Personal identity, anatta, and reincarnation

[vostibackle]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta#...etive_problems:

Students of Buddhism often encounter an intellectual quandary with the teaching in that the concept of anatta and the doctrine of rebirth seem to be mutually exclusive. If there is no self, no abiding essence of the person, it is unclear what it is that is reborn. The Buddha discussed this in a conversation with a Brahmin named Kutadanta.

...

Some Buddhists take the position that the basic problem of explaining how "I" can die and be reborn is, philosophically speaking, no more problematic than how "I" can be the "same" person I was a few moments ago. There is no more or less ultimacy, for Buddhists, between the identity I have with my self of two minutes ago and the identity I have with the self of two lives ago.

That last paragraph delights me. I imagine an old monk and a naïve student. The student asks, "master, if there is no soul, what do I now have in common with the person reborn after my death?" The master smiles and answers, "if there is no soul, what do you now have in common with the person who just asked that question?"



But still, assuming there is no soul, what is reincarnation?

It's sorta complicated, but it's possible to construct a philosophical theory of personal identity which makes me the same person as me two minutes ago. I'm interested in whether a theory of personal identity might conclude that someone alive after my death is the same person as me (ignoring sci-fi situations like downloading your consciousness into a computer and then uploading it into a new body after you're dead).

If I'm thinking in a more Buddhist rather than western philisophical way, the problem of how I can be the same person I was two minutes ago is pointless—you're NOT the same person you were two minutes ago. There is no "you" which persists through time. Unfortunately that suggests to me that the idea of reincarnation is meaningless. There is no way for some person in the future to be the same person as you, so what the hell could the Buddha mean when he talks about reincarnation?

[Macka Splaff]

reincarnation (as i believe it) is the belief that when the physical body dies the soul is released and goes to heaven and waits and then goes back into the physical world

[runner's high]

Originally Posted by vostibackle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta#...etive_problems:


That last paragraph delights me. I imagine an old monk and a naïve student. The student asks, "master, if there is no soul, what do I now have in common with the person reborn after my death?" The master smiles and answers, "if there is no soul, what do you now have in common with the person who just asked that question?"



But still, assuming there is no soul, what is reincarnation?

It's sorta complicated, but it's possible to construct a philosophical theory of personal identity which makes me the same person as me two minutes ago. I'm interested in whether a theory of personal identity might conclude that someone alive after my death is the same person as me (ignoring sci-fi situations like downloading your consciousness into a computer and then uploading it into a new body after you're dead).

If I'm thinking in a more Buddhist rather than western philisophical way, the problem of how I can be the same person I was two minutes ago is pointless—you're NOT the same person you were two minutes ago. There is no "you" which persists through time. Unfortunately that suggests to me that the idea of reincarnation is meaningless. There is no way for some person in the future to be the same person as you, so what the hell could the Buddha mean when he talks about reincarnation?

I took Intro. Buddhism in college and we ran into the same problem. My professor was a devout Buddhist, a student of the Dalai Lama, and even she admitted anatta contradicts reincarnation. On the very last day of the course, she admitted she did not believe in rebirth.

[SpartanInjun]

Originally Posted by runner's high

I took Intro. Buddhism in college and we ran into the same problem. My professor was a devout Buddhist, a student of the Dalai Lama, and even she admitted anatta contradicts reincarnation. On the very last day of the course, she admitted she did not believe in rebirth.

Rebirth is everything and nothing, just as you are. You are reborn every second of your life, you throw away what you were the last moment, each moment.

[vostibackle]

Originally Posted by SpartanInjun

Rebirth is everything and nothing, just as you are. You are reborn every second of your life, you throw away what you were the last moment, each moment.

Yeah, I can accept that, but the Buddha is clearly talking about something else. He specifically talks about the different realms you might be reborn into after death. Being reborn each moment is a cool esoteric way of looking at 'reincarnation', but I think it's obviously not what the Buddha was talking about.

[runner's high]

Originally Posted by vostibackle

Being reborn each moment is a cool esoteric way of looking at 'reincarnation', but I think it's obviously not what the Buddha was talking about.

It is a neat line of thought and it's even compatible with karma, if you see karma less like a spiritual report card and more like a subconscious state of mind. I've read more than one Buddhist describe karma as embedded in psychology rather than spirit. Everything you do creates a mental imprint in your mind, and these imprints affect how you perceive and behave in the world. If you do something bad, you create a negative karmic imprint, and this imprint will negatively impact your perception of reality. It's a neat idea.

Buddhism has a lot of appeal to me. It has some great ideas--like compassion--and great practices--like meditation--but as with every religion it has some ridiculous mythology. I guess I consider myself a methodological Buddhist--I subscribe to Buddhist values and practices, but not Buddhist metaphysics.

[vostibackle]

Originally Posted by runner's high

Buddhism has a lot of appeal to me. It has some great ideas--like compassion--and great practices--like meditation--but as with every religion it has some ridiculous mythology. I guess I consider myself a methodological Buddhist--I subscribe to Buddhist values and practices, but not Buddhist metaphysics.

Well said. I just wish Theravadins didn't think the Buddha automatically knew everything about cosmology just cus he was a Buddha.

[runner's high]

Originally Posted by vostibackle

Well said. I just wish Theravadins didn't think the Buddha automatically knew everything about cosmology just cus he was a Buddha.

Yeah that drives me crazy. Who knows how many good religions have been destroyed by overzealous followers who deify their dead teachers. That is to say, who knows how many good philosophies have been destroyed by becoming religions.

[bkadoctaj]

Originally Posted by runner's high

Yeah that drives me crazy. Who knows how many good religions have been destroyed by overzealous followers who deify their dead teachers. That is to say, who knows how many good philosophies have been destroyed by becoming religions.

Fucking incredible point.
One new believer and one fraction of a percent dilution of the original conception more.

[Maitereya]

i always saw the reincarnation thing as a Christian heaven idea. you be good and you get something after death. its an elaborate way to keep people stuck in the system.