How are you preparing for death?

[reiun]

I think we have a doctrinal dispute between those traditions whose adherents are comfortable with accepting teachings that cannot be proved on faith and those traditions that emphasize a more questioning attitude.

I pretty much share Shohaku Okumura Roshi's approach to rebirth:


Those who seem to think that refusal to believe unquestioningly in rebirth makes one not a Buddhist might want to reflect on whether they might be being sectarian.

That’s not a doctrinal formation or some tenet but one teachers upaya. Zen has all kinds of ceremonies directly addressing things like prayers for the deceased, etc. and like most Mahayana schools generally takes samsara as a given. That is not sectarianism, it’s the reality of Buddhist tradition as we know them, independent of personal belief.

There are certainly schools with vastly different emphasis on this, but the implication that agnosticism about rebirth is somehow a traditional Buddhist position is not really accurate IMO.

As to practices that help, I’d again mention simply imaging one is dying soon, it’s aided by the fact that for some of us, it may be true!

Corpse contemplation is another classic example, I’ve always loved the Japanese versions:
https://www.talkdeath.com/contemplation ... rt-kusozu/

Ah JD, you are not so really arrogant as to sit there and tell me that Okumura doesn't really believe what I just quoted just because it contradicts your position? It was only a skillful means to appeal to slow learners like me?

Whether his view is traditional or not is beside the point. If rebirth were a provable fact we'd all accept it as fact just as we accept death as a fact. Okumura's stated view is valid as is. Apparently he's a really nice guy. Maybe we could email him and ask him?

The problem I find with those who accept things they cannot know on faith is when they cannot then admit they might - just might - not know the whole story. That can start to smell a bit like fundamentalism.

Rebirth might exist exactly as described in the various teachings. You might be right. But you don't know for sure.

I think I need a break from this forum.

[Malcolm]

The problem I find with those who accept things they cannot know on faith is when they cannot then admit they might - just might - not know the whole story.

We accept that the Buddha knew the whole story. That's why we are Buddhists and not followers of some other religion. The Buddha made it very clear that we should accept the testimony of awakened people about hidden phenomena ordinary people cannot directly know through higher cognition (abhijñā), such as recollection of past lives, knowing the minds of others, and even the fact of awakening, and so on. Why do you accept the idea of awakening but reject the idea of rebirth. Neither is verifiable according to mundane empirical methods of validating evidence.

It may not appeal to you to accept things like rebirth and karma in absence of empirical validation of such phenomena by mundane science, but that's your problem, not ours. It's understandable that people would react with doubt about your skepticism about central problem Buddha set out to solve: how to end the suffering of rebirth. But in the end, what you choose to believe is up to you. But it is a choice.

[Archie2009]

I would argue that the 'one-out - one in' conception of rebirth is much more mired in clinging to a concept of self. Noone here is denying the possibility of some form of rebirth - just that its existence is not provable.

Rebirth occurs because of the habit of I-making. When that habit is eradicated, then one has control over birth. It may not be "provable" to those commoners with ordinary, contaminated, undeveloped sense organs, but it is verifiable by those who make the effort to cultivate samadhi and the deva eye, etc. That community has found rebirth empirically validated amongst themselves.

[Malcolm]

Quite honestly, I never understood how people can accept the idea of bodhi, and at the same time, reject karma and the rest of it. It makes no sense whatsoever to accept that the Buddha was an fully awake person who was incorrect about his entire model of liberation.

[Johnny Dangerous]

I think we have a doctrinal dispute between those traditions whose adherents are comfortable with accepting teachings that cannot be proved on faith and those traditions that emphasize a more questioning attitude.

I pretty much share Shohaku Okumura Roshi's approach to rebirth:


Those who seem to think that refusal to believe unquestioningly in rebirth makes one not a Buddhist might want to reflect on whether they might be being sectarian.

That’s not a doctrinal formation or some tenet but one teachers upaya. Zen has all kinds of ceremonies directly addressing things like prayers for the deceased, etc. and like most Mahayana schools generally takes samsara as a given. That is not sectarianism, it’s the reality of Buddhist tradition as we know them, independent of personal belief.

There are certainly schools with vastly different emphasis on this, but the implication that agnosticism about rebirth is somehow a traditional Buddhist position is not really accurate IMO.

As to practices that help, I’d again mention simply imaging one is dying soon, it’s aided by the fact that for some of us, it may be true!

Corpse contemplation is another classic example, I’ve always loved the Japanese versions:
https://www.talkdeath.com/contemplation ... rt-kusozu/

Ah JD, you are not so really arrogant as to sit there and tell me that Okumura doesn't really believe what I just quoted just because it contradicts your position? It was only a skillful means to appeal to slow learners like me?

I have no idea what he believes, I was stating that it’s not a doctrinal position or tenet of Zen, but rather was his teaching…as far as I know that is accurate, and Zen traditionally regards rebirth in samsara as a given. If you want to have the knee jerk reaction of calling me arrogant for that, ok.

Whether his view is traditional or not is beside the point. If rebirth were a provable fact we'd all accept it as fact just as we accept death as a fact. Okumura's stated view is valid as is. Apparently he's a really nice guy. Maybe we could email him and ask him?

You mentioned “doctrinal debate” earlier, but there is no doctrinal debate at all, regardless of his statement or your personal beliefs. I practiced in Zen tradition for a while and all Zen students are ever able to produce in this regard are few cherry picked quotes…versus all the traditional sources which assume rebirth as a given. So, if you did not mean it’s actually a doctrinal thing and are just talking about your or Okamuras beliefs, great, no issue, but it is important to distinguish between the two.

The problem I find with those who accept things they cannot know on faith is when they cannot then admit they might - just might - not know the whole story. That can start to smell a bit like fundamentalism.-

Totally your projection IMO, also personally amusing to be associated with being a fundamentalist when usually I am accused of the opposite. It begs the question of who really carries the heaviest baggage here wrt to opinions on rebirth, as you seem to carry a lot more assumptions about me than I do about you.

Anyway, my belief in rebirth is based somewhat on the word of the Buddha, but mainly on observation of my mind and mental phenomena, it is a different discovery than empiricism relying on record data and external factors, but being based on inference drawn from personal experience, it is not simply blind faith. Assuming that is misunderstanding the whole way Buddhist tradition encourages exploration of these questions ,and it avoids the notion of pramana.

Rebirth might exist exactly as described in the various teachings. You might be right. But you don't know for sure.

I think I need a break from this forum.

I have no idea if it is works as described, I actually assume a fair bit of hyperbole and poetic language in traditional description. Again, my confidence in it comes partially from traditional philosophical proof and tenets, but in large part from inferences made based on observation of my own mind stream.

Take a break if you want, arrogant is hardly the worst thing I’ve been called on DW and no hard feelings.

Btw I am fine not talking about rebirth, but again it seems somewhat absurd to expect a thread on a Buddhist forum about preparation for death to somehow avoid the subject of rebirth, and trying to make that happen is likely to be difficult unless we set specific limitations such as only wanting to discuss practical worldly preparation, etc.

[reiun]

Quite honestly, I never understood how people can accept the idea of bodhi, and at the same time, reject karma and the rest of it. It makes no sense whatsoever to accept that the Buddha was an fully awake person who was incorrect about his entire model of liberation.

One would like to see the first part as a humble admission.

As for the second, there may be a misreading (literalist) or misinterpretation involved. (E.g., many Bible scholars now use the pesher technique.)

No human, teacher or otherwise, is or ever has been infallible.

In fact, most of us are just "contaminated commoners", except, perhaps, for a few elite observers.

[Malcolm]

No human, teacher or otherwise, is or ever has been infallible.

The Buddha, axiomatically, is infallible about awakening and the path for realizing it. That is why he is called the Buddha.

He does not need to be free from error about number of ants in an ant colony, that kind of knowledge is irrelevant to bodhi.

[reiun]

No human, teacher or otherwise, is or ever has been infallible.

The Buddha, axiomatically, is infallible about awakening and the path for realizing it. That is why he is called the Buddha.

He does not need to be free from error about number of ants in an ant colony, that kind of knowledge is irrelevant to bodhi.

Axiomatically, as in "propositionally". I follow such a path, consisting of practicing zazen, to cultivate samadhi and to actualize it. I will try to report if/when it works for me infallibly, i.e. never failing, always effective. After all, only human.

It is enough to realize the fallibility, and the implication.

Oh, and good 'rule out' on the ants.

[Meido]

I practiced in Zen tradition for a while and all Zen students are ever able to produce in this regard are few cherry picked quotes…versus all the traditional sources which assume rebirth as a given.

Agreed. On the topic of preparing for death, this is one of my favorite quotes from Dogen (that I have here cherry-picked):

“When you leave this life, and before you enter the next life, there is a place called an intermediary realm [J.: chu-in]. You stay there for seven days. You should resolve to keep chanting the names of the three treasures without ceasing while you are there. After seven days you die in the intermediary realm and [receiving another body] remain there for no more than seven days. At this time you can see and hear without hindrance, like having a celestial eye. Resolve to encourage yourself to keep chanting the names of the three treasures without ceasing: ‘I take refuge in the Buddha. I take refuge in the Dharma. I take refuge in the Sangha.’

After passing through the intermediary realm, when you approach your parents to be conceived, resolve to maintain authentic wisdom. Keep chanting refuge in the three treasures in your mother’s womb. Do not neglect chanting while you are [being] given birth. Resolve deeply to dedicate yourself to chant and take refuge in the three treasures through the six sense roots.

When your life ends, your eye sight will suddenly become dark. Know that this is the end of your life and be determined to chant, ‘I take refuge in the buddha.’ Then, all buddhas in the ten directions will show compassion to you. Even if due to conditions you are bound to an unwholesome realm, you will be able to be born in the deva realm or in the presence of the Buddha [Where you may] Bow and listen to the Buddha.”

- Shobogenzo section 94, "Mind of the Way” (Levitt/Tanahashi translation)

[Malcolm]

No human, teacher or otherwise, is or ever has been infallible.

The Buddha, axiomatically, is infallible about awakening and the path for realizing it. That is why he is called the Buddha.

Axiomatically, as in "propositionally".

Axiomatically, as in "a statement or proposition which is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true."

[reiun]

By some, only. Remember: it is the "contaminated commoners" who are in the majority, especially in this case. Most of them probably think it is just a copout by the elites for not showing the actual proof of rebirth. No doubt there must be at least 86,000 examples hiding somewhere . . .

[Genjo Conan]

I practiced in Zen tradition for a while and all Zen students are ever able to produce in this regard are few cherry picked quotes…versus all the traditional sources which assume rebirth as a given.

Agreed. On the topic of preparing for death, this is one of my favorite quotes from Dogen (that I have here cherry-picked):

<snip>

Dogen taught about karma and rebirth quite often, not just in the Shobogenzo but in the Shobogenzo Zuimonki and the Eihei Koroku as well. It was perhaps the major subject of his later teaching career. And he died quite young, so I think we can safely say that he felt it was doctrinally important, rather than just "old man starts thinking about the end."

[Johnny Dangerous]

By some, only. Remember: it is the "contaminated commoners" who are in the majority, especially in this case. Most of them probably think it is just a copout by the elites for not showing the actual proof of rebirth. No doubt there must be at least 86,000 examples hiding somewhere . . .

Or they just have an impractical idea of what constitutes “proof” of rebirth and continually look outside their own experiences for said proof, because it is the habit of our culture to only accept this sort of truth claim, and to not entertain other ways of knowing, nor other philosophies of mind than “mind comes from brains.”

There is little way to examine the reported contents of someone else’s mind and somehow put them into empirical studies in rebirth. It is nearly non-falsifiable by modern scientific definition.

On the other hand, drawing inference based on our own direct experience of the mind combined with the Buddha’s teaching -is- a traditional method which is viewed as valid for establishing these things.

No one is as close to our subjective experiences as we are, and in fact they are available only to us. So taking a position that this question is about using the scientific method to “prove” rebirth to others is a bit beside the point. There is no point in proving it others, even if we could - Buddhadharma expects one to take up the question directly and personally, not to form a committee or do a study. In that sense it operates outside the acceptable norms for “proof” in our present society which is not inclined towards philosophical arguments or contemplation as means to truth.

Personally thats ok with me, I don’t care what people believe, I just think it’s important to be truthful about separating what is Buddhadharma and what is our own take.

One gains confidence in this based on personal experiences and inference, or they don’t and remain agnostic. That could be an issue of training, personal inclination, priorities, whatever, more factors than we can count.

It doesn’t change the fact that the Buddhist tradition pretty uniformly treats rebirth as a given, and often puts it as a central piece of practicing around death.

[Malcolm]

By some, only. Remember: it is the "contaminated commoners" who are in the majority, especially in this case. Most of them probably think it is just a copout by the elites for not showing the actual proof of rebirth. No doubt there must be at least 86,000 examples hiding somewhere . . .

It's like showing light to the congenitally blind, they have not developed the cognitive capacity to verify such phenomena for themselves. But everyone is capable of developing this capacity, thus it is different than congenital blindness.

[reiun]

Well then, it wouldn't matter if they developed the cognitive capacity, because of their physical disability (congenital blindness}.

Honestly, I'm getting to KV's point of departure. Many would love to believe in the equivalent of "perpetual light shining upon us", but the only arguments offered here are impracticality, irrelevance or incapacity of rational proof.

[Johnny Dangerous]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pramana

https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pramana

[reiun]

It is the universals, not the particulars, which are said to be understood in the second definition provided. Thus, there is no specific rational proof. Only an unproven general inference/theory remains.

[Johnny Dangerous]

It is the universals, not the particulars, which are said to be understood in the second definition provided. Thus, there is no specific rational proof. Only an unproven general inference remains.

Yes, that’s because “rational proof” - empirical proof verifiable by a third party- the kind you are talking about is the domain of modern science, and Buddhadharma uses a different scheme.

You are free to do that, but as we are addressing Buddhadharma and it’s frameworks and not RCTs on rebirth or something, your preference for that form of proof is largely irrelevant. Again, one “proves” it to themselves or doesn’t, comes to the conclusion or doesn’t m. Since Buddhists traditions unanimously include rebirth, obviously convincing skeptics was not seen as particularly relevant.

Anyway, again I don’t care about people’s beliefs much, but seeing the absurdity of a Buddhist thread on preparation for death where some insist that rebirth is not part of the conversation is surreal.

[reiun]

It has already been discussed on this forum that cells die and are replaced about every seven years, hence a form of rebirth. Or, also mentioned, moment-to-moment it can be said we experience a renewal or rebirth. So that is "gaining confidence based on personal experience." No problem rationally proving either of these, as far as I'm concerned.

As for using modern science in this discussion, I accept your capitulation.

[Tukaram]

I think I took us down a fruitless rabbit hole in my responses to Malcolm's answer. So let me rephrase:

So, anyone care to share what they are doing to prepare for their death (rather than their trip through the bardo)?

On the worldly side - I do need to update my will (the wrong wife is in it ha ha). I had to jump through some hoops to get my wife listed as beneficiary on my retirements (The US considers her a non-resident alien). I pre-purchased my funeral plan in 1986 (would like to sell it, actually).

On the metaphysical side - All I have is today (and maybe not the entire day). So today I will meditate, and try to be a good compassionate person. I will try to leave the world a little better than I found it.

Remember the teachings of the great prophets Bill & Ted: "Be excellent to each other, and party on, dudes".