If everyone in Tibet or Earth even for instance quit reproducing then how could a Lama reincarnate when his reincarnation depends on the freewill of the people who are reproducing?

  • Not to nitpick, but this question does not really have anything to do with evolution. Also freewill is not really the issue here. The same scenario could be asked if all of humanity became infertile or extinct. The question is still valid of course.
    – Thien
    Nov 18 '14 at 16:20
  • Yeah, I'm kind of confused with what evolution is meant here. Is this an attempt to find a zinger to refute evolution or reincarnation or free will? Nov 18 '14 at 16:41
  • I'm having a hard time explaining what I'm talking about. When we look at evolution we see that everything is a continuance of previous ancestors and there is no proof that this continuation involves a transfer of a mind that is independent of the body. In religions that believe in reincarnation the beginning of consciousness for a being is when a mind/soul enters into a body instead of the mind evolving with the body.
    – sw4130
    Nov 30 '14 at 23:15
  • I rolled back (reversed) your most recent edit: because that edit would have invalidated the existing answers to this question. After a question has been answered, if you want to ask a different question, please post it as a new question.
    – ChrisW
    Dec 1 '14 at 2:39
  • I'm putting this on hold as unclear, since neither the body nor the text really explains what exactly you are looking to find out and there's no clear line drawn between evolution and reincarnation for them to be discussed together. If you can come up with a clearer phrasing that keeps with existing answers then editing would work, otherwise I'd suggest a new question.
    – Hrafn
    Dec 1 '14 at 7:35

It's important to keep in mind the true pupose of a reincarnated Teacher: "As long as sentient being remain, may I too remain and dispel the miseries of the world". If there was no one left, then the teacher's job would've been completed and there would be no further need to come back to this world. From a bigger cosmos perspective, there're uncountable other places for sentient existence, so if our planet will no longer be habitable to sentient beings in the future, a great teacher will just simply move on to other places to dispel the miseries of those "other worlds".


These are really heterogeneous questions.

The answer to the body of the question: Bardo is the intermediate step between one life and the next. I don't know of any particular reason why we couldn't image Bardo to last longer if need be.

Also, in the cosmology, it the universe is mind boggling huge and there are multiple "universes", so if you can't be reborn on Earth, you'll be reborn in another universe.

As for what would happen if everyone died in all universes, then I guess that would be the same as the universe ending. The cosmologies say that a new universe will come along, pop back into existence and replace the old one.

The answer to the title, read up on Lopez's The Scientific Buddha. In short, Lopez doesn't think Buddhism has a lot of support for evolution (or vica versa)-- he thinks one is a science, one is a religion (magic, afterlife, abstruse philosophy) and mixing them is bad scholarship.

In Buddhist Biology Barash finds numerous parallels between ideas in Biology and Buddhism, entirely from a secular viewpoint (i.e. Buddhism without reincarnation)

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.