By TC Lo (盧天賜); January 21, 2012 (Latest revision, Apr. 28, 2013)
If God does not exist, we are facing the cardinal problem of Origin. Humanistic religions and philosophies tend to use a “circular” view of cosmology (note 1) pointing out that the universe has no beginning and no end. Perhaps this was why Buddhism and Hinduism (and later Aristotle) opine that universe in general and human lives in particular are endless cycle of re-births. But this kind of system of thought is not without serious problems: How can one answer the following tough questions?
- Rebirth (or reincarnation) connotes that human beings steadily improve in an evolutionary way. If this is true, why in reality human beings do not become morally perfect? For a universe whose being was without the “First Cause”, it should have infinitive time in the past to improve itself; if so, then why the world has not become a better place morally?
- Through re-birth, there should have been some “good” people who have attained the state of nirvana after they had departed from this world; these perfect beings need no reincarnation again. On the other hand, there should have been some “bad” people who would have remained downgraded to animals once they died. With these two extreme cases in view, it should result in reduction of human population. But the fact is that the world population increases instead of reduces. How would you explain that? Furthermore, since human beings have been given infinitive chances to progress in the past, they should all have attained nirvana by now and there should be no human beings today to even talk about this issue; but the reality points to the contrary (Ref. 3)
- Do you know of anyone who, in your opinion, should be qualified for nirvana now but he or she is not? If you find no one meets the qualification, or at best just only a few are eligible for reaching nirvana, then the entrance to nirvana is a very narrow gate. If so, your accusation against Christianity for intolerance based on Jesus’ claim that “He is the ONLY way to heaven” is not justifiable.
- As Buddhism claims that suffering in this life is a result of the sins of your previous life, then you ought to ask yourself a question: Did I ever experience sufferings in my present life? If your answer is “no”, I congratulate you. If your answer is “yes”, then may I ask what sins did you commit in your previous life? If you don’t know (in fact, I challenge you that you don’t know), then how would you redress your previous wrongs? Did you just say that reincarnation is a process of continuous purification (called Karma, see Note 2)? Without knowing what sins you had committed, how could you make improvements in the present life?
- If you detest the Christian idea of hell and charge it as intolerance, then, ponder this question: If you think everyone should be in the state of nirvana based on your insistence of tolerance, then why do we need religions of reincarnation (process of endless improvement) in the first place as everyone is destined to nirvana (heaven not hell) anyway?
- More fundamental question: If your previous life determined your fortune in this life, how did this “previous life” started in the first place? This goes back to the question of Origin that the Buddhists (and ancient philosophers) want to avoid.
- Buddha was a persona of 600 B.C. yet his biography was not written until after Jesus’ death (100 A.D.). Who could guarantee the authenticity of the record? But Jesus’ biography (in the four Gospels) was written in less than 100 years after his crucifixion which would preclude the possibility of mythology injection. More significantly, if one takes the prophecies concerning Jesus written in the Old Testament books, scholars claime they can reconstruct Jesus’ biography resulting in pretty much in agreement with what the Gospels recorded.
Note 1: Before the Big Bang gained currency, so many scientists were keen to dismiss it because it seemed to support the Bible story of Genesis 1:1. Some clung to Aristotle’s view of the “eternal universe” without beginning or end; but this theory, and later variants of it, are now discredited.
Note 2: Karma in Buddhism is an impersonal principle of causality. Christianity believes in a Personal God who determines what is good and what is evil and their consequences (John 5:29). Without a Personal Judge, there is no moral foundation for righteousness and forgiveness. Buddhism has no concept of forgiveness. Morality always relates to person-hood which impersonal principle fails to define.
離開聖經中的上帝, 人便無法面對宇宙的 “第一因” 的窮巷 (question of Origin). 人本宗教或哲學, 便喜愛 “圓圈式” 的宇宙觀, 認為宇宙是無始無終以迴避第一因 (first cause) 的難題. 佛教和印度教的輪迴很可能是從這種思想衍生出來的.
如果這個思想系统 (system of thought) 是對, 你如何回答下列的問題?
* 輪迴是以進化方式慢慢漸進地進步 (steadily improve in an evolutionary way). 如屬實, 為何人在道德上沒有變得更好 (become morally perfect)? 為何世界沒有變成一個更好的地方 (better place morally)?
* 藉着輪迴, 一定有些好人可以達到極樂世界 (state of nirvana), 他們離開塵世, 不再需要參與輪迴 (not be reincarnated). 也一定有 (更多的) 壞人, 由前生的 “人” 降為今生的 “動物”. 所以世界人口一定會越來越少; 為何事實上世界人口却越來越多? 如果輪迥是不斷的投胎 (rebirth) 以達到解脫的景界, 那在無限的過去應有無限的機會使每一個人都跳出輪迥的圈子了. 但事實並非如此. 如何解釋? (Ref.3)
* 你認識那些人你認為他們是有資格去極樂世界嗎? 如果你認為 “沒有” 或 “不多”, 那麽往極樂世界的門便很狹了. 但你不是說你不信耶穌是因為基督教所堅持的 “只有信耶穌才能得救” 教義是太狹窄嗎?
* 如佛學所言, 今生的苦難是因前生的罪孽所至, 你就應自問你的一生有無遇過苦難. 如果沒有, 恭喜你, 你前生一定是無罪孽, 那你就應一早巳不在這個人世間了, 你巳經在極樂世界了. 如果你今生遇過苦難, 代表你前生有罪孽, 那麽你前生是甚麼東西呢? 作過甚麼惡呢? 你說你不知道. 如果你不知道, 你又如何去修正呢? 你不是說信輪迴是一個以進化方式慢慢漸進地進步的過程嗎? 既無法修正, 何來進步呢?
* 如果你認為人人都可以往極樂世界, 真寬容呀! 那就不需要有輪迴了. 那還需要相信輪迴式的宗教嗎?
* 更基本的问题: 如果你前生的選擇决定你今生的景況, 那這循環過程中的 “前生” 又如何開始?
佛教與基督教兩者有相同之處:
- 如佛教: 善有善報, 惡有惡報 — Karma 業 (佛教名詞)
- 基督教: “行善的，復活得生；作惡的，復活定罪.” (John 5:29)
佛教與基督教兩者有不同之處:
業(Karma) 是一種無位格的因果關係 (impersonal principle), 是輪迴觀念的基礎, 把它應用在道德上的因果關係是沒有意義的; 因為公義必定是與位格有関的, 沒有一位有位格的審判官, 誰去决定甚麽是善, 甚麽是惡呢? 基督教相信 Personal God, 公義與赦免是基於有一位有位格的審判官作為道德的基石 (moral foundation). 佛教是沒有 “赦免” 的, 因為赦免是位格與位格間的互動.
最後一點: 佛是 600 B.C. 年代的人物, 但他的傳記直至 100 A.D. 年代才寫成. 佛經是基督時代的作品, 兩者時隔近六,七百年之久, 誰能保證它們的內容中間沒有傳說的成分介入? 誰能保證中間沒有神話的東西插進去? 但耶穌的傳記 (新約聖經的四福音書) 在他釘十字架後一世紀內巳經寫成. 更重要的是—如果你把耶穌出生前數世紀與他有關的預言從組起來, 你可以編出四福音書來. 聖經的可靠性和可信性就在此表明了.
總上所述, 相信輪迴的宗教是不適於實際生活的 (unlivable). 不如 “回頭是岸吧”!
Ref.1: 参閱本 blog 另一文: “榮耀的盼望, 真正的解脫” (6/22/2011). https://hocl.org/blogs/tincheelo/?p=69
Ref.2: 参閱本 blog 另一文: “論地獄” (8/25/2011). https://hocl.org/blogs/tincheelo/?p=172
Ref.3: “True For You, But Not True For Me” by Paul Copan, p.88.
