It warms me greatly to speak to members of the Jodo Sangha.
For a long time, one has been unable to attend temple practise due to covid pandemic.
My heart feels heavy, my mind has some doubts still.
Doubts in the Buddha-Dharma.
Though, i practise everyday, infront of my Amida Buddha alter. Further, saying the nenbutsu when i am alone in my heart, the way is taught as one read. Namu Amida Butsu
Gratitude to Amida Buddhas gracious benevolence.
Still ones faith is unsettled, however my life now is blessed by Amida Buddha. Ones life is seamless with all obstacles set aside by his grace.
One entrusts oneself to that Noblest of Buddhas, is steadfast to that Buddha.
One is filled with gratitude, and in ones heart feels saved.
Though life continues to go on, one continues to suffer in this present life. And no doubt a thousand lives before it.
Such is the limited time here, in this impure land.
My heart hopes, for the land of serene sustenance.
May one have settled faith. Then upon this help others to settle themselves in faith too. To thereby reach nirvana unfailingly in the afterlife is of the greatest concern.
Q. Though, i wonder rebirth in that land what of 'oneself' carries over?
Such a question, is ofcourse based upon ones current limited understanding, based upon life and death.
My aspiration in this life is to take the Jodo Shin Shu precepts and ordain in later life, may Amida Buddha save all sentient beings throughout the 10 directions and lead them to his Western Heaven
Thank you for reading.
Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9502
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
Your awareness.
Or rather, the awareness from which the illusionary experience of “oneself” has been imagined.
That awareness is what experiences everything as the six realms, as pure land, as buddhahood, whatever.
“Reborn” is actually a clumsy word, but it’s the word that is used. It’s more accurate than “reincarnate” which literally means to assume a new physical (flesh) body (cranes is the Latin root word meaning meat or flesh).
At the same time, “reborn” isn’t entirely accurate in the Buddhist context, because one’s individual stream of awareness now arises in a pure land, whereas being ‘reborn’ usually refers to samsara, or being trapped in samsara. In other words, having arisen in a pure land, one has avoided rebirth.
However, as long as there is no confusion, the terms are usable. Confusion (lack of conviction, being unsure) very often is the result of nothing more than a slight misunderstanding resulting from the limits of language. Thus, what may feel like being ‘unsettled’ isn’t really a lack of faith at all with regards to what is true. Rather, it comes from the concepts we have not really matching up with the words we use.
So, there is no “part of me” that takes rebirth. It’s one’s original awareness (tathagatagharba) free of self (or nearly free of self) manifesting in a pure realm.
Or rather, the awareness from which the illusionary experience of “oneself” has been imagined.
That awareness is what experiences everything as the six realms, as pure land, as buddhahood, whatever.
“Reborn” is actually a clumsy word, but it’s the word that is used. It’s more accurate than “reincarnate” which literally means to assume a new physical (flesh) body (cranes is the Latin root word meaning meat or flesh).
At the same time, “reborn” isn’t entirely accurate in the Buddhist context, because one’s individual stream of awareness now arises in a pure land, whereas being ‘reborn’ usually refers to samsara, or being trapped in samsara. In other words, having arisen in a pure land, one has avoided rebirth.
However, as long as there is no confusion, the terms are usable. Confusion (lack of conviction, being unsure) very often is the result of nothing more than a slight misunderstanding resulting from the limits of language. Thus, what may feel like being ‘unsettled’ isn’t really a lack of faith at all with regards to what is true. Rather, it comes from the concepts we have not really matching up with the words we use.
So, there is no “part of me” that takes rebirth. It’s one’s original awareness (tathagatagharba) free of self (or nearly free of self) manifesting in a pure realm.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
PadmaVonSamba's answer is perfect.
If I may add, it may be helpful in asking such a question what it is that we consider "oneself?"
If I may add, it may be helpful in asking such a question what it is that we consider "oneself?"
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9502
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
(Above should read carnes is the Latin root word meaning meat or flesh. Silly auto-correct changed it to cranes.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 12:52 pm “Reborn” is actually a clumsy word, but it’s the word that is used. It’s more accurate than “reincarnate” which literally means to assume a new physical (flesh) body (cranes is the Latin root word meaning meat or flesh).
But this demonstrates the challenge of translating Indian concepts using Latin-based words, and why we often have a crisis over whether things are valid or not, and we find that it’s simply a poorly substituted concept we are wrestling with.
It reminds me of when I first introduced my mother to the Korean pickled cabbage, kim chi. She could only conceive of it as “Korean saur kraut” which makes sense up to a point… both are made of some sort of cabbage, both are in jars. But really, they are two entirely different foods.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2021 6:31 am
Re: Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
Thank you for your replies.
Indeed, regarding my question it seems that my understanding is too limited, for my question regarding what of oneself carries over.
I suppose you mentioned awareness, therefore ones original awareness carries over.
This ofcourse naturally encourages new questions to arise. However, this answer also satisfies me. For, i am not looking for a verbal response to attempt to comprehend the incomprehensible. It to me, would be far outside my capacity, even if the answer was presented to me.
Secondly, what you said about language matching up to words, was quite accurate. Translations can lead to inaccuracies, or lacking clear depth. Latin languages are not influenced by 2500 years of buddhism unlike say the tibetan language.
To understand the buddhas use of nirvana, dukha and so forth we need to as you said, use our own limited language into translation.
Finally, what you said regarding setting of faith, yes i do agree. It may not be that, there is concern with my faith, rather with my confusions in self and illusions arising from my experience. Thank you.
Namu Amida Butsu
Indeed, regarding my question it seems that my understanding is too limited, for my question regarding what of oneself carries over.
I suppose you mentioned awareness, therefore ones original awareness carries over.
This ofcourse naturally encourages new questions to arise. However, this answer also satisfies me. For, i am not looking for a verbal response to attempt to comprehend the incomprehensible. It to me, would be far outside my capacity, even if the answer was presented to me.
Secondly, what you said about language matching up to words, was quite accurate. Translations can lead to inaccuracies, or lacking clear depth. Latin languages are not influenced by 2500 years of buddhism unlike say the tibetan language.
To understand the buddhas use of nirvana, dukha and so forth we need to as you said, use our own limited language into translation.
Finally, what you said regarding setting of faith, yes i do agree. It may not be that, there is concern with my faith, rather with my confusions in self and illusions arising from my experience. Thank you.
Namu Amida Butsu
Re: Settling of faith, faith as fundamental
One of Amitabha's vows in the Larger Sukhavati Sutra is:Maapaa2021 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 6:52 am Q. Though, i wonder rebirth in that land what of 'oneself' carries over?
Such a question, is ofcourse based upon ones current limited understanding, based upon life and death.
5. After I become a Buddha, if gods* in my land should not have the power to know their past lives and the past events in 100,000 koṭi nayuta kalpas, I would not attain the perfect enlightenment.
[* - The Chinese term 天人 can mean gods or gods and humans. The word gods is used here because all inhabitants of the Pure Land are reborn miraculously in lotus flowers, not from the womb. The Buddha explains later that they are neither gods nor humans, so gods is a false name.]
When one is reborn there, it is not the same "oneself", it is more like "everyself" - full memory of every rebirth taken. This would be a radical reorientation of one's perspective. This change in perspective would be so steep that it's very doubtful that it would feel like a simple continuation of the previous life.