🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂 📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
SORRY DOUG'S DHARMA... I CAN NO LONGER BE ABLE TO READ, I AM ALMOST 80 YEARS OLD ONLY I CAN ENJOY AND STUDY MY BUDDHISM BY LISTENING YOUR VIDEOS...I AM A LOW INCOME LIVING UNDER SECTION 8. I ALSO USED AUDIBOOKS FREE,
Yes this is often a question that comes up. A beautiful quote: "Form is the wave, Emptiness is the water." There is no-self means that the wave does not actually exist as a separate permanent independent entity but rather is co-exists with all of the ocean. The water and the wave inter-are. It is only because of our miss-understanding that we think of ourself as a wave, we have always been the sea. When we are "reborn" it is because we still have this miss-understanding, thinking we are a wave again. Only once we reach enlightenment we realize we have always been the water and thus we wont be born as a wave again, because we became the ocean.
Nein, wir sind ein Lebewesen - für immer im Kampf mit Schwierigkeiten und Zielen, aber wenn wir einsehen, dass wir unzerstörbar und vollkommen sind, machen wir uns keine unnötigen Sorgen mehr.
The way I've heard it explained is that consciousness is like a flame, passed from one candle to another. The flame is originally ignited by causes and conditions, continues through causes and conditions and eventually gets snuffed out. That's literally what nirvana means, extinguished. The flame obviously exists, but is constantly changing, so it's not the "same" flame from one moment to the next. Real "Ship of Theseus" vibes.
My response is to Duke Banerjee:I think that most of what you said is correct except that part, where you said that nirvana is the extinguishing of the flame, as if it is snuffed out. My understanding was that there is no extinguishing of the flame, and our consciousness is just liberated of all duality, of thirst to go on. It is like our consciousness is of samsara, with concepts of duality and self etc. When the consciousness is liberated from such false concepts then nirvana is experienced, so there is no need for the flame to be extinguished. Then in nirvana things will be seen in the correct perspective. I may not have been able to explain very clearly because to be able to express such profound concepts will be beyond words or human expression.I also sincerely apologize if my understanding is wrong, but I am hopeful that we can all learn from each other.
@@DougsDharma yes, of the craving, the thirst, but does it mean of the consciousness itself, or the consciousness gets enlightened. The flame of thirst ends, so that there is no longer any need for rebirth, to continue the samsara?
I love what Alan Watts taught about rebirth. My paraphrase is that life is like the waves in an ocean. We are each a wave that eventually crashes on the shore of a beach (death). New waves are forming out in the ocean (birth) that will also eventually reach the beach. Did the waves that crashed on a beach were necessary for the new waves to form out in the ocean? Yes. Are the waves that crash the same as the waves that newly formed? No. They are fundamentally different, yet they both are similar forms that are contingent upon one another. We couldn't be here and survive on the resources of this world without the effects of past generations who brought us into being. Everything is changing and contingent upon prior events.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
This reminds me of wave particle duality in physics. We are both wave and ocean. The aggregates form the particle of ego via a stream of causes and conditions but also the ocean.
@@jeffforsythe9514 This is a Buddhist discussion. Not that your perspective is invalid, but it's definitely off topic as it's not a Buddhist perspective. Peace 🙏☯️✌️
Perfectly put. The wave is part of the ocean, and the ocean continues to create more waves after other waves are gone. While each wave is distinct, they are all ultimately part of the same ocean and therefore intimately connected. Old waves crash on the beach and are no more (or no longer waves, but they're water returns to the ocean), but the new waves, while also distinct, are from the same source and return to the same source, and ultimately are all inseparable parts of the same ocean. A perfect analogy of reincarnation.
I’m so happy to see that you’ve covered this! It’s a question I’ve asked many times since beginning my practice. Looking forward to hearing your explanation!
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
@jeffforsythe9514 Hell is, just like heaven, something felt by the living. Torturing yourself with guilt is hell. Hatred is hell. Self-pity is hell. Greed and intense unfulfilled desires are hell.
Once again ... a very insightful post. After 30+ years on the path I find myself still struggling to learn and understand at times. The way you explain the more complex tenants is unparalleled, in my humble experience. Gassho Sensei
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
9:36 Yes Doug. See, so many today MISS the fact that so much of the Buddha's teaching was INTENTIONALLY made to be the opposite (or to contradict) the current CULTURAL and SOCIAL RELIGIOUS teachings of his time (because the CULTURE of Siddhartha's time was an OUTGROWTH of the Hindu religious philosophy of his time). If you don't want a Caste System, you need to set up a NEW RELIGIOUS teaching that dismantles it outright. Ergo: The Caste System grew out of the Vedanta or Brahminic Traditions, so the Buddha HAD to come up with a teaching that was contra to its teachings - no "permanent" Self, Anatman, but - rather - a Self that was original, new with each incarnation, FREE to change, unhindered and UNBOUND by the CULTURE or the SOCIAL norms, not locked into anything (even its own karma, which could be/can be "burned up" and gotten rid of as we know). HOWEVER - What transmigrates from lifetime to lifetime? Simple: Individual Consciousness rooted in Buddha-Nature (which is the indestructible Tathagata in us all!). That "Consciousness" is not the "Self" per se, but the sum total of awareness and experience for the Sentient Being (of which the Ego/Persona or Self is merely a part). "Consciousness" is that which travels in-between lifetimes as the original Sentient Being, but is re-created into a new Ego/Persona with each new incarnation. Do you see the beauty of this? I usually like to think of it as there being a permanent "Higher Self" (Buddha-Nature unique to each person) that is almost abstract, that is "transpersonal", that acts like a personal "hall of records" or "Akashic Records" of incarnational experience and wisdom (if you will), that lives in the Causal Body (gives us true Divine Wisdom or "Prajna" and Superconscious potential). Then, in addition to that, there is an impermanent "Lower Self" that is created anew with each incarnation that makes up the Mental Body, Astral Body, Etheric Body, and Physical Body (these are terms used in Esoteric Buddhism and Occultism of the Western Esoteric Tradition to describe the lower incarnational vehicles or sheaths). With THIS idea, you get to keep a continuing "Higher Self" and use the "Lower Self" as the Anatman part which is NOT permanent; the "Lower Self" is the one made of up the 5 Skandhas, with Consciousness (Chitta or Vijnana extending to the Causal Body where the faculty of "Buddhi" or Buddha Nature exists). ALSO, the Buddha's teaching on Emptiness is a similar slap in the face to the Brahmins, in that, their idea of Brahman was rooted in the idea of "Brahum" or FULLNESS. So the Buddha just "replaced" that with Sunyata or EMPTINESS. It's like I joke to myself, to the Hindus, the Glass is HALF FULL, whereas to the Buddhists, the Glass is HALF EMPTY. They are BOTH right. Therefore, much of what the Buddha taught was done ON PURPOSE to separate his movement from the Hinduism of his time. He could say to the Brahmins of his time, "There is nothing special about your Aristocrats! You are the same as any other Sentient Being. The Caste System is a lie." It's also the reason the Buddha denied the existence of a creator god, it's another "separation device" and an attack on Hindu theology. Keep that in mind and it will all make sense. ;o) - Namaste! - Bodhi John, USA, 25+ Year Practitioner of Esoteric Buddhism and Raja Yoga.
Very clear explanation. What people often don't realise is that, to the Buddha, Vinnana (or consciousness) is one of the five aggregates that make the self - it’s a process, not a ‘thing’. Consciousness is always a consciousness ‘of’.
Beautiful teaching on this one Doug, happy to have found this channel. Just had this conversation yesterday, everyday we die and are reborn and its not that big of a deal as some have made it to be. It is the reason why there is no permanent self, since people are coming and going all the time. It's why true close friends until the grave are so rare, because people are always changing like dumping a bucket into a stream and trying to follow it.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
I am a Ch'an Buddhist priest. The aggregate self you describe is not the true self. It is always changing and impermanent, and we often mistake that illusory self as the Self. That is what Buddhism means by there is no self. The self we perceive as being us doesn't exist. From a Ch'an perspective, we are all the Universe manifest, educating, entertaining & exploring itself. The true Self is on one hand the Universal consciousness, and on another hand beyond all conceptual understanding. That is what is reborn. The Universe continues manifesting life and consciousness after our limited consciousness and false identity are long gone. As Alan Watts so eloquently puts it, "Whenever someone dies, others are born, and they are all you."
Well, anyone perceiving the "TRUE SELF" within Citta, is simply unaware it is the fetter of self view they are perceiving. Any "self" doesnt exist.. Citta is empty... it is not the true self at all, perceiving self here is the fetter of self view and it is no different from the hindu belief, but they just dont see that.
"The aggregate self you describe is not the true self" The aggregate self is the only self you have got. You are a manifestation of the All, a mere part of the All. "It is always changing and impermanent" Exactly. You are always changing and impermanent. ". . . and we often mistake that illusory self as the Self The changing and impermanent self is not illusory. It is absolutely real. It really is changing and impermanent.
I've always liked the analogy put forward by Francis Story: Imagine a pool/billiard table. When you strike a ball it moves forward (birth/life) when it strikes another ball (death) the ball that was struck now moves forward. There is nothing of the first ball in the second - however without the first ball striking it the second ball cannot move forward. In other words the second ball is dependent on the first.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
@@jeffforsythe9514 When you write "We all have a primordial soul which is immortal" you are going against basic Buddhist doctrine. Anattā is a term that refers to the central Buddhist concept that there is no phenomenon that has "self" or essence. That is to say, there is no "soul" let alone an immortal soul.
Hello and Namasthe! As to the word "Gandhabbha:" it is the Pali version of the Sanskrit Gandharva, pronounced Gaandharva. Those are celestial beings like nymphs, fairies and such. Indeed, a man once asked the Buddha whether he was a God or a Gandharva or a man. Buddha replied that he was awake, a Buddha. Buddhi is often used in Sanskrit to denote intellect and therefore, one who is endowed with Buddhi, is a Buddha. In Sanskrit, the "Soul" is called the Atman (pronounced Aathmun; no it does not rhyme with Batman!) :) Buddhism is said to teach the belief of Anatta, or Anatman (a-naathmun or no-atman) but the Buddha NEVER DID CATEGORICALLY STATE it as such; his followers decided they didn't believe in the Brahmin concept of the Atman!. Anyhow, I wrote this in a book I wrote about 18 years ago: In Hinduism, the word Ätman refers to the immortal Soul. This excerpt from the book "The Buddha His Life Retold" by Robert Allen Mitchell shows the Buddha trying to avoid being pinned down to describing the “soul”: A wandering ascetic called Vacchagotra once approached the Buddha. “Venerable Gautama,” insisted Vacchagotra, “have you nothing to say about the existence of the soul? Does the soul exist?” At these words the Perfect One was silent. “How is it, Venerable Gautama? Is there no such thing as the soul?” The Perfect One was silent. Then Vacchagotra the wanderer rose up from his seat and went away in disgust. And not long after he was gone, the blessed Änanda said to the Perfect One: “How did it happen, Lord, that the Perfect One made no reply to the question asked by Vacchagotra, the wandering ascetic?” The Buddha answered: “If, Änanda, when asked ‘Does the soul exist?’ I had replied, ‘The soul exists,’ then that would be to side with those recluses and Brahmins who are eternalists. But if, when asked, ‘Then the soul does not exist?’ I had replied, ‘No, the soul does not exist,’ then that would be to side with those recluses and Brahmins who are nihilists. “Then again, Änanda, if when asked, ‘Does the soul exist?’ I had replied, ‘The soul exists,’ would that reply be consistent with my knowledge that all things are impermanent?” “No, Lord, it would not,” said Änanda. “Then again, Änanda, if when asked, ‘Then the soul does not exist?’ I had replied, ‘No, the soul does not exist,’ then that would have increased the bewilderment of Vacchagotra the wanderer, already bewildered. For he would have said, ‘Formerly I had a soul, but now I have a soul no more.’
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
What is self? Is it in physical form or is it in spiritual form? Is it because of Mind's holding element started to attach to external influences such as "Opinion, Lust, displease, anger, sadness, greed" and then form "ME" or "MY" over that emotions. It's mind's holding element attaches on to the five aggregates that caused all the sufferings. Elimination of mind's holding element is the Goal. How? In Dhammachuk sutta Aunyakotunya ( the first Buddhist monk) had enlightened himself by seeing the impermanent in one of the five aggregates " Anything that has a birth it will die naturally " while listening to the teaching of Buddha. That's normally a starting path of ending the mind's holding element. Seeing the moment mind's let go of matters. The holding element of mind will be eliminated totally or partially depends on the strength of one's own SATI. Mind's ability to hold on to matters would no longer possible without it's holding element present. Let alone to hold on to KARMA for reincarnation. Observing one's own mind's behavior during the day might be able to see the ending part of the attachment. Everything is moving starting from atomic level to earth, sun, solar system or milky Way Galaxy, black hole or even the whole universe. Holding on to matters is an act against the nature itself. The longer the holdings the more frequent the holdings the more severe mental illness it can become. That's my interpretation based on personal experienced.
Thanks as always Doug for the video. I think the last minute was most useful - we can choose to put to one side those aspects we find unhelpful, and move forward with the helpful aspects in our own lives.
Hey Doug! You’re such a light on peoples lives :) You know, I’ve been studying and I got to the same point of view as yours. To see that in this video of yours made me want to comment. I just started to study Buddhism and I know almost nothing, but it seems to me that our existence is made of matter (body) + mind/ consciousness + circumstances (causes and conditions, as you said) + essence of life (this fizzy foamy substance that animates all living beings); something like the 5 aggregates, I guess. Karma would be the impressions/ marks that we leave regarding how we temper with the circumstances of our lives (through our intentions/ consciousness), I believe. In that matter we can certainly influence the lives of others in the future, depending on how deep our impressions would be through our actions. Not by some spiritual line that pierces and connects our past lives and justifies our blessings or disgraces, but simply by the unfolding of collective actions. Since we cannot know by evidence the existence of rebirth and the perpetuation of a “formless self”, I agree it’s ok to leave it aside. I don’t think that will demerit the understanding of Buddha’s teachings in any way. Thank you for your efforts to teach us here on RUclips! I really appreciate it 🙏🏽🙏🏽🩵
Good of you to breach this topic . Reincarnation, Karma surviving our current life, The wheel of samsara , etc why is why i stopped calling myself a Buddhists . I've had so many discussions about it with different ' masters ' : ' what is it that re-incarnates ' Who ' created' this wheel ' etc. But (for me personally ) it's the reason why Buddhism is a religion. Re-incarnation is a Buddhist ' article of faith' . (almost ) every Buddhist master i talked with ended the discussion with something like ;:' The Buddha told us how he seen all his former lives , and how his path will liberate us from Dukha , the wheel of re-incarnating into samsara , we're bound by karma ' ....etc,etc. .I just don't see why i should blindly accept any such certainty about the 'afterlife ' as factual.
@@DougsDharma Yes , it's is obviously just my personal experience . I also realized that there are more then enough positive elements within Buddhism to use in daily life.
Conciousness doesnt arrive without a cause .. wow what a beautiful simple observation. I work in tech and ai and we are trying to mimick a machine that goes conscious.
It's such a perfect explanation that brightens my day. I have been having some lingering thoughts on this topic for quite some times. Thanks, Doug! May the light of Dhamma shine upon you day and night. 🙏
Very well-done Doug to pull together such a difficult subject. You see rebirth into future lives as speculative and I agree. What has puzzled me for a long time is that the Buddha was critical of those holding speculative views and yet rebirth must be the most speculative view of all.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
Thanks for this instructive vew of re-birth. I have no formal instruction in Buddhism , only what I have gleaned from the internet - such as your videos. I came to the conclusion early on that we all have the Buddha instint and originally came into this series of lives with different faults. In each life we have the opertunity to cleanse these faults until we reach perfection Nievana. I feel that if not a stream of concienceness we have a stream of values of carma. In other words in each life we add to our positive carma or add to our negative carma. The main thing that worries me is that there may be some heavy negative carma lurking in the background, waiting to pounce on me at any moment. Thanks again for your video. p.s. Do you think that, at the time of death, one could choose a place to be reborn? I didn't find budhism until I was sixty (I´m eighty six now). I would hate to be reborn in some country where Buddhism is unknown. Robert
The cells and atoms in the body are always changing being replaced. The illusion of permanence and the physical world may seem complex but it’s so simple it’s hard to understand
Agreed, I have read that book too. According to Analayo, in that book the Pali sutta's and parallel Chinese agamas in it, used as examples, the rebirth consciousness is formed with the volitional imprints (the second link of DO) providing much of the fuel needed. Then the craving link of DO, in particular, how strong the craving is at the time of death further fuels and influences the process of rebirth. How strong the volitional imprints are is what potentially allows for some people to be able to recall their past life. From this, there's no mistaking that the Buddha believed this is how rebirth occurs. Also, the rebirth consciousness is not the third DO link of consciousness. At least not totally. That consciousness is different than what is formed and called the 'rebirth' consciousness or the Gandhabba. The rebirth consciousness seems to be highly dependent on the 'strength' of the volitional imprint(s) collected during life, and not so much the other aspects of consciousness that are attained during life.
Very interesting and most enlightening. Thanks Doug for a well researched analysis of Non-self and Rebirth in line with what is recorded in the Nikaya. Sadhu sadhu sadhu...🙏🙏🙏
Thank you for addressing this question. I tried to find an answer many years ago (I thought I misunderstood or perhaps there was some explanation I hadn't heard. When I had ask the question of others (gurus, teachers and other buddhists) It was given inadequate explanations or was dismissed as not understanding (or being unenlightened). It was reassuring to hear how you had determined to deal with it in your life practice. I have never found the idea of rebirth from life to life compelling. Nor have I found the idea of any kind of consciousness as eternally persistent/present very compelling. Along with this kind of question is another one: If all is maya then whence comes any "thing" at all? If Brahma is one without a second then whence comes maya? I know this question is answered in the texts (Vedas), but I find the answers uncompelling as well. The only reason I don't dismiss it altogether is I find some of the ideas useful. I will be watching more of your videos to hopefully pick up a better understanding.
@@heinmolenaar6750 Been there done that and lots of others. But thanks for the suggestion. I found the Upanishads (trans. Swami Nikhilananda) came the closest to being able to help me grasp the nature of Brahma. I finally surrendered to what I did not know and accepted my fate (karma). This world is all I can be certain of - and in some sense - not even that. However, I do understand the transient nature of perception, experience, and that self-same understanding. Today I live the best I can to commit myself to what has presented itself. It would take pages to explain. But I will say this: I try to understand and not to think 'I know'. There are many who are sure, for me it has always been to move toward a better understanding. I have moved on from a spiritual walk...as per se, and moved toward a life of understanding, love, compassion. Not as a buddhist, but as myself. Thanks for reaching out I wish you well in your journey.
'rebirth' is a word referring to the final moment of mind in this life functioning as a cause for the first moment of mind of the next life in this way there is rebirth of a person, absent there being a person that can endure into the next moment through its own power
@@5piles great reply, much to think about here. Especially for the way I conceive of my self. As for any continuation beyond death, that is actually death - I cannot speculate, but our own transient nature as we go through our life - wow - there's much to contemplate here.
@@Summer-kb2dm just as there is law of conservation for mass-energy the same is true of subjectivity/mind. this is the whole point of buddhism and the other samadhi lineages. the point of meditation is to realize the nature of mind, discriminate the nature and status of samsara, and to unwind its causes that perpetuate the final moment of this life, just as any final moment of a physical object perpetuates. its not particularly difficult just need good teachers and to study the faults of physicalism. even pythagoras asserted remembering 20 of his previous lifetimes
From what I've heard and read from others who say they are more knowledgeable, the idea seems to be that there is a physical, though subtle, substance that consists consciousness, like how the substances of water, earth, fire, and air consist the elements of the same names. Well, I prefer not to get so caught up in these kind of debates. The way I see it, call it secularism or whatever you will, is that it requires a broadening of the sense of self. Perhaps it would be better to think of how we act with consideration of our future selves and/or other people -- our children, other family members, members of the same community, the human race at large, all living beings. We know that our consciousness is stuck flailing in the stream of existence, and that cessation of the stream is liberation (however you like to extend the metaphor eg. by stepping out of the stream to higher ground, damming or draining the stream, etc.) Therefore we must act in a way that conduces liberation for our future selves and similarly those that we love (which should be all living beings susceptible to the stream of existence). This involves learning the way of life that achieve liberation, but also teaching, supporting and otherwise paving the way for others to do the same. That is the Dharma in a nutshell to me. I don't see the need to debate metaphysics.
There are so much we can learn from the Buddha. It is surely true that there is no definite self that persist as "self" changes from moment to moment just like everything else. We've also learn from the Buddha that everything in our world is simply some concept that we come up with to serve some purpose(s). What we named "self" is simply a concept that serves some purpose like everything else that we give a name to. All purposes ultimately serve to benefit "oneself". In that sense, all concepts serve to satisfy oneself. Furthermore, our attachments are simply attachments to the concepts that we and our predecessors created. Without purposes, nothing exists as far as we are concerned. This does not mean that nothing exists. It means without serving any purposes for us, the existence of anything is simply meaningless and insignificant to us, thus their "non-existence'. When we see that something can be useful for us in some way, we find some purpose(s) for its existence, and that purpose materializes into a concept for that something, thus creating our own version of its existence. We can clearly see that every purpose and every concept we come up with simply serve our own interests and are highly superficial. It may be safe to think that the concept of “self” is the mother of all other concepts and purposes. When we see that purposes are superficial and temporary, we may be able to see that freeing ourselves from the concept of “self” frees us from all our attachments, thus allowing us to achieve “non-self”. However, even more important is that we must free ourselves from the concept of “non-self”. We may not be able to free ourselves from the concept of “self” if we are still attached to the concept of “non-self”
7:30 - curious to hear your take on psychological “temperament”, which is considered a relatively permanent mental state from youth to old age (eg phlegmatic, choleric). ~Patreon Tree donator (under another name), love your channel! 😊
There are aspects of personality that seem more or less continuous through life, but I think these are more like vague tendencies and preferences we have rather than anything very firm. In traditional Buddhism they would be considered part of our karmic baggage, nowadays we might also see them as driven by genetics or history. I've done a few related videos, such as a discussion of the unconscious, and personal continuity and karma. You can check them out in my playlist on self and non-self: ruclips.net/p/PL0akoU_OszRjA9n0-U24ZCpfEQVFxeGz2 . And thanks so much for your Patreon support! 🙏🙏
“It’s not that there’s literally no self. It’s rather that there is not permanent self.” At 7:53. As I understand it Doug, that’s not quite the whole story. The Three Marks of Existence include both Anicca/impermanence AND Anatta, which, while meaning non-self, is also has the connotation of “insubstantial”. Hence the Five Aggregates. Even in any single moment, there is no solid self. All that will be found on examination is the five aggregates. So in one way, you could call the whole cluster of them a self. But in another way, no, these are simply five different dependently arisen phenomena, none of which are you, are in some you, have some you in them, or belong to some kind of you. You will not find a solid substantial “I” even in a single moment. So whilst conventionally there is of course a self that persists through time, on deeper reflection, there is no permanent AND/OR substantial self.
I don’t think that is quite right. The Three Marks of Existence include both Anicca/impermanence AND Anatta, which, while meaning non-self, is also has the connotation of “insubstantial”. Hence the Five Aggregates. Even in any single moment, there is no solid self. All that will be found on examination is the five aggregates. So in one way, you could call the whole cluster of them a self. But in another way, no, these are simply five different dependently arisen phenomena, none of which are you, are in some you, have some you in them, or belong to some kind of you.
Thanks Doug for your video. Can I ask whether does the buddha preached universal conciousness which is never born or dies.My understanding is there should be because N.D.E people says they were concious after physical death for awhile before resuscitation. Thanks🙏
@@DougsDharma 🙏thanks alot Doug for your reply. My next question is if there is no permanent conciousness or awareness,how does karmic seeds retain its information from one birth to another.My guess is there must be a eternal field of conciousness(which is non-personal)or awareness as I learn from Ajahn Sumedho where he quoted a sutta where the buddha proclaimed that there is a realm of unborn, deathless realm in the here and now.🙏
People say all sorts of things & believe all sorts of things.nde is just like seeing the Virgin Mary ( she actually wasn’t) ; the church finally had to put a stop to it because literally 100s of people were seeing the Mother of Gd everywhere (actually it can’t have a mother then it wouldn’t be Gd would it?…
Well explained - really! In many of the Zen traditions and lineages overall - and I’m a Zen Buddhist - this is not dealt with clearly or well, or in an explicit fashion. Very helpful and a realistic approach.
I love the way Bhante Vimalaramsi suggests to translate the term Anatta in order to understand the dhamma in an esier way...He suggests to translate it as "impersonal" instead of "not self"....
Firstly thank you for this video. I have contemplated this question myself. I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself correctly here, but here goes....Do the notions of interbeing and emptiness suggest that streams of consciousness are not individual? Therefore, like a stream, could we be intermingled which would mean that what is reborn could be a mixture of different people or consciousnesses?
That isn't seen as a possibility in early Buddhism; one's karmic baggage is one's own to deal with. There may be some later schools in which karmic baggage becomes more diffuse but if so I'm not sure how really "intermingled" karma would be.
Yes these are important questions. I have a number of videos on the topic of personhood and personal continuity in my playlist on self and non-self. For example: ruclips.net/video/-ylkDiGgln8/видео.html
Hi Doug, I think any kind of aspiring consciousness whether be that of deva or brahma can attain human birth, not just gandhabba, the only condition is they must be higher or equivalent to humans in karma. Just like Buddha was a deva in Tusita devaloka, not a gandhabba as this has always been the case in Buddhism that beings from higher realms can willingly go to lower realms, but not possible vice versa. What do you think?
I have come to think of the solution as information. Our karma is information about the decisions we have made in the past, which influences our current habits and decisions. When we die this information is transferred to an new body much like a file is transferred from one computer to another. Nothing physical needs to go from place to place, just a change in the arrangement of matter. You hit in the key point about rebirth, it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not. It is not a requirement to believe in rebirth to be a Buddhist. If the thought helps a few people be nicer through moral dread, I see this as a good thing.
A great video! Would it be better to replace the phrase at 15:45 "consciousness coming and going" with "consciousness arising and ceasing", so as not to cause a mistaken idea that it is the same consciousness coming and going? I am listening to this Dhamma video a second time as i had encountered quite a few discussions on this topic where some termed it as 'no self', 'not self' and 'non-self'.
Yes different verbal nuances work for some and not for others. So find what works for you and feel free to “re-translate” into the phrases you find most congenial.
Thank you Doug! 🙏🙏🙏 To think about mind (consciousness) as a stream that is impermanent and dependent on causes and conditions opens up the possibility to understand why enlightenment and Buddhahood is possible at all. We know that enlightenment is described as liberation from birth and death (in the Sutras) which ties in neatly with the idea that consciousness (awareness) is not some permanent entity. We tend to think about life and death as two sides of reality, but from the point of view of us being a stream of an ever changing consciousness the duality of life/death get much more questionable, if not impossible. Maybe we can either say that there’s no birth/death at all, or we can say that the conscious experience is a never ending stream of deaths & rebirths, moment by moment. As I see it, this ties very well in with the general teachings by the Buddha on impermanence and interdependent origination as well. The transportation of karmic imprints in the stream of consciousness is an ‘expression’ of the stream still believing in its own existence. When the realization of the ‘non-self’ arises there’s no-one holding onto anything anymore and the vessel to hold karmic baggage is seen as non-existent. Karma can only be transported from one moment to the next by a mind not yet aware of its true nature. In fact, sentient beings are constantly involved in the futile endeavors of maintaining erroneous views of permanence, both on gross and subtle levels of existence. Karma becomes one of the buildings blocks in that endeavor. Since this process is not in accord with the true nature of reality beings expose themselves to all kinds of causes and conditions that leads to sufferings and miseries. Moreover, since beings persistently believes in permanence they also experience suffering and happiness to be real. That is what, in Buddhist terminology, is called Samsara. The question becomes; Can we still understand the Awareness of enlightenment as a stream? Since the qualities and abilities of a Buddha is said to be limitless, timeless and omnipresent the analogy of a ‘stream’ sounds somewhat limiting and has a connotation of duality attached to it, doesn’t it? The only way to find out is to follow in the footsteps of the Buddha, isn’t it?
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
Yes we can! Even Buddha entered paranarvana which is the timeless, ...... The mistake you are making is that the knowledge/wisdom of the buddha is timeless, .... However, the buddha was, meaning not eternal, not permanent, .....
Earth is punishment yet at the same time a school. If and when a human returns home to heaven, he or she will never look back at the countless times that they spent in this sewer..............falundafa
Huh. Oddly I found myself thinking about whether light is a particle or a wave. Many choose to be a particle where the Buddha implies we're a wave. And the form [of light] changes when one adds consciousness. Thank you, Doug, for bringing up this gut wrenching (do I really have a gut?) for me topic.☺
Thanks for your topic. As far as my understanding, "gandhaba" is like "Karmic energy" that carring some greed, ignorance and also carring many Karma (volitional action). Volitional action leads to rebirth consciousness. When it meets to zygote (biology term), it become mind and matter ( Nama Rupa). Therefore, at this point, I would say " gandhaba (no self) = consciousness = Karmic energy. Many buddhists cannot answer that question but it is important and difficult one.
In 1997 I asked a Soto Zen monk this exact question. He said honestly and truthfully 'I don't know, I've often wondered that myself'. Theology I found in zazen since that year 1997 failed me utterly to understand what is reborn. Only practice showed me through multiple past life experiences. I eventually settled on the Shingon path, as Shingon affirms the 'self'. As have my own experiences in training.
I've found a benefit understanding rebirth as what it feels like day to day or sometimes moment to moment, rather than lifetime to lifetime. Each day, you wake up and have a set of memories and tasks that are slightly or drastically different from the previous day and are affected by the actions you took then. Super interesting to consider the way they made it work literally as being born multiple times in early Buddhism. Thanks for another great one, Doug.
I've have translated the same ideas into this as well: I am continually reborn as myself carrying with me all that I have said and done up to this moment: This is my karma. Our resistance to our karma binds us to it and limits our freedom to be who we are. While I no longer consider myself a buddhist - I still find this way of thinking about myself very freeing. I have much I could say about the practice of "my life," but unfortunately it would go on for pages. Let me say this about it though: I seek to understand and not to say, "I know". For me it is a journey (a journey through this life) to merely understand what has been presented to me (to understand my karma so to speak).
i am new to Buddhism and have a question: If all life is a result of rebirth, how did the first life form originate? How did this constantly changing self, this steam come to exist in first place? Did it simply "spawn" on Earth? very good video by the way
Thanks! In Buddhism (as in all Indian religions) there was never a "first life": all of reality has always been here, or at least so far as we know this is the case. The Buddha talks of "beginningless lifetimes". Within this endless past and future there have been and will be infinite universes coming and going, creations and destructions. That's the picture. As for life on earth in particular, that's largely left unexplained: obviously the Buddha didn't know what we do about the creation of the solar system. The Buddha however did provide a kind of creation myth, that I did a video on awhile back: ruclips.net/video/Vtt9q1V-kAo/видео.html
@@DougsDharma, aren't you speaking of Sarvastivada's language? The Agganna Sutta, in Digh Nikaya, says life came to the Earth from Abhasssar. But was it really life? Can life sustain only on photons. Besides, it was only mind made. Does it support Panspermia Theory? Buddha says the universe goes through periodic cycle of contraction and expansion in aeons. So in that condition where the life can sustain? If life was always there then it is certainly problematic to Anicca concept. Only Nibbana is permanent not life or sankhara or matter and mind. I think Pali canon does give direct answer to this question.
Newbie Zen practitioner here. If there is no continuous "you", no "you" that realizes or is aware of a connection to a "you" of a previous life, why should we even care about rebirth? If this nexus of causes and conditions that identifies as Rob W is going to dissipate after it dies, except for some fuzzy bit of consciousness that carries on and becomes part of another nexus of causes and conditions that does not identify in the least bit as the nexus that identified as Rob W, again, why should we care about rebirth? I'm probably asking this rather crudely, and I apologize for that, but this is something I think about a lot. I can certainly see how rebirth and karma can be re-framed as happening within the confines of this life, but if the "thing" being reborn is not at all "me"....
I have come to interpret the concept of "no self" this way: The self - the entity or being that is our animating essence, our self - does not exist in any sense in the physical world. The self has no location, it has no form, and by extension has no time. But it still exists - I still exist - identified in this life by the physical form I occupy. When this physical form dies, the self - the "I' - can be reborn or not. It is not likely a conscious, managed decision, at least not at lower levels of awareness. The self is not the mind, although the mind and associated consciousness could be considered to be part of the self, the aggregate experiential path of the self. This viewpoint makes sense to me and resolves the seeming conundrum of a "no self" being reborn.
Great video Doug! I’m having a hard time with multiple consciousnesses because if this is the case then it seems there would be many more consciousnesses including one for each eye or ear, or how about even more consciousnesses for every pitch of sound or color, etc.. I think of consciousness as a central cpu that receives all the info from the 6 senses then projects a hologram of me to the world. It comes with a base program but the programmer continually adds and changes programs until it finally loses its job and we are awakened. 🙏🏽
We tend to think of consciousness as a kind of unifying principle of the mind. This is one picture we get of it in the Upaniṣads, and the Buddha did not agree. Perhaps he might allow more consciousnesses than six, but at least he said there were six.
There is a very clear contradiction. In the first part the real self is the "locust of perfect control" , "permanent". However, in the second part it is admitted that even in the original Buddha meaning, the self is a stream, ever-changing, nothing like a "permanent locust of self control".
I think some people mistake the idea of "universal consciousness" (like a permanent one) with entropy--not the everyday order-into-chaos entropy but thermodynamic entropy of energy going from a "pure" state to a fragmented and dispersed state. Similar to the misconception of the earth "using up" energy. It doesn't use up energy, it disperses it into fragmented units (sun light--> vegitation--> animal food--> other animals' food--> decomposition, etc.). I think of consciousness as just the brain braining but maybe that's on oversimplification.
how i interpret rebirth: karma means action, a 'quality' is the consolidation of repeated action. It is a being's qualities that is reborn; their tendency to act.
Gautama apparently met people spiritually 'where they were' - and in his case it was always from within a Vedic cultural context (where caste system relied on rebirth), right? So Gautama having been indoctrinated with the Vedas, and the people he was teaching having also been indoctrinated, no doubt it made sense to speak and teach from within that framework. And yet, when he reached the 4th jhana, or whatever highly penetrative state, it seems he 'saw' his Vedic cultural conditioning on all his rebirths for what it was, and eventually ESCAPED that cultural conditioning in order to enter his Nirvana. Thus, Gautama emitted the lions roar and announced: "I am liberated - FREE" - free from the shackles of his Vedic cultural conditioning, and thus finally accessing nature's truth directly. All of this seems to match what is put forth in the suttas 🙏.
The suttas do not appear to be logical accounts of universal laws in the way that Heraclitus' Fragments intend to be. Rather, they seem to be records of localised teachings - local to Vedic culture, and thus generally applicable only within that cultural framework - and especially when it comes to the idea of emerging out of Vedic rebirth/caste attachment. I think this is where most arguments regarding Buddhist rebirth stem from - from the Western assumption that Buddhist teachings were intended to be 'universal' - to be applicable beyond the borders of Vedic culture.
@@DougsDharma But was the Buddha even aware of non-Vedic cultural leanings? 🤔. Ionia, etc., in the Mediterranean region seemed to take on board that there are going to be various cultures from all over the place mixing, debating, and so on. Is there any evidence in Buddhist suttas that people from outside of Vedic culture were meeting and discussing with the Buddha or his disciples? It seems not...
Thank you for responding. I watched the video and gleaned some things from it. Can you please tell me if I got it right? 1. Only some part or parts of our transitory self are reborn. if this is so, then, which parts? 2. You yourself leave this topic aside due to its speculative nature and are not sure whether we are or are not reborn. 3. I once heard Alan Watts say in one of his talks (and I'm going to paraphrase) that the real serious buddhist scholars know that the whole idea of reincarnation is just traditional folklore, designed to elicit good behavior from people. Can this be true?
What we identify as a self is a function of our past mental and physical states and our environment..and moment to moment it gives in to a new state and this experience conditions us as stream… after death this experience continues since it arises from our the past stream of experiences and new states will be conditioned by this past experiences as a new form
The Buddha taught that rebirth is driven by karma and desire, but without a permanent self, it's the continuation of processes, not a soul, that is reborn!
Thank you, Doug,for a good presentation Ideas of Buddhism can be very profound,yet simple All existing phenomenas of life is direct effects of cause and effects,in my opinion Live each moment to the full,past is gone,we cannot change it,future is yet to come,only now,we can master
A seed of consciousness, or the name-shape aggregate in my opinion is very similar to the generated connection credentials. For example, you have a computer, which has a specific arrangement of peripherals and entrails. And you have a program (often even cloud-distributed program!) which wants to be run by this computer. For this, a speculative, abstract object is needed. A connection. And to maintain this connection it should be unique, representing both the hardware and the software. However, it can be broken by both sides. For example, I believe that dissociative fugue is when a body temporarily loses the connection to one 'soul' and faultly connects to another. This leads to this body harshly undertaking actions to bring itself more inline with this second soul, often forgetting previous experiences altogether.This also can explain how cults and ideologies possess people and manifest themselves through these people, and why the religions are the most alive when they either are small (to gather already similar people around) or very structured (to bring believers in tune with this frequency artificially)
My humble experience so far: ∙ The experience of Self is awareness of homeostasis; both physically and psychologically (and understanding they are interrelated); ∙ There are principles that precede the quality of this homeostasis and hence the quality of self-experience; ∙ These principles are to be actualised through the mind, body, speech; utilised through the power of cause and effect; ∙ To not actualise these principles is to be ignorant and generate suffering; ∙ These principles are the dharma; ∙ Though the Self is changeable we do not need to see it as ephemeral in the sense that it just falls apart and vanishes; the cultivated mind generates a Self that can move through the fabric of existence in a stable and principled manner, in contrast to the untrained mind that erratically hurls itself from form to form, place to place, situation to situation. The cultivated Self is changeable, but in a stable form -- it changes because it may evolve, not because it falls into a thousand karmic, hapless pieces.
What is reborn is the mind in itself. The mind is what refers to itself as 'I, me, myself'. Thanassiro Bhikku's article, No-self or not-self, found on accesstoinsight, clears up the misunderstanding of not-self. The sense of self is simply seen to be what it is and serves a function. The mind stream is what is reborn.
your videos are really helpful . I would like to know about Buddha's opinion on vegetarianism . And what is the Buddhist take on ghosts , Since we are reborn and there are different dimensions of existence that we go through , does buddhism accept ghosts and communication with ghosts ?
For the Buddha's take on vegetarianism see: ruclips.net/video/r5oncPD7jKo/видео.html . As for ghosts, I personally find claims about them unpersuasive. Early Buddhism does countenance the existence of spirits of various kinds, though they are not dharmically relevant. We reach the goal by our own practice of insight.
Sag nicht Geister sondern Wesen, sie sind das einzig wichtige, mit dem es umzugehen gilt, deshalb sicher nur vegetarisch leben. Nur der gute Umgang mit den Wesen bringt eine Verbesserung und dadurch auch das Auflösen des Karmas.
@@DougsDharma I’m agnostic and thought that other people’s ghost stories were BS. That was until I experienced a ghost while living in Myanmar almost 10 years ago. I’ve experienced nothing like it before or since then. Defied all my logic. 😅
THE EGO (NON SELF) EXPLANATION There is the world (or universe) and there are six senses we use to understand the world (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind) and most of the universe is made of matter that has eight inseparable natures (color, hardness, heat) etc. You can find what they are on the internet and other types of matter in Abhidhamma How it works is, for example, the consciousness that is born in the retina in the eye can only see color. In order for that to happen, there should be consciousness, the object (color) and a phenomenon called phassa (or contact - between the object and the consciousness) This phenomenon called contact (phassa) is very important, will come to it later. Since every human is looking for who they are, an identity for them to exist, what they do is they build an entirely new identity around their profession, education, gender, achievements, culture so on and fundamentally the images they see from their eyes, the pleasures or pain they experience from their bodies (and other senses etc.) and take those as me, mine and my soul but in reality, what happens is a chain of events where the consciousness see or feel things according to the phenomenon of contact A NON-TECHNICAL EXPLANATION A practical way to understand this is, humans have memories of the past, and dreams about the future. And they identify themselves with those memories and dreams, taking those memories as me, mine and my soul Some even say that if your mind goes to the past, you get depressed, if your mind goes to the future, you become anxious, so live at the moment. But the truth is the mind itself only exist in the present moment, and in the present moment it goes through memories. But people think that this memory is the past and the future, and mistakenly identify it as me, mine and my soul. (due to ignorance) So nirvana is something that exists right here, right now at the present moment, something that is beyond time. PHENOMENA OF CONTACT Another way to describe this is Brahmajala Sutta (you can read the Wikipedia article of this) Where Buddha teaches how his teachings are beyond anyone else, and how only a Buddha can uncover this In simple words, it teaches about point of views (dhitti) or how every other religion, philosophy, science will come to exist. Since they are all points of views, they are all relative to each other (and the mind) What Buddha's dhamma teaches is how you remove the point of view (dhitti). Once you remove the point of view, you become absolute, means achieve nirvana The other thing is all these points of views (even modern mathematics) arises from that phenomena called phassa (contact) between the mind and the thoughts Humans invented mathematics out of their own minds, means mathematics came out of contact. Anything that comes out of the phenomenon of contact is relative and not absolute (means is not nirvana) Nirvana itself cannot be described by words, because every word in the world arises from the phenomenon of contact. Anything that arises from contact will get caught up in the Law of Dependent Arising (Patichcha Samuppada - do a wiki search) CONCLUSION So the ego or self or existence is not really an illusion, it is a chain of effects that happens due to a cause, humans just see it in a wrong point of view due to the ignorance (avidya - not knowing) of the dhamma In other words, humans themselves create the ego that is not really there, due to their own ignorance, and they will do both bad and good things (karma) to maintain that ego that is not there in the first place Or scientifically, you can say that an evolved selfish consciousness is creating the illusion of a self (or an ego) to trick itself for survival (samsara - cycle of rebirth) Every phenomenon explained here happens very fast, and the goal is to understand that everything that comes into existence, also comes with nature of disappearance(nirodha) In the objective world, nothing is born, live for a period of time and then disappear. Everything disappears at the time of occurrence. The time it takes to arise and disappear is zero. Thus time is not a fundamental unit of the world and time doesn't really exist. If something is captured by time, it have the decaying and dieing nature. If something is not captured by time, it does not decay. Hence nirvana is "akaliko" (is not captured by time) IMPORTANT I think it is good to learn either Pali, sanskrit, sinhala or all these languages to truly understand the essense But remember, one will only come to the understanding of the truth (become enlighten) by their own mother tongue
In the same way we can talk of streams being the same even though no part of them is identical, so too we can speak of the same stream of psychophysical events, including consciousness.
I find this subject fascinating. I sometimes, while in meditation, I feel as though there were a hole in the mind. A singularity if you will. Like a drain that all the sense information goes swirling down into Akasha. Everything within awareness, everything without awareness, getting swallowed up in this tiny little hole. That which sees but is not seen. That which hears but cannot be heard. That which perceives perception.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
My focus is largely on early Buddhism, and this is a concept from China that is reflected in some later, East Asian schools. It's not found in early Buddhism.
I have a stupid question which I'd like to put as stupidly as possible. (You've probably answered it already in other videos, but this is the one I came in on.) If karma is real and what I do now is accruing good or bad karmic consequences, but most or all of them will be visited only on some future consciousness which is not me, why should I care? If I'm unenlightened enough to enjoy doing things which create bad karma, why stop? Traditional Christian teachings about hell give a simple answer: you yourself will suffer the consequences. But if that's not the case, why should anyone prefer doing good acts, if unpleasant or inconvenient, to doing bad acts that feel good here and now and don't backfire immediately?
Why you think your future consciousness is not you? The content of your consciousness is you. Whithout the content your consciousness as you know it does not exist. And you as ego does not exist. The content consist of all the collected knowledge from experiences, your memories and knowledge from experiences. And you are the total of all these memories and knowledge. This is the content of your consciousness . When you incarnate. This content reincarnates. But this content is without any reality but put together by thought. So, there's not a real self. But the self is maya. Beyond this self-consciousness, beyond the conditioned mind, is the mind. Self-consciousness, or the content of your consciousness is the brain. When the brain is absolutly silent then the mind will connect with your brain. Then brain and mind are the same. Are one.
I originally wrote "not me in any sense I can recognize," but deleted the last phrase as superfluous. Apparently it wasn't. Everything you say here is no doubt good Buddhist teaching, but it still doesn't add up to any future self I can recognize as me. Therefore my questions remain.
@@EricWexler your consciousness from your past life is in this life your guide, or intuïtion. If you can't remember your past life doesn't mean that past life never was. You can't even remember things from this life.
Yes, traditional Christian teachings give a story about a permanent self that continues through this life and into a future life. If that is all that motivates you to do good, then by all means continue believing it!
It you all want to know more about reborn, I would you all suggest to read or learn the cause and effect (Paticcasamuppaadada). Reborn concerning about 12 links of dependent. For non-self, you can learn Anattalakkana Sutta or Abhidhama (the higher teaching of the Buddha).
On your personal notes, I approach this a similar way, I think scientifically or philosophically, and pick apart different ideas as an agnostic I don't know who is right. I have studied the ancient teachings of our ancestors from all over the globe. I believe the truth is what they have in common, the mystics seem to all agree on a lot of stuff. Leave it to scholars to debate the differences. I like the idea of secular Buddhism, a global sangha, even those of other faiths will benefit from it! I have heard many faithful believers say Buddhism brought them closer to Jesus.
Suppose that technology allows 'me' (consciousness?) to be transferred out from my biological human brain to a cat brain. Before the transfer, I have human's memories, intentions and cognitive profiles. After the transfer, I lose all my human's mental features; instead now I have cat's memories, intentions and cognitive profiles. After the transfer, I completely don't know I was a human before. The strange point is 'me' is still 'me'. If compare such 'me' transfer scenario to rebirth concept in Buddhism, is that what Buddhism is talking about `rebirth'? Does anyone know? (No permanent features of `self' but instead a Mindstream sustained over on ever changing system's properties). If that is true then Buddhism has made an important prediction; in order to achieve 'me' (consciousness?) transfer technologically, it is not to copy any information/system properties or migrate any substance, but to sustain some sort of 'continuity' out from the biological brain to another system; despite what sort of 'continuity' is that is still being unknown by science. Does any one know my mentioned analogy is in line with Buddhism or not?
Hey Doug, love the videos. Can you do a video on "if there is now self, how can there be self love?" sometimes I feel like buddhism asks me to choose between disregarding myself and taking care of myself. How does buddhism align with modern wellness?
Ah, Buddhist practice is all about taking care of yourself by minimizing dukkha. So it aligns very well with modern wellness. And I'll put your idea for a video on the list!
@@DougsDharma that makes sense! sometime in my zen training i was taught that since there is no self then nothing is a problem (no good no bad) and nothing ever dies. but then i found myself negating or invalidating my emotions, and since then have turned away from zen to focus on a more therapy-centered path of healing. would love your perspective! it honestly could have just been the way i approached it (constantly checking to see if i was being mindful) rather than zen or buddhist teachings themselves.
@@DougsDharma Yes. And by minimizing dukkha it will be less an obstacle. Also, each of us have a capacity for compassion for ourselves and others and we also have a tendency to attach to love and its objects. To love without attachment is love in its truest sense.
As a secular inclined person, I think I can agree with how the early texts explain rebirth (except maybe for gandhabba). The consequences of our actions continue, but that's it. Is there a reason not to say that there isn't really anything personal (our mind, our body) left to be reborn? The parts of us that continue (our children, the consequences of our actions) are already present during our lifetime. The only things that are reborn after our life are the animals and plants that are nourished by our decomposing body? What more is there?
@@DougsDharma thank you for your reply. I enjoy your videos. I'm caught somewhere between buddhist and agnostic. I often listen to all branches buddhist dharma talks. Trying to figure it out. I really enjoy your take on things.
🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
Will do Doug.
Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu, living in the present moment,
Acknowledge Accept Let Go
SORRY DOUG'S DHARMA... I CAN NO LONGER BE ABLE TO READ, I AM ALMOST 80 YEARS OLD ONLY I CAN ENJOY AND STUDY MY BUDDHISM BY LISTENING YOUR VIDEOS...I AM A LOW INCOME LIVING UNDER SECTION 8. I ALSO USED AUDIBOOKS FREE,
The matrix teaching of the world Teachers .
youtube.com/@sourcetext
Good luck 🍀🤞
Find Vedic oldest sources given in UNESCO. And you will fimd it's 1400 AD rather 1400 BC. Those Brahmins sw!nes are just f**king lying...
One breath is one life... With each moment of thought, you are reborn in one of the six realms of existence.
Yes, that is a good way to look at it.
I wholeheartedly agree!
And this continuity of moments stops only when nibanna is attained, otherwise it goes on endlessly.
I'm using this and sharing with everyone
Fascinating.
Yes this is often a question that comes up. A beautiful quote: "Form is the wave, Emptiness is the water." There is no-self means that the wave does not actually exist as a separate permanent independent entity but rather is co-exists with all of the ocean. The water and the wave inter-are. It is only because of our miss-understanding that we think of ourself as a wave, we have always been the sea. When we are "reborn" it is because we still have this miss-understanding, thinking we are a wave again. Only once we reach enlightenment we realize we have always been the water and thus we wont be born as a wave again, because we became the ocean.
Nein, wir sind ein Lebewesen - für immer im Kampf mit Schwierigkeiten und Zielen, aber wenn wir einsehen, dass wir unzerstörbar und vollkommen sind, machen wir uns keine unnötigen Sorgen mehr.
🙏
So well said!!
Well explained!
Yes
The way I've heard it explained is that consciousness is like a flame, passed from one candle to another. The flame is originally ignited by causes and conditions, continues through causes and conditions and eventually gets snuffed out. That's literally what nirvana means, extinguished. The flame obviously exists, but is constantly changing, so it's not the "same" flame from one moment to the next. Real "Ship of Theseus" vibes.
What a great metaphor! Thank you!
Yes, the flame analogy does appear in the suttas as well, quite right!
My response is to Duke Banerjee:I think that most of what you said is correct except that part, where you said that nirvana is the extinguishing of the flame, as if it is snuffed out. My understanding was that there is no extinguishing of the flame, and our consciousness is just liberated of all duality, of thirst to go on. It is like our consciousness is of samsara, with concepts of duality and self etc. When the consciousness is liberated from such false concepts then nirvana is experienced, so there is no need for the flame to be extinguished. Then in nirvana things will be seen in the correct perspective. I may not have been able to explain very clearly because to be able to express such profound concepts will be beyond words or human expression.I also sincerely apologize if my understanding is wrong, but I am hopeful that we can all learn from each other.
The flame of craving is blown out, Third Noble Truth. 😊
@@DougsDharma yes, of the craving, the thirst, but does it mean of the consciousness itself, or the consciousness gets enlightened. The flame of thirst ends, so that there is no longer any need for rebirth, to continue the samsara?
I love what Alan Watts taught about rebirth. My paraphrase is that life is like the waves in an ocean. We are each a wave that eventually crashes on the shore of a beach (death). New waves are forming out in the ocean (birth) that will also eventually reach the beach. Did the waves that crashed on a beach were necessary for the new waves to form out in the ocean? Yes. Are the waves that crash the same as the waves that newly formed? No. They are fundamentally different, yet they both are similar forms that are contingent upon one another. We couldn't be here and survive on the resources of this world without the effects of past generations who brought us into being. Everything is changing and contingent upon prior events.
Nice! Thanks Aaron.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
This reminds me of wave particle duality in physics. We are both wave and ocean. The aggregates form the particle of ego via a stream of causes and conditions but also the ocean.
@@jeffforsythe9514 This is a Buddhist discussion. Not that your perspective is invalid, but it's definitely off topic as it's not a Buddhist perspective. Peace 🙏☯️✌️
Perfectly put. The wave is part of the ocean, and the ocean continues to create more waves after other waves are gone. While each wave is distinct, they are all ultimately part of the same ocean and therefore intimately connected. Old waves crash on the beach and are no more (or no longer waves, but they're water returns to the ocean), but the new waves, while also distinct, are from the same source and return to the same source, and ultimately are all inseparable parts of the same ocean. A perfect analogy of reincarnation.
I’m so happy to see that you’ve covered this! It’s a question I’ve asked many times since beginning my practice. Looking forward to hearing your explanation!
Great!
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
@jeffforsythe9514 Hell is, just like heaven, something felt by the living. Torturing yourself with guilt is hell. Hatred is hell. Self-pity is hell. Greed and intense unfulfilled desires are hell.
Once again ... a very insightful post. After 30+ years on the path I find myself still struggling to learn and understand at times. The way you explain the more complex tenants is unparalleled, in my humble experience. Gassho Sensei
My pleasure! Happy to help.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
9:36 Yes Doug. See, so many today MISS the fact that so much of the Buddha's teaching was INTENTIONALLY made to be the opposite (or to contradict) the current CULTURAL and SOCIAL RELIGIOUS teachings of his time (because the CULTURE of Siddhartha's time was an OUTGROWTH of the Hindu religious philosophy of his time). If you don't want a Caste System, you need to set up a NEW RELIGIOUS teaching that dismantles it outright. Ergo: The Caste System grew out of the Vedanta or Brahminic Traditions, so the Buddha HAD to come up with a teaching that was contra to its teachings - no "permanent" Self, Anatman, but - rather - a Self that was original, new with each incarnation, FREE to change, unhindered and UNBOUND by the CULTURE or the SOCIAL norms, not locked into anything (even its own karma, which could be/can be "burned up" and gotten rid of as we know).
HOWEVER - What transmigrates from lifetime to lifetime? Simple: Individual Consciousness rooted in Buddha-Nature (which is the indestructible Tathagata in us all!). That "Consciousness" is not the "Self" per se, but the sum total of awareness and experience for the Sentient Being (of which the Ego/Persona or Self is merely a part). "Consciousness" is that which travels in-between lifetimes as the original Sentient Being, but is re-created into a new Ego/Persona with each new incarnation. Do you see the beauty of this? I usually like to think of it as there being a permanent "Higher Self" (Buddha-Nature unique to each person) that is almost abstract, that is "transpersonal", that acts like a personal "hall of records" or "Akashic Records" of incarnational experience and wisdom (if you will), that lives in the Causal Body (gives us true Divine Wisdom or "Prajna" and Superconscious potential).
Then, in addition to that, there is an impermanent "Lower Self" that is created anew with each incarnation that makes up the Mental Body, Astral Body, Etheric Body, and Physical Body (these are terms used in Esoteric Buddhism and Occultism of the Western Esoteric Tradition to describe the lower incarnational vehicles or sheaths). With THIS idea, you get to keep a continuing "Higher Self" and use the "Lower Self" as the Anatman part which is NOT permanent; the "Lower Self" is the one made of up the 5 Skandhas, with Consciousness (Chitta or Vijnana extending to the Causal Body where the faculty of "Buddhi" or Buddha Nature exists).
ALSO, the Buddha's teaching on Emptiness is a similar slap in the face to the Brahmins, in that, their idea of Brahman was rooted in the idea of "Brahum" or FULLNESS. So the Buddha just "replaced" that with Sunyata or EMPTINESS. It's like I joke to myself, to the Hindus, the Glass is HALF FULL, whereas to the Buddhists, the Glass is HALF EMPTY. They are BOTH right.
Therefore, much of what the Buddha taught was done ON PURPOSE to separate his movement from the Hinduism of his time. He could say to the Brahmins of his time, "There is nothing special about your Aristocrats! You are the same as any other Sentient Being. The Caste System is a lie." It's also the reason the Buddha denied the existence of a creator god, it's another "separation device" and an attack on Hindu theology. Keep that in mind and it will all make sense. ;o) - Namaste! - Bodhi John, USA, 25+ Year Practitioner of Esoteric Buddhism and Raja Yoga.
Hi Doug, your explanation of "not self" v "no self" at 00:15:22 is very good. Thank you.
🙏😊
Self has nothing to do with enlightenment....................Falun Dafa
Very clear explanation.
What people often don't realise is that, to the Buddha, Vinnana (or consciousness) is one of the five aggregates that make the self - it’s a process, not a ‘thing’. Consciousness is always a consciousness ‘of’.
That's right, Hossain. Thanks.
Beautiful teaching on this one Doug, happy to have found this channel. Just had this conversation yesterday, everyday we die and are reborn and its not that big of a deal as some have made it to be. It is the reason why there is no permanent self, since people are coming and going all the time. It's why true close friends until the grave are so rare, because people are always changing like dumping a bucket into a stream and trying to follow it.
Yes exactly. 🙏
Hey Doug, thanks for this. I think questions on the self and reincarnation would be really good to discuss more in the future
🙏😊
try looking up the difference between rebirth and reincarnation
Go to Minghui and click on How Mankind Came To Be.
Falun Dafa explains everything concerning reincarnation and creation.
You explain these concepts so well! Helps me understand what I read in the sutras. Thank you so much.
Glad it was helpful!
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
Thanks!
Back atcha! 🙏
I am a Ch'an Buddhist priest. The aggregate self you describe is not the true self. It is always changing and impermanent, and we often mistake that illusory self as the Self. That is what Buddhism means by there is no self. The self we perceive as being us doesn't exist. From a Ch'an perspective, we are all the Universe manifest, educating, entertaining & exploring itself. The true Self is on one hand the Universal consciousness, and on another hand beyond all conceptual understanding. That is what is reborn. The Universe continues manifesting life and consciousness after our limited consciousness and false identity are long gone. As Alan Watts so eloquently puts it, "Whenever someone dies, others are born, and they are all you."
At least in an early Buddhist understanding, the "Self" is just as much a construct as is the self.
@@DougsDharma I like that. Right, it is beyond conception.
Well, anyone perceiving the "TRUE SELF" within Citta, is simply unaware it is the fetter of self view they are perceiving. Any "self" doesnt exist.. Citta is empty... it is not the true self at all, perceiving self here is the fetter of self view and it is no different from the hindu belief, but they just dont see that.
"The aggregate self you describe is not the true self"
The aggregate self is the only self you have got. You are a manifestation of the All, a mere part of the All.
"It is always changing and impermanent"
Exactly. You are always changing and impermanent.
". . . and we often mistake that illusory self as the Self
The changing and impermanent self is not illusory. It is absolutely real. It really is changing and impermanent.
@@DougsDharma self as context…elegant description. Thanks so much.
Thank you for finally stating the teaching between “no self” and “not self”🙏
🙏
Google........... How Humankind Came To Be.
Brilliant analysis. Or explanation. Or elaboration. Call it what you want - it's brilliant! 😁🙏
Thank you kindly! 😄
Thank you so much for this! I've been questioning this for a long time and you answered it perfectly.
Glad it was helpful!
I've always liked the analogy put forward by Francis Story: Imagine a pool/billiard table. When you strike a ball it moves forward (birth/life) when it strikes another ball (death) the ball that was struck now moves forward. There is nothing of the first ball in the second - however without the first ball striking it the second ball cannot move forward. In other words the second ball is dependent on the first.
Yes, that's a good start, now think of innumerable balls that only exist for a moment each. 😊
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
@@jeffforsythe9514falun dafa is a cult
But in that case the balls would eventually lose their energy and stop and the soul is immortal.................Falun Dafa
@@jeffforsythe9514 When you write "We all have a primordial soul which is immortal" you are going against basic Buddhist doctrine. Anattā is a term that refers to the central Buddhist concept that there is no phenomenon that has "self" or essence. That is to say, there is no "soul" let alone an immortal soul.
Hello and Namasthe! As to the word "Gandhabbha:" it is the Pali version of the Sanskrit Gandharva, pronounced Gaandharva. Those are celestial beings like nymphs, fairies and such. Indeed, a man once asked the Buddha whether he was a God or a Gandharva or a man. Buddha replied that he was awake, a Buddha. Buddhi is often used in Sanskrit to denote intellect and therefore, one who is endowed with Buddhi, is a Buddha. In Sanskrit, the "Soul" is called the Atman (pronounced Aathmun; no it does not rhyme with Batman!) :) Buddhism is said to teach the belief of Anatta, or Anatman (a-naathmun or no-atman) but the Buddha NEVER DID CATEGORICALLY STATE it as such; his followers decided they didn't believe in the Brahmin concept of the Atman!.
Anyhow, I wrote this in a book I wrote about 18 years ago:
In Hinduism, the word Ätman refers to the immortal Soul. This excerpt from the book "The Buddha His Life Retold" by Robert Allen Mitchell shows the Buddha trying to avoid being pinned down to describing the “soul”: A wandering ascetic called Vacchagotra once approached the Buddha. “Venerable Gautama,” insisted Vacchagotra, “have you nothing to say about the existence of the soul? Does the soul exist?” At these words the Perfect One was silent. “How is it, Venerable Gautama? Is there no such thing as the soul?” The Perfect One was silent. Then Vacchagotra the wanderer rose up from his seat and went away in disgust.
And not long after he was gone, the blessed Änanda said to the Perfect One: “How did it happen, Lord, that the Perfect One made no reply to the question asked by Vacchagotra, the wandering ascetic?”
The Buddha answered: “If, Änanda, when asked ‘Does the soul exist?’ I had replied, ‘The soul exists,’ then that would be to side with those recluses and Brahmins who are eternalists. But if, when asked, ‘Then the soul does not exist?’ I had replied, ‘No, the soul does not exist,’ then that would be to side with those recluses and Brahmins who are nihilists.
“Then again, Änanda, if when asked, ‘Does the soul exist?’ I had replied, ‘The soul exists,’ would that reply be consistent with my knowledge that all things are impermanent?” “No, Lord, it would not,” said Änanda. “Then again, Änanda, if when asked, ‘Then the soul does not exist?’ I had replied, ‘No, the soul does not exist,’ then that would have increased the bewilderment of Vacchagotra the wanderer, already bewildered. For he would have said, ‘Formerly I had a soul, but now I have a soul no more.’
🙏
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
What is self? Is it in physical form or is it in spiritual form?
Is it because of Mind's holding element started to attach to external influences such as "Opinion, Lust, displease, anger, sadness, greed" and then form "ME" or "MY" over that emotions.
It's mind's holding element attaches on to the five aggregates that caused all the sufferings.
Elimination of mind's holding element is the Goal.
How?
In Dhammachuk sutta Aunyakotunya ( the first Buddhist monk) had enlightened himself by seeing the impermanent in one of the five aggregates " Anything that has a birth it will die naturally " while listening to the teaching of Buddha.
That's normally a starting path of ending the mind's holding element. Seeing the moment mind's let go of matters.
The holding element of mind will be eliminated totally or partially depends on the strength of one's own SATI.
Mind's ability to hold on to matters would no longer possible without it's holding element present.
Let alone to hold on to KARMA for reincarnation.
Observing one's own mind's behavior during the day might be able to see the ending part of the attachment.
Everything is moving starting from atomic level to earth, sun, solar system or milky Way Galaxy, black hole or even the whole universe.
Holding on to matters is an act against the nature itself. The longer the holdings the more frequent the holdings the more severe mental illness it can become.
That's my interpretation based on personal experienced.
Thanks as always Doug for the video. I think the last minute was most useful - we can choose to put to one side those aspects we find unhelpful, and move forward with the helpful aspects in our own lives.
That's right. I wanted to leave the personal opinions until the end! 😄
Wisdom is learning how not to behave..........................Falun Dafa
Not sure if watching this baked helps me understand better or worse. Great video Doug!
Hey Doug! You’re such a light on peoples lives :)
You know, I’ve been studying and I got to the same point of view as yours. To see that in this video of yours made me want to comment. I just started to study Buddhism and I know almost nothing, but it seems to me that our existence is made of matter (body) + mind/ consciousness + circumstances (causes and conditions, as you said) + essence of life (this fizzy foamy substance that animates all living beings); something like the 5 aggregates, I guess.
Karma would be the impressions/ marks that we leave regarding how we temper with the circumstances of our lives (through our intentions/ consciousness), I believe. In that matter we can certainly influence the lives of others in the future, depending on how deep our impressions would be through our actions. Not by some spiritual line that pierces and connects our past lives and justifies our blessings or disgraces, but simply by the unfolding of collective actions. Since we cannot know by evidence the existence of rebirth and the perpetuation of a “formless self”, I agree it’s ok to leave it aside. I don’t think that will demerit the understanding of Buddha’s teachings in any way.
Thank you for your efforts to teach us here on RUclips! I really appreciate it 🙏🏽🙏🏽🩵
You’re very welcome and thanks for your comment! 🙏😊
Good of you to breach this topic . Reincarnation, Karma surviving our current life, The wheel of samsara , etc why is why i stopped calling myself a Buddhists . I've had so many discussions about it with different ' masters ' : ' what is it that re-incarnates ' Who ' created' this wheel ' etc. But (for me personally ) it's the reason why Buddhism is a religion. Re-incarnation is a Buddhist ' article of faith' . (almost ) every Buddhist master i talked with ended the discussion with something like ;:' The Buddha told us how he seen all his former lives , and how his path will liberate us from Dukha , the wheel of re-incarnating into samsara , we're bound by karma ' ....etc,etc. .I just don't see why i should blindly accept any such certainty about the 'afterlife ' as factual.
Right. If you don't, then leave it aside and focus on the practice right here and now.
@@DougsDharma Yes , it's is obviously just my personal experience . I also realized that there are more then enough positive elements within Buddhism to use in daily life.
@@spiritualanarchist8162 Nein, nur das Karma musst Du Dir vornehmen, alles andere bekommst Du dann geschenkt!
@@hansburch3700 Uhmmm..My German is a bit rusty😅Ik ben een Nederlander ,
@@spiritualanarchist8162 Edge will translate it for you.
these videos are beautifully well done,they should get more views, i think they deserve it.
Thanks so much! Feel free to share them with anyone you think might be interested! 😄
Conciousness doesnt arrive without a cause .. wow what a beautiful simple observation. I work in tech and ai and we are trying to mimick a machine that goes conscious.
🙏😊
Please explain some Abhidharma /Dhamma pada if you can 🙏
I may eventually do a video on the abhidhamma. I did one awhile back with some discussion: ruclips.net/video/yBKK1HvieqU/видео.html
Go to Minghui and click on How Mankind Came To Be.
It's such a perfect explanation that brightens my day. I have been having some lingering thoughts on this topic for quite some times. Thanks, Doug! May the light of Dhamma shine upon you day and night. 🙏
Wonderful! 🙏😊
Very well-done Doug to pull together such a difficult subject. You see rebirth into future lives as speculative and I agree. What has puzzled me for a long time is that the Buddha was critical of those holding speculative views and yet rebirth must be the most speculative view of all.
Yes, though in his case he believed he had witnessed it.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
Very masterful explanation. Very good work, sir.
So nice of you. 🙏
Thanks for this instructive vew of re-birth. I have no formal instruction in Buddhism , only what I have gleaned from the internet - such as your videos.
I came to the conclusion early on that we all have the Buddha instint and originally came into this series of lives with different faults. In each life we have the opertunity to cleanse these faults until we reach perfection Nievana.
I feel that if not a stream of concienceness we have a stream of values of carma. In other words in each life we add to our positive carma or add to our negative carma.
The main thing that worries me is that there may be some heavy negative carma lurking in the background, waiting to pounce on me at any moment.
Thanks again for your video.
p.s. Do you think that, at the time of death, one could choose a place to be reborn? I didn't find budhism until I was sixty (I´m eighty six now). I would hate to be reborn in some country where Buddhism is unknown.
Robert
If it were me, I'd concern myself with my life right here and now. Then if there is rebirth, that will be helped as well.
The cells and atoms in the body are always changing being replaced. The illusion of permanence and the physical world may seem complex but it’s so simple it’s hard to understand
An excellent book on this topic is Bhikkhu Analayo's "Rebirth in Early Buddhism and Current Research".
Agreed, I have read that book too. According to Analayo, in that book the Pali sutta's and parallel Chinese agamas in it, used as examples, the rebirth consciousness is formed with the volitional imprints (the second link of DO) providing much of the fuel needed.
Then the craving link of DO, in particular, how strong the craving is at the time of death further fuels and influences the process of rebirth. How strong the volitional imprints are is what potentially allows for some people to be able to recall their past life.
From this, there's no mistaking that the Buddha believed this is how rebirth occurs. Also, the rebirth consciousness is not the third DO link of consciousness. At least not totally. That consciousness is different than what is formed and called the 'rebirth' consciousness or the Gandhabba.
The rebirth consciousness seems to be highly dependent on the 'strength' of the volitional imprint(s) collected during life, and not so much the other aspects of consciousness that are attained during life.
Go to Minghui and click on How Mankind Came To Be.
Very interesting and most enlightening. Thanks Doug for a well researched analysis of Non-self and Rebirth in line with what is recorded in the Nikaya. Sadhu sadhu sadhu...🙏🙏🙏
Namo Buddhaya 🙏
🙏😊
WOW! What a great job Doug! PeaceMac
Thank you kindly!
Thank you for addressing this question. I tried to find an answer many years ago (I thought I misunderstood or perhaps there was some explanation I hadn't heard. When I had ask the question of others (gurus, teachers and other buddhists) It was given inadequate explanations or was dismissed as not understanding (or being unenlightened). It was reassuring to hear how you had determined to deal with it in your life practice.
I have never found the idea of rebirth from life to life compelling. Nor have I found the idea of any kind of consciousness as eternally persistent/present very compelling. Along with this kind of question is another one: If all is maya then whence comes any "thing" at all? If Brahma is one without a second then whence comes maya? I know this question is answered in the texts (Vedas), but I find the answers uncompelling as well. The only reason I don't dismiss it altogether is I find some of the ideas useful. I will be watching more of your videos to hopefully pick up a better understanding.
J. Krishamurti watch him.
@@heinmolenaar6750 Been there done that and lots of others. But thanks for the suggestion. I found the Upanishads (trans. Swami Nikhilananda) came the closest to being able to help me grasp the nature of Brahma. I finally surrendered to what I did not know and accepted my fate (karma). This world is all I can be certain of - and in some sense - not even that.
However, I do understand the transient nature of perception, experience, and that self-same understanding. Today I live the best I can to commit myself to what has presented itself.
It would take pages to explain.
But I will say this: I try to understand and not to think 'I know'. There are many who are sure, for me it has always been to move toward a better understanding.
I have moved on from a spiritual walk...as per se, and moved toward a life of understanding, love, compassion. Not as a buddhist, but as myself.
Thanks for reaching out I wish you well in your journey.
'rebirth' is a word referring to the final moment of mind in this life functioning as a cause for the first moment of mind of the next life
in this way there is rebirth of a person, absent there being a person that can endure into the next moment through its own power
@@5piles great reply, much to think about here. Especially for the way I conceive of my self. As for any continuation beyond death, that is actually death - I cannot speculate, but our own transient nature as we go through our life - wow - there's much to contemplate here.
@@Summer-kb2dm just as there is law of conservation for mass-energy the same is true of subjectivity/mind. this is the whole point of buddhism and the other samadhi lineages. the point of meditation is to realize the nature of mind, discriminate the nature and status of samsara, and to unwind its causes that perpetuate the final moment of this life, just as any final moment of a physical object perpetuates. its not particularly difficult just need good teachers and to study the faults of physicalism. even pythagoras asserted remembering 20 of his previous lifetimes
Dear Dough, Highly recommend your understanding of Buddhism.
Appreciate with Anumodhana❤
Doug, what is your opinion on chanting?
I think it can be a good meditation practice, leading to a kind of energized, light samādhi. I don't often do it myself though.
From what I've heard and read from others who say they are more knowledgeable, the idea seems to be that there is a physical, though subtle, substance that consists consciousness, like how the substances of water, earth, fire, and air consist the elements of the same names. Well, I prefer not to get so caught up in these kind of debates.
The way I see it, call it secularism or whatever you will, is that it requires a broadening of the sense of self. Perhaps it would be better to think of how we act with consideration of our future selves and/or other people -- our children, other family members, members of the same community, the human race at large, all living beings. We know that our consciousness is stuck flailing in the stream of existence, and that cessation of the stream is liberation (however you like to extend the metaphor eg. by stepping out of the stream to higher ground, damming or draining the stream, etc.)
Therefore we must act in a way that conduces liberation for our future selves and similarly those that we love (which should be all living beings susceptible to the stream of existence). This involves learning the way of life that achieve liberation, but also teaching, supporting and otherwise paving the way for others to do the same. That is the Dharma in a nutshell to me. I don't see the need to debate metaphysics.
🙏😊
Nicely put Pranav!
Awesome explanations, Doug. Thanks 🙏
Very welcome! 🙏😊
There are so much we can learn from the Buddha. It is surely true that there is no definite self that persist as "self" changes from moment to moment just like everything else. We've also learn from the Buddha that everything in our world is simply some concept that we come up with to serve some purpose(s). What we named "self" is simply a concept that serves some purpose like everything else that we give a name to. All purposes ultimately serve to benefit "oneself". In that sense, all concepts serve to satisfy oneself.
Furthermore, our attachments are simply attachments to the concepts that we and our predecessors created. Without purposes, nothing exists as far as we are concerned. This does not mean that nothing exists. It means without serving any purposes for us, the existence of anything is simply meaningless and insignificant to us, thus their "non-existence'. When we see that something can be useful for us in some way, we find some purpose(s) for its existence, and that purpose materializes into a concept for that something, thus creating our own version of its existence. We can clearly see that every purpose and every concept we come up with simply serve our own interests and are highly superficial. It may be safe to think that the concept of “self” is the mother of all other concepts and purposes. When we see that purposes are superficial and temporary, we may be able to see that freeing ourselves from the concept of “self” frees us from all our attachments, thus allowing us to achieve “non-self”. However, even more important is that we must free ourselves from the concept of “non-self”. We may not be able to free ourselves from the concept of “self” if we are still attached to the concept of “non-self”
Eventually yes, we have to free ourselves from clinging to all concepts, ideas, views.
You can't know the state of "no self"
@@heinmolenaar6750 very true. if we are aware of such state of non-self, then we are still clinging to the concept of self.
I like very much the way in which you explain clearly and just after that talk about your opinion. It's honest and didactic, thank you!
Namo Buddhaya 🙏
I appreciate that, Luiz. Thanks for sharing!
7:30 - curious to hear your take on psychological “temperament”, which is considered a relatively permanent mental state from youth to old age (eg phlegmatic, choleric).
~Patreon Tree donator (under another name), love your channel! 😊
There are aspects of personality that seem more or less continuous through life, but I think these are more like vague tendencies and preferences we have rather than anything very firm. In traditional Buddhism they would be considered part of our karmic baggage, nowadays we might also see them as driven by genetics or history. I've done a few related videos, such as a discussion of the unconscious, and personal continuity and karma. You can check them out in my playlist on self and non-self: ruclips.net/p/PL0akoU_OszRjA9n0-U24ZCpfEQVFxeGz2 . And thanks so much for your Patreon support! 🙏🙏
“It’s not that there’s literally no self. It’s rather that there is not permanent self.” At 7:53. As I understand it Doug, that’s not quite the whole story. The Three Marks of Existence include both Anicca/impermanence AND Anatta, which, while meaning non-self, is also has the connotation of “insubstantial”. Hence the Five Aggregates. Even in any single moment, there is no solid self. All that will be found on examination is the five aggregates. So in one way, you could call the whole cluster of them a self. But in another way, no, these are simply five different dependently arisen phenomena, none of which are you, are in some you, have some you in them, or belong to some kind of you. You will not find a solid substantial “I” even in a single moment. So whilst conventionally there is of course a self that persists through time, on deeper reflection, there is no permanent AND/OR substantial self.
Right, the only "self" that there is is a conventional, constructed notion of a self.
This is wonderful explanation! Thank you!
You're very welcome!
It's not that there is no self, it's just that there is no permanent self. That's a big difference.
Yes, that's right.
I don’t think that is quite right. The Three Marks of Existence include both Anicca/impermanence AND Anatta, which, while meaning non-self, is also has the connotation of “insubstantial”. Hence the Five Aggregates. Even in any single moment, there is no solid self. All that will be found on examination is the five aggregates. So in one way, you could call the whole cluster of them a self. But in another way, no, these are simply five different dependently arisen phenomena, none of which are you, are in some you, have some you in them, or belong to some kind of you.
Thank you, Doug. Very helpful.
Thanks Doug for your video. Can I ask whether does the buddha preached universal conciousness which is never born or dies.My understanding is there should be because N.D.E people says they were concious after physical death for awhile before resuscitation. Thanks🙏
Thanks for the question! See my earlier video: ruclips.net/video/NoFF8-rA1zE/видео.html
@@DougsDharma 🙏thanks alot Doug for your reply. My next question is if there is no permanent conciousness or awareness,how does karmic seeds retain its information from one birth to another.My guess is there must be a eternal field of conciousness(which is non-personal)or awareness as I learn from Ajahn Sumedho where he quoted a sutta where the buddha proclaimed that there is a realm of unborn, deathless realm in the here and now.🙏
People say all sorts of things & believe all sorts of things.nde is just like seeing the Virgin Mary ( she actually wasn’t) ; the church finally had to put a stop to it because literally 100s of people were seeing the Mother of Gd everywhere (actually it can’t have a mother then it wouldn’t be Gd would it?…
Well explained - really! In many of the Zen traditions and lineages overall - and I’m a Zen Buddhist - this is not dealt with clearly or well, or in an explicit fashion. Very helpful and a realistic approach.
Great, glad to hear it Zacko-Smith. Thanks for your comment. 🙏
this was so helpful thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
I love the way Bhante Vimalaramsi suggests to translate the term Anatta in order to understand the dhamma in an esier way...He suggests to translate it as "impersonal" instead of "not self"....
Yes, that's also a good way to see it.
Firstly thank you for this video. I have contemplated this question myself. I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself correctly here, but here goes....Do the notions of interbeing and emptiness suggest that streams of consciousness are not individual? Therefore, like a stream, could we be intermingled which would mean that what is reborn could be a mixture of different people or consciousnesses?
That isn't seen as a possibility in early Buddhism; one's karmic baggage is one's own to deal with. There may be some later schools in which karmic baggage becomes more diffuse but if so I'm not sure how really "intermingled" karma would be.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 stream analogy was most helpful!
What about memory? That persists throughout life. Intellect? Will? Desires?
Thanks for clear explanations
Yes these are important questions. I have a number of videos on the topic of personhood and personal continuity in my playlist on self and non-self. For example: ruclips.net/video/-ylkDiGgln8/видео.html
Hi Doug, I think any kind of aspiring consciousness whether be that of deva or brahma can attain human birth, not just gandhabba, the only condition is they must be higher or equivalent to humans in karma. Just like Buddha was a deva in Tusita devaloka, not a gandhabba as this has always been the case in Buddhism that beings from higher realms can willingly go to lower realms, but not possible vice versa. What do you think?
Excellent talk 🙏🏻 Not sure if you're discussed kama tanha, bhava tanha and vibhava tanha yet but I'd appreciate that thank you Doug.
Thanks, FP! I have mentioned them in past videos, but I'm not sure I've done a video specifically about them. I'll put it on the list.
I have come to think of the solution as information. Our karma is information about the decisions we have made in the past, which influences our current habits and decisions. When we die this information is transferred to an new body much like a file is transferred from one computer to another. Nothing physical needs to go from place to place, just a change in the arrangement of matter.
You hit in the key point about rebirth, it doesn't matter if you believe in it or not. It is not a requirement to believe in rebirth to be a Buddhist. If the thought helps a few people be nicer through moral dread, I see this as a good thing.
Yes it can be a useful belief for some. It can also lead to "blaming the victim" in other cases, which isn't so good. So it's a mixed bag.
Du musst nicht daran glauben, Du musst damit arbeiten, bis sich Dein Karma auflöst, sonst hast Du Deine Zeit vertan.
A great video! Would it be better to replace the phrase at 15:45 "consciousness coming and going" with "consciousness arising and ceasing", so as not to cause a mistaken idea that it is the same consciousness coming and going?
I am listening to this Dhamma video a second time as i had encountered quite a few discussions on this topic where some termed it as 'no self', 'not self' and 'non-self'.
Yes different verbal nuances work for some and not for others. So find what works for you and feel free to “re-translate” into the phrases you find most congenial.
Thank you Doug! 🙏🙏🙏
To think about mind (consciousness) as a stream that is impermanent and dependent on causes and conditions opens up the possibility to understand why enlightenment and Buddhahood is possible at all. We know that enlightenment is described as liberation from birth and death (in the Sutras) which ties in neatly with the idea that consciousness (awareness) is not some permanent entity. We tend to think about life and death as two sides of reality, but from the point of view of us being a stream of an ever changing consciousness the duality of life/death get much more questionable, if not impossible. Maybe we can either say that there’s no birth/death at all, or we can say that the conscious experience is a never ending stream of deaths & rebirths, moment by moment. As I see it, this ties very well in with the general teachings by the Buddha on impermanence and interdependent origination as well.
The transportation of karmic imprints in the stream of consciousness is an ‘expression’ of the stream still believing in its own existence. When the realization of the ‘non-self’ arises there’s no-one holding onto anything anymore and the vessel to hold karmic baggage is seen as non-existent. Karma can only be transported from one moment to the next by a mind not yet aware of its true nature. In fact, sentient beings are constantly involved in the futile endeavors of maintaining erroneous views of permanence, both on gross and subtle levels of existence. Karma becomes one of the buildings blocks in that endeavor. Since this process is not in accord with the true nature of reality beings expose themselves to all kinds of causes and conditions that leads to sufferings and miseries. Moreover, since beings persistently believes in permanence they also experience suffering and happiness to be real. That is what, in Buddhist terminology, is called Samsara.
The question becomes; Can we still understand the Awareness of enlightenment as a stream? Since the qualities and abilities of a Buddha is said to be limitless, timeless and omnipresent the analogy of a ‘stream’ sounds somewhat limiting and has a connotation of duality attached to it, doesn’t it? The only way to find out is to follow in the footsteps of the Buddha, isn’t it?
Thanks FT! 🙏😊
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
Yes we can! Even Buddha entered paranarvana which is the timeless, ......
The mistake you are making is that the knowledge/wisdom of the buddha is timeless, .... However, the buddha was, meaning not eternal, not permanent, .....
Earth is punishment yet at the same time a school. If and when a human returns home to heaven, he or she will never look back at the countless times that they spent in this sewer..............falundafa
@@charlesdacosta2446 The highest form of Buddhism is Falun Dafa. Its master is a Buddha of the highest realm.
Huh. Oddly I found myself thinking about whether light is a particle or a wave. Many choose to be a particle where the Buddha implies we're a wave. And the form [of light] changes when one adds consciousness. Thank you, Doug, for bringing up this gut wrenching (do I really have a gut?) for me topic.☺
Thanks for your topic. As far as my understanding, "gandhaba" is like "Karmic energy" that carring some greed, ignorance and also carring many Karma (volitional action).
Volitional action leads to rebirth consciousness. When it meets to zygote (biology term), it become mind and matter ( Nama Rupa).
Therefore, at this point, I would say " gandhaba (no self) = consciousness = Karmic energy.
Many buddhists cannot answer that question but it is important and difficult one.
Karma is black and adheres to our soul when we sin. We are here to suffer our karma away...........Go to Minghui and click on How Mankind Came To Be.
In 1997 I asked a Soto Zen monk this exact question. He said honestly and truthfully 'I don't know, I've often wondered that myself'. Theology I found in zazen since that year 1997 failed me utterly to understand what is reborn. Only practice showed me through multiple past life experiences. I eventually settled on the Shingon path, as Shingon affirms the 'self'. As have my own experiences in training.
🙏
And do you now know what incarnates?
@@heinmolenaar6750 Yes thank you.
@@davidcrawford8583 what incarnates?
@@davidcrawford8583 you don't know what incarnates. You are a liar.
I've found a benefit understanding rebirth as what it feels like day to day or sometimes moment to moment, rather than lifetime to lifetime. Each day, you wake up and have a set of memories and tasks that are slightly or drastically different from the previous day and are affected by the actions you took then. Super interesting to consider the way they made it work literally as being born multiple times in early Buddhism. Thanks for another great one, Doug.
Makes the ides of ghosts pretty fascinating. Ghosts (living people) can be those who can't let go of what used to be in their own waking life.
Yes, I agree, this is a useful understanding! 🙏
I've have translated the same ideas into this as well: I am continually reborn as myself carrying with me all that I have said and done up to this moment: This is my karma. Our resistance to our karma binds us to it and limits our freedom to be who we are. While I no longer consider myself a buddhist - I still find this way of thinking about myself very freeing. I have much I could say about the practice of "my life," but unfortunately it would go on for pages. Let me say this about it though: I seek to understand and not to say, "I know". For me it is a journey (a journey through this life) to merely understand what has been presented to me (to understand my karma so to speak).
@@Summer-kb2dm I love that :)
How are you, sir? Hope fine and well. I came across this website, and I hope it might be useful to you too.
i am new to Buddhism and have a question: If all life is a result of rebirth, how did the first life form originate? How did this constantly changing self, this steam come to exist in first place? Did it simply "spawn" on Earth?
very good video by the way
Thanks! In Buddhism (as in all Indian religions) there was never a "first life": all of reality has always been here, or at least so far as we know this is the case. The Buddha talks of "beginningless lifetimes". Within this endless past and future there have been and will be infinite universes coming and going, creations and destructions. That's the picture. As for life on earth in particular, that's largely left unexplained: obviously the Buddha didn't know what we do about the creation of the solar system. The Buddha however did provide a kind of creation myth, that I did a video on awhile back: ruclips.net/video/Vtt9q1V-kAo/видео.html
@@DougsDharma thank you for the answer, I will watch the video 👍
@@DougsDharma, aren't you speaking of Sarvastivada's language? The Agganna Sutta, in Digh Nikaya, says life came to the Earth from Abhasssar. But was it really life? Can life sustain only on photons. Besides, it was only mind made. Does it support Panspermia Theory? Buddha says the universe goes through periodic cycle of contraction and expansion in aeons. So in that condition where the life can sustain? If life was always there then it is certainly problematic to Anicca concept. Only Nibbana is permanent not life or sankhara or matter and mind. I think Pali canon does give direct answer to this question.
There is beginning or end, just is.
Newbie Zen practitioner here. If there is no continuous "you", no "you" that realizes or is aware of a connection to a "you" of a previous life, why should we even care about rebirth? If this nexus of causes and conditions that identifies as Rob W is going to dissipate after it dies, except for some fuzzy bit of consciousness that carries on and becomes part of another nexus of causes and conditions that does not identify in the least bit as the nexus that identified as Rob W, again, why should we care about rebirth? I'm probably asking this rather crudely, and I apologize for that, but this is something I think about a lot. I can certainly see how rebirth and karma can be re-framed as happening within the confines of this life, but if the "thing" being reborn is not at all "me"....
Right. Traditionally the only real sense in which it is "me" is the karmic baggage it retains. But make of that what you will. 🙏
I have come to interpret the concept of "no self" this way: The self - the entity or being that is our animating essence, our self - does not exist in any sense in the physical world. The self has no location, it has no form, and by extension has no time. But it still exists - I still exist - identified in this life by the physical form I occupy. When this physical form dies, the self - the "I' - can be reborn or not. It is not likely a conscious, managed decision, at least not at lower levels of awareness. The self is not the mind, although the mind and associated consciousness could be considered to be part of the self, the aggregate experiential path of the self. This viewpoint makes sense to me and resolves the seeming conundrum of a "no self" being reborn.
Great video Doug! I’m having a hard time with multiple consciousnesses because if this is the case then it seems there would be many more consciousnesses including one for each eye or ear, or how about even more consciousnesses for every pitch of sound or color, etc.. I think of consciousness as a central cpu that receives all the info from the 6 senses then projects a hologram of me to the world. It comes with a base program but the programmer continually adds and changes programs until it finally loses its job and we are awakened. 🙏🏽
We tend to think of consciousness as a kind of unifying principle of the mind. This is one picture we get of it in the Upaniṣads, and the Buddha did not agree. Perhaps he might allow more consciousnesses than six, but at least he said there were six.
This is just one of those things I’ll put aside for now and keep an open mind about understanding better in the future. 🙏🏽
There is a very clear contradiction. In the first part the real self is the "locust of perfect control" , "permanent". However, in the second part it is admitted that even in the original Buddha meaning, the self is a stream, ever-changing, nothing like a "permanent locust of self control".
Exactly so.
I think some people mistake the idea of "universal consciousness" (like a permanent one) with entropy--not the everyday order-into-chaos entropy but thermodynamic entropy of energy going from a "pure" state to a fragmented and dispersed state. Similar to the misconception of the earth "using up" energy. It doesn't use up energy, it disperses it into fragmented units (sun light--> vegitation--> animal food--> other animals' food--> decomposition, etc.). I think of consciousness as just the brain braining but maybe that's on oversimplification.
how i interpret rebirth: karma means action, a 'quality' is the consolidation of repeated action. It is a being's qualities that is reborn; their tendency to act.
Gautama apparently met people spiritually 'where they were' - and in his case it was always from within a Vedic cultural context (where caste system relied on rebirth), right? So Gautama having been indoctrinated with the Vedas, and the people he was teaching having also been indoctrinated, no doubt it made sense to speak and teach from within that framework. And yet, when he reached the 4th jhana, or whatever highly penetrative state, it seems he 'saw' his Vedic cultural conditioning on all his rebirths for what it was, and eventually ESCAPED that cultural conditioning in order to enter his Nirvana. Thus, Gautama emitted the lions roar and announced: "I am liberated - FREE" - free from the shackles of his Vedic cultural conditioning, and thus finally accessing nature's truth directly. All of this seems to match what is put forth in the suttas 🙏.
The suttas do not appear to be logical accounts of universal laws in the way that Heraclitus' Fragments intend to be. Rather, they seem to be records of localised teachings - local to Vedic culture, and thus generally applicable only within that cultural framework - and especially when it comes to the idea of emerging out of Vedic rebirth/caste attachment. I think this is where most arguments regarding Buddhist rebirth stem from - from the Western assumption that Buddhist teachings were intended to be 'universal' - to be applicable beyond the borders of Vedic culture.
Well I think the Buddha considered the dharma to be universally applicable, even though it arose out of a particular cultural context.
@@DougsDharma But was the Buddha even aware of non-Vedic cultural leanings? 🤔. Ionia, etc., in the Mediterranean region seemed to take on board that there are going to be various cultures from all over the place mixing, debating, and so on.
Is there any evidence in Buddhist suttas that people from outside of Vedic culture were meeting and discussing with the Buddha or his disciples? It seems not...
Me encantó la explicación. Muchas gracias!!!
¡De nada! 😄
Can you do a video on Dzogchen?
Maybe eventually, though the focus here is mostly on early Buddhism and Dzogchen is from a later tradition.
Thank you for responding. I watched the video and gleaned some things from it. Can you please tell me if I got it right?
1. Only some part or parts of our transitory self are reborn. if this is so, then, which parts?
2. You yourself leave this topic aside due to its speculative nature and are not sure whether we are or are not reborn.
3. I once heard Alan Watts say in one of his talks (and I'm going to paraphrase) that the real serious buddhist scholars know that the whole idea of reincarnation is just traditional folklore, designed to elicit good behavior from people. Can this be true?
What we identify as a self is a function of our past mental and physical states and our environment..and moment to moment it gives in to a new state and this experience conditions us as stream… after death this experience continues since it arises from our the past stream of experiences and new states will be conditioned by this past experiences as a new form
The Buddha taught that rebirth is driven by karma and desire, but without a permanent self, it's the continuation of processes, not a soul, that is reborn!
Thank you, Doug,for a good presentation
Ideas of Buddhism can be very profound,yet simple
All existing phenomenas of life is direct effects of cause and effects,in my opinion
Live each moment to the full,past is gone,we cannot change it,future is yet to come,only now,we can master
🙏😊
A seed of consciousness, or the name-shape aggregate in my opinion is very similar to the generated connection credentials. For example, you have a computer, which has a specific arrangement of peripherals and entrails. And you have a program (often even cloud-distributed program!) which wants to be run by this computer. For this, a speculative, abstract object is needed. A connection. And to maintain this connection it should be unique, representing both the hardware and the software. However, it can be broken by both sides. For example, I believe that dissociative fugue is when a body temporarily loses the connection to one 'soul' and faultly connects to another. This leads to this body harshly undertaking actions to bring itself more inline with this second soul, often forgetting previous experiences altogether.This also can explain how cults and ideologies possess people and manifest themselves through these people, and why the religions are the most alive when they either are small (to gather already similar people around) or very structured (to bring believers in tune with this frequency artificially)
My humble experience so far:
∙ The experience of Self is awareness of homeostasis; both physically and psychologically (and understanding they are interrelated);
∙ There are principles that precede the quality of this homeostasis and hence the quality of self-experience;
∙ These principles are to be actualised through the mind, body, speech; utilised through the power of cause and effect;
∙ To not actualise these principles is to be ignorant and generate suffering;
∙ These principles are the dharma;
∙ Though the Self is changeable we do not need to see it as ephemeral in the sense that it just falls apart and vanishes; the cultivated mind generates a Self that can move through the fabric of existence in a stable and principled manner, in contrast to the untrained mind that erratically hurls itself from form to form, place to place, situation to situation. The cultivated Self is changeable, but in a stable form -- it changes because it may evolve, not because it falls into a thousand karmic, hapless pieces.
What is reborn is the mind in itself. The mind is what refers to itself as 'I, me, myself'. Thanassiro Bhikku's article, No-self or not-self, found on accesstoinsight, clears up the misunderstanding of not-self. The sense of self is simply seen to be what it is and serves a function. The mind stream is what is reborn.
Yes, that's one way to look at it.
A simpler and more direct question to ask is this; If there is no Self, then who is asking this question?
your videos are really helpful .
I would like to know about Buddha's opinion on vegetarianism .
And what is the Buddhist take on ghosts ,
Since we are reborn and there are different dimensions of existence that we go through , does buddhism accept ghosts and communication with ghosts ?
For the Buddha's take on vegetarianism see: ruclips.net/video/r5oncPD7jKo/видео.html . As for ghosts, I personally find claims about them unpersuasive. Early Buddhism does countenance the existence of spirits of various kinds, though they are not dharmically relevant. We reach the goal by our own practice of insight.
Sag nicht Geister sondern Wesen, sie sind das einzig wichtige, mit dem es umzugehen gilt, deshalb sicher nur vegetarisch leben. Nur der gute Umgang mit den Wesen bringt eine Verbesserung und dadurch auch das Auflösen des Karmas.
@@DougsDharma I’m agnostic and thought that other people’s ghost stories were BS. That was until I experienced a ghost while living in Myanmar almost 10 years ago. I’ve experienced nothing like it before or since then. Defied all my logic. 😅
Waiting for your video on Wakefulness
THE EGO (NON SELF) EXPLANATION
There is the world (or universe) and there are six senses we use to understand the world (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind) and most of the universe is made of matter that has eight inseparable natures (color, hardness, heat) etc. You can find what they are on the internet and other types of matter in Abhidhamma
How it works is, for example, the consciousness that is born in the retina in the eye can only see color. In order for that to happen, there should be consciousness, the object (color) and a phenomenon called phassa (or contact - between the object and the consciousness)
This phenomenon called contact (phassa) is very important, will come to it later.
Since every human is looking for who they are, an identity for them to exist, what they do is they build an entirely new identity around their profession, education, gender, achievements, culture so on and fundamentally the images they see from their eyes, the pleasures or pain they experience from their bodies (and other senses etc.) and take those as me, mine and my soul but in reality, what happens is a chain of events where the consciousness see or feel things according to the phenomenon of contact
A NON-TECHNICAL EXPLANATION
A practical way to understand this is, humans have memories of the past, and dreams about the future. And they identify themselves with those memories and dreams, taking those memories as me, mine and my soul
Some even say that if your mind goes to the past, you get depressed, if your mind goes to the future, you become anxious, so live at the moment.
But the truth is the mind itself only exist in the present moment, and in the present moment it goes through memories. But people think that this memory is the past and the future, and mistakenly identify it as me, mine and my soul. (due to ignorance)
So nirvana is something that exists right here, right now at the present moment, something that is beyond time.
PHENOMENA OF CONTACT
Another way to describe this is Brahmajala Sutta (you can read the Wikipedia article of this)
Where Buddha teaches how his teachings are beyond anyone else, and how only a Buddha can uncover this
In simple words, it teaches about point of views (dhitti) or how every other religion, philosophy, science will come to exist. Since they are all points of views, they are all relative to each other (and the mind)
What Buddha's dhamma teaches is how you remove the point of view (dhitti). Once you remove the point of view, you become absolute, means achieve nirvana
The other thing is all these points of views (even modern mathematics) arises from that phenomena called phassa (contact) between the mind and the thoughts
Humans invented mathematics out of their own minds, means mathematics came out of contact. Anything that comes out of the phenomenon of contact is relative and not absolute (means is not nirvana)
Nirvana itself cannot be described by words, because every word in the world arises from the phenomenon of contact. Anything that arises from contact will get caught up in the Law of Dependent Arising (Patichcha Samuppada - do a wiki search)
CONCLUSION
So the ego or self or existence is not really an illusion, it is a chain of effects that happens due to a cause, humans just see it in a wrong point of view due to the ignorance (avidya - not knowing) of the dhamma
In other words, humans themselves create the ego that is not really there, due to their own ignorance, and they will do both bad and good things (karma) to maintain that ego that is not there in the first place
Or scientifically, you can say that an evolved selfish consciousness is creating the illusion of a self (or an ego) to trick itself for survival (samsara - cycle of rebirth)
Every phenomenon explained here happens very fast, and the goal is to understand that everything that comes into existence, also comes with nature of disappearance(nirodha)
In the objective world, nothing is born, live for a period of time and then disappear.
Everything disappears at the time of occurrence. The time it takes to arise and disappear is zero. Thus time is not a fundamental unit of the world and time doesn't really exist. If something is captured by time, it have the decaying and dieing nature. If something is not captured by time, it does not decay.
Hence nirvana is "akaliko" (is not captured by time)
IMPORTANT
I think it is good to learn either Pali, sanskrit, sinhala or all these languages to truly understand the essense
But remember, one will only come to the understanding of the truth (become enlighten) by their own mother tongue
So it can be said it's the same conscious stream?
In the same way we can talk of streams being the same even though no part of them is identical, so too we can speak of the same stream of psychophysical events, including consciousness.
In Milinda Pancha , Nagasena explained it to King Melandros "what is reborn ".
🙏😊
I find this subject fascinating. I sometimes, while in meditation, I feel as though there were a hole in the mind. A singularity if you will. Like a drain that all the sense information goes swirling down into Akasha. Everything within awareness, everything without awareness, getting swallowed up in this tiny little hole.
That which sees but is not seen. That which hears but cannot be heard. That which perceives perception.
We all have a primordial soul which is immortal. When the body dies, this soul reincarnates either here or Hell. Heaven can only be obtained when we are alive....................falundafa
In Buddhism, what is the Chi'i or Qi, which is "vital energy"?
My focus is largely on early Buddhism, and this is a concept from China that is reflected in some later, East Asian schools. It's not found in early Buddhism.
Self is a temporary construct while in samsara. Just as a raft is a temporary construct while on the river.
🙏😊
I have a stupid question which I'd like to put as stupidly as possible. (You've probably answered it already in other videos, but this is the one I came in on.) If karma is real and what I do now is accruing good or bad karmic consequences, but most or all of them will be visited only on some future consciousness which is not me, why should I care? If I'm unenlightened enough to enjoy doing things which create bad karma, why stop? Traditional Christian teachings about hell give a simple answer: you yourself will suffer the consequences. But if that's not the case, why should anyone prefer doing good acts, if unpleasant or inconvenient, to doing bad acts that feel good here and now and don't backfire immediately?
Why you think your future consciousness is not you? The content of your consciousness is you. Whithout the content your consciousness as you know it does not exist. And you as ego does not exist. The content consist of all the collected knowledge from experiences, your memories and knowledge from experiences. And you are the total of all these memories and knowledge. This is the content of your consciousness . When you incarnate. This content reincarnates. But this content is without any reality but put together by thought. So, there's not a real self. But the self is maya. Beyond this self-consciousness, beyond the conditioned mind, is the mind. Self-consciousness, or the content of your consciousness is the brain. When the brain is absolutly silent then the mind will connect with your brain. Then brain and mind are the same. Are one.
@@heinmolenaar6750
I originally wrote "not me in any sense I can recognize," but deleted the last phrase as superfluous. Apparently it wasn't. Everything you say here is no doubt good Buddhist teaching, but it still doesn't add up to any future self I can recognize as me. Therefore my questions remain.
@@EricWexler your consciousness from your past life is in this life your guide, or intuïtion. If you can't remember your past life doesn't mean that past life never was. You can't even remember things from this life.
Yes, traditional Christian teachings give a story about a permanent self that continues through this life and into a future life. If that is all that motivates you to do good, then by all means continue believing it!
Thank you for explaining. How is the Gandhabba (consciousness) not the atman/soul?
Because it isn't permanent and unchanging.
It you all want to know more about reborn, I would you all suggest to read or learn the cause and effect (Paticcasamuppaadada). Reborn concerning about 12 links of dependent. For non-self, you can learn Anattalakkana Sutta or Abhidhama (the higher teaching of the Buddha).
Yes, thanks! I've done a few videos on aspects of dependent origination: ruclips.net/p/PL0akoU_OszRjcEvO6Gt2MSKF-u7Y8XaNc
Maha sadhu for the right efforts! 👍🙏
🙏😊
Appear to Disappear (Anittcha or Natural Phenomena of IMPERMANENCE ) Buddhist Insight meditation ❤
On your personal notes, I approach this a similar way, I think scientifically or philosophically, and pick apart different ideas as an agnostic I don't know who is right. I have studied the ancient teachings of our ancestors from all over the globe. I believe the truth is what they have in common, the mystics seem to all agree on a lot of stuff. Leave it to scholars to debate the differences. I like the idea of secular Buddhism, a global sangha, even those of other faiths will benefit from it! I have heard many faithful believers say Buddhism brought them closer to Jesus.
Yes to each their own. 🙏
Suppose that technology allows 'me' (consciousness?) to be transferred out from my biological human brain to a cat brain. Before the transfer, I have human's memories, intentions and cognitive profiles. After the transfer, I lose all my human's mental features; instead now I have cat's memories, intentions and cognitive profiles. After the transfer, I completely don't know I was a human before. The strange point is 'me' is still 'me'. If compare such 'me' transfer scenario to rebirth concept in Buddhism, is that what Buddhism is talking about `rebirth'? Does anyone know? (No permanent features of `self' but instead a Mindstream sustained over on ever changing system's properties). If that is true then Buddhism has made an important prediction; in order to achieve 'me' (consciousness?) transfer technologically, it is not to copy any information/system properties or migrate any substance, but to sustain some sort of 'continuity' out from the biological brain to another system; despite what sort of 'continuity' is that is still being unknown by science. Does any one know my mentioned analogy is in line with Buddhism or not?
Hey Doug, love the videos. Can you do a video on "if there is now self, how can there be self love?" sometimes I feel like buddhism asks me to choose between disregarding myself and taking care of myself. How does buddhism align with modern wellness?
Ah, Buddhist practice is all about taking care of yourself by minimizing dukkha. So it aligns very well with modern wellness. And I'll put your idea for a video on the list!
@@DougsDharma that makes sense! sometime in my zen training i was taught that since there is no self then nothing is a problem (no good no bad) and nothing ever dies. but then i found myself negating or invalidating my emotions, and since then have turned away from zen to focus on a more therapy-centered path of healing. would love your perspective! it honestly could have just been the way i approached it (constantly checking to see if i was being mindful) rather than zen or buddhist teachings themselves.
@@DougsDharma Yes. And by minimizing dukkha it will be less an obstacle. Also, each of us have a capacity for compassion for ourselves and others and we also have a tendency to attach to love and its objects. To love without attachment is love in its truest sense.
The real self is non self. It is second by second
As a secular inclined person, I think I can agree with how the early texts explain rebirth (except maybe for gandhabba). The consequences of our actions continue, but that's it. Is there a reason not to say that there isn't really anything personal (our mind, our body) left to be reborn? The parts of us that continue (our children, the consequences of our actions) are already present during our lifetime. The only things that are reborn after our life are the animals and plants that are nourished by our decomposing body? What more is there?
Right, that's how I'd look at it.
@@DougsDharma I love your videos!
Still struggling on this. How does the Dali Lama fit in? Similar personality and able to remember past life possessions.
I'm not familiar with the Dalai Lama's opinions on this, so not sure!
@@DougsDharma thank you for your reply. I enjoy your videos. I'm caught somewhere between buddhist and agnostic. I often listen to all branches buddhist dharma talks. Trying to figure it out. I really enjoy your take on things.
@@brandoncomeaux86 Du musst nur ein bisschen Dein Karma anschauen und auflösen, dann wird alles sehr viel einfacher.