The question of re-incarnation?

Introduction

In contemplation or insight (Vipassanā) meditation a few weeks ago, I decided to focus on the question of reincarnation. I was participating in a half-day meditation retreat at the monastery and the discussion we had at the Sutra Study class a few evenings before was still present in my awareness. The Shifu had encouraged a discussion on the ways to engage English speaking practitioners and noted that re-incarnation was often a hurdle that was too high for many to leap over and observed that one advanced ley practitioner had decided to abandon their practice because they could not discover a foundation of belief in the principle of multiple lifetimes. With this discussion in mind and knowing that Buddhist practice is based on reason, I formed the question of focus and settled into the first period of meditation. The question was:

Can dependent origination prove reincarnation?

In forming the question, I recognised that Śūnyatā is the voidness of all manifest phenomena from holding any intrinsic reality or independent form of existence. Or to rephrase slightly differently, everything in existence only exists as a result of the interaction of the causes and conditions that give rise to its manifestation. In considering the question of reincarnation, I reasoned that reincarnation itself is Śūnyatā and must be dependent on its own causes and conditions. In which case, reincarnation might be provable through the theory of dependent origination.

After settling in to meditation, the most immediate thought that arrived was that of innate genius, where child prodigies demonstrate abilities that far exceed their years. How do such capabilities in some children manifest alongside the development of their motor control over their bodies, while in other “less gifted” children the development of such skills must be the result of patient study and tuition over the course of time and even over an entire lifetime? On the later case, we see causes and conditions at work to create an outcome, while in child prodigies we don’t see this at all.

Let’s look at the theory of dependent origination for the case of the lifetime of effort in skills development.

 

Dependent Origination

The theory of dependent origination, that all of manifested creation is the subject of originating causes and conditions, can be summed up in the following statement of variables:

Cause(s) + Condition(s) = Outcome(s)

In the case of a committed effort to become a skilled practitioner in a chosen field, say music, those variables become:

Causes: Study and tuition over time
+ Conditions: Patience, commitment, desire, access to an instrument, encouragement, etc.
= Outcomes: Attainment and gradual perfection of a new skill.

This makes sense to us on an intuitive level. We all know it takes hard work and commitment to achieve exceptional things like musical skills, however, if we consider the case of a child prodigy, we get a different set of observable variables that just don’t seem to add up, either intuitively or logically.

Causes: Development of mental and motor control functions
+ Conditions: Access to an instrument
= Outcomes: Rapid attainment and perfection of skill or capability.  - X

How does one reconcile these causes and conditions with the observation of the outcome? What if we throw in the theory of reincarnation into the mix with the Outcome achieved by a lifetime of study being the input into the Conditions that exist for a child prodigy to manifest their skill?

Causes: Development of mental and motor control functions
+ Conditions: Attainment of skill or capability in a previous lifetime and access to an instrument
= Outcomes: Rapid re-attainment and perfection of skill or capability

And now? The case of the child prodigy makes greater intuitive and logical sense because the theory of re-incarnation supports the observation of the outcome. In fact it seems simple and obvious really.

But still, some people cannot accept the possibility of re-incarnation as a credible theory even though the theory seems to be supported by observations. Perhaps because of biases derived from religious dogma or simply because they have no personal experience that would link them to a previous incarnation (lifetime).

 

Religious Bias against Re-incarnation

For those biased against re-incarnation due to prior religious grounds, the occurrence of a child prodigy attaining skills that others spend a lifetime developing may seem unfair and preferential, but they may allow it on the exception that “god moves in mysterious ways”. However, the observation that re-incarnation makes this otherwise unfair occurrence exceedingly fair and the use of exceptionalism unnecessary, may have little bearing in the consideration of reincarnation from a biased perspective. However, if the child prodigy has already invested the effort to develop the skill or capability in a previous lifetime that they are exhibiting in this lifetime, the law of causality is preserved as is the sublime nature of a supposed benevolent, monotheistic god.

Might this be a bit confronting for those seeking to reconcile reason against their learned doctrine and enshrined world view? Perhaps more confronting still is the transformation of all of life’s inequalities and apparent inconsistencies when one more broadly considers the implications of the theory of re-incarnation. In short, re-incarnation makes the entire nature of life fair and reasonable when one realises that no opportunity is denied them and any errors of judgement experienced in this life are not permanent definitions of your character or constraints on your potential, and rather than damning one to eternally burn in hell-fire, allows the transgressor the opportunity to try again. Would a good and loving parent do less for their child? If not, then how much more magnificent would one expect the actions of an omnipotent, all-loving god to be? For the monotheistic religions that pronounce their god as a just and fair god, as a benevolent and loving god, that is all-powerful and all-seeing, far from contradicting such a belief, the theory of re-incarnation supports it. But the theory of re-incarnation confronts the dogma of those religions that deny it, as this dogma is simply inconsistent with the pronouncement of the loving and virtuous characteristics of their godhead.

A benevolent, just and loving god, providing an equal opportunity to all of his sentient creations (people) through the process of re-incarnation makes sense because of the demonstrated perfection in fairness of opportunity, but does challenge religious dogma. If the paternal support of equal opportunity for all of a god’s creations makes better sense, what does the “one-shot at the goal” theory have to say about the ability of a religious doctrine to rationalise an unfair and limited opportunity as unconditional love? It would seem that denying the possibility of re-incarnation is equivalent to asserting that one’s god offers limited vision, limited love, is down-right unfair and chooses favourites? How much more perfect is the theory of re-incarnation for demonstrating a just god, which is unbounded in vision or love for its creations?

That is not to say there is a singular godhead or not, but to identify that to believe in an omnipotent, all-loving, monotheistic god while denying re-incarnation as a theory is logically inconsistent. One’s critical assessment of such religious doctrines, those that promulgate them and the reasons for believing in them may be fruitful in coming to terms with the concept of re-incarnation.

So, we can see that the theory of re-incarnation offers some explanation for the case of child prodigies and is consistent with monotheistic religions that pronounce an all-powerful, all-loving god. But why is it that child prodigies are the exception rather than the rule if re-incarnation is a fact?

In the case where potentials planned or intended for a lifetime are cut-short or incomplete, does it not make sense  that the retention of such skills are allowed to support the completion of a life’s plan? Indeed, it might be considered an unjust punishment to force a being to re-learn again that which it has already attained and integrated. Instead of punishing the entity, by some mechanism, new life experiences are allowed that complete those previously planned, and life is begun again from an informed base of practical experience. Again, it makes intuitive sense that beginning from some point of previous attainment would be most efficient and fair, for no useful purpose would necessarily be gained from relearning what had already been learned and integrated. Once more, one may see the perfection of a monotheistic god in such action where reincarnation is supposed. Or the sublime operation of the cycle of life and even the involvement of karma as a force for influencing that cycle in a Buddhistic world view.

 

No Personal Sense of Re-incarnation

While it is known that there are cases of people holding memories of their past-life, the reason we do not universally remember our past-lives is also important if one is expected to rationally accept the theory of re-incarnation. Why do we not remember our past lives and why can’t I access my previous knowledge and experience as child prodigies seem to? In my meditation I was happy enough to glance over this as I have considered it many times and can accept the concept from this perspective:

What if we all remembered our past lives?

What motivation or opportunity would there be for self-improvement, growth of wisdom or for developing new skills if the skills, personality and memories of previous lives carried forward into this life? Given that re-incarnation is to support the ongoing development and perfection of the individual over many lifetimes, wouldn’t a reliance on past skills and abilities be an impediment to the pace and progress of one’s further development?

If one new without any doubt that there was no risk in living or dying, that there was continuity of consciousness and experience from one life to the next, one’s motivation to achieve would be greatly diminished if not completely eviscerated from the tenor of physical life. Instead, through some mechanism, previous experiences and memories are veiled from conscious remembrance and perspectives on the nature of existence are thereby confused, ensuring that one is motivated for survival, learning and improvement.

Or to translate into our formula for dependent origination:

Causes: Individual physical existence
+ Conditions: Forgetfulness of past life memories and experience
= Outcomes: Motivation for survival, learning and improvement and new individual experiences

So it stands to reason that the development of new skills, new experiences and the perfecting of wisdom would be enhanced by forgetting the specific details of past lives. The accumulated maturity and wisdom of those lifetimes of previous experience, however, are manifested through the diversity of individual personality characteristics seen every day in the people around you. Hence, the same explanation for why we generally do not have any sense of our previous existences, also explains why there is such diversity observed in the population of humanity. Each developmental path is unique, with the twists and turns taken through many lifetimes accumulated in the matrix of the personality/consciousness that transcends each lifetime and becomes the basis from which new lives are begun. This accumulated experience provides an input to the potentials of one’s next life and forms the manner with which one perceives the significance of new experiences in that life. (This was attempted to be exemplified in terms of archetypal elements of personality previously, here.)

Therefore, while you may be unaware of past-lives and doubt re-incarnation as a theory, it is only the theory of re-incarnation that can adequately explain your experience of uniqueness, of having a well of intuition from which to draw and a sense of perspective and knowing by which you judge the significance of the world around you.

 

Cessation

However, if re-incarnation is not just a theory, but a manifest reality, it too must be dependent on the causes and conditions that create it, just as everything else is that manifests. Which means in-turn, by overcoming the conditions and eradicating the causes that give rise to re-incarnation, it may be possible to break free from it. That is, by acknowledging that re-incarnation is itself Śūnyatā, or impermanent, one is acknowledging that it is also possible to break free of the cycle of birth and death.

If you have followed this discussion so far, you must be asking yourself, “but what are these causes and conditions that I may avoid them and overcome this cycle of re-incarnation?” Well, we are speaking of non-other than the path of transcendental enlightenment when we ask such a question. I have provided a visual guide to the path previously in these pages that point to Ignorance and Attachment as the causes and conditions that keep us rooted in this cycle of re-birth. Or to translate into our formula for dependent origination:

Causes: Eradicate Ignorance (Prajñāpāramitā – perfection of wisdom)
+ Conditions: Overcome Attachment (sustained detached compassion and universal sense of loving kindness)
= Outcomes: Break free of the cycle of birth and death, attain the Bodhi-mind and Nirvana

The Buddhist Dharma provides the guide to the path didactically, starting with the Four Noble Truths for the perfecting of wisdom, being:

1. The Truth of Suffering;
2. The Truth of the Origin of Suffering;
3. The Truth of the Cessation of Suffering; and
4. The Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering.

And the Noble Eightfold Path for overcoming attachment and developing a sense of loving kindness to all things:

1. Right view
2. Right intention
3. Right speech
4. Right action
5. Right livelihood
6. Right effort
7. Right mindfulness
8. Right concentration

And to contrast that to the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas we can see Jesus speaking in similar concepts, referencing the transcendence of suffering:

(58) Jesus said, "Blessed is the man who has suffered and found life."

And that one’s sincerity and form of conduct is a measure of one’s transcendence:

(14) Jesus said to them, "If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your spirits. When you go into any land and walk about in the districts, if they receive you, eat what they will set before you, and heal the sick among them. For what goes into your mouth will not defile you, but that which issues from your mouth - it is that which will defile you."

May we all overcome our ignorance and attachment, break-free of this cycle of re-birth and attain the Bodhi-mind.

A Mi Tuo Fo