In Buddhism Where Will Souls Go if they Haven''t Reached Nirvana Before the Sun Dies?

[Rhondazvous]

This is a serious question, not an attempt to poke fun at Buddhism. To my knowledge, this question has not been addressed because the thought of total annihilation did not occur to the ancients. As I said to my knowledge. I could be wrong. Enlighten me.

Many people believe Buddhism gives us this indefinite amount of time to be reincarnated over and over until we get it right. But suppose there’s nothing to come back to?

It’s a matter of when, not if. Forget apocalyptic dooms day theory. We know the sun will one day use up it’s power and no longer be able to support life on earth. Even before that if we keep on humans will bomb, pollute and genetically modify ourselves into extinction quite soon.

So what will happen to the souls that haven’t made it to nirvana by then? Will they just float around in oblivion? Until the universe collapses into a black hole and begins to expand again with a new set of laws, hoping a new form of life will appear that is more amenable to nirvana than humans?

[Anomalocaris]

If you see Buddhism to be the bullshit it is, then you are not enlightened.

[LuisDantas]

This is a serious question, not an attempt to poke fun at Buddhism. To my knowledge, this question has not been addressed because the thought of total annihilation did not occur to the ancients. As I said to my knowledge. I could be wrong. Enlighten me.

Many people believe Buddhism gives us this indefinite amount of time to be reincarnated over and over until we get it right. But suppose there’s nothing to come back to?

It’s a matter of when, not if. Forget apocalyptic dooms day theory. We know the sun will one day use up it’s power and no longer be able to support life on earth. Even before that if we keep on humans will bomb, pollute and genetically modify ourselves into extinction quite soon.

So what will happen to the souls that haven’t made it to nirvana by then? Will they just float around in oblivion? Until the universe collapses into a black hole and begins to expand again with a new set of laws, hoping a new form of life will appear that is more amenable to nirvana than humans?

Buddhism does not use Atman / Soul concepts.  It specifically denies them ("Anatta").  Incidentally, it does not have a concept of reincarnation either, although people often misunderstand rebirth to be reincarnation.

Buddhist doctrine does not really have a choice, either.  Interdependent Origination and other core concepts of Buddhism also deny the idea of an immortal essence that transcends death.

As it was once said, that what reincarnates is neurosis.  As the doctrine goes, there are psychic residue that are explicitly mortal but nonetheless are associated with certain cravings.

Hinduism, however, has different conceptions.  So does kardecist spiritism, which is very popular here in Brazil.

It is only IMO a real problem with doctrines that rely on the idea of reincarnation (which Hinduism as I understand it does not).  Kardecism shows all too painfully that once a doctrine becomes obsessed with reincarnation there is no room for religion proper in there.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's an interesting take on buddhism.  Are you sure that you've described the meaning of anatta properly, and what leads you to conclude that reincarnation and rebirth are not analogous concepts?

For example, if I were to suggest that anatta means that there is no underlying singular substance to self, but that the transcendent immaterial consciousness we are can be reborn with karmic responsibilities, what would the functional difference between that and having a reincarnating soul actually be, as concepts?

[I_am_not_mafia]

A related question is how this reincarnation process copes with changes in population size. If the population keeps growing then where do the souls come from for each birth? Is there a queue of souls waiting to reincarnate and as the population grows the time to rebirth gets shorter? And what if there aren't enough souls? Do they then start inhabiting multiple bodies?

Or is this compensated by the fact that there is a mass extinction underway and that means there are fewer animals but more people? But how are you supposed to learn anything new by reincarnating as a slug if you messed up your last life as a human?

[brewer]

Rhonda: don't be to concerned, Xenu will come for them. 

Mathilda: If not enough human souls are around as the human population expands don't animal souls get their next step up? I think Darwin covered this in soul evolution.

[LuisDantas]

That's an interesting take on buddhism.  Are you sure that you've described the meaning of anatta properly, and what leads you to conclude that reincarnation and rebirth are not analogous concepts?

There are those who understand Anatta far better than me, but you do not have to take my word on the contrast between reincarnation and rebirth.  If anything, it is as close to a consensus as it gets.

https://www.thoughtco.com/reincarnation-...ism-449994

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/reincarnation.htm

For example, if I were to suggest that anatta means that there is no underlying singular substance to self, but that the transcendent immaterial consciousness we are can be reborn with karmic responsibilities, what would the functional difference between that and having a reincarnating soul actually be, as concepts?

It seems to me that a soul is supposed to be personal. Karma is not.

---

A related question is how this reincarnation process copes with changes in population size. If the population keeps growing then where do the souls come from for each birth? Is there a queue of souls waiting to reincarnate and as the population grows the time to rebirth gets shorter? And what if there aren't enough souls? Do they then start inhabiting multiple bodies?

Or is this compensated by the fact that there is a mass extinction underway and that means there are fewer animals but more people? But how are you supposed to learn anything new by reincarnating as a slug if you messed up your last life as a human?

If you want a Buddhist response, the short of it is that there are no such ideas on Buddhadharma.

[The Grand Nudger]

For example, if I were to suggest that anatta means that there is no underlying singular substance to self, but that the transcendent immaterial consciousness we are can be reborn with karmic responsibilities, what would the functional difference between that and having a reincarnating soul actually be, as concepts?

It seems to me that a soul is supposed to be personal.  Karma is not. 

A transcendental immaterial consciousness reborn -with- karmic responsibility seems very close to the function of soul in western mythologies.  To be expected, since it's an eastern mythology that seeks to answer the same fundamental questions and likely has at least -some- shared pedigree.  In being repackaged for a western audience the concept of anatta was rendered to be no self or no soul in some materialist sense, but it's a fair question..then, to ask what gets reborn.  The materialistic western buddhist might respond "oh, you know, circle of life".....but how does this square with the buddha (or anyone) recalling past lives?  

Ultimately, alot is made of the differences between buddhism and....say, christianity, as a marketing gimmick.... to present buddhism as a less superstitious alternative.  It isn't.  When you cut through the obfuscation they're very similar, and western buddhism is very much like western cultural christianity. As in cultural christianity, in western buddhism..inconvenient but essential dogma is simply omitted. Rebirth or reincarnation makes no more sense in the western repackaging of anatta than the title of christ does in cultural christianity. Buddhism...as practiced here, is just exotic jesusism.

[Angrboda]

It seems to me that a soul is supposed to be personal.  Karma is not. 

A transcendental immaterial consciousness reborn -with- karmic responsibility seems very close to the function of soul in western mythologies.  To be expected, since it's an eastern mythology that seeks to answer the same fundamental questions and likely has at least -some- shared pedigree.  In being repackaged for a western audience the concept of anatta was rendered to be no self or no soul in some materialist sense, but it's a fair question..then, to ask what gets reborn.  The materialistic western buddhist might respond "oh, you know, circle of life".....but how does this square with the buddha (or anyone) recalling past lives?  

Ultimately, alot is made of the differences between buddhism and....say, christianity, as a marketing gimmick.... to present buddhism as a less superstitious alternative.  It isn't.  When you cut through the obfuscation they're very similar, and western buddhism is very much like western cultural christianity.  As in cultural christianity, in western buddhism..inconvenient but essential dogma is simply omitted.  Rebirth or reincarnation makes no more sense in the western repackaging of anatta than the title of christ does in cultural christianity.  Buddhism...as practiced here, is just exotic jesusism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prat%C4%AB...rigination

[LuisDantas]

A transcendental immaterial consciousness reborn -with- karmic responsibility seems very close to the function of soul in western mythologies.  To be expected, since it's an eastern mythology that seeks to answer the same fundamental questions and likely has at least -some- shared pedigree.  In being repackaged for a western audience the concept of anatta was rendered to be no self or no soul in some materialist sense, but it's a fair question..then, to ask what gets reborn.  The materialistic western buddhist might respond "oh, you know, circle of life".....but how does this square with the buddha (or anyone) recalling past lives?

What of that? Lives exist and can be witnessed and remembered. That does not imply an atman/soul.

Ultimately, alot is made of the differences between buddhism and....say, christianity, as a marketing gimmick.... to present buddhism as a less superstitious alternative.  It isn't.  When you cut through the obfuscation they're very similar, and western buddhism is very much like western cultural christianity.  As in cultural christianity, in western buddhism..inconvenient but essential dogma is simply omitted.  Rebirth or reincarnation makes no more sense in the western repackaging of anatta than the title of christ does in cultural christianity.  Buddhism...as practiced here, is just exotic jesusism.

You would probably benefit from learning about the meanings of "Dharma".