No room for Rebirth in Rationalism
Jaipal Reddy is entirely correct
It is reported that:
“S. Jaipal Reddy mentioned in a Buddhist International Conference that Buddha was a symbol of rationalism and humanism. He was the first intellectual democrat and great believer in moderation. But there is no room for rebirth concept (of Buddhism) in rationalism.”
Mr. Reddy is absolutely correct. All the rationalists have criticized idea of rebirth as exploitative. About those who accept rebirth of the persons, fate, heaven and hell and so on, the rationalists comment that, those accepting rebirth wish to transcend this world considered only as a temporary abode of the souls. There are moral injunctions but there is no socialization of the individual. Spiritual liberation is given the top priority. Society and the world are to be discarded as evil. It must be realized that this is the one single factor of exploitation and also it prevents any sort of rebellion or revolt by the victims. [http://www.iheu.org/node/3155]
The problem is of that when Mr. Reddy says ‘Rebirth concept of Buddhism is not rational’, he is actually referring to the Brahminical concept of rebirth.
Brahminic Rebirth is misnomer
I had asked the question of Rebirth to Late Dr. Bhadant Anand Kausallyayan in open meeting. He explained that what the Brahmins call as ‘Rebirth’ cannot be rebirth. For some thing to be reborn, it has to first die. Brahmins believe that the atma does not die. How can something be reborn if it never died? What they mean by ‘rebirth’ is that atma enters a new body. That cannot be called a ‘rebirth’. It is transmigration of soul. The Brahmins wrongly call it rebirth. Then he explained what rebirth is according to Buddhism, as explained by Dr. Ambedkar.
A lot of confusion is caused by terminology, and some traditional Buddhists do try to preach same doctrine of Brahmins as doctrine of the Buddha. May be, Mr. Reddy remarked because of that.
The Ten Unanswered Questions of Buddha
The confusion about Rebirth is caused by what is known as, ‘the ten unanswered questions’ by the Buddha. There are two main texts in the Pali scriptures, Sutras 63 and 72 of the Majjhima Nikaya, each with the same list of ten propositions or ‘views’ (ditthi):
1. The world is eternal.
2. The world is not eternal.
3. The world is infinite.
4. The world is not infinite.
5. The soul (jiva) is identical with the body.
6. The soul is not identical with the body.
7. The Tathagata exists after death.
8. The Tathagata does not exist after death.
9. The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death.
10. The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.
The Buddha refused to give any teaching about these issues, although the monk Malunkyaputta challenged him. The Buddha’s fundamental point was that to know the answers to these questions is not necessary for relief from Dukkha. He told the parable of the man pierced by a poisoned arrow. If the victim insists to know details of shooter of arrow, before receiving medical treatment, he will die before his thirst for knowledge is satisfied. This was to emphasize that leading a religious life and get freedom from Dukkha, does not need answers to metaphysical matters. (Majjhima Nikaya, 63).
Everybody used to ask these questions. There were, apart from Brahminic, 62 different schools of thought, six of them being prominent, prevalent during the times of the Buddha, and every one of these six believed in the soul except the Buddha, though each had its own way of describing the soul.
But the Buddha had already answered these questions, not in one place but separately, right from the very first sermon at Sarnath, which is famous by the name of Dhamma Chakka Pavattan Sutta, where there is strong rejection of atma. From doctrine of Pratityapa Samutpad, it is clear that the world is infinite. Theory of Anitya was propagated which says world is changing, which means it is not eternal. In Chula Dukkha Khanda Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya, in a dialogue between the Buddha and the Jains, the Buddha asks:
“Do you know, reverend sirs, whether you had an existence before this or you were not non-existent?” On negative reply, he asks: “Do you know that, in a former existence, you were guilty, and not guiltless, of misdeeds?” On further negative reply, he further asks: “Do you know that, in that former existence, you were guilty, and not guiltless, of this or that specific misdeed?” To this again he receives a negative reply.
The gist of the Sutta is there is no other life. This life is the only life, which answers whether the Tathagata lives after death etc.
Now question remains why the Buddha did not reply when Malunkyaputta challenged him. Dharmanand Kosambi explains that Buddha did not reply to avoid confusion in the minds of people to this complex question about Atma, which could be analyzed into five skandha-s. The theory of annatta was already propagated by the Buddha.
The difference of opinion between the Original Buddhism and the traditional Buddhists about Rebirth is caused because the Buddhists misinterpreted the ‘Pratityapa Samutpad’ to include past and future births.
Dr. Ambedkar raised the question of ‘Rebirth’ of ‘what’ and of ‘whom’ and explained that the elements in the body after death disperse and join the wide mass of elements from which new life comes into existence. This means there is no real rebirth in the sense of Brahminic concept, in Buddha’s original teachings.
Brahminic concept of Rebirth
Even the Brahminic theories had very many different ideas about atma. Delicate nuances between the ‘atma’ (soul) and ‘parmatma’ (god) have been exhaustively described in Brahminic spiritual books for centuries. According to this concept it is believed that whatever position you got in this birth is the result of the deeds (karma) of the previous birth/s, the hypothesis of ‘karma vipak’.
The practical discernible use of all the ideological discourses is the concept of Rebirth. The only use the Brahmins made of the theory of atma and karma and rebirth etc. is to avoid responsibility of society to deal with the problems of the poverty and misery in life of poor and lowly, and lead the masses to believe that the cause of their present misery is the deeds their own previous births.
It is still used today by Brahminists to justify inequality, atrocities and injustice to weaker sections of society. At the time of Viacom Satyagraha, the Nambudiri Brahmins argued that the present day untouchables have sinned in previous birth/s, and therefore got the birth of untouchables in this life, and hence can not complain about their sufferings.
We boast of our philosophy of soul, atma, god, karma and rebirth, to be the best in the world, but forget that this ‘great’ philosophy is poisoned by the rules of caste, which has made it highly exploitative and made this country a slave for centuries.
Idea of Rebirth and Karma-vipak reduced this country to slavery
Scholars have observed that the Idealistic outlook – belief in god, soul, rebirth, and all that goes with these – presupposes separation of ‘thought from action’ – ‘manual from mental labor’ and degradation of manual labor.
Concept of Brahminic rebirth is crucial in social field as this doctrine leads to dampen, or rather prevents the creation of, the motivation to fight against exploitation and inequality created by human vested interests.
A person is told and made to believe that his poverty, lower ranks in the varna-caste system, miseries of widowhood, and other sorrows of life are due to his own deeds of past lives and no external exploiter or social order is responsible for his miseries. That creates tolerance to accept sorrows and prevents him from creating just and equitable systems. Because of this doctrine of ‘karma-vipak’, for thousands of years, the evil systems of social life and exploitation got the ideological sanction leading to misery of population in this caste infested country. The realistic opposition to this karma doctrine could challenge the social order based on injustice, and prevent the fatalist attitude.
Laxman Shastri Joshi has observed that, the ideas of otherworld or unrealistic spiritual concepts being the basis of all religious ideologies, they lead to retrograde system of production, evil social structure and parochial worldview.
Thanks
Sunday, June 26, 2011
