Denial of Rebirth

5 Minute Dharma


I will argue that the Buddha taught rebirth. Now. He was either right about rebirth or he was wrong. I let us be clear about the fact that the Buddha taught rebirth. On the night of his awakening, the Buddha said I recollected my many kinds of past lives with features and details. This was the first knowledge which I achieved in the I watch of the night on quote. And just to be clear, it's wrong, too, so that he taught rebirth just for cultural and pragmatic reasons alone. The. Buddhist said quote, and what is wrong view? There is no meaning in giving sacrifice or offering. There's no fruit or result of good and bad deeds. There's no afterlife. Notice the Buddhist said that that was wrong view. There's no afterlife. The first component of the noble eightfold path is right view, and the denial of rebirth is counter to this. The teaching of rebirth rights be boaty crops out almost everywhere in the Pali Canon. And is so closely bound to a host of other doctrines that to remove it would virtually reduced the Dhamma to tatters. Was the Buddha wrong about rebirth. The Buddha has three insights on the night of his awakening the first, which we just read about was the recollection of his past lives. The second was the KARMIC death and rebirth of other beings, and the third was a complete grasp of the four noble truths. Now if we accept the four noble trues, why should we deny the other two insights? Psychologist Robert. Wright has written a book entitled why Buddhism is True. In it. He gives evidence that quote. Buddhism's diagnosis of the human predicament is fundamentally correct. And, that it's prescription is deeply valid urgently important on quote. But like so many modern people. He accepts the psychology of Buddhism while rejecting its metaphysics. I used to do this myself when I was a secular Buddhist. But. How could the Buddha be so right about human psychology and so wrong about the nature of reality? Was the Buddha right. In my opinion, it seems more probable that the Buddha was right about rebirth. But someone object. There's no solid scientific evidence for a berth. Remembering. That Buddhism teaches that we have six senses. The usual five plus the mind that respond. Scientists based on what the five senses tell us, but ignores the six sense of the mind. Without all our senses, we cannot know all of reality. It is like ignoring the sense of hearing, and then concluding that sound is not real. There's a name for this fallacy. It is scientism. Bryan appleyard defines it as the belief that science is or can be the complete and only explanation. Scientists Limited to the physical world, because it ignores consciousness it ignores are six sense. As Philip Goff states, nothing is more certain unconsciousness, and yet nothing is harder to incorporate into our scientific picture of the world. The problem of consciousness began when Galileo decided that science was not in the business of dealing with consciousness on quote. Pan, Sai Qasem tries to correct this error. Quote Pan psychics believed that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the physical world on quote. Thomas Nagel argues if any two hundred pound chunk of the universe contains the material needed to construct a person, and if we deny both cycle, physical reductionism and a radical form of emergence, then everything reduced to US elements must have proto mental properties on-court. That means that consciousness is weaved into the very fabric of the cosmos. The great physicist David Bohm hypothesized that reality is incorporated. Of An explicit order and an implicit order which is unfolded. Consciousness would be part of that in folded implicit or That

Coming up next