donutszenmom.com

At the death of one personality, a new one comes into being, much as the flame of a dying candle can serve to light the flame of another.

As one might imagine, in a situation like the one I am in now (a loved one has died), I am put in the very interesting position of explaining my belief in reincarnation. “Not many people think the way you do,” The Cop reminded me at dinner tonight. Indeed.

I am interested in the difference between the Buddhist and Hindu perspectives on reincarnation. The quote above represents a Buddhist perspective.

Since, according to Buddhism, there is no permanent and unchanging self (identity) there can be no transmigration in the strict sense. Buddhism teaches that what is reborn is not the person but that one moment gives rise to another and that this momentum continues, even after death. It is a more subtle concept than the usual notion of reincarnation, reflecting the Buddhist concept of personality existing (even within one’s lifetime) without a “soul.” (wikipedia reference)

Just as a man discards worn out clothes and puts on new clothes, the soul discards worn out bodies and wears new ones.

Bhagavad Gita 2.22

And there we have a Hindu perspective.

According to Hinduism, the soul (atman) is immortal, while the body is subject to birth and death. The idea that the soul (of any living being with a consciousness – including animals and humans) reincarnates is intricately linked to karma, another concept first recorded in the Upanishads. Karma (literally: action) is the sum of one’s actions and the force that determines one’s next reincarnation. The cycle of death and rebirth, governed by karma, is referred to as samsara. Hinduism teaches that the soul goes on repeatedly being born and dying. (wikipedia reference)

As I get older (and more beings who I love die), I find myself more attracted to the Hindu perspective. Back in the day, I suppose the Buddhist perspective suited my more atheistic/scientific/materialist view.

Eh, but times change.