Seeking sources on -- practicing for this life alone is not even Dharma

The Gelugpa Lam Rim says that someone who practices for benefit in this life alone is not even practicing Dharma -- the minimum Dharmic motivation is to achieve better rebirth (and there are two levels above that, which I am not concerned about here). Here is Pabongka Rinpoche, *Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand* (Wisdom Pubs, Kindle Edition, location 2937; same spot in the 1991 paper edition from Wisdom begins on p. 154): > The difference in our motivation makes an enormous difference to the > sort of virtuous karmic results we will receive, and to the measure of > strength of these results. Suppose four people are reciting together > the Praise of the Twenty-One Tārās. One has bodhichitta as a motive. > Another is motivated by renunciation. The third yearns for a better > rebirth. The last only aspires to the concerns of this life: long > life, good health, and so on. Although all four recite the same amount > of words, there is a great difference in the sort of karmic results > they will obtain. ... The fourth’s recitation belonged only to this > life and so was not even Dharma. And it would even be difficult for it > to have any of the the hoped-for effect on his life. So, my question -- can folks point me to similar material in the Pali Canon, Visuddhimagga or other non-Tibetan sources. Likewise in Tibetan lineages other than Gelug. ---------- Added 11/25 -- Or, is this a Mahayana teaching, and therefore not found explicitly in the Pali Canon. The distinction between bodhicitta and renunciation as motivation is certainly Mahayana -- initially taught in this "three scopes" form in Tibet by Atisha in *Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment*. So maybe even this pre-three-scopes teaching is not only Mahayana, but a Tibetan addition not found even in Atisha. If so, then I'd be interested to at least find other Tibetan sources, or hear that this is strictly a Gelug teaching. ---------- More still 11/25 -- Looks like Tsongkhapa, contra Pabongka, includes motivation for this life only in the lower scope, thus making a general motivation for better samsaric life apart from the rebirth distinction: > Furthermore, the scriptures mention many ways of positing a least, a > medium, and a superior person. Like Atisha's Lamp for the Path to > Enlightenment, Vasubandhu's Abhidharma-kosa Auto-commentary > (Abhidharma-kosa-bhasya) defines the three types of persons. Among the > persons of small capacity, there are indeed two types — those who are > intent on this lifetime and those who are intent on future lifetimes. > However, here I am speaking of the latter, whom I will identify as > those who engage in the unmistaken method for attaining high status. (*The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, Volume One. The Lamrim Chenmo*, Wisdom Pubs, pp. 131-132) So maybe this teaching is actually post-Tsongkhapa Gelug.