What do you think of reincarnation tradition in vajrayana?

Discussion
32

One would have to stretch quite a lot what is found in EBTs to support the concept of a lineage of Dhamma masters who are reborn lifetime after lifetime just to carry on a point of view or traditional interpretation of the teachings - i.e. the reincarnation-based authority tradition of Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism the thread is supposedly about.

I also flag that the circumstances around which the parajika #4 was made necessary sound similar to what the whole tulku institution seems to be aimed at facilitating: individuals falsely claiming for themselves super-human qualities with the explicit or implicit goal of keeping steady the supply of the four requisites (and likely wealth) to themselves.

Maybe now that people are getting smarter and more easily accessing translations of the EBTs it is possible that such so-called tulkus will start claiming for themselves the attainment of stream-entry or similar things .

If that happens, we better make sure to point them that if they were still living under the training rules established by the Buddha those false claims would result in their expelling from the Sangha right on the spot! :smile:

1 Like
33

Yes, that makes sense. It does not make sense (to me) however, to project those differences onto the two English words. That is a difference of doctrine, but the two English words have no inherent attribution to specifically one or the other doctrine, which is why I am reasoning that both English words can not incorrectly be ascribed to both doctrines. Thus the difference needs to be explained, not merely signified by the two different words on the assumption that the English speaking people attribute such a doctrinal difference to those two English words, since the English dictionary indicates otherwise, as does our evidence from the widespread use of the term ‘reincarnation’ to signify the Buddhist concept entirely connected with kamma, such as in Tibetan Buddhism.

34

I have to say I am not sure if I know anything about Western Buddhism. I’m trained in Tibetan Buddhism and Theravada. I was speaking on that basis.

35

You seem to have misunderstood what the tulku system does. Please see above where I explain some of the issue. It is certainly not how you have just described it!

36

You are assuming that their claims are false.
Above I mentioned that there may be some cases where it is false. That however only brings into question truthfulness, not the actual principle of tulkus reincarnating and being recognised. So that is not a valid argument against the principle, or evidence that the principle is out of line with the EBTs.

While the ethics of those claims which are false could be discussed, I think that will be too off topic for me just now so I will leave that.[quote=“Gabriel_L, post:32, topic:5580”]
Maybe now that people are getting smarter and more easily accessing translations of the EBTs it is possible that such so-called tulkus will start claiming for themselves the attainment of stream-entry or similar things .

If that happens, we better make sure to point them that if they were still living under the training rules established by the Buddha those false claims would result in their expelling from the Sangha right on the spot! :smile:
[/quote]

You sounds like you may be anti-Tibetan Buddhism. Is that the case? The rule which you just mentioned ( parajika #4) is about false claims. Why do you assume that such people are making false claims? In fact, those people you have mentioned are merely hypothetical people, and yet you accuse them of making false claims. This comes across as an extreme bias against any tulkus and an assumption that none of them could be stream enterers - an apparently highly sectarian view. Was that your intention?

38

Let’s leave the polemics aside and instead quote what an actual individual who holds a tulku title once said about the topic:

“And now, I personally think that to hold that culture, institutionalized Tulku. That culture is dying; it’s not going to work anymore. And even if it… And if it doesn’t work, I think it’s almost for the better because this tulku, it’s going to… If the Tibetans are not careful, this Tulku system is going to ruin Buddhism. At the end of the day Buddhism is more important [than] Tulku system, who cares about Tulku… [and] what happens to them.[6]”
– Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, who is considered to be the third “iteration” or incarnation of Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo

Now, back to the topic, acknowledging that the pre-anagami states found in EBTs may allow for multiple lifetimes prior to the disappearance from the (lower) human realms as the path unfolds, I created a separate topic to discuss what EBTs have to say about how could someone at that stage be identified.

I think that may be the closest thing to a well intended tulku - mind nevertheless that EBTs suggest there is a seven lifetimes/reincarnations limit to the pre-anagami attainments. That could be an issue for most the individuals currently assumed as tulkus: with the institution’s age at 800-900 years, most of them are at the 10+ reincarnation! :cold_sweat:

Last but not least, and for the record, note that my first contact with Buddhism was through khenpos and lamas from Karma Kagyu. And it was the polemics of who is the legitimate Karmapa amidst the Karmapa controversy that opened my eyes to how troublesome is the concept and dubious the ultimate motives of the tulku institution as a whole. Karmapa tchyen no! :anjal:

1 Like
39

Don’t you worry James
I mean no harm
And only have friendliness and kindness
to tulkus, non-tulkus, all beings in all four directions
above and below. :heart_eyes:

I just don’t understand
how the concept of tulku

  • which is the foundation stone of Tibetan schools -
    can be supported by anything found in the
    earliest strata of the Teachings
    as preserved in Pali and Chinese.

Mind nevertheless
that it was you
who asked what we think about it :wink:

All I did wast to put in words my thoughts
It is now your turn to respect and accept
that sometimes people may not agree with you.

Some people like apples :apple:
others like pineapples. :pineapple:

Be well! :anjal:

1 Like
41

It does make sense because not all Buddhists take the word “birth” in the Pali suttas to only mean “physical birth” and because not all Buddhists regard the “human”, “godly”, “animal”, “ghost” & “hell” realms to refer to different physical planes.

In other words, believing in “re-birth” does not mean you believe in “reincarnation” because you can believe in a “re-birth” that only happens psychologically, during one life-time, many times in that life-time, even many times in one day.

Every Buddhist must believe in “re-birth”. To not believe in “re-birth” or results of kamma is is wrong view (MN 117). But every Buddhist does not have to believe in “reincarnation” because “re-birth” does not have to mean another life in the future after the termination of the present life.

In the Pali suttas, it is quite clear words such as “animal talk” do not refer to literally making noises the same as a four -legged animal. There are many suttas where the realms of “re-birth” appear to obviously refer to mental states in this current life.

Vajyrayana reincarnation can only have one meaning where as Pali rebirth can have two meanings.

:seedling:

42

Is the life-to-life rebirth (=reincarnation) not fundamentally a part of Early Buddhism? It was my impression that scholars such as Gombrich find that there is no ambiguity there, and that the Buddha’s teachings are totally integrated with that view. Is that not the whole point of enlightenment also? To escape that literal rebirth process?

And if you put a ‘must’ on one EB belief, why not put it on all, or at least on such a fundamentally important aspect of the doctrine?

43

Gombrich is not even a Buddhist. Buddhists are advised to take refuge in the Noble Sangha rather than in non-Buddhists. If what you posted is really true, then Gombrich is clearly mistaken.

The ‘beliefs’ or 'views" I was referring to are listed in MN 117 therefore it may not include every idea that happened to find its way into the EBTs.

‘Re-birth’ is not a ‘belief’. It is a knowable reality. That wholesome actions lead to a ‘happy’ or ‘heavenly’ state & unwholesome actions lead to a ‘hellish’ or state of ‘deprivation’ is a reality rather than a belief. If you optionally chose to extend this reality to after the termination of life, you can. But if you exclude this reality from the current life, I personally say you are very mistaken.

The problem with the physical interpretation of the follow verse is it excludes the operation of kammic results in the current life.

When my concentrated mind was thus purified, bright, unblemished, rid of imperfection, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, I directed it to knowledge of the passing away and reappearance of beings. With the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, I saw beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate. I understood how beings pass on according to their actions thus: ‘These worthy beings who were ill conducted in body, speech, and mind, revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrong view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappeared in a state of deprivation, in a bad destination, in perdition, even in hell; but these worthy beings who were well conducted in body, speech, and mind, not revilers of noble ones, right in their views, giving effect to right view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappeared in a good destination, even in the heavenly world.’ Thus with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, I saw beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and I understood how beings pass on according to their actions. MN 4

As I previously posted, the words ‘birth’ (‘jati’) & ‘death’ (‘marana’) appear to not always be ‘physical’ in the EBTs. If Gombrich does not discern this, then he must not be a very good scholar.

For example, the two verses below, if interpreted ‘physically’, state the arahant does not die but the non-arahant dies, which is the opposite of the general idea Buddhists have about ‘re-birth’.

Heedfulness is the path to the Deathless. Heedlessness is the path to death. The heedful die not. The heedless are as if dead already. Dhp21

Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and does not yearn. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he yearn? MN 140

44

Pubbenivāsa, on the contrary, means precisely “past lives”.[quote=“Deeele, post:31, topic:5580”]
many Westerners are fundamentalist about ‘re-birth’
[/quote]

Well, to each their own, but rather than “fundamentalist”, I prefer to think of it as “knowing Pali”. :sunglasses:

3 Likes
45

If that is so, then the following translations appear to be errors:

At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, those ascetics and brahmins who recollect their manifold past abodes all recollect the five aggregates subject to clinging or a certain one among them. What five? SN 22.79

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). DN 2

46

“Past abodes” is not an error, it’s just too literal. In English, “abode” is not a term for past lives, but nivāsa is in Pali.

1 Like
47

OK. You have said ‘nivasa’ is preferable to the Pali word for ‘life’, namely, ‘jīva’ or ‘jīvita’.

Since I am always grateful for a Pali class, how would you distinguish ‘nivasa’ from:

  • ni­ve­sā

  • ābhini­ve­sā

  • vāsa

And how does one not live at home? Any desire, lust, delight, and craving, the engagement and clinging, the mental standpoints, adherences (ābhini­ve­sā) and underlying tendencies… these the Tathagata has abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Therefore the Tathagata is said to be not dwelling at home. SN 22.3

Bhikkhus, there are these ten abodes (vāsa) of the noble ones in which the noble ones abide in the past, present, or future. What ten? Here, a bhikkhu (1) has abandoned five factors; (2) possesses six factors; (3) has a single guard (4) and four supports; (5) has dispelled personal truths, (6) totally renounced seeking, (7) purified his intentions, (8) tranquilized bodily activity, and become (9) well liberated in mind and (10) well liberated by wisdom. AN 10.20

48

I said no such thing. Nivāsa is one of several terms that means “life” in the sense of reincarnation in past lives or future lives. Jīva, like āyu, means “life” in the sense of “being alive”, although jīva also commonly means “soul”, being the preferred term for this in Jainism.

For the remaining terms, try a dictionary, and let me know if you have any more specific questions.

49

Are you able to provide some other examples of the usage of ‘nivāsa’ like this, apart from the 2nd knowledge ‘recollection of pubbe nivasa’?

50

Sorry, not now, i’m working and such research takes time.

51

OK. Thank you, again. :seedling:

52

@sujato

Hi bhante , if I may ,

the meaning of " birth " :
Does rebirth is of next body
or psychological rebirth ?

53

There is physical rebirth in the EBTs. Vipaka sutta, for example.

There is no rebirth (punbbhava) moment by moment in the suttas, only arising and passing (udayabbaya) of phenomena. Denoting this as ‘psychological rebirth’ is a recent (this century?) and idiomatic way of describing arising and passing away and is not stated in that way in EBTs -i.e. there is no ambiguity.

As for Tulkus, this come the closest I think. However there is no ability mentioned at becoming a specific entity in life eventually, as such:

"Herein, monks, a certain person makes a gift to a recluse or a brahman, offering him food, drink, garments, a vehicle, flowers, incense, ointment, bedding, housing or lighting. In making the gift, he hopes for a reward. He now notices noblemen of wealth, brahmans of wealth or householders of wealth, provided with the five sense pleasures and enjoying them. And he thinks: ‘Oh, may I be reborn among them, when I die, when this body breaks up!’ And he sets his mind on that thought, keeps to it firmly and fosters it. This thought of his aims at what is low,[7] and if not developed to what is higher,[8] it will lead him to just such a rebirth. After his death, when his body breaks up, he will be reborn among wealthy noblemen, wealthy brahmans or wealthy householders. This, however, I declare only for the virtuous, not for the unvirtuous;[9] for it is due to his purity, monks, that the heart’s desire of the virtuous succeeds. AN8.35

A determination alone isn’t adequate, however and wholesome actions (good kamma) probably play an important part:

the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Just as a stick thrown up in the air lands sometimes on its base, sometimes on its side, sometimes on its tip; in the same way, beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving, transmigrating & wandering on, sometimes go from this world to another world, sometimes come from another world to this.

“Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries — enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released.” SN15.9

1 Like