Quickie ? about rebirth

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
[N.B. This is the forum that was called ‘Exploring Buddhism’. The new name simply describes it better.]
Post Reply
User avatar
Rick
Posts: 1547
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Rick » Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:40 pm

Can 2+ substrate consciousnesses "merge together" in a rebirth, like multiple flames lighting one candle? Or is it always one flame to one candle?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

Seeker12
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:54 pm

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Seeker12 » Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:05 pm

According to Malcolm in a recent reply, Dharmakirti argues strongly for mindstreams being distinct. (EDIT: "Dharmakiriti makes strong arguments defending the idea that mind streams are separate and unique.") I do not know the source for that, though, and I don't know how to summon someone on dharmawheel. Maybe he'll show up and explain further.

This was from page 4 of the soul fragmentation thread on the Mahayana board - in general, you might check out that thread, as it's basically the same principle as what you're asking just in reverse.

User avatar
Rick
Posts: 1547
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Rick » Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:31 pm

Thanks! :-)
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:09 pm

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:53 pm

19:03

But this is not the only explanation.

It could also be some sort of psychic effect, which would not mean that they actually lived the past life.

20:05




:anjali:
I participate in this forum using Google Translator. https://translate.google.com.br/

http://www.acessoaoinsight.net/

muni
Posts: 4303
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by muni » Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:03 am

Interesting posts.
I understand Dharmakirti as Malcolm mentioned, that in that way, we our responsible for our own actions/purification.

Then by a reflection, how, since being a conditioning of stream, can it be exactly ‘one’ ( locked as one) as karma are as well interactions, and like Mathieu Ricard explains there is no thread in between the beads? How about the interactive dependency and shared phenomena? As for example some “beings/energy” have strong karmic connections with each other and other not.

The stream of consciousness is not having a thread is perhaps as “we” is constantly change, this in experiences of time, situation, interactions, circumstances; in short all dependent on causes and condition, because the stream is conditioned.
First of all, it's important to understand that what's called reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the transmigration of some ‟entity” like an autonomous "self". It's not a process of metempsychosis. As long as one thinks in terms of entities rather than function and continuity of experience, it's impossible to understand the Buddhist concept of rebirth. As it's said, ‟There is no thread passing through the beads of the necklace of rebirths.” Over successive rebirths, what is maintained is not the identity of a ‟person,” but the conditioning of a stream of consciousness.
Buddha said all is empty like my brain.
Let’s make a selfie!

Having meditated on love and compassion, I forgot the difference between myself and others. Yogi Milarepa.

User avatar
Rick
Posts: 1547
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Rick » Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:21 pm

Yes, dependent arising guarantees that what passes on is not "the individual" ... indeed there IS no (inherently existing) individual.

But I'm talking about the mechanics of rebirth, specifically of the alaya vijnana's role in it. My particular alaya vijnana is specific to me, yours to you, etc. (Right?) So when you die and your alaya vijnana moves on and "attaches" to another sentient being at that being's conception, does it sometimes happen that another alaya vijnana attaches with yours? Or 2+ others? It's like twins/triplets/+ in reverse!
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

Seeker12
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:54 pm

Re: Quickie ? about rebirth

Post by Seeker12 » Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:19 pm

Rick wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:21 pm
Yes, dependent arising guarantees that what passes on is not "the individual" ... indeed there IS no (inherently existing) individual.

But I'm talking about the mechanics of rebirth, specifically of the alaya vijnana's role in it. My particular alaya vijnana is specific to me, yours to you, etc. (Right?) So when you die and your alaya vijnana moves on and "attaches" to another sentient being at that being's conception, does it sometimes happen that another alaya vijnana attaches with yours? Or 2+ others? It's like twins/triplets/+ in reverse!
In general, I think people get into wordplay a lot.

IMO, which is probably unpopular, you could potentially say that there is a soul, but with the understanding that it is not actually ultimately established as inherently existent or an ultimate self.

What I mean is that you could argue that until samyaksambuddhahood, there is a karmic pattern of apparent continuity of being-ness that occurs and is taken to be real, but ultimately it is not 'real' in the sense of being truly inherently existent - it is relative.

As such, if you think that there is a truly established soul that is ultimately existent, this is mistaken. However, if you understand that this 'soul', so to speak, or mindstream, or alaya, is a relative phenomena that has some merit on the relative level but is not ultimately established as being inherently real, then to a certain degree you can understand that on the level of the relative there is a certain karmic pattern of identification which continues until Buddhahood which is mistaken to be an existent self or soul.

I believe that at the first Bhumi, it is seen that nothing within the 'content' of this mindstream is an established self, but there still is a sort of ... river. A river appears to be consistent although the content of the river is always changing - this river is, perhaps, the being-ness or deeper pattern of I-making that occurs rather than a specific dharma or object which is thought to be a self.

But ultimately, this also isn't fully established, just like if I am talking to my son and I talk about our neighbor, our neighbor is not ultimately established as inherently existent.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests