takso

DID JESUS TEACH REINCARNATION?

Reincarnationists that profess a Christian faith, are, of course, forced to believe that Jesus Christ Himself accepted and promoted transmigration of souls, which He allegedly was taught in India during the eighteen "silent years" of his adolescence and early adulthood. Most often cited in support of this claim, is the conversation between Christ and Nicodemus found in the third chapter of the Gospel of John:

"(Nicodemus) came to Jesus at night and said, ‘Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.’

"In reply, Jesus declared, ‘I tell you the truth, no one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again (John 3:2-3)."

Erroneously resorting to a literal method of interpretation of the above, reincarnationists insist that when Jesus spoke of being "born again", He was actually implying cyclic rebirth. However, if this indeed was His implication, it unfortunately was entirely lost on Nicodemus:

"How can a man be born when he is old?... Surely, he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born (verse 4)!"

Instead of rebuking the Jewish religious leader for his lack of understanding of the presumably wide-spread doctrine of reincarnation, Jesus then went on to explain the true meaning of His words:

"I tell you the truth, no one can enter the Kingdom of God unless He is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at My saying, you must be born again (verses 5-7)."

In the above passage, Jesus made it quite clear that He was not speaking of a physical birth, or a series of them for that matter, but one of a spiritual nature. Actually, the correct rendering of this text from the original Greek should use "born from above", for that is precisely what is involved. Mortal human beings mate and bring forth offspring that were mortal and subject to death like themselves ("flesh gives birth to flesh" - verse 6.) However, the "birth" that Jesus spoke of was not achieved through natural reproductive means, but as an event initiated by God alone (John 1:13).

When a person is "born again" as a child of God through faith in Christ’s redemptive provision of Himself on the cross, the Holy Spirit imparts to him a new nature that is not physical and therefore perishable (I Peter 1:23). Continued rebirth does not necessitate itself, for the individual has already entered God’s Kingdom of eternal life (John 5:24).

Source : http://www.mission.org/jesuspeople/reincarn.htm

bakedbean

Nah I think you're venturing into codswallop territory there. I've not been to church for a very long time indeed but I do seem to remember that we are all God's children. But, anyhow, it's all down to interpretation on either religion/philosophy isn't it. And each to their own of course. I like the Christian philosophy personally.

I took the liberty of googling some of your postings and see that you're copying and pasting on various sites. Hope the stuff isn't copyright protected or you'll be for it (under Site Rules).

I used to find Buddhism quite interesting until I moved to a Buddhist country (Thailand), though have never been a Buddhist. Again, it's down to interpretation always, but it used to drive me nuts the way people would just not look forward or look back. Always the here-now. I'm all for here-now but you gotta plan for the future too, and good to think about the past too. But.... that's just my opinion.

takso

Well, thanks for reading my postings and don't need to worry much about the copyright thing. I am the copyrighter of all these articles.

bakedbean

Good for you. You write well.

nonthaburi

I would be interested to know more about the Tripitaka ; history of it. Oldest one in existence etc, and also how similar or not it is to the Bible or Qur'an.

If you have the time please.

takso

The Singularity of Existence

Everything that exists is empty because there is no essence to anything and nothing has ever exists in its own quality – nothing is permanent and unchanging. All objects exist conditionally without an eternal essence. They only exist in relation to each other as appearances that in turn vary as per the perceptions of the beholders.

Energy is the underlying element for all existence and it is dependent on conditional phenomenon. And phenomenon is thing that appears to or is perceived by senses and therefore, it is empty as well.

At the end of the day, we could summarise that emptiness is the beginning for all existence. Every existence is empty and emptiness is in every existence.


Emptiness Everywhere

From direct experience, we know that humans and things cause pleasure and pain, and that they can help and harm. Therefore, phenomena certainly do exist but the question is how? They do not exist in their own quality but only have an existence dependent upon many factors, including a consciousness that conceptualises them.

But in what way is consciousness mistaken? Because all phenomena appear to exist in their own quality, all of our ordinary perceptions are mistaken. We have taken in a wrong sense that living beings, things and phenomena appear to exist in and of themselves. It seems that phenomena could be established in their own right or quality, and from the object’s side upon conceptualising our consciousness. Unfortunately, with this false mode, we are hindering ourselves from recognising the discrepancy between appearance and reality.

Nevertheless, one could train oneself to develop wisdom and eliminate one’s ignorance on the ultimate truth. Upon seeking through in-depth analysis, one could find inherent existence of whatever object one is considering — oneself, another person, one’s body, one’s mind, or anything else is completely lacking.

For example, when you examine an object such as car, its inherent existence is negated, but what is left is a body dependent on an engine, seats, lamps, window glasses, tires, etc. In other words, what is left after the analysis is a dependently existent phenomenon. Thus it is not that you come to understand that the object or phenomenon does not exist but rather, you find that its inherent existence is unfounded. This is the ultimate discovery about the orientation of the nature. Nature is a system of existence fully occupied with factors that rise and fall dependently in continuum.

At the end of the day, dualism of the subject and object, and the appearance of multiplicity arises out of our ignorance on the true nature would vanish once emptiness appears. We could then differentiate the way things are perceived to exist and the way things really exist.


Why is there an existence at all? Why not nothingness?

Emptiness is a necessary pre-requisite for any object to exist; without it, the object would be impossible. Upon in-depth analysis, we could discover that emptiness corresponds to two distinct scenarios:

1. It corresponds to the inherent existence (due to unchanging nature) that all conventional phenomena lack.

2. It corresponds to dependent arising (a conditional phenomenon) i.e. subject to the same lack of inherent existence as every other object or phenomenon. This is referred to as the emptiness of emptiness.

The above is a rather strange paradox but still logical because emptiness is a universal or infinite phenomenon. Therefore, it is evident that object could arise out of emptiness due to the 2nd scenario clarified as above.

As a summary, the emptiness of phenomena is both the cause and consequence of the dependent nature of phenomena. It is comparable to scientific term of a singularity and also the starting point of the nature or existence. In other words, emptiness is an inherent quality of existence and is considered the ultimate truth because it inherently exists exactly as it is perceived when it is perceived directly by an enlightened mind. And discovering the ‘ultimate truth’ is the key to overcoming the ignorant state of mind.

nonthaburi

So can you tell us anything about the Tripitaka ?

bakedbean

Personally.... I think he needs to get out more.

redbean

You may be right, bakedbean. Enough to put one off buddhism forever. lol

bakedbean

Yeh

I do like the Dalai Lama tho. He talks a lot of sense. Very straight talking.

redbean

The Dalai Lama does not try to preach and what he says make a whole lot of sense.

My all time favourite buddhist monk is a Brit and he goes by the name of Ajahn Brahm. Great sense of humour and he always laughed at his own jokes.

nonthaburi

Religion- take it or leave it.

My kids are benig brought up Buddhists though and it doesn't seem to be doing them any harm .

See what they are like when they're older though

redbean

According to Ajahn Brahm......"Buddhism is a religion for tax purposes" .... .

takso

The Within of the Within

Phenomena appear to arise or are perceived by our senses to arise in and of themselves, but they are not. All phenomena, including emptiness, are dependent-arising. Emptiness, however, did correspond to both inherent existence and dependent arising due to its universal qualities.

Thus, phenomena do not exist inherently as this or that from their own sides, unrelated to the consciousness that perceives them. Phenomena exist as this or that - are dependent on the observers.

Now, we need to look at the definition of existence. What exists is defined as ‘that which can be known’. If it cannot be known, then it does not exist. The fact is that things do not exist in the ways that concepts and languages imply they do.

In addition, we shall realise that the deepest fact about things does exist. It is beyond mind and beyond concepts and words in the sense that it is beyond our usual ways of perceiving things. Language and conception only imply that things exist in distinct manners i.e. wise person, dumb person, saint, devil, etc. - in such well-defined and independent categories.

Thus, when we say that the deepest fact about things is that they exist in a way that is beyond mind and beyond words, we are referring to the fact that things do not exist in the ways that concepts and languages imply they do.

Perceiving reality is seeing that things do not exist in these fantasised, impossible ways, in ‘black and white’ categories.

redbean

Takso, matey....take a chill pill.......you are giving us, buddhists a bad name.