March 26, 2015: A dialogue between Thurman and Batchelor.

     This week, Ann Selzer, your Consensap, led the discussion of an article from "The Tricycle", in which Robert Thurman and Stephen Batchelor debate whether true Buddhist belief requires a belief in rebirth. I have summarized that dialogue as follows. The group has this article ahead of time to read and contemplate.

Here is the url of that article:   http://www.tricycle.com/feature/reincarnation-deba

Rebirth

               There is a debate between traditional Eastern Buddhism and the Western iteration of Buddhism and one of the important disagreements between these two groups is what the concept of rebirth means to Buddhism. This brief dialogue is between Stephen Batchelor who lives in England and is the Director of Studies at the Sharpham College for Buddhist Studies and Contemporary Inquiry. Robert Thurman is the Jey Tsong Khapa Professor of Indo-Tibetan Studies at Columbia University and a cofounder of the Tibet House in New York City. Both have done considerable work in translating some of the traditional standards of Buddhist literature in addition to original writing about Buddhist beliefs.

               Robert Thurman is the more traditional of these two gentlemen. Although he feels that anyone can be a Buddhist no matter what they believe, he strongly feels that the concept of rebirth is a very important one in Buddhist thought. He feels that the traditional Buddhist must include a responsibility for past and future lives. He feels that without the concept of good and bad karma and the resultant good and bad rebirth levels, people would not be motivated to do good works. He believes strongly that the Buddha could relate other of his own lives, and taught the existence of rebirth. He feels that there is more than ample evidence in the stories of children who have remembered their former lives. And he feels that this concept is necessary for the ongoing study and advancement of Buddhism and for the advancement of Buddhist practitioners as well as for spiritual evolution in general.

               Stephen Batchelor portrays more of the Western view which is sometimes regarded as a “watered down” view.  He says that he really “doesn’t know” if there is rebirth or not. He admits that some of the evidence is compelling but postulates that even if some individual personalities are indeed reborn, it probably doesn’t happen to everyone. And he believes that this idea that it would happen to everyone is not necessary for the advancement of Buddhist beliefs. He feels that one could even serve as a bodhisattva by dedicating even our one life to saving all beings through leadership and teaching by the one personality who then dies. He also feels that part of the idea of rebirth may just be a function of its wide distribution among traditional religions at the time of Buddha.  He thinks that there probably is something after bodily death  but he really “doesn’t know”. And this is not a “don’t care” attitude but simply an “I don’t know” as in the agnostic “I don’t know.”  He agrees that there may be something after death of the body that none of us today with all of our science can even conceive or dream up.  He agrees that the idea of rebirth is very attractive to the human spirit and he would love to buy rebirth totally. But he can’t

               Whereas Thurman believes that the threat of bad karma leading to a lower rebirth determines the Buddhist excelling at helping others. Batchelor has asked himself if that was the case for him, and he feels that the concept of rebirth was never a driving force in his own behavior. He says that even if we could scientifically prove the existence of rebirth as a process, there would still not be evidence of karmic continuity and it would not prove rebirth as consequence of former presence or absence of moral acts.

               Again in terms of the Buddha, Batchelor seems to place the Buddha in his time period of history along with its limitations of cultural boundaries, from which he carries over ideas that Buddha was not a Superman. However Thurman truly believes the Buddhist scriptures and regards the words of Buddha about rebirth and about karma as absolute truths handed down over a remarkable 2500 years – those years of study providing support for his traditional view of rebirth. In fact he views even a kernel of Western science and its materialistic view of consciousness and the idea that “Boom, dead, finished.” -- he views this as  nihilistic toward spiritual progression. It provides a weird kind of freedom and a sense of helplessness. “There is nothing you can do because you don’t think that this piece of training, this piece of reasoning will really accomplish any transformation…  The idea that you will become nothing at death, which subliminally  makes you feel like nothing even now, is the major obstacle to people’s emotional life, their sense of connectedness to nature, to other people and to the environment.

               In answer, Batchelor says that he certainly agrees that people need to have a world view that supplies a deeper sense of connectedness with the environment, with other people and with society. But he feels that a believer can account for spiritual transformation, responsibility and causality just fine without having to believe in personal continuity through multiple lives.

               Much of the third page is devoted to a debate about the bodhisattva vow and what it means in the presence or absence of rebirth and multiple lifetimes to effect the vow. Thurman’s vow would be quite literal. Batchelor’s vow is symbolic.

               Batchelor believes that much of religious teachings come out of a desire for stories of consolation. We do need theories that are a first step toward an actual practice that can begin to change our sense of who we are in the world. Though not entirely happy with this, Thurman got Batchelor to admit that he posits a “virtual” continuity and connectedness, if not a literal former and future life one.  Batchelor: I would try to behave as if there were infinite lifetimes in which I would be committed to saving beings. Thurman: Then in case it turns out that you have to spend infinite lives here, you’ll be all set!


     I had particularly thought that we might discuss several of the comments that appeared after this article. I particularly liked comments 3, 6-8, 11, 13 and its sub comments, and the sub comment of 14, the last one. However, as is usual in our group the discussion went in its own direction.

     Gary commented that he feels reincarnation is very duality driven. In his preferred world view of monism, reincarnation cannot exist. The duality is that there is right and wrong, one has to achieve enlightenment to join the dharma, and karma assumes that the victim has done wrong in order to suffer. All of these monism would not have a place for.

     Paul wonders why in this article when Thurman set up a ball on a tee for Batchelor to hit it out of the park, Batchelor turned it down. He caved into Thurman several times. Regarding absolute truth, there is non in Buddhism. The goal is to achieve Nirvana, and then there is no self. Therefore the goal is for there to be no self to exist, which is the opposite of the identity of the self going forward. Buddha said "I teach suffering and the need to relieve it." What may happen in a future life does not inform Paul's behavior at all. And mostly the feeling is that we humans just do not know. We just do not know what happens after death and in the universe after death.  

     Meridith: Buddha often said, "This I have not specified." We all come with a story we are comfortable with. Every religion has finger shaking going on. And sometimes we do need that. "I (Meridith) think that when it comes to my death, if I have lived a good life, I will be all set. And if there's no afterlife, well then I have lived a good life."

     Kathy wanted to get in a last statement. Due to her experiences which she has told us about, she strongly believes in reincarnation. She knows the soul is incarnated. It is one part of the evolution of the soul. Last word!