The aggregates are not transfered, neither from moment to moment nor from life to life. Moreover, inside, outside or in-between such aggregates no self is ever seen enjoying the (movementless) ride.


  • Nafis Rahman
    NO SELF IN VOLITION
    Surely we would expect to find an “I” in an act of volition. Who decides to act? Who makes a choice? But if we look closely at a simple action, we see that a multitude of factors converge to bring it about. Let’s say we are sitting in a room feeling a bit chilly and we decide to draw a shawl over our lap. In a normal account, that is all there is to say: “I felt cold, so I put on a shawl.” But if we look more closely, with the eyes of meditative mindfulness, we see that there are more steps in the process.
    First there is the recognition that one is sitting (mindfulness of body). Then at some point there is a sensation (contact) that we recognize as cold (perception). Cold is felt as unpleasant (feeling tone), and there is a reaction of aversion (volitional formation). Not seeing the reaction mindfully (delusion), we don’t pause to investigate the feeling tone or formation, but rather distract ourselves (beginning of proliferation) with the mildly complaining inner voice, “I’m starting to feel cold,” and perhaps we feel a little shiver (sensation). Perhaps some perception of “warm” then arises, either by feeling a part of the body that is well covered or by remembering how the room felt when we sat down. Based on the perception of warmth, a desire (formation) arises to experience being warm (sensation with pleasant feeling tone). Just as the earlier aversion was not seen mindfully as something to investigate, so also the desire for warmth is not seen mindfully or investigated. Based on desire for warmth and a touch of delusion (lack of mindful attention), a memory arises of the shawl lying on the sofa. Based on desire and memory, a volition arises and we turn our head to see the shawl on the end of the sofa (perception). Next the urge arises (volition) to reach for the shawl and cover our lap with it (action) — which we do.
    In this entire chain of linked causes and effects, there is never a separate agent or self. Rather there is a back-and-forth dialogue between the body, perceptions, feeling tone, aversion, desire, volition, and action. Volition is just another factor of mind that arises based on prior causes and conditions. It then leads to action, in this case, of the body. It can be very tempting to identify with volition: “I decided to reach” or “I reached.” But when we see the momentary nature of all the factors arising and passing, we see there is no continuity to volition either. It too arises, does its work, and passes away.
    Me: The same principle applies for the process of rebirth as well.
    Emptiness: A Practical Guide for Meditators
    AMAZON.COM
    Emptiness: A Practical Guide for Meditators
    Emptiness: A Practical Guide for Meditators


  • Nafis Rahman
    Continued (from the same text):
    REBIRTH AND NOT-SELF
    As we saw in the last chapter, the repetitive patterns of karmic acts lead to a consistency in personality that can lull us into believing in a stable, ongoing self. However, when investigated more closely, there is no actual stability to personality but only the appearance and reappearance of patterns whose actual makeup is impermanent volitional formations. In a similar way, the reappearance of a being, or rebirth, can make us think that there is something stable and ongoing — a self who journeys from one life to the next. This view can be summed up in the question, If there is no self, who is reborn? Or in another form, Where is the self that continues?
    Buddhism considers these questions to be wrongly put. They are like the question, Who is it that grasps? There is no “one” who is reborn or, for that matter, who is born at any time, since all birth is rebirth. Birth is just another event in the unending chain of causes and conditions that lead to effects. In this chain, karma plays a critical role. There may always be a great mystery around birth, as there is around death, but some things in the teachings seem clear. Let us look into the mechanics of cause, effect, and rebirth as described in the Pali Discourses.
    When we examine cause and effect in just this lifetime, we see that there is continuity in the patterns of our experience, even though no one thing continues. Moment after moment, sense experiences arise and pass. Each experience in each new moment arises conditioned by what was in the previous moment. This moment fades and conditions the following moment. In this way, the past makes its imprint on the present, and the present upon the future. No one thing lasts across the three times, from past to present to future. Nothing endures, but patterns are perpetuated as each moment “rubs up against” and conditions the next.
    According to the texts, this is what happens in rebirth also. When a being dies, there is some continuation of moment-to-moment experience during the time following death. That continuity of experience becomes linked to a new body, which becomes the previous being’s next birth. Nothing among the aggregates has endured, but some stream continues in a new channel, influenced by the old. This is the same way experience is happening for each of us right now. As expressed by Ajahn Amaro, the abbot of Amaravati Monastery in England, “The process of going from one life to the next is not very different from the process of going from one moment to the next in this life.”[7]
    The aggregate of consciousness plays a key role here. Consciousness is not lasting either, but rather arises and passes with each new moment of sense contact. So it is this impermanent consciousness that forms the link to the new life. In one discourse, the Buddha says that “the nutriment consciousness is a condition for the production of future renewed existence,” in other words, rebirth.[8]
    A few discourses discuss the process in more detail. In one, the Buddha says that “the conception of an embryo in a womb takes place through the union of three things: the union of the father and the mother, the mother’s season, and the being to be reborn.”[9] In another discourse, the Buddha explains the role of consciousness more clearly: “If consciousness were not to come into the mother’s womb, would name-and-form develop there?” A bhikkhu replies, “No, Lord.” “Therefore consciousness is the root, the cause, the origin, the condition of name-and-form.”[10] Name-and-form is the translation of nāmarūpa, which means the combination of material form — here meaning the new body — with the mental faculties that (eventually) allow one to name experience. Yet another discourse speaks of this moment as the “descent into the womb” of the future embryo.[11]
    Bhikkhu Bodhi summarizes it like this:
    It is the stream of consciousness coming from the preceding existence that functions as the nutriment consciousness by generating, at the moment of conception, the initial rebirth-consciousness, which in turn brings forth . . . name-and-form.[12]
    The new life is influenced in both outer circumstances and inner disposition by the prior being’s karma. Outwardly, the circumstances of the new being will be determined in some ways — though not necessarily in every way — by the being’s prior karma, as outlined in the discourse cited above on the karmic causes for abundance and health. Inwardly, the character and spiritual temperament of the new being are influenced by the prior being’s character development, as outlined in that discourse on the karmic cause for wisdom. In the story of the Buddha himself, it took many lifetimes for him to develop and perfect — to accumulate — all the wholesome qualities required to reach awakening under his own guidance. Collectively these qualities are known as the perfections (Pali: pāramī). In the Theravadan tradition they are ten in number: generosity, virtue, renunciation, wisdom, energy, patience, truthfulness, determination, loving-kindness, and equanimity. Similarly our journey to awakening may take many lifetimes, but we are advancing all the time, in every life, in which we conscientiously develop the perfections.
    How long is the gap between a person’s death and the conception moment of their next rebirth? The Buddha didn’t answer this question directly, but there are hints in the Pali Discourses that the “being to be reborn” may refer to an interim form of existence that could last for an unspecified time.[13] The Theravadan Abhidhamma posits that there is not even a moment’s gap between death and the next conception. Perhaps the Abhidhamma tenet was invented to support the view that consciousness cannot exist apart from a physical form — a view nowhere proclaimed by the Buddha. The Tibetan Book of the Dead says that the gap is typically around forty-nine days, although by tracking the deaths and subsequent rebirths of many Tibetan lamas, one can see a wide variation in this number.
    Could the terms death and rebirth mean just the moment-to-moment passing away of a temporary identity (for example, “I am cold”) and then rebecoming as a new identity in this life (“Now I am warm”)? According to the Pali Canon, the answer is no. The discourses define death as “perishing, breakup, disappearance, mortality, death, completion of time, the breakup of the aggregates, the laying down of the carcass.”14 They describe birth (and hence rebirth) as beings’ “being born, descent [into the womb], production, the manifestation of the aggregates, the obtaining of the sense bases.”15 Taken together, these passages clearly define birth as the taking up of a new physical body after a previous physical death (…)
    Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakosa has a more elaborate explanation regarding the process of rebirth. However if someone is interested in this topic from the perspective of direct experience, I recommend attempting to realize mutual interpenetration across space-time since it enables oneself to experience rebirth in real-time and access the ‘karmic chain’ of one’s existence.


  • Nafis Rahman
    Wikipedia has a basic overview as well:
    Karma and what gets reborn
    An important question which was debated by Indian Buddhist thinkers was the question of what exactly gets reborn, and how this is different from the Indian concept of an attā (ātman, unchanging self), which Buddhism rejects. The early Buddhist texts sometimes speak of an "evolving consciousness" (Pali: samvattanika viññana, M.1.256)[54] or a "stream of consciousness" (Pali: viññana sotam, D.3.105) as that which transmigrates. However, according to Bruce Matthews, "there is no single major systematic exposition on this subject" in the Pali Canon.[55][56]
    Some Buddhist scholars such as Buddhaghosa, held that the lack of an unchanging self (atman) does not mean that there is a lack of continuity in rebirth, since there is still a causal link between lives. The process of rebirth across different realms of existence was compared to how a flame is transferred from one candle to another.[57][58]
    Various Indian Buddhist schools like the Sautrantika, Mahasamghika and the Mahasisaka held that the karmic link between lives could be explained by how karmic effects arose out of "seeds" which were deposited in a mental substratum.[59] The Sautrantika Elder Srilata defended the theory of a "subsidiary element" (anudhatu or *purvanudhatu) which corresponds to the seed theory.[60] The Sautrantika school held this was a "transmigrating substratum of consciousness".[61] It argued that each personal action "perfumes" the individual stream of consciousness and leads to the planting of a seed that would later germinate as a good or bad karmic result. This allowed them to explain what underwent the process of rebirth.[62]
    The Sarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika school on the other hand did not make use of the seed theory, since they held an eternalist theory of time, which held that phenomena (dharmas) in the past, present and future exist. Because of this, they argued that after an action was done by a person, it still continued to exist, and to be in a state of "possession" (prāpti) vis a vis the mindstream (santana) of the person who performed the action. According to Vaibhāṣikas, it was this which guaranteed the capacity of past karma to produce an effect long after it had been performed.[63]
    The seed theory was defended by the influential Buddhist philosopher Vasubandhu in his Abhidharmakosha.[60] It is also present in the Viniscayasamgrahani of the Yogacarabhumi.[64] The Sarvastivada Abhidharma master Saṃghabhadra states that the seed theory was referred to by different names including: subsidiary elements (anudhatu), impressions (vasana); capability (samarthya), non-disappearance (avipranasa), or accumulation (upacaya).[60]
    The seed theory was adopted and further developed by the Yogacara school into their doctrine of the "container consciousness" (alaya-vijñana), which is a subliminal and constantly changing stream of consciousness that stores the seeds and undergoes rebirth.[62][53] Asanga's Mahāyānasaṃgraha equated the alaya-vijñana with similar teachings found in other Buddhist schools which indicates that the idea of a rebirth consciousness was widespread. He states that this is the same idea which is called "root-consciousness" (mula-vijñana) by the Mahasamghika schools and what the Sthavira schools call the bhavaṅga.[65]
    According to Lobsang Dargyay, the Prāsaṇgika branch of the Madhyamaka school (which is exemplified by the philosopher Chandrakirti), attempted to refute every concept for a support or a storehouse of karmic information (including the alaya-vijñana). Instead, some Prāsaṇgika philosophers argue that a karmic action results in a potential which will ripen later. This potential is not a thing and does not need a support. However, other Madhyamaka thinkers (which are classified as "Svatantrikas" by Tibetans scholars), generally adopted the Sautrantika concept of tendencies stored in the stream of consciousness.[62]
    The Theravāda school's doctrine of the bhavaṅga (Pali, "ground of becoming", "condition for existence") is another theory that was used to explain rebirth. It is seen as a mental process which conditions the next mental process at the moment of death and rebirth (though it does not actually travel in between lives, see below).[66]
    The Pudgalavada school of early Buddhism accepted the core premise of Buddhism that there is no ātman, but asserted that there is a "personal entity" (pudgala, puggala) that retains karmic merit and undergoes rebirth. This personal entity was held to be neither different nor identical to the five aggregates (skandhas).[67] This concept was attacked by Theravada Buddhists in the early 1st millennium CE.[67] The personal entity concept was rejected by the mid-1st millennium CE Pali scholar Buddhaghosa, who attempted to explain rebirth mechanism with "rebirth-linking consciousness" (patisandhi-citta).[67][68] It was also criticized by northern Buddhist philosophers like Vasubandhu.
    Rebirth (Buddhism) - Wikipedia
    EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG
    Rebirth (Buddhism) - Wikipedia
    Rebirth (Buddhism) - Wikipedia








  • Robert Dominik Tkanka
    🌊♒️🌊♒️🌊♒️🌊♒️🌊♒️🌊♒️🌊
    🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵➡️🁵
    🕯🔥🕯🔥🕯🔥🕯🔥🕯🔥🕯🔥🕯🔥*
    You see continuity?
    What is continued?
    Same self?
    Continuity doesnt mean that a self is continued. Just the next chain in dependent origination arising in dependence of the previous one.
    *traditional examples:
    - One candle lighting another one. Its not the same flame but there is continuity.
    - One wave arising after another one
    *nontraditional
    - added domino
    - You can add game of pool, one 🎱 hitting another ball making it move
    - animation - if You quickly go through a series of drawings, they might make an illusion of continuity, it might look like there is the same body moving from frame to frame
    - display screens - You can see some pixels points going off and some lighting on next to them, giving the impression of one object moving from one place to another
    Etc.

    • Reply
    • 3d
    • Edited

    Yin Ling
    Robert Dominik Tkanka very good examples too.
    Buddha has used flame 🔥 traditionally.
    When I spoke to my partner ytd ( he heard this Q on a podcast and asked me), I used the example rainbow.








  • John Tan
    Jean-Sebastien Thorn summer does not become winter likewise a vision-consciousness does not become sound-consciousness. The fact that Buddha taught six stream of consciousness originating dependently is cut the mind from seeing "this" has transformed to "that".
    The inherent mind cannot see dependent arising in proper so when it is taught, it is misunderstood. For example, when it is taught that dependent on causes and conditions or on parts, the inherent mind sees origination and production but the intended purpose of Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, Tsongkhapa is to demonstrate the opposite, that is:
    Dependency on causes and conditions is EQUIVALENT to saying no production, no cessation, no coming and no going.
    So instead of seeing "this" is transformed to "that", we see dependent arising -- non-origination, does not arise, abide or cease. Sim Pern Chong learn to see this then the chain is cut.🤣

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited

    William Lim
    John Tan to see dependent origination "properly" (without inherency) is to see non-arising and non-cessation?

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited

  • Jean-Sebastien Thorn
    John Tan in accord with what you said, do I have a right view seeing it as a seeming transforming continuum of empty clarity that does not see origination, production and cessation, no coming and no going? At that point maybe one can see that the six stream of consciousness is conceptual, every sense is also conceptual, and that it is in actuality empty clarity that is being experienced that does not originate, come or go ?

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited



  • John Tan
    Jean-Sebastien Thorn I understand what u said and there is nothing wrong with it except that from the perspective of grasping, there is still remainder and not thorough from my experience.
    But that is just how insights unfold for me, from anatta to dependent-arising and emptiness to freedom from all elaborations to spontaneous perfection, I try not to "bypass" the in-between insights. Also anatta and dependent arising have special meaning to me, so I tend to over emphasize...🤪.

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited

  • Jean-Sebastien Thorn
    John Tan yes and to add a bit to my last reply, as well as this is seen, I really do enjoy my cup of coffee and this precious family life here 😆. Maybe I’m not familiar with the terms of spontaneous perfection but freedom from all elaboration speaks to me. So really it’s a love for the width, layers and no layers of what is this. 😄

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited

  • John Tan
    Jean-Sebastien Thorn you hold the cup, I taste the coffee. I hit the bell, you hear the sound. When there is no essence that connects, everything "connects" wondrously and miraculously. Enjoy the ride and nice chat!😁

    • Reply
    • 2d
    • Edited

  • Jean-Sebastien Thorn
    John Tan thanks so much for the nice chat! ☕️🔔
    🏄‍♂️🌊


  • Sim Pern Chong
    John Tan Thanks so much John 😁


  • Yin Ling
    Thanks! Best answer for the question above 😁
    If dependent origination is seen clearly, the rebirth cycle is cut. Birth and death also is transcended. Hence replacing the framework thoroughly with dependent arising / emptiness of inherent existence / no-self is they key to understand rebirth (or not).








  • Alan Smith
    Is there a need to explain anymore really? Maybe now there is relaxing into the curiosity. This wonderful curiosity.

  • Reply
  • 1d
0 Responses