Buddhist polemicists ought to focus more on the possibility and desirability of escape from rebirth

Buddhism is known for its methodical philosophical basis. Unlike other religions its reliance on revelation or tradition for its epistemology is minor. It is based instead on observations which are are analyzed logically to arrive at its conclusions. Much of this explication didn’t come with the historical Buddha, but developed in the intervening millennia. Nevertheless, they form the basis of Buddhist views.

One aspect of Buddhist doctrine that may seem to some as not grounded in empiricism or rationality is samsara or rebirth/reincarnation. Buddhists in modern times have gone to pains to defend it. The Buddhadharma teachings on rebirth as I understand them can be outlined in four postulates:

1. Rebirth takes place.
2. It is possible to escape from the cycle of rebirth.
3. It is desirable to escape from the cycle of rebirth.
4. Buddhism provides the only reliable methodology for escaping rebirth.

#1 wouldn’t have faced many challenges in the context from which Buddhism arose, as it is a common assumption among Indic religions. The main apologetic focus was reconciling this belief with the distinctively Buddhist teaching of anatman (no self). Over time, as Buddhism has come in contact with religions or worldviews that posit very definite beginnings and ends of human lives, and subsequent eternal states or extinction, it has needed to argue for rebirth. In particular, Buddhism must argue against the common materialist/physicalist view that consciousness ceases upon death.

And yet, as things stand, this may not be such a large obstacle as a Buddhist polemicist might believe. 1/3 of Americans believe in reincarnation. (www.pewresearch.org/…/views-on-the-afterlife/). This despite it being contrary to Christian and so-called “skeptical” doctrine. Further, evidence for, if not rebirth per se at least persistence of memories/personality has been collected by the Institute of Noetic Sciences and the Division of Perceptual Studies at University of Virginia School of Medicine. These researchers have found many instances where young children are able to access the memories of other recently deceased individuals. These (as well as less credible) accounts have started to filter out into the mainstream via media such as Netflix’s miniseries “Surviving Death”. Clearly there is a large number of people who are receptive to the idea of rebirth.

#3 is addressed indirectly elsewhere in Buddhist teachings. It is implicit from the Noble Truth of duhkha (suffering/dissatisfaction). A lot of attention is given to detailing duhkha and how to overcome it, but I haven’t encountered explicit statements comparable to what Epicureanism says regarding pain.

But Buddhist philosophy has seemingly most overlooked #2. I have yet to see it properly addressed, though unlike #3 it cannot be seen as simply self-evident. By what evidence can we conclude that escape from the cycle of rebirth is possible? Without some strong arguments borders on an article of faith.

In context of the sramana movement from which Buddhism arose it wasn’t necessary to create strong arguments for #1-3, as these views were widely shared. In modern times a more rigorous basis for these views must be developed for Buddhists to gain new adherents. A lot of focus has been given to premise #1, and many potential converts are receptive to the notion of rebirth. But premises #2-3 have scarcely been identified let alone addressed.

Edit: In another post I’ve compiled most of the substantial subreddit posts on Buddhist doctrine. From there I’ve only found one comment sonfar which addresses point #3 from u/markevens:

Sure, this question comes up a lot for people living in a cozy 1st world country, living better than kings did not long ago. For most of human history, people struggled for food and basic necessities. People found equilibrium in their struggle, but famine and disease were a constant threat. In essence, life was short and brutal. For most other life forms on the planet, life is a constant struggle for survival, every waking moment spent trying to find food and not get eaten by something else. So to put it mildly, life was not very pleasant. In the Buddhist Cosmology, when a living being dies it gets reincarnated, usually as a different kind of life form. What life form that is, is determined by your karma (the things you did in that life and previous lives as well). Basically the ride is painful, and there is no getting off. Well, no getting off until the Buddha came along and found a way off, which is what Buddhism is really all about. Some people say enlightenment is the goal, but that isn’t entirely correct. The real goal of Buddhism is to get off the cycle of reincarnation, and enlightenment is the tool to do that. When someone is enlightened to a certain level they are no longer reincarnated. I’m not very good at the particulars here so I’ll probably disappoint, but there is something that continues to exist after death. It isn’t just a complete cessation of everything. That state is Nirvana.

I have to object to some of the characterizations made here. Many animals spend much of their time in apparent idleness. Even many non-agricultural humans have been observed to spend only a fraction of their waking hours in procuring food. The “nasty, brutish, and short” thesis has been debunked by anthropology and biology as far can I can tell.