Reincarnation verses Rebirth

I find it very, very easy to understand the difference between reincarnation and rebirth.

The first involves separate dwellings in the earth for the same soul, in different bodies and at non-concurrent times.

The second represents a philosophical change of view for a person taking place during a single earth dwelling. "Rebirth" can happen many times in a single lifetime.

 

Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism comes from a very different tradition of Buddhism: Vajrayana. Robert Thurman, currently its best known promoter, claims that it combines the best of Theravada monasticism and Mahayana messianism. Thurman,"Tibetan Buddhism in America" in Prothero, Nation of Religions, p.p. 114-16.

 

Is that all? Why didn't I think of that before? Just understand reality. But isn't that what they all say: Christianity, Islam, Marxism-Leninism, etc. I sense that your view of reality may be different from mine.

 

That sounds more like the Christian idea of being "born again". I think Buddhists are more metaphysical than that. In Buddhism, it happens after death. Rebirth

 

That may be correct. When I use the term "religion" I'm looking at the whole chart. The "I" and "WE" are the belief-value system experienced by the believers. The "IT" and "ITS" are the phenomenon observed by scholars. Of course, the essential ingredient is the sacred, spiritual, transcendental, metaphysical and/or divine.

 

Any time a profound change manifests within a person, it might be viewable as a "rebirth" for that person - especially if it alters their philosophical view of life or purpose.

There's no requirement for belief in Christ or Christianity - or any form of organized dogma in particular.

 

Granrted. But in Buddhism, which is what we're talking about, "rebirth" is something that happens after death. To say it happens before death is revisionism.

 

Buddhism does not believe that one is "reborn" into the same corporeal form as was used in a previous incarnation. It believes one is born into a new corporeal form. That is reincarnation - it's different from "rebirth".

 

We've been through that. See post #1. Hinduism, specifically Vedanta, believes in reincarnation--the transmigration of a soul from one body to the next after death. It doesn't have to be the same corporeal form. A human could be reincarnated as a cockroach. Buddhism, however, was a rebellion against certain aspects of Vedanta, especially the notion of a soul (atman) that transmigrated after death. Since Buddhist associate the soul with the self, and believe the self is an illusion, they think there is no transmigration of a soul. However, they say what happens instead is "rebirth". I find the distinction tenuous, and wonder what it could possibly mean. Cuz if there is no identity with whatever is "reborn", what sense does it make to say anything is reborn?

 

Systems are irrelevant. Societal function is irrelevant. Behavioral conditioning is irrelevant.

Religion means back to the source. Re = back, Ligion = root, or source.

Any personal thought, prayer or endeavor that seeks reunification with the source - with the creator - is religion.

 

Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.
"Religion is usually defined as a social-cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, morals, beliefs, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organizations, that generally relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, and spiritual elements—although there is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion. Different religions may or may not contain various elements ranging from the divine, sacredness, faith, and a supernatural being or beings. Religion - Wikipedia

 

"The term religion... is ultimately derived from the Latin word religiō. According to Roman philosopher Cicero, religiō comes from relegere: re (meaning "again") + lego (meaning "read"), where lego is in the sense of "go over", "choose", or "consider carefully". Contrarily, some modern scholars such as Tom Harpur and Joseph Campbell have argued that religiō is derived from religare: re (meaning "again") + ligare ("bind" or "connect"), which was made prominent by St. Augustine following the interpretation given by Lactantius in Divinae institutiones, IV, 28."
Religion - Wikipedia

 

You're, of course, free to define religion any way you want, but that isn't the usual definition.

"While much of the scientific study of religion is on theology-based doctrinal religions, the evolutionary psychologist Robin Dunbar thinks this is a narrow way of studying the phenomenon because it “completely ignores the fact that for most of human history religions have had a very different shamanic-like form that lacks gods and moral codes”. (By shamanic, Dunbar means religions of experience that commonly involve trance and travel in spirit worlds.) While the theology-based forms are only a few thousand years old and characteristic of post-agricultural societies, Dunbar argues that the shamanic forms date back 500,000 years. These, he claims, are characteristic of hunter-gatherers." How and why did religion evolve?

 

They don't call it dialectical materialism for nothin'. Marxism-Leninism purports to offer a "scientific" understanding of history and the future, as it is now, always was, and ever shall be.