The undetermined problem of Rebirth

The undetermined problem of Rebirth

        The problem about former life, future life or reincarnation is still a controversial question among Thai Buddhist who cling to their self belief often ask that - " Will we be reborn after we die ? "

         Even if someone asked this question directly to Lord Buddha, you would not get a straight " yes " or " no " answer. The Blessed One considered such a question as nonsense and regarded as a non predicted question because it is not related to attain the ultimate truth. It is not compiled with the law of causality, in which explained in the dependent origination.

         Buddhadasa Bhikku, the late venerable monk explained that, generally the Buddha's answer would depend on the level of individual comprehension of Dhamma. The Buddha never directly said whether or not reincarnation exists. Instead, the Blessed One would ask the questioner if believing in rebirth would be beneficial to them and then let them merely decide the answer for themselves.



         On the mundane moral level, a belief in rebirth is better for both individuals and society as it encourage people to do good in their current life for fear paying for their misdeeds in their future life. Contrarily, the belief that one has only one life to live, accounts for much hedonism, selfishness and exploitation which may lead to the present moral decline.

          Phra Dhammapitaka [ P.A. Payutto ], a respected venerable scholar agrees with this idea. His view is that " The belief of rebirth and other lifetimes enable us to realize the law of Impermanence which helps us to ease our own attachment and greed. It also enables us to see others as friends i the cycle of lifetimes, to see all beings are interrelated, which leads us to the sense of compassion. "

          On the super mundane or the ultimate reality, Buddhism teaches that no self exists but there is only an endless and ever changing stream of interdependent elements, including one's mind and thoughts. One who beliefs in future life will attach to self that creates selfishness, exploitation, oppression. If he has the right way. Also Buddhadasa Bhikku states that the belief in rebirth or reincarnation existed long in the Uppanisadic concept before the advent of Buddhism. The Buddha faced dilemma of how to tackle this issue by looking at whether or not he should dismantle the old belief and replace it with a new teaching of non - self.

          " Since people are different, the Buddha concluded that there should be different teaching that are appropriate to different groups, while most people still can not grasp the rather abstract notion of non - self, so that they embrace the belief of reincarnation to be better on the safe side. "

         However, this question is still controversial among people who cling to the Atman's point of view, regarding to the rebirth of consciousness that accumulated the result of karma. If this type of consciousness is rebirth after death, so is the consciousness of ordinary person reborn forever ? If it is so, as we, the ordinary persons can understand, where is the place that consciousness is reborn ? How does it make the theory of Anatta possible ? Unless the rebirth of consciousness as mentioned above is proclaimed in order to compromise with the law of Karma for the benefit of the Buddhist ethics. If so, may it say that the conception of consciousness in Buddhism is solely analogous to the theory of Uppanisadic - eternalistic philosophy ? And if this hypothesis is true, how could such doctrine be able to reconcile with the middle that the Buddhist theory of rebirth, is intended to retain or to compromise with the Uppanisadic concept of Soul, in order to make preaching of morality possible ? These are question that many people need an appropriate answer from any well intellect commentator.

          Since the solution of these undetermined question are related not only to the theory of Anatta but also to conception of consciousness, we shall first review the nature of thoughts between Buddhism and Uppanisadic concepts as follows :

          According to Buddhist philosophy, consciousness is without Self, Atman Soul or Ego. It is not self - consciousness, non - substantial and impermanent. It arise and perishes every moment therefore consciousness is momentary, instantaneous. Each moment of consciousness consist of there instants, namely ; genesis, development and dissolution, so it is not being in itself but a becoming. By nature is consciousness dependently originated. Moments of consciousness are causally related by way of contiguity, immediacy, and disappearance. The past moment of consciousness , on passing away, transmitted all its contents, including karma - energy to the present moment. The past and the present moments of consciousness are neither the same nor difference. Causal relations therefore effect the unity and continuity of consciousness. The rapid succession of conscious moments constitutes the stream of consciousness. This stream flows on without interruption. When man is in deep dreamless sleep, his consciousness subsides into the subconscious state. It is this state that accumulates the results of karma and is reborn after death. The sequence of rebirths or Samsara is cut off and free when consciousness realizes Nirvana. Before realizing Nirvana, consciousness is not free because its intention is Nirvana, consciousness is not free because its intention is determined by desire, like consciousness that belong to ordinary man. Consciousness will be free when desire is completely eradicated in the state of Nirvana. So when an Arahant dies, his body is broken, perception is stopped, all feeling are cooled, mental formations are clam down, consciousness  is not reborn, therefore, Nirvana is the cessation of Samsaric existence.

          If the terms - death and rebirth defined by means of such conventional truth, then the controversail problem will arise perennially and makes the doctrine of Anatta to be in deadlock. Here are the undetermined question.

          According to the Buddhist philosophy, the Buddha claims to have avoided the two extreme views, namely, eternalism and annihilationism. Unlike the eternalism such as Uppanisadic thinkers, the Buddha rejects the existence of permanent self. Unlike Ajita Keskampala, the Buddha rejects nihilistic view while the doctrine of karma accepts the concept of rebirth ? Many Buddhist newcomers raise these following questions :

          Does this middle position however constitute some major problems ? How can one reconcile the Anatta doctrine that denies the permanent self with the doctrine of kamma and rebirth, which seems to presuppose the identity and the continuity of the person ? It is possible to talk of personal identity and unity of consciousness without  recourse to the notion of permanent self ? Does the concept of kamma and rebirth merely make the Buddhist ethics possible ?

          Like the idea of Emmanuel Kant he says :

          " So far it is still doubtful whether the transcendental ego is immortal or not, and as far as the immortality of the soul is concerned, I has no theoretical proof of it, yet I have to postulate the immortality in order to make morality possible. "

           Also Sartre, who rejects the permanent self, and does not believe in rebirth. Death for Sartre is " The nihilation of all my possibilities, hence rebirth of consciousness is impossible. "

           Sartre says that " Each life is complete in itself, it is a unique life, that is, a life which does not begin again, a life in which one never recovers his stroke. "

          Sartre assumes that there is no rebirth because he can not find a reason for it. According to Sartre, how consciousness is born from a particular embryo is a metaphysical problem, and this problem perhaps insoluble. Therefore Sartre's viewpoint is annilhilationist, according to Buddhist concept. To this question, according to Buddhaghosa's idea, he explains that :

          " The life of living beings lasts only for single conscious moment in our daily life is applied to the dissolution of body and rebirth into the next life. Just as the present conscious moment is the result of the preceding conscious moment. "

          Anyway, this explained is not clear for not only the Buddhist newcomer but also many Buddhist monks. The content insides the following article, quoted some part from the book " Good and Evil and the Law of kamma " written by Phra Dhammapitaka, is the best answer to clarify such controversial questions.





By THE BUDDHA'S Core Teachings