Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Belief in rebirth necessary to practice 8-fold path?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Can you highlight specifically what of that passage you quoted supports this statement? I do not see it.
Not quite. My point is that it is possible for practitioners to actualize the two accumulations and traverse the five paths in this or any lifetime. That merit or virtue can ripen (as Je Rinpoche clearly states in the passage above) in this very life.
Faith in rebirth is actually irrelevant. Rebirth is a conventional phenomena, it either happens or it doesn't (I think it does). Faith is as relevant to rebirth as faith in the sun rising is to the day.
I went back and made bold the meritorious actions and #1 about the most powerful karma taking effect first. Geshe Sopa makes clear that only powerful karma can produce powerful effects in the same lifetime.
I do not see how the powerful, sublime bodhisattva motivation (which is central to becoming a buddha) can occur in 2-renunciation; 4-great compassion or 8-giving (representing the first 5 paramitas?) if one ignores one's vows & intent to stay for countless rebirths for the sake of countless beings.
As for 6-Triple Jewel refuge, that cannot be but a feeble refuge, if the Dharma of rebirth that Buddha taught is ignored or rejected.
So the short reply is: no faith in rebirth, no powerful karma made in this lifetime; no powerful action now, no strong merit-effect now; no strong cause or effect in this life, no merit accruing from such weak cause/effect in the present lifetime.
Time for bed.
The event we call stream-entry occurs when a mind clearly perceives the impermanent nature of all reality including the mind-body complex (aggregates). It is at this point that one understands fully in which ways the mind's trends go against the natural flow of the stream, and this "self" of unwholesome trends is perceived not as one's true self but as the problem-child no longer to be left to its own devices.
The notion, the concept, of rebirth is in no way a requirement for one's mind to awaken to this reality. It plays no part whatsoever in this most important "key" that opens the window. One may believe in literal rebirth, not believe in literal rebirth, believe in metaphorical rebirth moment-to-moment, a combination of both of these, or have no knowledge of this concept.
The Buddha need not ever have existed. He did, and he taught, but reality stands "just so" whether one follows these teachings or not. There are those who have awakened with no knowledge of the Buddhist teachings, and we should always be aware that what stands right in front of our eyes, before our minds, always trumps our squabbles over doctrine and belief.
You can believe in rebirth however you want, and it may even be true. It just simply is not relevant to awakening (which is the goal of following the path). That is the answer to the question.
Good post.
P
And does she attach to this?
P
Your logic is really weird, to be honest. Putting "faith in rebirth" as the first requisite for virtue in this lifetime, etc. is ridiculous. I have never once heard any teacher advocate such an odd view in person or in commentaries or treatises, including Je Tsongkhapa, whom you blatantly misrepresented and painfully misunderstood earlier in this thread, not to mention great masters of the other Tibetan lineages and earlier Indian Mahayana. Your invocation of the bodhisattva vow is equally ridiculous. One takes the bodhisattva vow with the intent of attaining Buddhahood and leading all beings to that state. "Faith in rebirth" is absolutely not a prerequisite for the noble aspiration of a bodhisattva on the first bhumi, once one progresses on the path of the bhumis the relative truth of rebirth may become apparent to them, but at that point still, it shouldnt matter. It will only be a circumstance of conditioned existance. One can take the bodhisattva vow with the pure intent of benefiting beings, traverse the stages and paths, attain Buddhahood and serve beings without ever concerning themselves with "faith in rebirth". When you assert otherwise you fall into the same traps that you did before, where you make the very teachings you are trying to invoke in support of your twisted view irrelevant and redundant.
Rebirth is a conventional phenomena, there is absolutely under no circumstances a necessity of "faith" in a conventional phenomena.
"Faith in rebirth" as a prerequisite for the accumulation of merit and wisdom, and practicing the paramitas is your invention and nothing more.
You certainly stayed up past your bedtime putting that argument together.
Where is this listed as a factor of the 8FP, including in traditions other than your own? Thanks.
Please don't forget all of us when you do, either.
The race is on!?
I'm gonna start using HGH and blood doping to make sure I win.
Aspiring to the shepherd type of bodhisattva - everybody wins, but me.
I think that's the point, it very much depends on which tradition we practice in.
P
He seems to be of the opinion that his tradition is correct, and everybody else's is wrong, which seems odd, because I really don't understand what justifies or gives him the right or authority to think that.
Myself.....
I would like to believe you but I can not find this translation of the sutta. The more common one is as follows:
Anuruddha, for what purpose does the Thus Gone One tell the disciples, without wasting time, before you die, be born in something higher. Stating one is born there, another there. (* 2) The Teaching’s origin is the Blessed One, its lead is from the Blessed One, and its refuge is the Blessed One. Good that the meaning occurs to the Blessed One. We, bhikkhus, hearing it from the Blessed One, will bear it in mind. Anuruddha, the Thus Gone One tells the disciples, without wasting time before you die, be born in something higher. Telling them one is born there, another there. Not to deceive people, not for prattling, and not for gain honour or fame and not thinking may the people know me thus. Yet, Anuruddha, there are sons of clansmen who are born in faith and are pleased, to hear it. Hearing it they would arouse interest and direct their minds to that and it would be for their good for a long time.
It is not a rejection of rebirth but an adoption of some local baptizing ritual. Probably much like the christian one.
No (obviously not) that is why it says aging & death.
Very good example, no need to interpret Jati as "birth of the self" anywhere in that sutta to understand the essense of it.:).
Good point. I agree without reservation.
/Victor
It's Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation [pg. 568]. XD Ironically. XD The translation you gave is awkward, not in the form the suttas are normally translated. That it happens to be a version published online and comes up in Google doesn't make it the most common version, not that that would mean anything anyway. :P Bodhi is absolutely pro-rebirth, and yet...
o.o
There is nothing in that thread that answers my question other than personal opinions such as "I do not believe he believed in rebirth strongly". Only avoiding answering it. As I said in that thread I would not buy a car from a person arguing the point that the Buddha did not believe in rebirth himself.
Exactly! And that is the nature of subjective truth.
Is it scientifically verifiable? Or do you mean subjectively verifiable?
/Victor
Nobody likes Bhikkhu Bodhis translations anyway:p...Actually I avoid reading them entirely when at all possible.
But I will make this my first pali project to translate that sutta from source.
Your wisdom is infathomable.
/Victor
Well if that hadn't been the criteria used I wouldn't have had to point it out. :P
Bodhi's translations are THE standard.
Regardless of whether rebirth is true or not (personally I believe it is), the Buddha taught rebirth. This is because some (including myself) may find that the teachings on kamma and rebirth are useful for inspiring them to practice, others might not. Maybe it is not essential, but potentially useful depending on the individual.
Can we all agree on this?
Oki... for now
I think he puts too much interpretation into translation. As I believe, without actually looking at the pali text, is the case here. The other translation is more akward as you put it but probably closer to the original wording. Just guessing now though.
I know I am pretty daft at times. My woman says it is all because I am a man.:D.
Victor
Ok ok. I might have exagerated a little bit when I said nobody likes B. Bodhi. Sorry for any aching toes.
/Victor
There are a number of people who would agree that B. Bodhi isn't necessarily a perfect translator and adds his own interpretations to words in the suttas.
.
THAT
saying there is no rebirth is a misunderstanding. It is understanding the self to be the aggregates....
The aggregates of the body and mind (including the memory and self concept) are NOT reborn..
But rather there is no essence only wide open space..
I do not understand how this wide open essenceless thing could have attained intelligence...
Or how it is said that we will keep practicing at our rebirth...
Indeed I acknowledge that I am confused...
But I am ok with that. Gonna wait and see what comes to light.
Thank you
So do you think there are more objective translators of the suttas, and if so could you give some examples?
Thanks.
P
You aren't the only one.
However, it's most often his translations that get cited for pro-rebirth arguments.
Well, if he took liberties here it sure as hell backfired in supporting his pro-rebirth agenda...
Honestly it's completely incoherent to me. Did you gather from it that it's so "baptizing ritual" or did you read this somewhere (because I have heard that before)? When I read it I just go "wtf?" but maybe I'm missing something... + I haven't read the Buddha teaching about such a "ritual" in any of the suttas?
No, not at the moment, unfortunately. However I've seen the meanings of various words and interpretations in sutta translations questioned and discussed in other places....so therefore the existing translations aren't necessarily revered by everyone who investigates the Pali .
.
One example is the translation of pubbenivasa. It is best to be translated as "past dwellings" not as "past lives" imo but I see it is translated as past lives in most case, even in the popular online sutta collection. "Past dwellings" would mean any past memory. It does not have to be translated as past life memories. Anyone who has had "past life insights" can of course extend it to past life memories as well.
It is my own understanding of the text so I should have said IMO.
If you look at the wording
before you die, be born in something higher
Yet, Anuruddha, there are sons of clansmen who are born in faith
This is almost word perfectly how some christians describe baptism. Notice before you die, ie in this life not in the next.
I gather from the context that the words Telling them one is born there, another there. Refers to that baptising ritual not to rebirth. IMO.
I have not read about any such ritual either but nevertheless many buddhist sangas in the West practise baptising because that is the custom here. Which is what I think the sutta says here:
I got my name Dharma Parlo from a Tibetan Lama. That is why I interpreted the sutta that way.
/Victor
Let's take an example like nibbana. Is it scientifically verifiable? Did the Buddha say it is a subjective reality which differs from person to person or did he say it is a direct insight which the wise should see for themselves and verify for themselves? Buddhist insights are probably only provable to oneself. Others can be guided
There is nothing to avoid. You got a lot of sutta quotes suggesting that it is possible he taught it as a moral teaching; not as an absolute truth. You have been told everything that needs to be told by now. If it makes you happy, please continue to be the self proclaimed rebirth fanatic you are
Nonetheless, if you strongly believe in life after death, it is wise to investigate where this belief is comming from. Imo, strong belief in rebirth is a hindrance to full relinquishment although it is a motivation to practice. That is my extremely unpopular opinion
"Past dwellings" could mean any number of things, it depends on the context. But I agree different interpretations are possible.
P
It could be argued that strong dis-belief is also a hindrance. It's all attachment to views.
P
Indeed. Letting go of 'views' one way or another frees the mind into the spacious freshness of the present moment
.
Of course. I said belief as it is the topic under discussion at that moment.
Us Buddhists here are trying to escape existence? I see that in anxiety/depression forums
I think the idea is to escape suffering not to escape life.
Life in cyclic existence is not life, its sleep
never said we are trying to escape life, said that its cessation from cyclic existence. This is different. In fact i just watched a wonderful program by deepak Chopra and Robert Thurman. Deepak quoted Walt Whitman to the effect that whitman was saying
"I cannot be awake for nothing looks to me as it did before, Or else I am awake for the first time, and all before has been a mean sleep".
This is what i mean by "escape cyclic existence". Not annhilation , im not a nihlist.
:
Actually the Bible says that it was John the Baptist who was a reincarnation of Elijah, not Jesus. Just sayin'...
Palzang