Both lay Buddhists and Buddhist monks and nuns believe in karma and reincarnation: According to this belief, ordinarily when a person dies, they are reborn in some condition in some world. What condition and world they are born into depends on good and bad karma stored up in this life through good or bad deeds. Karma is a force that works automatically (there is no god handing out rewards and punishments). This belief was common in India already before Buddhism arose.
This belief plays a different role for lay Buddhists than it does for monks and nuns.
Lay Buddhists who are not monks and nuns are encouraged to do good deeds in order to store up good karma which will bring them rewards either in this life or the next life.
Monks and nuns are taught that desire for a better life next time is a form of Tanha/Thirst to be eliminated. The person who reaches Nibbana is not reborn at all, into any world.
One good way of making sense of this latter belief, somewhat puzzling in itself, is to consider it in the light of what is said in a passage which is the subject of another essay on "The Five Khandhas and the Non-Abiding Vinnana." "Vinnana" means "consciousness," and the passage describes consciousness as having a choice about whether to "abide in," or "seek support in," some particular object or condition that it perceives. Consciousness is said to metaphorically "come into existence" when it "abides in" some particular object or condition it perceives. I say "metaphorically," because the passage assumes that consciousness "exists" (in an absolute sense) even when it is not "abiding in" any perceptual object. To "come into existence" means to become part of the changing world (the world of "birth, decay, and death").
Buddhist thought on Nibbana as escape from reincarnation is based on a kind of parallelism between
a- consciousness metaphorically “coming into existence” by grasping at perceptual objects to cling to (as in the passage about the non-abiding Viññana), and
b- karma as a force literally bringing a person back into existence in some world.
In both cases, “coming into existence” is coming into existence with some essential connection, driven by “Craving and Clinging,” to some changing conditions in some world. Being essentially connected to some changing conditions is a source of Dukkha.
In acts of perception, Craving causes Viññana to (metaphorically) “spring up into existence” by grasping at some perceptual object, thus subjecting itself to Dukkha. In a parallel way, if a person dies still Craving some connection to something outside her own consciousness, this same Craving acts as a force which will bring her back into some world pervaded by change and thus also pervaded by Dukkha.
In this life, the goal of the ideal Buddhist monk or nun should be to attain a mental state where his or her Viññana exists in a (metaphorically) “unborn” state, not Craving, “abiding in,” or “finding support in” any perceptual object, hence (metaphorically) not “coming into existence” in the present world. This will free the person from Dukkha in the present life. Because of the above parallelism, and in the context of a pre-existing belief in karma/reincarnation, it is understood that the cessation of Craving in this life eliminates the force (Craving) that causes reincarnation.
This gives Buddhist striving in this world the aura of an heroic cosmic achievement. Craving is an immensely powerful psychological force, a chain or “fetter,” binding a person to Dukkha-causing connections to the present changing world. Through heroic efforts at meditation, extraordinary individuals can break the force of this Craving in this life and attain the blissful state of Viññana able to find full satisfaction in its own being. But this has a cosmic dimension as well: People in the grip of Craving are bound to the wheel of karma, forced to come back into a dukkha-filled world over and over again. Buddhist monks and nuns see their lives in terms of a cosmic drama, heroically trying to break the chains and get free of the powerful psychological forces within themselves that would otherwise keep them coming back over and over again into changing, Dukkha-filled worlds.
Question: Should we say that the main goal of Buddhist monks and nuns to cease to exist after life?
In the background of such a question seems to lurk the Western religious idea that the main goal of life should be to get to heaven. When Buddhist thought is understood by contrast, it makes the Buddhist belief unintelligible. We can understand why a sensible person would want to go to an extremely pleasant place like heaven after death. It is hard to understand why a sensible person would take it as her main goal to cease to exist.
Addressing this question is a bit complicated.
What does the Pali Canon say about this?
First, it should be noted that the Pali Canon explicitly rejects the view that the person who reaches Nibbana in this life ceases to exist. “Craving for non-existence” is also listed as a kind of Craving (Tanha) a person needs to be rid of. Whatever else this means, it seems to clearly discourage the idea that one should take “not existing after death” as a goal in life.
The problem is that “Craving for existence” is also a negative Craving. And the view that a person who reaches Nibbana continues to exist after death is also labeled as a false view. When Upasiva asks the Buddha about these matters, the Buddha first changes the subject, and ends up by saying “no words describe the indescribable.”
What can we say?
Most emphatically, escaping rebirth is clearly pictured as an heroic achievement. This is greatly emphasized, because it is seen as essentially the same achievement as preventing Viññana from "coming into existence" by grasping at perceptual objects.
Trying to form a positive picture of the state of a person who has escaped rebirth is discouraged. I suggest two reasons:
First, if a person who dies after reaching Nibbana in this life does continue to exist in some sense, the state of this person would still be indescribable. To describe this state would be to describe the person as existing in some world. But the essence of a person who has reached Nibbana is that she is a person whose identity cannot be described in terms of its connection to some particular circumstances in some particular world. How would we describe a person without describing her position in some particular world?
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, we should remember the pragmatic intent of Buddhist teachings explained in the parable of the Raft and the parable of the Arrow. The Buddha declares he is not teaching people objective truths to answer curiosity about theoretical questions. All Buddhist teaching is practical instruction, ultimately serving as to motivate and guide people in overcoming the psychological forces that cause Dukkha. What practical effect would giving them a positive picture of the afterlife condition of an Enlightened person have? This is too problematic. It’s better to discourage them from focusing on this question.
Click here for a longer discussion of afterlife-Nibbana, applying the "demythologizing" approach of scripture scholar Rudolf Bultmann.
*****
This practical bent of Buddhist thought also helps explain why Buddhist teachings are different for laypeople and for monks and for monks and nuns.
So far as monks and nuns are concerned: The desire for a better life next time around is basically a desire to exist in better circumstances. Even existing in a “heaven” after death is a desire to live in particular circumstances different from the circumstances in which we now exist. The whole point of Buddhist monastic spirituality is to diminish and even possibly eliminate this reaching out to find some source of happiness or meaning in something external to oneself.
But eliminating this desire is only good if it is part of a life dedicated to reaching a higher spiritual state. In traditional times in Asia, the assumption was that this goal and way of life would be attractive only to a small minority of Buddhists. This is a goal that needs to be voluntarily taken on by idealistic individuals for its own sake, and cannot be made obligatory for everyone.
For the majority of Buddhists, not striving for this goal, desire for a better life next time has the positive practical effect of helping motivate them to observe some rules of basic moral decency, to be helpful to other people, and particularly to help keep Buddhism alive by supporting monks and nuns. To tell laypeople not to desire a better life next time around would not make them better persons but would take away one of their motivations to be good.
So Buddhist laypeople are encouraged to be good to each other to store up good karma bringing them rewards in this life or the next. Buddhist monks and nuns are encouraged to cultivate in themselves loving compassion for all sentient beings, not because this will bring them external rewards, but because this is one aspect of the Enlightened mind they are trying to become.