[FutureBuddha (Hunches X)] A New Notion of Karma & Rebirth

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jundo
    Treeleaf Founder and Priest
    • Apr 2006
    • 40664

    [FutureBuddha (Hunches X)] A New Notion of Karma & Rebirth

    Today’s ' A New Notion of Karma & Rebirth' post builds on my previous essays, entitled "Further Hunches" (LINK) and "Even Further Hunches" (LINK) and "Yet Even Further Hunches" (LINK), Still Yet Even Further Hunches (LINK), Still Yet Even MORE Further Hunches (LINK), "10 Amazing Lucky Breaks Leading to You" (LINK), "10 Hunches about Hunches" (LINK) and "Hunches about Causes" (LINK). They follow on my original scribblings, entitled just "Hunches" (LINK). If you don't buy the wild notions I toss out there, you surely won't catch what I'm pitching today. The premises of those essays can be summarized as follows (you can read the rest at the foregoing links):

    • There is something special, deserving special explanation, about the fact that, in a seemingly wild and largely random universe, you find yourself to be a self-aware being able now to imagine and contemplate any point in time in the history of this universe, beginning from a moment after the Big Bang, continuing on through 13.7 billion years to the moment of your conception when, according to our currently accepted notions of physics, chemistry, stellar and planetary development, biology and evolution, the intricate sequence of events headed in precisely a direction necessary for your eventual existence despite the seemingly far greater likelihood time-and-time again that any single event amid the ages-long unbroken chain could, it would be thought, have turned in another direction among the vast set of directions which would have foreclosed your eventual existence, all as proven by the simple fact that here you are, alive and pondering your existence and all it required.
    • Although the same unlikelihood could be claimed for any sentient being, creature or thing that has come into existence at this now current moment of universal history, the fact that the contemplator is not just someone or some creature or something, but rather, you yourself now subjectively contemplating your own personal fortune is a special phenomenon deserving special explanation.
    • You are not the winner of a single lottery (something not particularly amazing), but the always and each-and-every time winner after winner of a string of constant lotteries within lotteries, one after the other in sequence and often entwined in complex parallel, stretching through all time from cosmic expansion to sperm meets egg, which unbroken chain of a googol of wins resulted in you, no step skipped or tripped over, bar none, not a single miss as proven conclusively just by your present contemplation of the most personal outcome.
    • This outcome, if more than brute fact, may point to a mechanism, as yet unknown but open to conjecture, which has served to weight nature’s dice, tilt the roulette wheel, limit the possible results, fix the game. If such a mechanism exists, it need not always remain unknown, its nature can be the subject of theory and, hopefully, testing and demonstration.
    • Though beings identical to you, or extremely close, may have appeared time and again in an infinite universe or ensemble of universes where like circumstances endlessly happen, their existence would not explain your existence, here and now, in this place and timeline where you apparently need to find yourself to be this you right here and now. The others might be doppelgängers or twins, but that would be different from this very you which you need right now in order to be experiencing you.
    • While Buddhism is generally not concerned with "where we all came from," being content in guiding us to Liberation here and now however we got here, Buddhism also does not forbid our investigating such matters. In fact, Buddhism is based on certain suppositions about reality, our deep connection and inter-identity with the universe, and even a "built in" system of ethics/Karma, which overlaps with many of my speculations
    ~ ~ ~


    I propose that there is something special, deserving special explanation, in the fact that this very personal "I" (and, I will assume, the same for you) finds myself as a sentient, self-reflective life form existing now as the apparent product of an amazing chain (in fact, tangled chains within chains within chains) of forces, factors and freak events in physics, chemistry, stellar and planetary development, biology and evolution, as well as human and personal ancestral history, which apparently all had to happen to work out just so, just on time (and did!), to allow my conception and birth in this fragile yet complex and intricately structured body and brain (without which workings of body and brain, together with all past events which led to this body and brain, I seemingly could not be this self-aware "I") now able to reflect back over what seems billions of years of moment-by-moment happenings and happenstances where events could (one would surmise) have headed off in any of untold other directions without some "me" as a result at all (and, I assume, the same for you.)

    If you do not think such fact anything special, then you are wasting your time reading this.

    Today, I wish to ask whether the premises described above might allow for, and even point to, the existence of a system Karma and Rebirth in traditional Buddhist meaning.

    My answer: Yes, at least in some aspects.

    If you are reading these words right now, and are self aware of your doing so right now, then you are the product of a most intricate, and seemingly (at almost any imagined point in time prior to your conception and birth) most unlikely, chain of events which has led to your being so. Assuming that such outcome is not merely the happenstance result of a most tangled, billions-of-years long series of dice rolls (and assuming that there is not other explanation, such as that "everything happens sometime" in an infinite reality, so your being so had to happen sometime ... a proposal I reject as it seems merely to explain versions of "you" happening one or more somewheres and many sometimes, maybe countless times, but not this particular "you" happening right here now ... and further begs the question of why the universe has any "you" at all, and most importantly, this particular one you are experiencing right now), there might be a guiding principal, natural process or "programming" to the universe that has steered events in particular directions, one outcome of which (among all its resulting outcomes) is this "very you" experiencing you right now.

    Traditional Buddhism proposed a system of Karma, in which causal effects from the past, tied to volitional moral behavior deemed good, bad, neutral or mixed, passed in long streams of causes leading to effects, until coming to fruition as the good and bad in a particular lifetime (which lifetime, in turn, would be filled with its own Karmic actions leading to future effects in subsequent lifetimes.) Karmic causes were never the only determinant of someone's life (e.g., chance, social causes, natural environmental causes and the like were also determinants, besides our past volitional acts). However, traditional Buddhism found something special in the happenstance of human existence, described this way:

    [In] the “King Wonderful Adornment” (twenty-seventh) chapter of the Lotus Sutra [it states] that encountering a Buddha’s teaching is as rare as a one-eyed turtle finding a floating sandalwood log with a hollow in it to hold him. The Nirvana Sutra uses the same image to express the rarity of being born human and encountering a Buddha’s teaching. The story behind this reference is found in the parable of the blind turtle in the Miscellaneous Āgama Sutra. A blind turtle, whose life span is immeasurable kalpas, lives at the bottom of the sea. Once every one hundred years he rises to the surface. There is only one log floating in the sea with a suitable hollow in it. Since the turtle is blind and the log is tossed about by the wind and waves, the likelihood of the turtle reaching the log is extremely remote. It is even rarer, says Shakyamuni, to be born a human being; having been born human, one should use the opportunity to master the four noble truths and attain emancipation. https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/O/17
    It is unclear where and when, according to traditional Buddhism, such chains of cause-and-effect would have begun, whether they had an initial cause or are somehow endless (much as we wonder the same about this universe itself, its start and such). However, whatever their start, Buddhism posited that these cycles can eventually be brought to an end in "nirvana," and its escape from the samsaric cycle of rebirth.

    If you are "you" right now, you cannot have been very different from how you are now while still being "you." For example, you could not lack a heart and lungs and still be able to be experiencing your "you" right now (not for very long anyway). The molecules that constitute you could not be in the shape of a chair, tree or ant while recognizable in any way as "you" (especially to you), even if perhaps that would still be loosely "you" in some sense growing or crawling in my garden, or serving as this seat upon which I sit. Even small changes (at nearly any one point during at least the last 13.8 Billions years that we know about) in the chain of "cause-and-effect which led to this current "you" right now would seemingly have sent the chain off in radically other directions, the vast majority not possible to result in a "you" at all, especially this one "you" reading these words now.

    Of course, your life would tolerate small changes which would still allow for a recognizable you: Your parents could have decided to move to Paris just prior to your birth, and to raise you there, rather than Los Angeles, for example. You could have been born with six fingers on each hand, an inherited heart defect, or other genetic condition which you do not now have, which (assuming it would not be so serious as to have killed you) would still allow this "you" here and now, even if in poorer health or speaking French. However, if we might assume that you could not have been born as "you" without those very parents, and their most specific act of copulation and insemination, nor if some genetic error had been such as to cause the mother's body to reject the resulting fetus in miscarriage before birth, then your being born was a most fragile outcome. In other words, while there appears to be some "play" in the range of variations which would have allowed you to be this "you," that range still would occupy a very narrow window compared to all other seeming possibilities.

    For some reason, the universe did not result merely in this "you" with your particular parents, your heart and lungs, but also in this "you" with your life situation, filled with its various starting conditions that are most unique to you. As you are well aware, those conditions of your birth and life are mixed and varied: You were born rich or poor or in between, with good health or bad or in between, in the culture and age when you were born, with the opportunities or obstacles that life presented to you at birth based on the surrounding circumstances of your birth which (for whatever reason or no reason) life handed you. To reiterate, while there could have been some variation in those conditions while still allowing "you" to be "you" (e.g., you could have been a bit more handsome and a mega-rich version of you, or the opposite), the range of variations which would have allowed this "you" to be "you" seemingly remains finely narrow compared to all other imagined possibilities.

    Thus, the question is presented: If the universe did, in fact, load the dice in some way to "summon forth" this "you" who, seemingly, the universe could more easily have done without altogether, did it do so by "setting up" the particular conditions required for you to be you including, not only the physical requirements for a human being such as heart and lungs, but also the particular family situation, wealth, health and the like into which you were born? Those conditions are so narrow in range, and seemingly as unlikely as all the other events of physics, astronomy, earth history, evolution and human history required for this "you," that they may have been a "set up" too together with all the other incredibly unlikely conditions for "you," the product of that guiding principal, natural process or "programming" that appears to have perhaps loaded the dice.

    I am not prepared to say that the situation you found yourself in as a child (with a certain family, a certain kind of familial environment, with a certain level of wealth and health) is somehow directly attributed to some good or bad acts done by you in some life earlier in the stream of cause and effect which has resulted in this current you. However, I will assert that, for whatever reason, if the universe is somehow a guided process less random than it superficially appears, that process seems to have set you up with the particular life start you experienced, with all its advantages, benefits, obstacles and demerits. Nor could it have done much otherwise, assuming that you are to be "you" (which you obviously are) and that your being "you" was not a pure crap shoot.

    If the universe did so, might there be a purpose to it? Buddhism does imply that there is some "purpose" and direction to the process (liberation), thus is traditionally teleological. And besides the process of "liberation" which Buddhism envisions, other religions speak of God's "mysterious" plan for each of us (in which we are sometimes tested like Job). Perhaps, as I suspect, there is a certain "story" to the universe being played out or told, and our individual lives just make good characters in the intricate tale, entertainment for the gods or for the universe itself, even if just small bit players in whatever is playing out. Theologians like Teilhard de Chardin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre...ard_de_Chardin), philosophers like Philip Goff (https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...w-a-real-poser) and some physicists like Paul Davies (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWuC6jh1r0Q&list=PLFJr3pJl27pLetTwsMIM7OWz wESz9J2Nl&index=4) propose that "something is up" with some apparent ends or objectives. I believe that Dogen and the other old Zen masters felt and expressed that "something is up." I feel that "something is up" too.

    Of course, none of this means that we human beings need to be playing a central and starring role in some plot: After all, every tree or ant, stone and breeze is just as unlikely in its way, the product seemingly of billions of years of fantastic events. Nevertheless, one might surmise that they each and all play a role if there is an overarching cosmic "story:" The tree is to grow as a tree, the ant is to crawl and cleans the soil, each in its position in the world. Likewise, if we find ourself (as we do) born into a certain human life, in certain conditions, might we equally surmise that our role is to grow and crawl through our life, beginning from where we find ourselves? "Set up" or not, if finding oneself born and alive in a little rowboat in the middle of a river, oar in hand, my suggestion is to start rowing (drifting now and then too is fine)! Certainly, our being born in these human bodies is as strange as finding ourself suddenly, very mysteriously, alive and aware in such a little boat on such a twisting, sometimes terrifying yet oh so beautiful river.

    I suspect (another one of my hunches) that the guiding principal, natural process or "programming" (yes, with some form of intelligence or designer tuning things, either behind the process or which is the process itself) does not have perfect control of this wild and chaotic cosmos. "It" is powerful, yes, far beyond our puny human scale, but far from omnipotent. It too can only steer things, set things rolling, adjust here and there, but it is too facing a wild rolling river ... better, an ocean ... of currents in which it can only tune the heading of its boat now and then. It is not unlike our own life in our own boat amid a river of life circumstances, where the best that we can do is try to point our bow in good directions, avoiding unwanted rocks and shoals. Even so, nature seems a wild place, a jungle, where so many babies are stillborn for every healthy birth ... many more never make it beyond childhood ... much like scattered seeds in the garden, some of which sprout tall and some of which never do. (Or perhaps the universe is like a film in which, in fact, the script is totally written, all events determined, but what we see on the screen is only the appearance of wild events and chance actions.) In either case, "something is up."

    What you cannot deny is that here you find yourself ... with your life, amid its conditions here and now. I suspect that we are meant to do a little more, play a special role, a bit more than the trees, ants, rocks and breezes (although, of course, they play their precious roles too and are not to be dishonored: Where would we be without the trees and ants and all the rest, each necessary to make this balanced world and its environment what it is.) I suspect that human beings, with our degree of self-sentience, creativity, powers of thought and emotions, the current product of long chains of evolution, are to play some special role commensurate with those special talents. I do not mean that we human beings are the "end of history" in any way (I doubt that we are the final product, especially as we seem such flawed "works in progress"), but it is very possible that we are important stepping stones to what comes and emerges next.

    I suspect that there is a moral element to it too, for the simple reason that now (unlike much of the past) our very survival as a species depends on our overcoming the hate and violence, greed and overconsumption, divisive and small thinking of our human condition. The lion which kills the elk need not ponder the morality of killing, the world's very existence did not hang in the balance when samurai armies stormed enemy castles, the planet was fine as our ancestors engaged in "slash and burn" agriculture or built rows of smokestacks for their 19th century mills ... but now is very different. If we are to survive and thrive from this point forward ... not burned to ashes in some nuclear armageddon, or scrambling to get by on an unlivable, hot husk of a poisoned world ... we must make the right moral choices from now on ... for peace, non-violence, generosity, mutual respect and tolerance. Should we fail to realize such ethical standards, we do not deserve to survive amid all the other likely lifeforms scattered like seeds through the galaxies, each facing their own crossroads to tomorrow.

    Finally, I cannot guaranty that "you" will be reborn as any one, identifiable lifeform in the future. I cannot say that, if you eat that extra piece of pie now, you will be born as a hungry ghost next life, or as worm, puppy or god. That still does not make sense to me and, perhaps, when the Buddha spoke of his sitting under the Bodhi Tree witnessing the past lives of "all" beings, and our future prospects, he witnessed that we are each "all lives," for our causal streams are more like tangled blood vessels, coming together and dividing apart, heading in many directions, all sustaining the one body. We are the trees, ants, stones, breezes, tomorrow's lifeforms too, maybe intelligent robots, really all the life of the galaxies. Those are our rebirths, determined in part by the choices we make, the acts we undertake now.

    My notion which I propose in these "hunches" also implies that "you," and likewise me, everyone, each ant and pebble, are all the product of our particular respective lines of cause-effect falling dominoes that have wound around through the billions of years to our own individual doorsteps. That fact seems undeniable given our present understanding of the history of our universe. As Carl Sagan said, "We are stardust," as the atoms in ypu were forged in unknown exploding stars long ago, which atoms have since been many things before finding their current (and temporary) home in you (likewise for for me and my atoms, and the ants and all else.) So, in a sense, we can say that the particular twisting line of falling dominoes, and all that developed, formed and decayed along the way, was "your" particular stream, without which you would not be you. That also resembles traditional Buddhist beliefs on rebirth.

    So there you have it: A vision of Karma and Rebirth ...

    ... Causes and conditions we are mysteriously handed as the ground of our life ... Ethical choices we individually (and thus collectively) make ... Effects and lives which result from those choices and acts in the near and distant future ... Resultant lives which are also somehow "us."

    Let the show go on. That show is us too.

    Gassho, J
    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 08-15-2024, 01:03 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE
  • Zenkon
    Member
    • May 2020
    • 227

    #2
    With all due respect:

    1. you say "....There is something special, deserving special explanation, about the fact that, in a seemingly wild and largely random universe, you find yourself to be a self-aware being able now to imagine and contemplate any point in time in the history of this universe..." Why do you think "you" and "I" are special? These are not permanent entities, but rather creations of our own minds. We are not special because we are illusions. We simply don't exist. From birth, we experience the world in the only way we can - through our senses. This leads us to envision a world in which "me" is at the center of everything, Therefore, I must be "special".


    Then you state “…If you are "you" right now, you cannot have been very different from how you are now while still being "you." …” This seems to imply that the special “you” is somehow more permanent, carrying over from one lifetime to the next. Where is this “you” that carries over?
    This deluded sense of self is really the cause of many of our problems. It creates a duality between “me” and the rest of the world, a separateness. It creates a self-centeredness, which fosters greed and anger. Impermanence and emptiness tell us that there can be no permanent “you”.
    If “I” am simply a creation of my own mind, impermanent and empty, then “I” am not “special” but rather just like, a part of, everything else. With this understanding, greed becomes meaningless, and compassion and generosity develop naturally.
    I agree with your explanation of karma. It is these karmic tendencies which transfer from one lifetime to another – nothing more, nothing less. No “You”.

    2. you say “…I suspect (another one of my hunches) that the guiding principal, natural process or "programming" (yes, with some form of intelligence or designer tuning things, either behind the process or which is the process itself) does not have perfect control of this wild and chaotic cosmos. "I …” This seems to propose the existence of some higher power, some “God”, a “designer turning things”. Do we really need a “God” to explain this? If I look at the night sky, I get a sense of my infinitesimally small existence. Is it really sod to accept the randomness of it all?

    Gassho

    ZenKon
    sat/lah


    Comment

    • Jundo
      Treeleaf Founder and Priest
      • Apr 2006
      • 40664

      #3
      Matt, can I move your fine post out to another section and a separate thread? It is more about traditional notions of Karma than my wild speculations here, and I would like to respond on its own.

      Gassho J

      Stlah
      ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

      Comment

      • ZenJay
        Member
        • Apr 2024
        • 208

        #4
        Just a wild speculation here…If there is a “self” that continues, could it be something of a fractal consciousness of Buddha nature? Fractals are repeating patterns that continue on and on after all… just an idea that occurred to me. (Strange one, I know) Perhaps the pattern changes as we make choices and accumulate karma (so to speak) and we express accordingly life after life…the pattern dictating the expression…

        but the other side of that coin is like you said… what if the Buddha meant that we already are all lives, all consciousness at all times etc? Then what is there to be reborn into? We are already there!

        Sorry to ramble… just some ideas that came while reading this. Thanks!

        Gassho,
        Jay

        Sat/Lah today

        Comment

        • Jundo
          Treeleaf Founder and Priest
          • Apr 2006
          • 40664

          #5
          Hi Zenkon,

          Thank you for going through my wild speculations, not to be taken so seriously. However, let me respond to what you wrote:

          Originally posted by Zenkon
          ... " Why do you think "you" and "I" are special? These are not permanent entities, but rather creations of our own minds. We are not special because we are illusions. We simply don't exist. From birth, we experience the world in the only way we can - through our senses. This leads us to envision a world in which "me" is at the center of everything, Therefore, I must be "special".
          Well, what you write is correct from the perspective of the "absolute," but Buddhism does not teach that we are totally "illusions" as a "self" in this relative world. After all, who is reading these words now, rather a waste of time if all is but an illusion? I do not think that we are any more "special" than any grain of sand, ant, breeze or rusty tin can in this universe, but there is something "special" in the phenomenon that we are standing here ourselves, self-aware, as the product of every single twist and turn of early cosmology and physics, the formation of the properties of the periodic table and the tangled chain of chemical reactions ... reaction by reaction ... that has happened ever since, the life supporting properties of solar system and earth development, every development in biology and evolution, the particular structure of our complex bodies which resulted, the events of world history and our own ancestral history right up to the moment of our respective conceptions ... wherein even a tiny failure to happen of a single required event at any moment along the way would preclude our being here now to consider that fact.

          If you think that there is nothing strange in that fact, or "we just got lucky" or "we don't really exist," then there is nothing to discuss. If you say, "well, anybody in my place would feel the same," then you overlook the fact that they would not be you, and it is incredibly unlikely that you would be the one here experiencing so. If you say, as you do, that it is just an "illusion," then you are not that far from some of the speculative explanations offered in "hunched (IX)," such as that this is some simulation, illusion, dream experience, film, mental creation or the like.

          You are quite correct: We are as tiny as dust in the wind in this vast, vast universe. We are also dreamlike in one sense (that we think ourselves separate "selves" apart from reality, possessing abiding being). However, somehow events in that vast, vast universe seem to have wound around a most tangled stream of falling dominos for 13.8 Billion years right to our doorsteps, all without a single miss. That may merit special explanation.

          Then you state “…If you are "you" right now, you cannot have been very different from how you are now while still being "you." …” This seems to imply that the special “you” is somehow more permanent, carrying over from one lifetime to the next. Where is this “you” that carries over?
          No, I did not say that. I do not believe that there is a "you" that is earlier in the causal stream or who is "you" in some earlier or later lifetime. I am only concerned with the freak outcome of this particular "you" here and now in this body and world, and all it took for that to be so.


          This deluded sense of self is really the cause of many of our problems. It creates a duality between “me” and the rest of the world, a separateness. It creates a self-centeredness, which fosters greed and anger. Impermanence and emptiness tell us that there can be no permanent “you”.
          I so much agree. But do not look at things only from one side: Do you think that the Big Bang was just an "illusion?" Do you think that the properties of elements described in the Periodic Table are just an "illusion?" Do you believe that gravity and the other forces of nature are just "illusions?" Do you believe that the sun and earth, its volcanos and oceans and the first advent of life on earth are just "illusions?" Do you believe that the dinosaurs, Roman Empire and WWII were just "illusions?" Your mother and father were "illusions?" You are correct that there are none of those separate things from the perspective of the absolute, but do you deny them in every sense? If not, there is a little mystery in our being here at the tail end of all of that (one explanation for which is, by the way, that yes, they are some kind of "illusion." )

          If “I” am simply a creation of my own mind, impermanent and empty, then “I” am not “special” but rather just like, a part of, everything else. With this understanding, greed becomes meaningless, and compassion and generosity develop naturally.
          My years in Buddhism lead me to conclude that we overplay this hand a bit. Realizing "non-self," dropping separate self, realizing that we are everything else and the other guy ... is not an automatic assurance that we will be more compassionate and generous. I have seen too many Buddhists, including respected Buddhist teachers, who seem to have profound realization of that fact, yet go about their business being almost as self-concerned as anyone. The sex scandals involving some of our most profound teachers are but one example. I believe that our brains are deeply wired to "take care of No. 1 (ourself)," and the mere realization of wholeness cannot easily defeat those drives. My joke is that one can have a deep experience that "I am everyone ... and scr*w them! "

          I agree with your explanation of karma. It is these karmic tendencies which transfer from one lifetime to another – nothing more, nothing less. No “You”.
          I agree, but you said it is just an illusion.

          2. you say “…I suspect (another one of my hunches) that the guiding principal, natural process or "programming" (yes, with some form of intelligence or designer tuning things, either behind the process or which is the process itself) does not have perfect control of this wild and chaotic cosmos. "I …” This seems to propose the existence of some higher power, some “God”, a “designer turning things”. Do we really need a “God” to explain this? If I look at the night sky, I get a sense of my infinitesimally small existence. Is it really sod to accept the randomness of it all?
          Buddha actually never said there is or is not a "cause" to how the world is, but rather, he ducked the question (maybe he did not know) or simply refused to answer as unimportant to his central message. In fact, Buddhism, including Zen, very much implies that there is some "system" to the cosmos, and some special place of human beings in it (between the animals below, the divas above).

          There is nothing wrong with believing in and accepting the randomness of it all. Could be.

          But the attitude also reminds me of a fellow who survives 13.8 Billion years of plane crashes, plane crash after plane crash, with the fellow walking away from the wreckage of one plane only to board another which immediately crashes yet again which he again survives, a plane crash at each and every moment in universal and planetary history in which his existence hung in the balance, a plane crash every hour, minute or even second through the ages .... plane crashes entangled with plane crashes any one (1) of which might have been his end ...

          ... then, after what is only the most recent, crawling from the wreckage of the latest crash, dusting off, he declares, "Well, nothing strange about all that. Just lucky I guess."

          Gassho, J
          stlah
          Last edited by Jundo; 08-13-2024, 11:02 PM.
          ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

          Comment

          • Jundo
            Treeleaf Founder and Priest
            • Apr 2006
            • 40664

            #6
            Originally posted by ZenJay
            Just a wild speculation here…If there is a “self” that continues, could it be something of a fractal consciousness of Buddha nature? Fractals are repeating patterns that continue on and on after all… just an idea that occurred to me. (Strange one, I know) Perhaps the pattern changes as we make choices and accumulate karma (so to speak) and we express accordingly life after life…the pattern dictating the expression…

            but the other side of that coin is like you said… what if the Buddha meant that we already are all lives, all consciousness at all times etc? Then what is there to be reborn into? We are already there!

            Sorry to ramble… just some ideas that came while reading this. Thanks!

            Gassho,
            Jay

            Sat/Lah today
            I believe that, somewhere in these various "Hunches" posts, I discuss the notion ... based on Indra's Net ... that we are some wholeness (which we sometimes call "Buddha" in absolute sense) as if in a carnival "House of Mirrors" giving the appearance of separate things and beings, but really a single source reflected countless different ways. Or, reeking of "panpsychism" of some sort, we might be like a single consciousness (which grand consciousness, by the way, probably is as vastly unlike our experience of little human consciousness as we are from ant consciousness, so maybe nothing we can easily relate to) looking out of separate windows with separate views (our particular eyes and senses, localized at a particular vantage point in time and space by our personal brains), creating a kind of firewall between all of us such that we do not realize that we are also each other.

            By the way, Jay, you asked and raised some points about standard, traditional Buddhist views on Karma and Rebirth which I am going to respond to elsewhere. Please do not confuse this thread with that. These "hunches" threads are creative and "out of the box," not discussing the traditional and standard teachings on such topics as Karma. I will address that in a separate thread. I don't want you mixing up the silliness and speculation here with that.

            Gassho, Jundo
            stlah
            ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

            Comment

            • Kaitan
              Member
              • Mar 2023
              • 553

              #7
              Now that you mentioned Paul Davis, I discovered few days ago a book written by William A. Dembski, a philosopher and mathematician. He proposes to substitute matter for information as the primary stuff in science, I love that premise, it has so many fascinating implications. He also supports the theory of intelligent design. I don't much about him, but you might like him.



              I'll love to buy the book, but is a bit expensive and I already have plenty of books on my list to read, I feel this is a must read for sure.



              This newer book tackles more the topic of chance, perhaps it is dense in math, but I like the premise here too

              Gasshō

              stlah, Kaitan
              Last edited by Kaitan; 08-14-2024, 09:49 AM.
              Kaitan - 界探 - Realm searcher

              Comment

              • Jundo
                Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                • Apr 2006
                • 40664

                #8
                I will adjust something I said:

                Then you state “…If you are "you" right now, you cannot have been very different from how you are now while still being "you." …” This seems to imply that the special “you” is somehow more permanent, carrying over from one lifetime to the next. Where is this “you” that carries over?
                No, I did not say that. I do not believe that there is a "you" that is earlier in the causal stream or who is "you" in some earlier or later lifetime. I am only concerned with the freak outcome of this particular "you" here and now in this body and world, and all it took for that to be so.
                I do not believe that there is somehow this current "you" that is earlier in the causal stream or who is "you" in some earlier or later lifetime. However, according to traditional Buddhist beliefs, there is still "your" particular stream of "cause and effect." For example, "I" was not the wild fox who was in my stream five rebirths ago, but that is still my/the fox's stream (for we are products of the same causal stream).

                My notion which I propose in these "hunches" also implies that "I," and likewise you, everyone, each ant and pebble, are all the product of our particular respective lines of cause-effect falling dominoes that have wound around through the billions of years to our own individual doorsteps. That fact seems undeniable given our present understanding of the history of our universe. As Carl Sagan said, "We are stardust," as the atoms in ypu were forged in unknown exploding stars long ago, which atoms have since been many things before finding their current (and temporary) home in you (likewise for me and my atoms.) So, in a sense, we can say that the particular twisting line of falling dominoes, and all that developed, formed and decayed along the way, was "your" particular stream, without which you would not be you. That also resembles traditional Buddhist beliefs on rebirth.

                Gassho, J
                stlah
                Last edited by Jundo; 08-15-2024, 03:00 AM.
                ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                Comment

                • Jundo
                  Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                  • Apr 2006
                  • 40664

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Kaitan
                  Now that you mentioned Paul Davis, I discovered few days ago a book written by William A. Dembski, a philosopher and mathematician. He proposes to substitute matter for information as the primary stuff in science, I love that premise, it has so many fascinating implications. He also supports the theory of intelligent design. I don't much about him, but you might like him.
                  Paul Davis describes himself as an atheist or agnostic. William Dembski, on the other hand, is one of the forces behind the so-called "Intelligent Design" movement which, although they do not say so overtly, consists primarily of Christian scientists seeking to prove "God in the gaps." Their main argument is "irreducible complexity," namely, that there are certain bodily systems too complicated, with too many interconnected parts which would have had to evolve separately and on their own, for Darwin's evolution to be the mechanism. I have no comment on that, except to say that I am (of course) also not a Christian (I am agnostic at best on the matter of an intelligent designer), and many biologists have pushed back on some of their arguments (showing that the moving parts could have evolved separately).

                  The "intelligent design" folks sometimes also raise "fine tuning" of the universe's constants and other properties as evidence for a special suitability of the universe for "life in general" or "intelligent life," but I have never heard them raise the same argument I raise (the incredible, extreme improbability of the biologist's own existence to allow for her contemplating that fact.)

                  I believe that there may be some natural process or condition of the universe like "intelligence" with an ability to determine or guide conditions, but it is far from the fellow with a beard sitting in the clouds.

                  Gassho, J
                  stlah
                  Last edited by Jundo; 08-15-2024, 12:55 AM.
                  ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                  Comment

                  • Guest

                    #10
                    You raise some interesting thoughts here, I’m trying to pay attention and understand what you are saying but I think my essential way of to thinking makes difficult to simply accept without giving it some thought. this is why the whole premise of “amazing things that led to me” is hard to wrap my head around, given that there are far more “amazing things that led to xyz species disappearing without trace”.

                    I like to think myself susceptible to wonder, life is so staggeringly unlikely and beautiful, and I’m fairly convinced that the universals is sentient, because here we are being sentient, that’s sufficient proof. However, when we consider that we don’t even know what most of the universe is made up of, and of what we do know, most of it is simply inert matter subject to the laws of physics, life is certainly an anomaly, statistically we are an outlier. I can’t help but think however, and this is one of the things that convinced me to abandon theistic religions, that there might be a survivorship bias involved in our thinking we’re special. The fact that I was the chicken who happened to survive crossing the freeway and is able to realise how unlikely the chances were is no argument for an unseen hand guiding my steps if all the other chickens are now pancakes with feathers, where was the universe guiding events in those instances?

                    Something Douglas Adam’s wrote, sometimes used to describe the illusion of intelligent design, is pretty apropos:

                    “This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.“

                    From the Salmon of Doubt: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/708...-puddle-waking

                    Gassho
                    Satlah
                    M
                    Last edited by Guest; 08-15-2024, 02:09 AM.

                    Comment

                    • Jundo
                      Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                      • Apr 2006
                      • 40664

                      #11
                      Excellent points .... but ...

                      Originally posted by Myojin
                      ... this is why the whole premise of “amazing things that led to me” is hard to wrap my head around, given that there are far more “amazing things that led to xyz species disappearing without trace”.
                      Yes, animals die crossing the road daily and, while XYZ did not survive, we might think (if we imagine any of the endless chain of crossroads of the past) neither might you have. Certainly, somebody or something might have survived, and many might die ... but the odds that the something or somebody that survived would be you, most personally and presently and self-aware right now, are beyond infinitesimal. The following chicken examples will show you what I mean:

                      .... I can’t help but think however, ... that there might be a survivorship bias involved in our thinking we’re special. The fact that I was the chicken who happened to survive crossing the freeway and is able to realise how unlikely the chances were is no argument for an unseen hand guiding my steps if all the other chickens are now pancakes with feathers, where was the universe guiding events in those instances?
                      Yes, it may be a selection effect, a survivorship bias. BUT, think of it this way instead ...

                      Not just one road was crossed.

                      Rather, 13.8 Billion years of roads had to be crossed, roads intersecting roads, a road successfully crossed in each hour, minute, second (and less) at each and every causational crossroads since the Big Bang ... not a single (not even 1) "splat" along the way ... countless roads (I leave it to your mathematical skills to calculate how many roads that is) ... and further, roads that did not just lead anywhere, but rather to the particular set of conditions which are necessary for you, here and now ... not one semi-truck of disaster encountered, not one ancestor who ended up "road kill" before mating ... PLUS let us make you a blindfolded chicken too ... all this necessary to leave your (not any other) particular chicken as the survivor which ... crossing but the most recent road prior to your conception and birth ... you were heard to squawk "Gee, that was lucky, since I could have been those other guys."

                      There are events which are chance and unlikely, then there are events which happen because, so unlikely, something else must be afoot. If one goes out to the chicken coop in the morning, morning after morning (13.8 Billion years of mornings) only to find the chickens one put there the night before always missing, would the explanation most likely be just "poor luck," or "chance" or "something had to happen, it might as well be this," or would it be that big hole where the fox can enter, or that greedy neighbor who always seems to have plenty of chickens? Even if you have no evidence right now that there is a fox or that the neighbor is stealing, is there not reason to suspect and posit that it is so?

                      Oh, there are selection effects, and then there is being a blind chicken.

                      Something Douglas Adam’s wrote, sometimes used to describe the illusion of intelligent design, is pretty apropos:

                      “This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.“
                      But imagine that, as you get ready to turn in one night, you find the puddle is in the middle of your bed. Would you just assume that "well, puddles must be somewhere, in some shape, and this one fits the bed nicely" ... Or would you look for the source of the leak?

                      Gassho, J
                      stlah
                      Last edited by Jundo; 08-15-2024, 03:48 AM.
                      ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                      Comment

                      • Guest

                        #12
                        I'm probably more of a Taoist in this respect, Lao Tzu's straw dogs always felt more likely to me, we're special until one day we aren't, then we're trampled underfoot.

                        Originally posted by Jundo


                        Yes, animals die crossing the road daily and,.........Yes, it may be a selection effect, a survivorship bias. BUT, think of it this way instead ...
                        I grew up in rural Suffolk, and would regularly pass the locally famous 'Chicken roundabout: 'What is the chicken roundabout in Ditchingham, Bungay? | Eastern Daily Press (edp24.co.uk)
                        It occurred to me that the site might be a microcosm of evolution, faster, smarter chickens might live long enough to breed, and so on down the line, while slower, stupider chickens didn't. Unfortunately the experiment seems to be a thing of the past, but it's an interesting notion nonetheless. The thing is, those that didn't make it are not here to question the fact, it's us survivors of eons of evolution, chance meetings, stochastic events, who are here to ask the question, the dead don't ask questions (as far as we know), so who else could it be?

                        You also got me thinking about the cane toad: Cane Toad Evolution (canetoadsinoz.com), those with slightly longer legs, are a little stronger, a little faster, on the whole are more likely to reach the next watering hole, survive and breed. We hear nothing from their unlucky competitors, so there's an element of superiority in that, when put in an alien environment, these traits tend to lend themselves more to survival, although the chances of their being in Australia at all is really a fairly random event, if you consider introduction by humans random, as far as the toads are concerned that was a pretty significant turn of events, something beyond their ken was definitely afoot. ​

                        In any case, speaking of survival, we have a typhoon on the way and still the threat of a megaquake to consider, so we're going to batten down the hatches and survive that. I hope you have everything tied down and we may have the chance to discuss these things in greater detail at some point.

                        Gassho

                        Satlah
                        M​

                        Comment

                        • Jundo
                          Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                          • Apr 2006
                          • 40664

                          #13
                          I slightly rewrote my prior response ...

                          Originally posted by Myojin
                          I'm probably more of a Taoist in this respect, Lao Tzu's straw dogs always felt more likely to me, we're special until one day we aren't, then we're trampled underfoot.



                          I grew up in rural Suffolk, and would regularly pass the locally famous 'Chicken roundabout: 'What is the chicken roundabout in Ditchingham, Bungay? | Eastern Daily Press (edp24.co.uk)
                          It occurred to me that the site might be a microcosm of evolution, faster, smarter chickens might live long enough to breed, and so on down the line, while slower, stupider chickens didn't. Unfortunately the experiment seems to be a thing of the past, but it's an interesting notion nonetheless. The thing is, those that didn't make it are not here to question the fact, it's us survivors of eons of evolution, chance meetings, stochastic events, who are here to ask the question, the dead don't ask questions (as far as we know), so who else could it be?
                          Sorry, you keep talking like the chicken crossed only 1 road, or just 2 or 3 roads, or 10 roads or 100 roads, or even a million roads.

                          That is not even chicken feed!

                          And it is not just any chicken ... it is Cock a Doodle-you and, one would think, you should have never even hatched to consider the matter at all, let alone blindly wandered through 18.7 billion years of "chicken roundabouts!"

                          I mean, you might have made it by chance ... and we cannot totally rule it out ... but much more likely is that the farmer gave you a ride in the back of the chicken truck and deposited you safely on the other side. You just don't know it because you had that blindfold on.

                          Gassho, J

                          stlah
                          ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                          Comment

                          • Ramine
                            Member
                            • Jul 2023
                            • 177

                            #14
                            There is something special, deserving special explanation, about the fact that, in a seemingly wild and largely random universe, you find yourself to be a self-aware being able now to imagine and contemplate any point in time in the history of this universe, beginning from a moment after the Big Bang, continuing on through 13.7 billion years to the moment of your conception when, according to our currently accepted notions of physics, chemistry, stellar and planetary development, biology and evolution, the intricate sequence of events headed in precisely a direction necessary for your eventual existence despite the seemingly far greater likelihood time-and-time again that any single event amid the ages-long unbroken chain could, it would be thought, have turned in another direction among the vast set of directions which would have foreclosed your eventual existence, all as proven by the simple fact that here you are, alive and pondering your existence and all it required.
                            I sometimes wonder (in hope) whether the universe has a 'creative' or 'life' or 'consciousness' bias - just someting subtle that pushes in a certain direction - but that is as far as I go, really. Sometimes I think of 'love' as well, but that seems to be a somewhat narrow human perspective? Whether that is the case or not - I don't know...

                            Ramine
                            Sat and lah

                            Comment

                            • Jundo
                              Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                              • Apr 2006
                              • 40664

                              #15
                              I will also announce my new project here ... just starting to write now ...

                              New Book: IMPLAUSIBLY-IMPROBABLY-IMPOSSIBLY YOU (Tentative Title)

                              Hey All,

                              [Announcing] my new book project, tentatively titled (PLEASE, do suggest a better title if one comes to mind):
                              .
                              IMPLAUSIBLY-IMPROBABLY-IMPOSSIBLY YOU

                              The ultra-unlikely turns and too-timely twists of
                              physics, chemistry, biology, evolution, human history and more,
                              from the Big Bang to your own Birth.

                              It will be a version of several of my 'Hunches' posts, but written in a lighter, more fun and conversational style. I plan that friends who are, respectively, a physicist, chemist, biologist, medical doctor, neuro-scientist and historian will write short sections highlighting but some of the amazing 'had to happen if you were to happen happenstances' leading to you, each in their respective fields.

                              Of course, your birth was not literally "impossible" (proven by the simple fact that, we must assume, you were born.) However, when viewed from any point amid the billions of years of preceding events leading up to your appearance on stage, one might consider that such a specific outcome would have then been so implausible and improbable as to have been "practically impossible."

                              Gassho, J
                              stlah​​
                              ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                              Comment

                              Working...