My Reincarnation

I just watched a few movies and one landslid into another. I started off with the movie, Unmistaken Child . I'm curious I want to know what is out there, and Tibetan monks seem to have all kinds of history and hidden information surrounding them. The next movie that pops up (on netflix) is My Reincarnation. I thought the premise of both movies being a documentary was a good tactic. The first movie was fairly slow and not really convincing but it left you with a small chance of thinking, maybe this is real. I did some research and while I was watching the second movie I came across this article.

China Outlaws Reincarnation

Interesting that the gov. would actually put a law like that in force.

Well this leads to the self immolation and how the monks do not place living here as a top priority.
Monk Self Immolation
YouTube

I remember reading about this but never really placed the two ideas together. I guess if you firmly believe in reincarnation, the second part only falls into line. I'm not sure where this is going but I just wanted to share.

Oh yeah! The second movie, "My Reincarnation" turned to out to be really interesting as it involved a renegade monk who wanted to teach everyone without restriction. His son was declared a reincarnated master and the movie centers more on how his mindset slowly changes from disbelief to thinking there is some truth to what his father believes.

check them out!

Thanks for sharing I been looking a lot into reincarnation lately.
Will definately have to give these 2 a look sometime.

reply to post by QuietSpeech


I think this should have been your thread title;

China Bans Reincarnation Without Government Permission

It is just to strange, funny and silly! Barred from seeking reincarnation wow!

By barring any Buddhist monk living outside China from seeking reincarnation, the law effectively gives Chinese authorities the power to choose the next Dalai Lama, whose soul, by tradition, is reborn as a new human to continue the work of relieving suffering.

reply to post by Char-Lee


I agree that title is pretty catchy, but that was way back in 2007! I am just trying to share the cool bits if that makes sense, stars and flags come second. Thanks for checking my post out though!

reply to post by ElOmen


There is a movie called Little Buddha that stars a famous American actor. The starting illustration is a great story, I only watched it because stories told inside of the actual plot. I skimmed it, you may find something interesting if yo do the same. (bad acting aside)

reply to post by QuietSpeech

After checking out the links, looking up the famous photos of Thich Quang Duc, and watching the video, I think self immolation looks like a horrible way to die. I have trouble understanding why anyone would purposefully inflict this on themselves. It is certainly a shocking protest, but it most definitely hurts the protestor more than those who are being protested against.

I have an affinity for many of the concepts of Buddhism (I recommend listening to the Urban Dharma podcasts by Rev Kusala), but regardless of whether reincarnation is true, why would self immolation be considered a preferable option to end one's current life? I can think of so many more peaceful ways to go. Thanks for the movies, I will have to watch those. They both sound very interesting.

reply to post by QuietSpeech


Why wouldn't a government outlaw reincarnation.... They did it in biblical times too!

It was considered a heresy, and likely the belief was punishable by death...

Why give a slave the option of having another go at life?

Especially when that organization has the monopoly and owns all the "rights" on Salvation...

IF you only get one chance... and the leaders know how to do "it" right...

You best listen to your leaders, or there are "eternal consequences"

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
reply to post by QuietSpeech

 

After checking out the links, looking up the famous photos of Thich Quang Duc, and watching the video, I think self immolation looks like a horrible way to die. I have trouble understanding why anyone would purposefully inflict this on themselves. It is certainly a shocking protest, but it most definitely hurts the protestor more than those who are being protested against.

I think you missed the point of his self immolation. It was not to hurt the people they were protesting against, it was to demonstrate the validity of Buddhism as a religion. The whole point was that a monk sat down, set himself on fire, and didn't start screaming or flailing around. He just sat there, perfectly still and content, until he died.

reply to post by Damsel


Exactly, it was thought out, it was not a knee jerk reaction. My tie in was, his "sacrifice" just lent further support to the belief system. It was a demonstration, but what was actually being said? " You control this life, I know that there is more and I will not hesitate to show you how firm my belief is." That is what I take away from this instance.

Originally posted by Damsel

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
reply to post by QuietSpeech

 

After checking out the links, looking up the famous photos of Thich Quang Duc, and watching the video, I think self immolation looks like a horrible way to die. I have trouble understanding why anyone would purposefully inflict this on themselves. It is certainly a shocking protest, but it most definitely hurts the protestor more than those who are being protested against.

I think you missed the point of his self immolation. It was not to hurt the people they were protesting against, it was to demonstrate the validity of Buddhism as a religion. The whole point was that a monk sat down, set himself on fire, and didn't start screaming or flailing around. He just sat there, perfectly still and content, until he died.

I do think I am missing the point, yes, because I don't see how his death in any way demonstrated the validity of Buddhism as a religion. I find Buddhism plenty valid enough, without including self immolations as part of the equation.

I'm not sure that one can infer contentedness from the fact he sat still for the fifteen seconds or so before he fell over dead. One might, however, be able to infer that his ability to not react outwardly to the pain he must have experienced, demonstrates incredible discipline, shock, or....?

I'm also not sure if the ability to sit still and not flail around while burning to death is something that we should wish to develop.

reply to post by gwynnhwyfar

Originally posted by QuietSpeech
reply to post by Damsel

 

Exactly, it was thought out, it was not a knee jerk reaction. My tie in was, his "sacrifice" just lent further support to the belief system. It was a demonstration, but what was actually being said? " You control this life, I know that there is more and I will not hesitate to show you how firm my belief is." That is what I take away from this instance.

I don't think that was really the case. I think it was more "I am able to control my body and mind through the teachings in Buddhism." Even in the face of extreme physical pain--burning alive--he had enough control over his mind to sit still and did not need to react to it; did not suffer because of it.

It wasn't a display of faith as much as it was a display of mind over matter. It was a demonstration of what Buddhism is all about: freedom from suffering.

Originally posted by Damsel
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar

 

Originally posted by QuietSpeech
reply to post by Damsel

 

Exactly, it was thought out, it was not a knee jerk reaction. My tie in was, his "sacrifice" just lent further support to the belief system. It was a demonstration, but what was actually being said? " You control this life, I know that there is more and I will not hesitate to show you how firm my belief is." That is what I take away from this instance.

I don't think that was really the case. I think it was more "I am able to control my body and mind through the teachings in Buddhism." Even in the face of extreme physical pain--burning alive--he had enough control over his mind to sit still and did not need to react to it; did not suffer because of it.

It wasn't a display of faith as much as it was a display of mind over matter. It was a demonstration of what Buddhism is all about: freedom from suffering.

I agree that it was a display of mind-over-matter. What I take issue with is that I see no need to unnecessarilly cause oneself suffering, in order to demonstrate to others that one can appear not to suffer. I still have trouble imagining that he did not suffer awfully, simply because he did not appear to react, up until he fell over, obviously dead.

I may have inadvertantly derailed the thread, though, on this issue - I think the OP originally meant to talk about the reincarnation aspects of the belief system, and the self immolation was just meant to be an illustration of how profoundly the confidence in that belief could alter one's perceptions, such that mortality becomes no apparent concern.

I just got side tracked on the self immolation part, because it seems so counter-intuitive to me.

If you died and were faced with a choice to spend a lifetime in hell dying over and over again or incarnate into a human slave what would you choose? Also if you were a slave master and you knew someone had made that choice could still keep slaves?

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
I agree that it was a display of mind-over-matter. What I take issue with is that I see no need to unnecessarilly cause oneself suffering, in order to demonstrate to others that one can appear not to suffer. I still have trouble imagining that he did not suffer awfully, simply because he did not appear to react, up until he fell over, obviously dead.

I can't imagine that he did suffer. I'd think if you sat down and set yourself on fire, instinct would kick in and you'd try to put it out. It takes some serious discipline to just sit there and take it. I mean, I'm sure he felt physical pain, but I don't think he suffered because of it. That's how he was able to endure and remain still.

I also don't think this discussion is too far off topic from reincarnation. If we're speaking of the Buddhist idea of rebirth, it all ties together with the mind and with suffering.

Originally posted by Damsel

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
I agree that it was a display of mind-over-matter. What I take issue with is that I see no need to unnecessarilly cause oneself suffering, in order to demonstrate to others that one can appear not to suffer. I still have trouble imagining that he did not suffer awfully, simply because he did not appear to react, up until he fell over, obviously dead.

I can't imagine that he did suffer. I'd think if you sat down and set yourself on fire, instinct would kick in and you'd try to put it out. It takes some serious discipline to just sit there and take it. I mean, I'm sure he felt physical pain, but I don't think he suffered because of it. That's how he was able to endure and remain still.

I also don't think this discussion is too far off topic from reincarnation. If we're speaking of the Buddhist idea of rebirth, it all ties together with the mind and with suffering.

If that wasn't a whole bunch of suffering, condensed into a very short amount of time, then I don't know what to think... But again, even if you have the ability to control your reaction to physical pain and suffering, why would it be a good idea to promote it? What purpose does it serve? Does it really sell anybody on exploring Buddhism? Should people start sitting down around Times Square, meditating, and self immolating, to serve any purpose, religious or otherwise?

I just don't get it. But, obviously, it must have inspired a lot of people, so maybe I am just missing the point, even though, as I stated earlier, I do have an affinity for many Buddhist concepts, including reincarnation.

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
If that wasn't a whole bunch of suffering, condensed into a very short amount of time, then I don't know what to think... But again, even if you have the ability to control your reaction to physical pain and suffering, why would it be a good idea to promote it? What purpose does it serve? Does it really sell anybody on exploring Buddhism? Should people start sitting down around Times Square, meditating, and self immolating, to serve any purpose, religious or otherwise?

I just don't get it. But, obviously, it must have inspired a lot of people, so maybe I am just missing the point, even though, as I stated earlier, I do have an affinity for many Buddhist concepts, including reincarnation.

His self immolation wasn't just out of the blue to make Buddhism look neat to the layman, it was because of the persecution of Buddhists going on at the time by the Vietnamese government, and the actions of Thich Quang Duc brought a decisive end to that.