Buddha encouraged us to think for ourselves. So unless somehow you know for sure what happens when you die, then being honest with oneself, most will say they simply don't know what happens. The Buddhist teachings are all about being honest with yourself. It does nobody any good to try to deliberately delude yourself or convince yourself of something you are unsure about.
You may have reasons that means rebirth makes more sense to you than other approaches, but nobody has ever come up with incontrovertible proof that everyone else accepts. Different Buddhist schools have different ideas.
The Tibetan schools are perhaps the most elaborate and I think the only ones that identify rebirths. This is something generally strongly discouraged in Buddhist teaching because it generally will lead most people into confusion and suffering to do that. But on the other hand Buddha did talk about his own previous lives. Their approach seems to work well for Tibetans, but is only used for great teachers not for ordinary Tibetans who don't try to identify their previous rebirths in any way. Tibetans also think that we spend some months in the Bardo typically (not always) as we journey from one life to another and some of the great teachers are said to enter a "death meditation" where they meditate for several days after their heart stops, before they finally die completely and (so they believe) enter the bardo.
Therevadhan schools generally teach that the transition is instant, when you die, then you immediately start on your new rebirth.
Zen Buddhists don't go into many details at all.
And many modern Buddhists find the idea of rebirth hard to relate to at all.
The four noble truths are a little hard to relate to without this idea of some form of continuation after you die. You can though still apply them in this life, and see non self in this life, which is what Buddha himself did after all.
But it's hard to relate fully to the idea of escaping from Samsara if you think that when this life is over, that's it.
However, all you need is an open mind, that you are not totally sure that when we die that's the end.
Scientists have not by any means proved this. Science is very limited in its scope. Nobody knows what awareness is or what the mind is. The idea of mind as a computer program is just a hypothesis with many issues in it. You may be interested in my If A Program Can't Understand Truth - Ethics Of Artificial Intelligence Babies which explores some of the consequences if it is not true.
Many scientists are Christian or Buddhist or Hindu or other religions and see no conflict with their scientific studies at all.
For myself, I do believe in rebirth. The main reasons are:
Now those are not knock down logical arguments or everyone would have to beleive in rebirth. And that's good because it means I can also respect those of other religions or none who have other views. Otherwise I'd be unbearably "stuck up" thinking "I know what is right and nobody else does".
But they are reasonable enough arguments I think to be getting on with for now. While leaving it also open, that I don't know. I think it is so important, no matter what you think, to acknowledge clearly that you don't know, in areas where you don't know the answer.
Even if you are Christian or Muslim, have firm faith in God or Jesus or Allah, still, its a matter of faith in that case and without harming your faith in the least, you can still acknowledge that in the ordinary sense, you "don't know". I think that would even strengthen your faith otherwise it is an unacknowledged hidden doubt, by bringing it into the open to look at it. And can help with tolerance of those of other faiths or none.
Same also for Hindus, Ancestor worshippers, etc etc.
Same also applies to scientists. Some atheist scientists may be absolutely sure that this life is all there is, even write books about it. But they haven't proved this, at least only to themselves and their followers. It can help with tolerance to acknowledge that scientifically also, we don't know. After all many scientists also believe in a continuation of this life after they die, and see no conflict, while applying the same critical judgement to their religious beliefs as they do to their scientific work. They don't claim to have proved a continuation of life after they die, but see no evidence of a scientific disproof of it.
Indeed I remember a Korean zen teacher I listened to a teaching by, who made this point the main focus of his talk. I'm not sure how he put it exactly as this was about 30 years ago. Still it stays in my memory, and he was saying that the central point of the path of the Buddha was to keep saying "I don't know"!.
You may have reasons that means rebirth makes more sense to you than other approaches, but nobody has ever come up with incontrovertible proof that everyone else accepts. Different Buddhist schools have different ideas.
The Tibetan schools are perhaps the most elaborate and I think the only ones that identify rebirths. This is something generally strongly discouraged in Buddhist teaching because it generally will lead most people into confusion and suffering to do that. But on the other hand Buddha did talk about his own previous lives. Their approach seems to work well for Tibetans, but is only used for great teachers not for ordinary Tibetans who don't try to identify their previous rebirths in any way. Tibetans also think that we spend some months in the Bardo typically (not always) as we journey from one life to another and some of the great teachers are said to enter a "death meditation" where they meditate for several days after their heart stops, before they finally die completely and (so they believe) enter the bardo.
Therevadhan schools generally teach that the transition is instant, when you die, then you immediately start on your new rebirth.
Zen Buddhists don't go into many details at all.
And many modern Buddhists find the idea of rebirth hard to relate to at all.
The four noble truths are a little hard to relate to without this idea of some form of continuation after you die. You can though still apply them in this life, and see non self in this life, which is what Buddha himself did after all.
But it's hard to relate fully to the idea of escaping from Samsara if you think that when this life is over, that's it.
However, all you need is an open mind, that you are not totally sure that when we die that's the end.
Scientists have not by any means proved this. Science is very limited in its scope. Nobody knows what awareness is or what the mind is. The idea of mind as a computer program is just a hypothesis with many issues in it. You may be interested in my If A Program Can't Understand Truth - Ethics Of Artificial Intelligence Babies which explores some of the consequences if it is not true.
Many scientists are Christian or Buddhist or Hindu or other religions and see no conflict with their scientific studies at all.
For myself, I do believe in rebirth. The main reasons are:
- It just made sense of so many things I struggled with as a Christian. If I am in this life as a result of many previous lives and due to confusion in the past, it just is so much more believable for me.
- In science, all the measurements eventually have to be made by humans (or similar beings if we meet ETs). The idea of an observer is not at all clear, especially in Quantum Mechanics. I am not persuaded at all by the scientific arguments that limit awareness to a single lifetime (and have a solid background in science).
- I know that I am aware, whatever that means. But it is something simple or direct. You are most aware in the simplest situations, for instance moments of shock, pain, pleasure etc. It is surely not just a result of complexity indeed seems one is less aware when involved in complex calculations.
- When I die, then if my awareness stops then, it would be as if I never existed. No awareness then means no memory, and no past either, for me none of this ever happened, because there is no me. So how can it be happening now if it stops in the future?
- Similarly, how could there be such awareness now if some time in the past it didn't exist? Again would mean that at some time in the past, there is no future me yet existing. Then suddenly I exist. It doesn't make sense to me.
Now those are not knock down logical arguments or everyone would have to beleive in rebirth. And that's good because it means I can also respect those of other religions or none who have other views. Otherwise I'd be unbearably "stuck up" thinking "I know what is right and nobody else does".
But they are reasonable enough arguments I think to be getting on with for now. While leaving it also open, that I don't know. I think it is so important, no matter what you think, to acknowledge clearly that you don't know, in areas where you don't know the answer.
Even if you are Christian or Muslim, have firm faith in God or Jesus or Allah, still, its a matter of faith in that case and without harming your faith in the least, you can still acknowledge that in the ordinary sense, you "don't know". I think that would even strengthen your faith otherwise it is an unacknowledged hidden doubt, by bringing it into the open to look at it. And can help with tolerance of those of other faiths or none.
Same also for Hindus, Ancestor worshippers, etc etc.
Same also applies to scientists. Some atheist scientists may be absolutely sure that this life is all there is, even write books about it. But they haven't proved this, at least only to themselves and their followers. It can help with tolerance to acknowledge that scientifically also, we don't know. After all many scientists also believe in a continuation of this life after they die, and see no conflict, while applying the same critical judgement to their religious beliefs as they do to their scientific work. They don't claim to have proved a continuation of life after they die, but see no evidence of a scientific disproof of it.
Indeed I remember a Korean zen teacher I listened to a teaching by, who made this point the main focus of his talk. I'm not sure how he put it exactly as this was about 30 years ago. Still it stays in my memory, and he was saying that the central point of the path of the Buddha was to keep saying "I don't know"!.
About the Author
Robert Walker
Writer of articles on Mars and Space issues - Software Developer of Tune Smithy, Bounce Metronome etc.Studied at Wolfson College, Oxford
Lives in Isle of Mull
4.8m answer views110.3k this month
Top Writer2017, 2016, and 2015
Published WriterHuffPost, Slate, and 4 moreHuffPost, Slate, Forbes, Newsweek, Business Insider, and Science 2.0