COMMENTS BY JOHN D. HUGHES ON THE THIRD DISCUSSION GROUP: RELIGIOUS RESEARCH AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, WEDNESDAY 19 SEPTEMBER, 2001
In my view, there are two main reasons for sitting down and developing Religious Cooperation. The first is that the spread of Buddha Dhamma as a serious way of life has entered into the traditionally Christian-orientated western world. The second is that there is an even more widespread serious interest in Buddha Dhamma as a subject worthy of close study. The unifying factor is that English is now effectively the world language and the most widespread linguistic vehicle for all forms of communication.
The Pali and Sanskrit scriptures have been translated into English and great efforts are being made to translate the Chinese Canon into other languages. Even though some existing translations are now dated stylistically and may contain errors, the next round of translators are alive and working to bring the texts up to date for more popular consumption. It is not within the true spirit of Buddha Dhamma to adopt a "fundamentalist" attitude towards the scriptures and it is open to the reader to regard the text translated with an open and critical mind.
Similar activity has occurred with the texts of other religions. It is not unnatural for persons to seek common ground in the various universes of discourse made by the various religions. In some senses all religions provide answers to questions such as Why are we born? Why do we suffer? Why do we die? and What happens next? In Buddha Dhamma many passages disprove the idea that consciousness (vinnana) transmigrates. A new re-linking consciousness (patisandhi) arises at conception, dependent on the old.
In the third discussion group - Religious Research and Biotechnology - it is therefore clear that scientists do not create life as they cannot synthesise the re-linking consciousness, but can only provide the material stuff of the body and the material nutrients of the body for the re-linking consciousness to operate with. There is no immediate necessary condition that life could only be nurtured intra-utero within the Buddhist perception, but if the conditions were right life would come into being. A being born by biochemistry principles extra-utero would be able to be trained in morality depending on the past kamma, because it is a human being. The same principles apply to cloning. The cloned being has a different re-linking consciousness to the original being and therefore is a unique separate individual as we all are. Other religions which rely on creation theory experience difficulty.
According to the usual view of the 12 links of the chain of "dependent origination", although conditioned "co-production" is probably a better term, the 12 links are spread over 3 lives: 1-3 belonging to a past life; 3-10 to this present life and 11-12 to a future life. The Monk Sati was seriously rebuked for declaring that "this very consciousness" transmigrates, whereas a new consciousness arises at birth depending on the old. Nevertheless there is an illusion of continuity as much in the same way as there is this life. Rebirth from life to life is a principle scarcely different from rebirth from moment to moment.
Maurice Walshe (1987) comments "The point can be intellectually grasped but it is only at the first path-moment, with the penetration of the spurious nature of what we call self, that it is clearly understood without a shadow of a doubt."
The Buddhist practitioners at Group Three on Religious Research and Biotechnology experienced no emotional stress on the notion of cloning because of this understanding of the rebirth process.
It is my impression that followers of other religions did not resonate with the Buddhist practitioners’ experience. They came to states of strong emotional abhorrence at the very notion of bio-technology assistance in the rebirth process. There seems little chance this emotional turmoil could be stilled within the type of discussion framework and the time restraints of the conference. As an optimist I would recommend further discussion of these delicate matters with those who believe in creator Gods if we are to reach religious cooperation.
John D. Hughes
Dip. App. Chem. T.T.T.C. GDAIE
Founder, Buddhist Discussion Centre (Upwey) Ltd.
Vice President, World Fellowship of Buddhists