Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Three marks of existence - Buddhism
#1
It is not necessary to believe in the concept of rebirth to accept the truth of core Buddhist teachings. This is because of the three marks of existence, which each stand on their own regardless of reincarnation. Other factors such as the three defilements, the five obstacles, and the five fetters also stand up on their own. However, I will focus on the three marks of existence as accepted facts of life, and I will show how the Buddha’s empiricism allows them to stand independent of a belief in reincarnation. These three marks of existence are the core basis upon which much of the Buddha’s teachings rest. The first mark of existence is Anatta, meaning no atta or no permanent self. The second mark of existence is dukkha, which is unsatisfactoriness or suffering. A third mark of existence is anicca, which is impermanence. Rebirth is accepted in Buddha’s culture as a physical fact, seemingly the best scientific explanation. Samsara can be thought of as a cycle of rebirth, but it also can be viewed as reoccurring suffering in life. Whether one believes in rebirth or not, they may perceive reoccurring suffering.

One way in which it is not necessary to believe in rebirth is that there is still no atta. Buddha states that “consciousness is dependently arisen, since, without a condition, there is no arising of consciousness”. It is stated that “These six bases of sense have psycho-physicality as their cause”.  Observing a feeling as a feeling, empirical reality is not skewed and comes from a place of neutral observation. This contrasts a transcendental account of Brahman, for example. The final truths or arrival of liberation from suffering are within nirvana. The Buddha’s skepticism of a metaphysical consciousness nearly negates the idea of rebirth. This is because the focus is not on rebirth, but rather how to escape it. Rebirth is caused by craving, but suffering within our own lives is also connected to craving. The Buddha does not teach that same consciousness or self is carried through multiple lives . The Buddha states that “without condition, there is no arising of consciousness.”. When consciousness emerges based on body and tangible things, it is considered “bodily consciousness”. Consciousness and permanence therefore is not part of any greater immortal self.

Another way in which it is not necessary to believe in rebirth is that dukkha is viewed empirically. Dukkha is simply of the experience of life. Part of the path of dhamma is “passing beyond grief and lamentation” . This is not just escape from rebirth, but it could be perceived as escape from suffering in general. Suffering is universal regardless of whether one accepts Indian physics of reincarnation or not. Instead of remedying reincarnation, dhamma is an attempt to remedy suffering. Suffering may be circular in nature, and rather cause and effect which is like Samsara. There are concrete results from shaping one’s own dispositions to action. A person’s morality, their mind, and awareness of life may change. Every major religion in some way addresses suffering in its beliefs.

A third way in which it is not necessary to believe in rebirth is that impermanence can be seen regardless of one’s belief in rebirth. Regarding how the bhikkhu should live in the world, the Buddha states that “He lives unattached and grasps after nothing in the world”. This is not based on a speculative perspective, as shown before. The Bhikkhus are taught that the impermanent self is unpleasant, painful, and subject to damage. The Buddha explains “Sensual desires as affording little gratification, generating much pain and trouble”. This can be seen in how we in modern society for example, strive for more material wealth, which leads to more dissatisfaction and discontentedness. A constant desire for entertainment also leads to a similar emptiness. The Buddha encourages that one considers oneself and their constituent parts like a skilled butcher. A trained bhikkhu develops an awareness of mortality, and of the composition of oneself. This is how the individual detaches themselves.

               The three marks of existence are addressed heavily in Buddha’s teachings. It has been demonstrated in this essay how each of these marks of existence stand up without necessitating the belief in rebirth. The Buddha’s teachings stem heavily from empirical observations, leaving out speculative arguments.  Buddhist teachings can also be seen as a form of individual discipline, and possibly quite applicable to the modern world. Suffering may be seen as subjectively emerging from our drives, in the way which Buddha describes. Overall, Buddhism is very philosophically influential outside of circles that accept the ancient indian physics idea of rebirth. Westerners observe Buddhist tradition regularly and gain value from its teachings.
Reply
#2
The strive for permanence, identity, self & other limits, stems from the awareness of impermanence.
When the awareness turns into emotions - like fear & hope - death & rebirth concepts come to life (and distort it). 

P.S: The approaches of Zen-Buddhist appear quite fitting for western mind structures
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)