﻿Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 29th, 2022 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: “special transmission”?
Content:
Astus wrote:
The master said: The mind is transmitted with the mind.
[The questioner] said: If the mind is transmitted, how can you say that the mind is also nonexistent?
The master said: To not attain a single dharma is called the transmission of the mind. If you comprehend this mind, then there is no mind and no dharma.
[The questioner] said: If there is no mind and no dharma, why do you call it a transmission?
The master said: You have heard me say “transmission of the mind” and have taken it that there is something that can be attained. It is for this reason that the patriarch said, “When one recognizes the mind-nature, it should be called inconceivable. Clearly and distinctly without anything that is attained, when one attains it one does not speak of it as understanding.” If I taught this to you how would you be able to understand it?
(Essentials of the Transmission of Mind, in Zen Texts, BDK ed, p 36)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 21st, 2022 at 3:04 PM
Title: Re: Are these points against a Ishwara creator valid from a buddhist point of view?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Arguments may work within a rational context, but the fear of God is based on irrational ideas. Emotions like anxiety and doubt are easier to overcome by addressing them directly instead of the roundabout way of reasoning. Similarly, whatever one may imagine to be the supreme being, that is nothing more than fantasy that not only cannot be proven to exist in any experiential or logical way, but is rather harmful in hindering one in actually eliminating the causes of suffering. And it being an obstacle to liberation is the main argument in Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, March 17th, 2022 at 6:27 AM
Title: Re: Why do Zen teachers write books?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Kosho Uchiyama:
'What I want for you, the reader, is that you understand with your own intellect that Zen concerns the true depth of life that is beyond the reach of that intellect. This “life” is not Eastern or Western, it extends through all humanity. I hope that as you read you will look at your own life with a completely fresh mind and apply what I have written to your everyday life. That is the only place where the real world of Zen is.'
(Opening the Hand of Thought, p xxx)

Koun Yamada:
'It is my hope that this book will be a true aid to people around the world who are earnestly seeking a way to spiritual peace, and that it will inspire many to set out on the path of Zen practice. It is my particular wish that the book will provide sound information on matters concerning Zen and Buddhism that heretofore may have been given incomplete treatment in other books.'
(Zen: The Authentic Gate, p xv)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 16th, 2022 at 6:28 PM
Title: Re: Why do Zen teachers write books?
Content:
clyde said:
Yes, I agree that talking and writing books is a method of teaching - but if “What is beyond words and letters cannot be something taught or transmitted,” what is it that Zen teachers teach in their books?

Astus wrote:
What is it that Zen teachers teach? Generally it should be the same message that the Buddha and the ancestors repeated over and over throughout the centuries. It shouldn't matter if it's a formal speech, an informal discussion, a blog post, an essay, or a book.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 16th, 2022 at 6:22 AM
Title: Re: Why do Zen teachers write books?
Content:
clyde said:
but why do Zen teachers write books?

Astus wrote:
For the same reason they talk: to teach. After all, a teacher who does not teach is not a teacher. What is beyond words and letters cannot be something taught or transmitted.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, March 11th, 2022 at 7:42 PM
Title: Re: Some Available Chan Meditation Scriptures in context
Content:
Astus wrote:
Why "chan meditation scriptures"? There are the so called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhy%C4%81na_sutras, but they're more like a background for what became the Chan school. The major work of Zhiyi should also be mentioned in that context: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Clear_Serenity_Quiet_Insight/ZIGVswEACAAJ?hl=en.
As for sutras more closely associated with Chanzong: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Sutra_of_Perfect_Enlightenment/xROTQHH4RQwC?hl=en; https://www.google.com/books/edition/Cultivating_Original_Enlightenment/LY4BEAAAQBAJ?hl=en; https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Surangama_Sutra/I59_BAAAQBAJ?hl=en.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 21st, 2022 at 6:35 PM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
master of puppets said:
The Origin of Heaven and Earth
Has no Name.
The Mother of the Myriad Things
Has a Name.

Astus wrote:
The Taoist idea of a single source/substrate is rejected by Zongmi in the Treatise on the Origin of Humanity found in the same volume as Sengzhao's treatises https://bdkamerica.org/product/three-short-treatises-by-vasubandhu-sengzhao-and-zongmi/.

An exemple from Zongmi to show some problems with imagining a singular source for all things:

'Again, it has been said that the myriad things are produced and transformed by Nature and do not arise due to causes and conditions. If this is the case, then birth and transformation would take place everywhere free from causes and conditions. This means that a stone might give birth to grass, grass might give birth to a man, and men might give birth to animals, etc. Furthermore, it would also mean that all birth would be without the distinction of prior and subsequent, that the time of rising from bed [after sleep] would be no different whether in the morning or evening, that immortality does not depend on alchemy and herbs, that peace does not depend on virtuous talents, and that humaneness and justice are not dependent on education and cultivation. If this is so, how could the doctrines established by Laozi, Zhuangzi, the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius have become the norm?'
(Treatise on the Origin of Humanity, in Three Short Treatises, BDK ed, p 149-150)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 21st, 2022 at 4:13 PM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
clyde said:
Malcolm, Regarding capitalization of Mind, I was following the usage of Blofeld, the translator of Huang Po’s teachings used in the OP.

Astus, See the OP.

P.S: I’m not fond of using “Mind” because of the confusion it may cause and prefer other terms such as Dharmakaya, but there are many others. See the quote of Chinul in the OP. I found “stringless lute” to be an amusing term, but he also uses “true mind” (the translator doesn’t capitalize the terms).

Astus wrote:
In the OP there's a short quote from the beginning about one mind without much definition. To clarify, see this one for instance:

'It is like the nature of honey: if honey is sweet by nature, then all honey is sweet — you cannot say that a specific honey is sweet while the rest is bitter. Where would such a thing be possible? Therefore, it is said, ‘Empty space has neither inside nor outside’; so too is it with the dharma nature. Empty space has no middle; so too is it with the dharma nature. Therefore sentient beings are buddhas and buddhas are sentient beings.
Sentient beings and buddhas are intrinsically one in their essence. Saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, conditioned and unconditioned, are intrinsically one in their essence. Mundane and supramundane, the six rebirth destinies and the four modes of birth, the mountains, streams, and lands, and the nature and its lack are also the same one essence. By calling them the ‘same,’ we mean that their designations are empty, their existence is empty, and their nonexistence is empty. Worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges are inherently this one emptiness.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, 2.29)

In other words, what makes 'one' in 'one mind' is the essence, that is emptiness. Another term for it is self-nature (zixing 自性).

clyde said:
Now that we’ve discussed capitalization, terminology, and my motives for raising a question, let me rephrase my question.
Astus linked this,
Astus wrote:
How unexpected! The self-nature is originally without movement.
How unexpected! The self-nature can produce the ten thousand dharmas.'
( http://www.cttbusa.org/6patriarch/6patriarch3.asp.html )

clyde said:
How does the self-nature produce the ten thousand dharmas without movement?

Malcolm said:
What is a “self-nature”?

Astus wrote:
Huangbo:

'The self-nature is empty and pervasive, that’s all.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, 1.7)

'This immaculate self-nature is originally neither deluded nor awakened. The realm of empty space that entirely pervades the ten directions is intrinsically our one-mind essence. Even though you engage in dynamic functioning and productive activity, how are these separate from empty space? Empty space is originally neither large nor small, neither contaminated nor conditioned, neither deluded nor awakened. If you look clearly, you’ll find not a single thing, no persons and no buddhas. Bringing an end to even a hair’s breadth of conceptualization means not relying on or being attached to anything. A clear stream flowing in one direction is the selfnature’s acquiescence to the nonproduction of dharmas.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, 2.16)

Huineng:

"The ratiocination of the mind is vast, like space, which is boundless. ... The wondrous natures of people of this world are empty, without a single dharma that can be perceived. The emptiness of the self-natures is also like this.
...
The emptiness of the natures of the people of this world is also like this. Good friends, that the self-natures can embody the myriad dharmas is ‘great.’ The myriad dharmas are within people’s natures. If one perceives the goodness and badness of people without ever grasping or rejecting [their goodness and badness], one will not become tainted or attached. For the mind to be like space is called ‘great.’"
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 28, 29)

"There is in the self-nature fundamentally not a single dharma that can be perceived. To think that there were any would be a false explanation, a disaster, a false view of enervating defilements. Therefore, this teaching takes nonthought as its central doctrine. ... Good friends, thoughts are activated from the self-nature of suchness. Although the six sensory faculties possess perceptual cognition, they do not defile the myriad realms. And yet the true nature is always autonomous. Therefore, the sutra says, ‘When one is able to discriminate well the characteristics of the dharmas, this is to be unmoving within the cardinal meaning.’"
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 44)

SELF-NATURE (Ch. zixing 自性)
"A Chan soteriological term referring to a person’s Buddha-nature. It does not denote any self-existence or any changeless essence existent in and by itself. No such metaphysical meaning is involved in the original use of this term. A  notable case of the traditional Chan usage of this term is in the Platform Sutra, where Buddha-nature is equicalent to self-nature (zixing) in the sense that Buddha-nature cannot be objectified and realized outside each person. Seeing or realizing the Buddha-nature is the existential transformation of the human mind and entire personhood, being able to understand and appreciate what constitutes a person - elements of impermanence and non-abiding - and then acting accordingly. The realization of self-nature thus requires the accomplishment of action, the practical-behavioral carrying out of non-attachment, rather than identifying a metaphysical object or discovering subjectivity through knowledge. The usage also indicates the Chan appropriation of positive or kataphatic language in its teachings without abandoning the use of negative or apophatic language: the Chan walk on two roads."
(Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism by Youru Wang)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 21st, 2022 at 6:01 AM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
clyde said:
Astus, Do you think that Huang Po meant “the mind that thinks and names everything” when he taught about Mind?

Astus wrote:
Could you be more specific what section of Huangbo's teachings you refer to?

'The five aggregates are mind, but the five aggregates have no self and no master.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, ch 4)

'mind means no-mind and attainment means there is nothing to attain.'
(ch 7)

'How can you recognize your own mind? That which right now is speaking is precisely your mind.'
(ch 16)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 21st, 2022 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
clyde said:
Then why are you calling it “the mind that thinks and names everything”?

Astus wrote:
That's what the mind does, among other things. To assume that there is a separate, special mind, can only mean there are two minds, and it begs the question: what is that other mind and what does it do? Saying that it cannot be explained, then why call it mind, or anything at all?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 20th, 2022 at 2:59 PM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
clyde said:
Astus, If I had meant “the mind that thinks and names everything” I would not have used the term “ineffable”.

Astus wrote:
How many minds are there?

clyde said:
Nevertheless, I did search for Sengzhao’s treatise, but only found a scholarly review of it. (See: https://philarchive.org/archive/HOTNO-3.) Based on that review, Sengzhao’s reasoning is that nothing moves through time. Additionally, Sengzhao holds that motion and rest are nondual.

Astus wrote:
They are available here: https://bdkamerica.org/product/three-short-treatises-by-vasubandhu-sengzhao-and-zongmi/


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 20th, 2022 at 5:55 AM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
clyde said:
Regardless of name or translation, how can the ineffable be “without movement” (function) and give rise to “the ten thousand dharmas”?

Astus wrote:
Because 'the ineffable' is not a thing. The nature of mind, like the nature of everything, is without movement (see Sengzhao's treatises), and it is the mind that thinks and names everything. But since it's all just ideas and names, including the mind, there's nothing actually arising or ceasing. Furthermore, even this comprehension of there being nothing to grasp needs letting go of (see discussion with Zhichang in chapter 7 of the Platform Sutra), how much more so the idea that there is really an ultimate?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 20th, 2022 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
All dharmas are like a dream: this is what all the saints have taught. Consequently, deluded thoughts are originally calm and the sense-spheres are originally void. This void and calm mind is numinous, aware, and never dark. This void and calm mind is precisely the pure-mind which was transmitted by our predecessor, Bodhidharma. Whether deluded or awakened, the mind is fundamentally self-aware. It does not come into existence through dependence on conditions; it does not arise because of sense-objects. When deluded it is subject to the defilements, but this awareness is actually not those defilements. When awakened it can manifest magic and miracles, but this awareness is actually not that magic or those miracles.

This one word "awareness" is the source of all wonders." Because of delusion concerning this awareness, the marks of self arise.
Zen Master Tsung-mi (Zongmi), as quoted by Zen Master Chinul in the Collected Works of Chinul, translated by Robert Buswell, p.265 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
Alternative translation:

'All dharmas are like a dream. All the noble ones have said the same thing. Therefore, thought ofthe unreal from the outset is calmed, and sense objects from the outset are void. The mind of voidness and calm is a spiritual Knowing that never darkens. This calm Knowing of voidness and calm is precisely the mind of voidness and calm that Bodhidharma formerly transmitted. Whether you are deluded or awakened, mind from the outset is spontaneously Knowing. [Knowing] is not produced by conditions, nor does it arise in dependence on sense objects. Even during delusion the depravities are Knowing, but [Knowing] is not the depravities. Even during awakening the divine transformations are Knowing, but Knowing is not the divine transformations. Thus, the one word "Knowing" is the source of all excellence.'
(Zongmi on Chan, p 88; X63, no. 1225, pp. 33c20-34a1)


Ted Biringer said:
Question: According to the explanations of the noumenal nature given in all the Mahayana satras, in the teachings of all the schools of Son both past and present, and even in Ho-tse's school, there is neither arising nor ceasing, creation nor sign, ordinary man nor saint, right nor wrong: truth is inexpressible and unattestable. Why not simply accept this standpoint? What need is there to discuss numinous awareness?

Answer: These are all examples of apophatic discourse;" they are not intended to expose the essence of the mind. If I did not point out that the clear, constant awareness which is present now, never interrupted and never obscured, is your own mind, what could I refer to as being uncreated and signless and so forth? For this reason, you must realize that all the various teachings explain only that it is this awareness which is neither arising nor ceasing and so forth. Consequently, Ho-tse pointed to the knowledge and vision which exist within the void and signless state so that men would recognize it; then they could comprehend that even though their minds pass from one life to another, the mind is eternally uninterrupted until the achievement of Buddhahood. Furthermore, Ho-tse gathered together various terms like uncreated, nonabiding, even inexpressible, and simply referred to them all as being the void and calm awareness which assimilates everything. Voidness means that it is devoid of all signs; it is still an apophatic term. Calm is the immutable, immovable aspect of the real nature; it is not the same as empty nothingness. Awareness refers to the manifestation of this very essence; it is not the same as discrimination. These three components alone comprise the fundamental essence of the true mind. Therefore, from the inital activation of the bodhicitta until the attainment of Buddhahood, there is only calmness and only awareness, unchanging and uninterrupted.
Zen Master Tsung-mi (Zongmi), as quoted by Zen Master Chinul in the Collected Works of Chinul, translated by Robert Buswell, p.274 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
Alternative translation:

'[Pei Xiu] asks: According to the Mahayana sutras and the Chan gates of all the lineages from the past to the present, up to and including what Heze says, the nature of principle is always the same. [They all] say: "There is neither arising nor disappearing; there is neither the conditioned nor characteristics; there is neither the noble one nor the common person; there is neither right nor wrong; [it is] not to be proven; [it is] not to be spoken of." If in the present we just rely on this, it will be correct. What need is there to speak of spiritual Knowing?
[Zongmi] answers: These are but negative expressions, which have yet openly to show the mind substance. If it is not pointed out that right now the complete and constant Knowing that never darkens is one's own mind, then what are we speaking of as "neither the conditioned nor characteristics," etc.? Thus, we know that the teachings just say that this Knowing neither arises nor disappears, etc. Therefore, the Heze, at the locus of voidness and the absence of characteristics, points out Knowing-seeing. This enables people to attain recognition, that is, awaken to their own mind, passing over the rebirth process and transcending the world, eternally without interruption, up to and including becoming buddhas. Heze also takes care of various expressions such as "unconditioned," "non-abiding," up to and including "inexpressible," etc., just by speaking of "the Knowing of voidness and calm." Everything is subsumed. "Voidness" means to empty out all characteristics; it is still a negative term. Just "calm" is the immutable principle of the real nature; it is not the same as voidness and nonexistence. Knowing is the principle of revealing the thing-initself;68 it is not the same as discrimination. Just this is the original substance of the true mind. Therefore, from the first time one produces the thought [of awakening] up to and including becoming a buddha [it is] just calm, just Knowing, immutable and uninterrupted.'
(Zongmi on Chan, p 93-94; X63, no. 1225, pp. 34c13-35a1)

Ted Biringer said:
“Who would have thought,” I said to the patriarch, “that the essence of mind is intrinsically pure! Who would have thought that the essence of mind is intrinsically free from becoming or annihilation! Who would have thought that the essence of mind is intrinsically self-sufficient! Who would have thought that the essence of mind is intrinsically free from change! Who would have thought that all things are the manifestation of the essence of mind!”
The Sutra of Hui-Neng, A. F. Price & Wong Mou-lam, p.73 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
Better translations:

"I experienced a great enlightenment, [realizing that] all the myriad dharmas do not transcend their self-natures. I thereupon informed the patriarch of this, saying, ‘No matter when, the self-natures are fundamentally and naturally pure. No matter when, the self-natures are fundamentally neither generated nor extinguished. No matter when, the self-natures are fundamentally and naturally sufficient unto themselves. No matter when, the self-natures are fundamentally without movement. No matter when, the self-natures are able to generate the myriad dharmas.’"
(Platform Sutra, ch 1, BDK ed, p 23)

'Hui Neng experienced the great enlightenment and he knew that all the ten thousand dharmas are not separate from the self-nature. He said to the Patriarch:
How unexpected! The self-nature is originally pure in itself.
How unexpected! The self-nature is originally neither produced nor destroyed.
How unexpected! The self-nature is originally complete in itself.
How unexpected! The self-nature is originally without movement.
How unexpected! The self-nature can produce the ten thousand dharmas.'
( http://www.cttbusa.org/6patriarch/6patriarch3.asp.html )

Ted Biringer said:
A. The Greatness of the Essence of Suchness

The essence of Suchness knows no increase or decrease in ordinary men, the Hinayanists, the Bodhisattvas, or the Buddhas. It was not brought into existence in the beginning nor will it cease to be at the end of time; it is eternal through and through.

B. The Greatness of the Attributes of Suchness

From the beginning, Suchness in its nature is fully provided with all excellent qualities; namely, it is endowed with the light of great wisdom, the qualities of illuminating the entire universe, of true cognition and mind pure in its self-nature; of eternity, bliss, Self, and purity; of refreshing coolness, immutability, and freedom. It is endowed with these excellent qualities which outnumber the sands of the Ganges, which are not independent of, disjointed from, or different from the essence of Suchness, and which are suprarational attributes of Buddhahood. Since it is endowed completely with all these, and is not lacking anything, it is called the Tathagata-garbha when latent and also the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata.

Question: It was explained before that the essence of Suchness is undifferentiated and devoid of all characteristics. Why is it, then, that you have described its essence as having these various excellent qualities?
Answer: Though it has, in reality, all these excellent qualities, it does not have any characteristics of differentiation; it retains its identity and is of one flavor; Suchness is solely one.
The Awakening of Faith, Yoshito Hakeda, p.64-65 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
A better translation:

"Moreover, suchness’ own intrinsic reality and characteristics neither increase nor decrease for any ordinary people, hearers (śrāvaka), solitary realizers (pratyekabuddha), bodhisattvas, or buddhas. It is neither that suchness arose in a former time, nor that it will cease at some future time. It is absolutely constant. It has always been inherently replete with all qualities. It means this because of the idea that [suchness’] own intrinsic reality is imbued with the light of great wisdom; that it pervasively illuminates the dharma realm; that it is the recognition of reality; that it is the intrinsically pristine mind; that it is eternal, blissful, Self, and pure; and that it is cool, unchanging, and sovereign [that is, nirvana]. And it is because [suchness’ own intrinsic reality] is replete with inconceivable buddha dharmas more numerous than the sands of the Ganges, which are not separate, not cut off from, and not different from it, to the extent that it is perfect and lacks nothing. It is called the tathāgatagarbha; it is also called the dharma body of tathāgatas.
Question: Earlier, you stated that the intrinsic reality of suchness is uniform and free from all characteristics. How, then, can you also state that this intrinsic reality has such various kinds of qualities?
Answer: Although suchness truly has these qualities, it has no characteristics of differentiation. It is homogeneous and of one taste: there is only one suchness. Why? Since it is without any discriminating [function], and so free from the characteristics of discrimination, it is therefore non-dual."
(Treatise on Awakening Mahāyāna Faith, 1.2.7)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 19th, 2022 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
On the Unchanging Nature of the One Mind

Zen study is basically to reach the fundamental and clarify the essence of mind. If you don’t reach the fundamental, you live and die in vain, misunderstanding yourself and others. As for what this fundamental essence is, your features may differ as you die and are born over and over again, but at all times there is an inherent awareness.
Keizan, Transmission of Light, Thomas Cleary, p. 136 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
A https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/denkoroku/pdf/CHAPTER_THIRTY_TWO.pdf:

'To inquire into Zen and study the way is, at root, for the purpose of penetrating through to what is fundamental, and greatly clarifying the mind-nature. If you do not reach the fundamental, you will have lived uselessly and will die uselessly, deluding self and deluding others. When we speak of so-called original nature, it means that all of you people - although you change shape through death after death, birth after birth, and face after face - are, from hour to hour and moment to moment, never unendowed with perfectly complete wisdom.'

Ted Biringer said:
Mind is like the void in which there is no confusion or evil, as when the sun wheels through it shining upon the four corners of the world. For, when the sun rises and illuminates the whole earth, the void gains not in brilliance; and, when the sun sets, the void does not darken. The phenomena of light and dark alternate with each other, but the nature of the void remains unchanged. So it is with the Mind of the Buddha and of sentient beings. If you look upon the Buddha as presenting a pure, bright or Enlightened appearance, or upon sentient beings as presenting a foul, dark or mortal-seeming appearance, these conceptions resulting from attachment to form will keep you from supreme knowledge, even after the passing of as many aeons as there are sands in the Ganges. There is only the One Mind and not a particle of anything else on which to lay hold, for this Mind is the Buddha. If you students of the Way do not awake to this Mind substance, you will overlay Mind with conceptual thought, you will seek the Buddha outside yourselves, and you will remain attached to forms, pious practices and so on, all of which are harmful and not at all the way to supreme knowledge.
The Zen Teaching of Huang-Po, John Blofeld, p.31 (Emphasis added)

Astus wrote:
A newer version (Bird in Flight Leaves no Trace, ch 1):

'Like empty space, that mind is free from admixture or deterioration. It is like the great orb of the sun that shines over all four quarters of the world. When the sun rises, its light shines over the entire world, but empty space has never been illuminated. When the sun sets, darkness pervades the entire world, but empty space has never been darkened. The realms of light and dark alternate, but the nature of empty space is expansive and invariable. The minds of both buddhas and sentient beings are also like this. Say one observes buddhas as having the characteristics of purity, radiance, and liberation or observes sentient beings as having the characteristics of foulness, darkness, and birth and death. One who generates such an understanding will not be able to attain bodhi [enlightenment] even after kalpas [eons] as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, because one is attached to characteristics. There is only this one mind; there is not another dharma, even as small as a mote of dust, to be attained. The mind is the buddha. Those who train in the Way these days do not awaken to the essence of this mind. They then give rise to mental states overlaying this mind, seek the buddha externally, and practice while being attached to characteristics. All these are harmful techniques, not the path to bodhi.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 16th, 2022 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Sudden Awakening 101
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
While I, in harmony with the classic Zen records, did and do describe “mind” (in the context of “mind is Buddha”) as synonymous with essential nature, fundamental awareness, etc., and do recognize it as constant, immutable, unchanging, etc.

Astus wrote:
So, according to you, the mind that is Buddha is: 'constant, immutable, unchanging'

Ted Biringer said:
And I never said or implied that it was an “independent” existent. Just the opposite. All the thoughts and things (dharmas) that do appear as coming and going, arising and ceasing, “independently” are in fact not thoughts and things but mind itself, Buddha-nature, etc. To see dharmas as somehow independent of mind is to be caught up in conceptualization – for there is only the one mind, the essential nature of our own mind here and now:

Astus wrote:
At the same time, according to you, the mind that is Buddha is dependent. Although then you go on to say not that the mind is dependent, but that everything else depends on the buddha-mind. Still, going to the next section.
If the nature of mind is not independent, then how could it be unchanging?

Ted Biringer said:
That is the million dollar question! Yes!
In any case, the fact that this awareness or mind is unchanging or immutable and at the same time not independent is asserted by the masters.

Astus wrote:
If something is unchanging and dependent, then it necessarily depends on something unchanging, otherwise it would be changing as well. What other unchanging and dependent things are there?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 15th, 2022 at 4:04 PM
Title: Re: Sudden Awakening 101
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
In my op I clearly pointed out what I meant by “mind” in the context of “mind is Buddha.” This was to distinguish its usage from the many other possible meanings that “mind” can have depending on the context, for instance as distinct from the  meaning you apply above as “a common term for a complex system of processes that arise dependent on various conditions.” Not what I meant at all, as a reading of the op makes clear.

Astus wrote:
That's very much my contention here as well. In general mind in Buddhism refers to the six (or eight) types of consciousness and the four mental aggregates. That's a complex system of processes dependent on other factors, especially as presented most commonly that consciousness arises dependent on the sense faculty and the sense object.

The op makes clear that you assume there to be a constant, independent awareness, and you named that the nature of mind to be awakened to. How is that not mistaking consciousness for a self, taking what is impermanent as permanent?

Ted Biringer said:
Further, it is fine to say it “does not exist” as long as you mean “does not exist independently.”

Astus wrote:
If the nature of mind is not independent, then how could it be unchanging? But then you state:
To recognize that objects of mind (phenomena, forms, dharmas) arise and cease endlessly, while mind itself neither arises nor ceases is not to deny the reality (Buddha-nature) of such objects – just the opposite in fact. It is, in truth, the very coming and going of all transient forms that allows us to awaken to that which is ever and always free from coming and going.
That looks very much like a duality of a permanent awareness and impermanent objects. Then how is such an awareness not independent?

Ted Biringer said:
see that while things (objects of mind) appear to come and go the essence of mind is intrinsically free from change.

Astus wrote:
An unchanging subject, isn't that what is called a self?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 14th, 2022 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: Sudden Awakening 101
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
Nevertheless, I don’t see how you could confuse my explanation (quoted in your post) as suggesting it might amount to “mistaking consciousness for a self.” In fact, my explanation was meant to clarify that consciousness (that is, our fundamental consciousness, or awareness itself) is the Buddha.

Astus wrote:
It is because you specified mind as 'our core-subjectivity, or awareness itself. In short, they do not mean thoughts, feelings, sensations, perceptions, etc. – all of these are objects of mind or contents of awareness. ... mind or awareness is the unchanging realm in which objects come and go, the immutable dimension wherein the contents of awareness arise and cease.'

The meaning of emptiness is that there is no core, no substance, no self. Mind is a common term for a complex system of processes that arise dependent on various conditions.

'Whenever we see form, it is just seeing the mind. The mind does not exist by itself; its existence is due to form.'
(Sun-Face Buddha, p 62)

To say that only an awareness apart from everything else is the buddha contradicts what you quoted from Mazu, that 'All dharmas are Buddhadharmas and all dharmas are liberation. Liberation is identical with suchness: all dhannas never leave suchness. Whether walking, standing, sitting or reclining, everything is always inconceivable function.'

You also quoted Bodhidharma's answer to the question about mind, and it also illustrates this very well: 'You ask. That’s your mind. I answer. That’s my mind. If I had no mind, how could I answer? If you had no mind, how could you ask? That which asks is your mind. Through endless kalpas without beginning, whatever you do, wherever you are, that’s your real mind, that’s your real buddha.'

Asking, answering, those are all mental functions, not some subject/awareness merely watching in the background. An awareness apart from thoughts and feelings is without function and actually does not exist. To say that this mind is the buddha, and not something special, there is no need to exclude anything. The only issue to solve is the matter of attachment.

'If the mind grasps at dharmas, then it gets involved in external causes and conditions, which is the meaning of birth and death. If the mind does not grasp at dharmas, that is suchness.'
(Sun-Face Buddha, p 67)

And as you quoted: 'If you really want to find the Way, don’t hold on to anything.'

Huangbo warned (Essentials of the Transmission of Mind, in Zen Texts, BDK ed, p 21): 'Ordinary people grasp at [their sensory] realms, while religious persons grasp at the mind. For the mind and the realms to both be forgotten is the True Dharma. To forget the realms is relatively easy, but to forget the mind is extremely difficult. People do not dare to forget the mind, fearing that they will fall into the void (i.e., the emptiness of space) with nowhere to grab hold. They do not understand that the void is without void, that there is only one true Dharma body.'


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 13th, 2022 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Sudden Awakening 101
Content:
Ted Biringer said:
When the Zen masters use the term “mind” in the sense that “mind is Buddha” they mean mind as it is in itself, that is, our core-subjectivity, or awareness itself. In short, they do not mean thoughts, feelings, sensations, perceptions, etc. – all of these are objects of mind or contents of awareness. Objects of mind come and go in an endless stream, contents of awareness arise and cease – mind or awareness is the unchanging realm in which objects come and go, the immutable dimension wherein the contents of awareness arise and cease.

Astus wrote:
If that had been the case they would have been simply mistaking consciousness for a self. For direct insight it is exactly that kind of grasping and identifying that should be immediately put an end to. How? By recognising that all five aggregates are empty, and there is no mind to be found anywhere.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 12th, 2022 at 4:22 AM
Title: Re: What is the "Jin'ganding Jing?"
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
What is the Jin'gandingjing? Anyone know?

Astus wrote:
My guess is 金剛頂經, i.e. Vajraśekhara Sūtra, a version of which is translated as https://bdkamerica.org/product/two-esoteric-sutras/.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 11th, 2022 at 5:05 AM
Title: Re: Is kensho stream entry?
Content:
Malcolm said:
The four kinds of āryas are defined on the basis of the fetters they have dropped. To say one is stream entrant in a Mahāyāna context is to claim to be a first stage bodhisattva.

Astus wrote:
In light of the fetters here's a classic story:

"there was a fourteen year old novice called Daoxin (Faith in the Way) who came to pay his respects to the Third Patriarch, saying, ‘Would that the Venerable Monk’s compassion allow me to beg for the Dharma gate of Liberation.’
The master replied, ‘Who binds you?’
‘No one,’ responded Daoxin.
‘Why seek liberation then?’ asked Sengcan.
On hearing this [Dao] Xin had a great awakening."
(Records of the Transmission of the Lamp, vol 1, 3.40)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 11th, 2022 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Is kensho stream entry?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Mahāyāna also has stream entry. It’s called the path of seeing. Mahāyāna has once-returners, 7th stage bodhisattvas, never-returners, eighth on up, and arhats, aka samyaksambuddhas.

Astus wrote:
Do you know if anyone actually called them so? I have not found such a definition for stream entry (入流, 預流, 須陀洹) in the https://www2.buddhistdoor.net/dictionary/.

Malcolm said:
Which are the same fetters abandoned on the Mahayana path of seeing.

Astus wrote:
But, as you noted in another thread, a first stage bodhisattva can still break even basic precepts, unlike a stream enterer.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 11th, 2022 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Is kensho stream entry?
Content:
Dan74 said:
One of the things I am not clear about is whether according to the Theravada, stream-enterers can regress and lose some of these qualities.

Astus wrote:
They cannot. That's why it's called change of lineage ( https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php/Gotrabhu ).

Dan74 said:
The Chan definition you quoted above doesn't appear to distinguish between (insight into the Original Nature) kensho and full awakening (satori), but most contemporary teachers do. Hakuin did too, with many kenshos, didn't he?

Astus wrote:
The definition above is based on the Platform Sutra. As you note, there are other usages of the term. Hence the difficulty with comparing kensho with various attainments, since one first needs to define kensho itself.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 10th, 2022 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: Is kensho stream entry?
Content:
Dan74 said:
It would be worth comparing the descriptions of each.

Astus wrote:
Definitions for stream-entry are fairly standard. Here's a modern summary of the https://buddhadhamma.github.io/awakened-beings.html#active-qualities and the https://buddhadhamma.github.io/awakened-beings.html#abandoned-qualities qualities.
The bigger problem is that there is no generally accepted interpretation for kensho. Here's a definition from the Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism by Youru Wang (p 138):

JIANXING. A Chan term and an important notion in Chan teachings. Literally, it means "seeing (one's authentic) nature." This teaching was a Chinese appropriation of Indian Mahayana tathagatagarbha (Buddha-nature) thought. The tathagatagarbha tradition teaches that every human being has Buddha-nature within. This Buddha-nature is the inner cause and condition of enlightenment. Some texts of this tradition also teach that this Buddha-nature is the foundation of the world.
In Chinese Chan tradition, for example, in the Platform Sutra Buddha-nature is equivalent to the self-nature (zixing) in the sense that Buddha-nature cannot be objectified and realized outside each person. Seeing or realizing the Buddha-nature is the existential transformation of personhood, being able to understand and appreciate what constitutes a person - elements of impermanence and non-abiding - and then acting accordingly. Jianxing is therefore another term for enlightenment. The English translation of xing here as "nature" is somewhat misleading. The Buddha-nature or self-nature in the above-mentioned Chan soteriological context is not a changeless essence deeply rooted in the human mind for one to discover; rather, it refers to the changeability, transformation, and growth of personhood. Jianxing thus requires the accomplishment of action, the practical-behavioral carrying out of non-attachment.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 10th, 2022 at 8:19 PM
Title: Re: Is kensho stream entry?
Content:
clyde said:
I don’t recall reading any Zen text that compared or equated kensho and stream entry

Astus wrote:
Stream entry is on the shravaka path, hence it is something to be avoided by Mahayana followers.

clyde said:
It seems to me that kensho is the direct experience of emptiness or impermanence and so does result in stream entry

Astus wrote:
Kensho is defined in different ways according to who says it. If we are to rely on the Platform Sutra for instance, it is realising buddha-nature and attaining buddhahood, thus the saying 'kensho jobutsu' (see nature and become buddha). Stream entry would fall very short of that.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 10th, 2022 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: Discerning conceptual thought about the body from non conceptual sense experience in Vipaysana
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Is that book more of a historical/textual thing, or actual instruction?

Astus wrote:
For practical by Ven. Analayo try these:

https://www.windhorsepublications.com/product/satipatthana-meditation-practice-guide-paperback/
https://www.windhorsepublications.com/product/mindfulness-of-breathing-a-practice-guide-and-translations-paperback/

And this one by Ajahn Sucitto is quite keen on the body as something felt: https://forestsangha.org/teachings/books/meditation-a-way-of-awakening?language=English


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 9th, 2022 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: Discerning conceptual thought about the body from non conceptual sense experience in Vipaysana
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is a central topic in Burmese Vipassana teachings.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 8th, 2022 at 4:43 PM
Title: Re: the Zen promise is empty
Content:
Malcolm said:
You have to believe the narrative. But there is nothing about the narrative that can be proven to anyone. So, yes, there is in the end nothing but faith, unless someone is claiming direct personal knowledge, and you know how sketchy that is.

Astus wrote:
If by faith you mean cannot be proven to others, then it's all just faith. Personal knowledge of what? That the narrative is historically true, or that the teachings communicated in the texts is true? The latter is meant to be verifiable, for oneself at least (e.g. https://suttacentral.net/an10.51/en/sujato ). For instance, can we see for ourselves that the entirety of our experiences can be categorised according to the five aggregates? If so, then can we tell if those aggregates are permanent or impermanent, satisfactory or unsatisfactory, personal or impersonal, substantial or insubstantial, independent or dependent, etc.? Similarly, can we confirm whether by calming the mind there is more peace? Can we decide if there is contentment by not clinging? And so on. It is another step that through the proper application of the teachings how much of the harmful, unskillful inclinations and obsessions are diminished or even eradicated.

Malcolm said:
Anyone want to stand up here and proclaim they are awakened? No? I thought as much.

Astus wrote:
Maybe narrow it down. Awakened to what? For instance the declarations https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=38956 that there is no doubt about the validity of the Nagarjuna's teachings, how is that not some stage of awakening? In fact, the https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/T/75.

Here's Jinul's take on the matter of faith:

'If you have sufficient faith and your doubts suddenly vanish, you will display the will of a great man and generate authentic vision and  understanding; if you know its taste for yourself, arrive at the stage of selfaffirmation [and thus gain understanding of your true nature], then this is  the experience of the understanding-awakening achieved by those who have  cultivated the mind. Since no further steps or sequences are involved, it is  called “sudden.” Therefore it is said, “When in the cause of faith one meshes  without the slightest degree of error with all the qualities of the fruition of  buddhahood, faith is achieved.”'
(Moguja’s Secrets on Cultivating the Mind, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 224)

'we should know that there is no need to worry about  either the [thirty-two] major or [eighty] minor marks [of sanctity] or the  superpowers. We must first trace back the radiance of our own minds to  ensure that our faith and understanding are genuine; then, we will not fall  into either eternalism (śāsvatadrsti) or annihilationism (ucchedadrsti), and,  by relying on the two approaches of samādhi and prajñā, we will be able  to remedy the maculations of mind. This is the proper way. On the other  hand, if our faith and understanding are not yet genuine, the contemplation practice that we cultivate will be subject to impermanence and will in the  end result only in backsliding. This is called the contemplation practice of the foolish; how could it be the practice of the wise?'
(Encouragement to Practice: The Compact of the Samādhi and Prajñā Society, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 129-130)

'Cultivators nowadays belong to the Buddha’s spiritual family. They rely upon the direct-pointing (chikchi 直指) approach of the  Sudden school, and, having developed firm faith and understanding, they straightaway comprehend that their own minds are perpetually calm and  ever alert. Since they initiate their cultivation on such a foundation, even  though they cultivate the manifold practices [of the bodhisattva], they only  regard no-thought (munyom 無念) as their core and nonconstruction (mujak 無作, akrtaka) as their basis. Because of this no-thought and nonconstruction,  their practice is free from any temporal (sigop 時劫) or soteriological (chiwi 地位) sequences and also devoid of any sign of discrimination between  dharmas and their aspects (dharmārtha). Since their cultivation is complete,  approaches to dharma as numerous as dust motes and the meritorious  qualities developed on all the bhūmis are also complete in the essence of  their sublime minds, which is accordingly the same as a wish-fulfilling gem  (cintāmani).'
(ibid., p 148-149)

'Sentient beings of great aspiration who rely on the supreme-vehicle approach to dharma have firm faith and understanding  that the four great elements (mahābhūta) are like a bubble or a mirage,  that the six sense-objects are like flowers in the sky, that their own minds  are the buddha-mind, and that their own natures are the dharma-nature.  Since time immemorial, they have themselves left behind the nature of the  afflictions. Their alertness is instantly alert; their clarity is instantly clear.  Although people who cultivate while relying on this understanding may still  have beginningless proclivities of habit (vāsanā), if they control them with  the unabiding wisdom, they instead become the foundational wisdom and  need neither be suppressed nor removed.'
(ibid., p 167-168)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 8th, 2022 at 6:25 AM
Title: Re: the Zen promise is empty
Content:
Malcolm said:
Necessarily. You have to have faith in these texts as authorities.

Astus wrote:
What do you mean by that? One first needs to have faith in the texts initially, or there is nothing beyond faith? If the former, then why necessarily?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 8th, 2022 at 4:38 AM
Title: Re: the Zen promise is empty
Content:
Malcolm said:
It’s still subjective, since who knows whether the “mendicant” is deluded. There is no way to book dance your way around it.

Astus wrote:
Yes, subjective, but not necessarily based on faith. The Okkantasaṃyutta (SN 25) distinguishes between the faith follower who is confident because of trust and will attain stream entry, the Dhamma follower who is confident because of discernment and will attain stream entry, and the one who understand and sees is the one who has entered the stream.
However, all that is about knowing the Dharma, just like in the discourse you quoted (and another one with Sariputta should also be mentioned, where he declares his confidence in the unsurpassed awakening of the Buddha: https://suttacentral.net/sn47.12/en/sujato ). Related to your quote too are a series of other discourses (SN 48.12-17) on the five faculties where the level of one's attainment is defined by the strength of those faculties, and while the weakest one is the faith follower, those completely without them are ordinary people (SN 48.18).

Malcolm said:
And hanging out with someone for a long while is also no guarantee, as the case of Sunakshatra shows.

Astus wrote:
Not a guarantee, but that's what may give one the full picture.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 7th, 2022 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: the Zen promise is empty
Content:
Malcolm said:
There is also no reason to believe there is. Awakening is not a falsifiable phenomena.

Astus wrote:
'There is a method—apart from faith, preference, oral tradition, reasoned contemplation, or acceptance of a view after consideration—that a mendicant can rely on to declare their enlightenment.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn35.153/en/sujato )

'Great king, as a layman enjoying sensual pleasures, living at home with your children, using sandalwood imported from Kāsi, wearing garlands, perfumes, and makeup, and accepting gold and money, it’s hard for you to know who is perfected or on the path to perfection.
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. ... You can get to know a person’s purity by dealing with them. ... You can get to know a person’s resilience in times of trouble. ... You can get to know a person’s wisdom by discussion. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn3.11/en/sujato; also AN 4.192 & Ud 6.2)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 5th, 2022 at 6:20 AM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Malcolm said:
FFS, Astus, get a sense of humor. We know very well you are an excellent book dancer, ready with your handy kindle library.

Astus wrote:
It seemed like a legit question.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 5th, 2022 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Malcolm said:
So when the Buddha disagreed with someone, he was suffering?

Astus wrote:
If he had disagreed by taking one view and opposing with another, then it would have been so, as shown in the https://suttacentral.net/snp4.8/en/sujato. As for instance the https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato explains, the various grounds of views arise from misconceiving a self.

“Sir, my teaching is such that one does not conflict with anyone in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans. And it is such that perceptions do not underlie the brahmin who lives detached from sensual pleasures, without doubting, stripped of worry, and rid of craving for rebirth in this or that state. That’s what I teach, and that’s what I explain.”
( https://suttacentral.net/mn18/en/sujato )

'For a bhikkhu wholly dispassionate
And freed by the destruction of craving,
Searches have been relinquished
And uprooted the standpoint of views.'
( https://suttacentral.net/iti55/en/ireland, also https://suttacentral.net/an4.38/en/sujato )

And here's MMK 18.5 and 25.24 expressed the Zen way:

'All are clambering after the worthless contrivances of the men of old. As for myself, I haven’t a single dharma to give to people. All I can do is to cure illnesses and untie bonds.'
(Record of Linji, p 22, tr Sasaki)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 5th, 2022 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Pablo said:
Yes, but here again there would be some disagreement over what "liberation" is, wouldn't it?

Astus wrote:
If there is disagreement then there is discrimination, if there is discrimination there is suffering.

'If one possesses a locus,
One becomes attached or detached;
But the great beings who’re devoid of locus,
They have neither attachment nor detachment.'
(Sixty Stanzas of Reasoning, v 58, tr Geshe Thupten Jinpa)

"Nonabiding is to consider in one’s fundamental nature that all worldly [things] are empty, with no consideration of retaliation—whether good or evil, pleasant or ugly, and enemy or friend, etc., during times of words, fights, and disputation.
Within continuing moments of thought one should not think of the previous [mental] realm. If one thinks of the previous thought, the present thought, and the later thought, one’s thoughts will be continuous without cease. This is called ‘fettered.’ If one’s thoughts do not abide in the dharmas, this is to be ‘unfettered.’ Thus it is that nonabiding is taken as the fundamental"
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 43)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 5th, 2022 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
master of puppets said:
Is liberation the last stop. or some where in between?

Astus wrote:
Briefly put: it is the end of greed, hatred, and delusion.

master of puppets said:
ı would happy to choose the second.

Astus wrote:
Who gains, who loses?

Once the great Fayan of Qingliang was with some monks in front of his studio. When Fayan pointed to a curtain, two of the monks went to roll it up.
Fayan said, “One gains, one loses.”
(Wumen's Gate, case 26, in Three Chan Classics, BDK ed, p 91)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 4th, 2022 at 8:21 PM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Pablo said:
Just to be clear (I ask because I truly do not know, I'm not really interested in polemics), what Malcolm and Johnny are saying is that the language used in the Zen tradition re Buddhahood (see for instance Astus's messages in this thread) is rhetorical, and that the awakening spoken of in Zen does not correspond with awakening as understood in the general Mahayana tradition. Is this correct?

Astus wrote:
There is such an interpretation, especially when one takes the side of Doctrine (jiao 教 - a Zen term for the rest of Buddhism that's based on scriptures and treatises). On the other hand, it can also be said that it's the 'general Mahayana' that is rhetorical, while Zen is seeing how things are. And there's also a third option, that it's all a matter of skilful means and one works with whatever one can work for the single goal of liberation.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 4th, 2022 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: the Zen promise is empty
Content:
clyde said:
And I believed the Zen promise that Buddhahood was attainable “in this lifetime”.

Astus wrote:
Complete awakening "in this lifetime", or "in this body" - that's what Vajrayana goes with, Zen not so much. In Zen it is buddhahood in this moment, right now.

Q: What is Sudden Enlightenment? 
A: "Sudden" means instantly stopping false thought. "Enlightenment" means [awareness] that one attains nothing.
( https://ymba.org/books/entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment/treatise-entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment )

'I am offering you the quick method. Take all of your thoughts ─ good, bad, indifferent ─ and drop them. If you can do this, you will be enlightened instantly. If you can reach the state of mind where there is no self, no other, no discrimination, no sentient beings, no Buddha, then you will realize the true reality of things. Take the sword of practice and cut open the mind of discrimination. When enlightenment cuts through the discriminating mind, it leaves nothing behind, because from the beginning there has never been any real self to divide.'
( http://old.ddc.shengyen.org/mobile/text/09-04/45.php by Sheng-yen)

And also note:

'If there are those who say that they see bodhi and have attained it, we should know that they are the ones with exceeding arrogance.'
( https://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra13.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 3rd, 2022 at 5:50 PM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Astus wrote:
When the meaning of seeing the nature is viewed in its context then there's not much difference between the systems. In Japanese Rinzai it currently stands for an experience that needs to be followed up by continuous practice. In Soto the practice is itself the experience of the nature and has to be continuous. Both fits the standard of obtaining the correct view (darśana, 見) and then habituating (bhāvanā, 修習) it.
The difficulty with matching Chan and Doctrine lies in Chan's focus on the individual point of view where terms like buddhahood change their meaning to something immediately accessible, hence seeing the nature is attaining buddhahood, just as forgetting it is becoming an ordinary being.

'To use wisdom to contemplate all the dharmas without grasping or rejecting is to see the nature and accomplish the enlightenment of buddhahood.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 31; T2008p350c8-9)

'If you presume you attain realization by practicing for three incalculable kalpas, you will have no success even after kalpas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. But if in a single kṣaṇa [instant] you obtain the dharma body and directly see the nature, this is the culminating discourse of the three-vehicle teachings. Why is this so? Seeing the dharma body as something that can be obtained is a view associated with the provisional (neyartha) teachings.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, II.39; X1315p22a23-b2)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 2nd, 2022 at 5:02 AM
Title: Re: We Are All This Luminous Mind
Content:
Astus wrote:
'Nowadays, deluded and ignorant people wrongly assume that one moment of awakening manifests in turn incalculable sublime functions, as well as magic and miracles. This is the sort of understanding to which I was referring when I said that you did not know the proper sequence of practice and did not distinguish the root from the branches. To seek the path to buddhahood while not knowing the proper sequence [of practice or distinguishing] the root and the branches is like trying to insert a square peg into a round hole. How is this not a grave mistake? Since they do not know of any expedients, they consequently [hesitate], presuming they have reached a sheer precipice, and allow themselves to cower and back away in discouragement. Alas, many are those who have thus broken their ties with the spiritual lineage of the buddhas. Since they neither understand for themselves nor believe that others have had any experience of the understanding-awakening, when they see someone without superpowers they act insolently, ridiculing the saints and insulting the sages. This is really quite pitiful!'
(Moguja’s Secrets on Cultivating the Mind, in Collected Works on Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 214-215)

'when it is realized that these six — color, sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharmas — are all empty forms, they cannot bind the man of the Way, dependent upon nothing. Constituted though he is of the seepage of the five skandhas, he has the supernatural power of walking upon the earth.'
(Record of Linji, p 20, tr Sasaki)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 1st, 2022 at 6:59 PM
Title: Re: Is first dhyāna necessary for the first bhūmi?
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
The title says it all. Related: Is first dhyāna necessary for any particular significant degree of Bodhi?

Astus wrote:
While in various treatises there are all sorts of minute details to debate about, neither the sutras nor those focused on meditative practices do that. It is agreed that concentration and wisdom go together, even if initially they look separate. The concept of dhyana, when elevated to a high level, seems nearly impossible to reach (e.g. Vism XII.8, p 371), so it is not suprising that the usage of that classification has mostly been abandoned, and instead there's more generic terminology, like samatha, samadhi, and one-pointedness.

As for not developing absorption to any significant degree (whatever that means), that is a possibility, as there are all sorts of cases where somebody gained entrance without much preparation or none at all. Still, at the moment of realisation, how could it be without the absence of mental disturbance?

'The initial concentration of someone practising insight may be ‘temporary’ (khaṇika-samādhi). But at the point of attaining path and fruit (magga-phala), concentration is firmly established (‘attainment concentration’ – appanā-samādhi), reaching at least the first jhāna.'
( https://buddhadhamma.github.io/calm-and-insight.html#introduction, p 817)

'Light a lamp (dīpa); bright as it is, you cannot use it if you leave it in the full wind; put it in a sheltered place, it will be very useful to you. It is the same for wisdom in a distracted mind (vikṣiptacitta): if the shelter of dhyāna is absent, the wisdom will exist, but its usefulness will be very restricted. It is necessary to have dhyāna so that the true wisdom is produced.
...
Moreover, when one is pursuing worldly business (laukikārtha) but does not apply one’s whole mind to it, the business does not succeed; then how [would one reach] very profound (gambhīra) Buddhist wisdom if one neglects meditation?'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc225394.html; second part also quoted by Jinul in 'Encouragement to Practice: The Compact of the Samādhi and Prajñā Society' in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 138-139)

'Dhyāna is the basis of Prajñāpāramitā; the latter arises spontaneously when the virtue of dhyāna is relied upon. A sūtra says: “The one-pointed (ekacitta) and concentrated (samāhita) bhikṣu is able to contemplate the true nature of dharmas.”'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc225467.html )

“Good friends, our teaching takes meditation and wisdom as its fundamental. Everyone, do not say in your delusion that meditation and wisdom are different.
Meditation and wisdom are of one essence, not different. Meditation is the essence of wisdom, and wisdom is the function of meditation. At times of wisdom, meditation exists in that wisdom; at times of meditation, wisdom exists in that meditation. If you understand this doctrine, this is the equivalent study of meditation and wisdom. All you who study the Way, do not say that they are different, with meditation prior to and generating wisdom or with wisdom prior to and generating meditation. If your view of them is like this, then the Dharma would have two characteristics. This would be to say something good with your mouth but to have that which is not good in your minds. It is to make meditation and wisdom falsely existent to consider them as not equivalent.
“If there is good in both mouth and mind and if internal and external are identical, then meditation and wisdom will be equivalent. One should understand oneself that spiritual cultivation does not exist in argumentation. If you argue about which is prior and which secondary, then you are just like [all the other] deluded people. Not to desist from competition is to increase the illusion of selfhood. One will not transcend the four characteristics [this way]!
“Good friends, how is it that meditation and wisdom are equivalent? It is like the light of a lamp. When the lamp exists, there is light; when there is no lamp, there is darkness. The lamp is the essence of the light, and the light is the function of the lamp. Although the names are different, in essence they are fundamentally identical. The Dharma of meditation and wisdom is just like this.”
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 41-42)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 30th, 2022 at 8:01 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Aemilius said:
"There is" is a positive statement, indicating the existence of the unconditioned. "Were there not" says that if the unconditioned  didn't exist neither would the path exist.

Astus wrote:
What existence there it refers to is the existence of the escape (nissaraṇa) from the cycle of pleasure and pain. That escape is the removal of craving (SN 22.26, SN 35.13), it is because of that escape that there is liberation (SN 22.28, SN 35.17), that is cessation (Iti 72), the most peaceful deathless element (Iti 73).

Aemilius said:
"Freedom from barrenness and bondage" it has been described and "freedom from debt or imprisonment" . These are powerful metaphors, which indicate freedom to act and freedom to live.  I wonder why it doesn't seem like that? If you are free from prison, you don't become "extinct", the very opposite should be the case. The fact that we have to discuss this matter indicates there is something wrong, seriously wrong, in the system.

Astus wrote:
It is not about anyone's extinction, such thinking is solely based on the assumption of a self. With the removal of ignorance it's just the misconception of self that disappears (SN 22.47), and with it greed and anger (SN 36.6). Then one acts not out of ignorant inclinations but wisdom (SN 36.3).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 30th, 2022 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Aemilius said:
It exists in a very positive sense, as is taught by  the Blessed one himself:
Ud 8:3:
" There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unfabricated. If there were not
that unborn, unbecome, unmade, unfabricated, no leaving behind of the born,
become, made, fabricated would be discerned. But because there is indeed an
unborn, unbecome, unmade, unfabricated, a leaving behind of the born, become,
made, fabricated is discerned."

Similarly, you can't cross the flood of samsaric existence if there is no other shore.

Astus wrote:
Un born (ajāta), un become (abhūta), un made (akata), un fabricated (asaṅkhata). Which one is positive? They are actually synonyms (cf. AN 3.47), and they are defined, as quoted above, as 'The ending of greed, hate, and delusion.' (rāgakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo), in other words, the third noble truth, the cessation of suffering. 'And what is the cessation of suffering? When craving ceases, suffering ceases.' (AN 6.63), or in other words: 'When relishing ceases, suffering ceases' (SN 35.64).

'Not abandoned, not acquired, not annihilated, not eternal,
not ceased, not arisen, thus is nirvāṇa said to be.
Nirvāṇa is not, on the one hand, an existent; if it were, its having the characteristics of old age and death
would follow, for there is no existent devoid of old age and death.
And if nirvāṇa were an existent, nirvāṇa would be conditioned,
for never is there found any existent that is not conditioned.
And if nirvāṇa were an existent, how could one say that nirvāṇa is nondependent?
For never is there found any existent that is nondependent.
...
It is not to be asserted that the Buddha exists beyond cessation,
nor “does not exist” nor “both exists and does not exist,” nor “neither exists nor does not exist”—none of these is to be asserted.
Indeed it is not to be asserted that “The Buddha exists while remaining [in this world],”
nor “does not exist” nor “both exists and does not exist,” nor “neither exists nor does not exist”—none of these is to be asserted'
(MMK 25.3-6 & 17-18, tr Siderits)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 29th, 2022 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Aemilius said:
If the aggregates are conditioned, and nirvana or amata/amrita is unconditioned, then they are outside the conditioned, outside the aggregates.

Astus wrote:
Since the unconditioned is merely the cessation of defilements, it is not a thing or being to be somewhere.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 29th, 2022 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Malcolm said:
I didn't say they were right.

Astus wrote:
That's clear.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 29th, 2022 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Queequeg said:
I think the catalyst you are looking for are the hosts of buddhas and bodhisattvas that actively endeavor to respond to the needs and capacities of all living beings. Its those vows that turn the balance toward buddhahood.

Astus wrote:
Even just hearing about the Dharma depends on each being's karma, not simply on the effort of others. To the same extent one could mention the hosts of maras and the basic inclinations of beings (MN 64). Also, more apparent than the activities of buddhas and bodhisattvas are the divine messengers (MN 130) of birth, old age, sickness, punishment, and death. But who listens? Therefore 'the sentient beings who die as humans and are reborn as humans are few, while those who die as humans and are reborn in hell are many' (SN 56.102).


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 29th, 2022 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
The pratisaṃdhivijñāna, specifically in the case of the modern Theravāda sect (which rejects the "in-between" state between births), is compared to lighting an unlit candle with a lit candle. If there is no unlit candle to inherit the flame, then the flame goes out and dies (i.e. it becomes "extinguished"/nirvṛti). I believe that this is what Schrödinger’s Yidam was referring to.

Astus wrote:
It might be so, although it could as well be what's taught in the https://suttacentral.net/mn72/en/sujato as an illustration of the Buddha not being identifiable as anything already in his life, hence the baseless conjecture about birth after death:

“Suppose that fire burning in front of you was extinguished. Would you know: ‘This fire in front of me is extinguished’?”
“Yes, I would, Master Gotama.”
“But Vaccha, suppose they were to ask you: ‘This fire in front of you that is extinguished: in what direction did it go—east, south, west, or north?’ How would you answer?”
“It doesn’t apply, Master Gotama. The fire depended on grass and logs as fuel. When that runs out, and no more fuel is added, the fire is reckoned to have become extinguished due to lack of fuel.”
“In the same way, Vaccha, any form by which a Realized One might be described has been cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated, and unable to arise in the future. A Realized One is freed from reckoning in terms of form. They’re deep, immeasurable, and hard to fathom, like the ocean. ‘They’re reborn’, ‘they’re not reborn’, ‘they’re both reborn and not reborn’, ‘they’re neither reborn nor not reborn’—none of these apply.”


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Some people conceive of tathagatagarbha as a kind of uncompounded agent that propels one inevitably to buddhahood.

Astus wrote:
Even so, it is not in and of itself the cause of liberation, hence cannot guarantee it either.

'The causes of freedom from these two veils are the two jnanas, considered as being the non-conceptual jnana and the ensuing jnana.'
(Uttaratantrasastra 5.174, tr Holmes)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
I don’t know what you mean by “on top of”.

Astus wrote:
This:

Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
Mahayana adds to the 5 and posits an 8th consciousness
No Shravakayani would accept the idea of an 8th consciousness that goes from one life to another.

Astus wrote:
Nor would any Buddhist accept that (MN 38, SN 12.61). The eighth consciousness is just as momentary as all the other conditioned phenomena. At the same time, Theravada has the concept of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhavanga, what is not exactly the same as the alayavijnana, but similar in being a basic continuum.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
The idea that all beings will eventually become Buddhas is a Mahāyāna teaching not covered by the Śrāvakayāna texts.

Astus wrote:
But why would all eventually become a buddha? The reasoning that "if it can happen, it will happen" does not stand. That all beings have buddha-nature is not a sufficient condition either.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 8:38 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
Vasabandhu is a Mahayana author.

Astus wrote:
It is in Mahayana where one can find the doctrine of eight consciousnesses. But the eighth is not something posited on top of the five aggregates.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 7:49 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
Mahayana adds to the 5 and posits an 8th consciousness that goes from life to life.

Astus wrote:
All eight consciousnesses are included in the consciousness aggregate. See for instance the Pañcaskandhaprakaraṇa by Vasubandhu.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 7:46 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Aemilius said:
Amrita/amata is a synonym for nirvana/nibbana in Dhammapada.

Astus wrote:
Amata is one of the many synonyms for nibbana, the unconditioned, as listed in the Asankhatasamyutta (SN 43.12-43), and is defined as 'The ending of greed, hate, and delusion.' It's not a thing outside/beyond the aggregates.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 7:36 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Because of the nature of eternity and infinite arrangements, every being will come to have the arrangement of conditions that you speak about, Astus.

Astus wrote:
Samsara has no beginning (SN 15), therefore the infinite arrangements is already covered by that. In other words, just because something could happen does not mean it eventually happens.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 5:24 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
The analogy used in teaching Shravakayana view is that it like a candle going out. Nothing happens next.

Astus wrote:
The candle going out happens in this life (see e.g. AN 9.47), not after or by dying.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 5:12 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Astus wrote:
The condition for buddhahood is the twofold accumulation that must be completed by each being. On the causes to begin accumulating merit and wisdom on the Great Vehicle Gampopa says:

'This family can awaken through freedom from unfavorable contributory causes and through the support of favorable conditions. If the opposites occur, then they cannot awaken.
There are four unfavorable conditions: being born in unfavorable circumstances, having no habitual tendency toward enlightenment, entering into wrong conditions, and being heavily shrouded by the obscurations. There are two favorable conditions: the outer condition of a teacher, and the inner condition of a mind with the proper desire for the precious Dharma and so forth.'
(Jewel Ornament of Liberation, p 54)

Since there is no guarantee that all beings necessarily obtain the favourable causes, there is no assurance of all attaining buddhahood.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 28th, 2022 at 3:24 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Astus wrote:
All feelings are suffering because they are impermanent (SN 36.11), if there was no pleasure there would be no craving either (AN 3.105), but because there are both pleasure and pain there are reasons for liberation too (SN 22.60).

To say that the cessation of the aggregates is somehow annihilationism, that's taking them to be a sort of self, in which case there is a reason to assume annihilation. However, as it's been clarified regarding the death of a liberated being (e.g. SN 22.85-86), it is a misunderstanding to claim either that there is continuation or discontinuation (see also MMK ch 22).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 27th, 2022 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Aemilius said:
That gives a wrong idea of the nature of the Buddha. Buddha's nature is active like the nine similes of the Buddha activity in Mahayana Uttara Tantra Shastra tell us.

Astus wrote:
The unique qualities of a buddha is a different matter, like the difference between the essence of a buddha (dharmakaya) and the way it manifests to beings (rupakaya).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 27th, 2022 at 8:01 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Malcolm said:
No more deluded than imagining that there are Buddhas and sentient beings “in here somewhere”

Astus wrote:
Such an assumption was meant to be avoided by the subsequent quotes. Another one on that specifically:

When the snow was gone, the three monks bade farewell and started to depart. 
Dizang accompanied them to the gate and asked, “I’ve heard you say several times that ‘the three realms are only mind and the myriad dharmas are only consciousness.’”
Dizang then pointed to a rock lying on the ground by the gate and said, “So do you say that this rock is inside or outside of mind?”
Fayan said, “Inside.”
Dizang said, “How can a pilgrim carry such a rock in his mind while on pilgrimage?”
Dumbfounded, Fayan couldn’t answer. He put his luggage down at Dizang’s feet and asked him to clarify the truth. Each day for the next month or so Fayan spoke about the Way with Dizang and demonstrated his understanding.
Dizang would always say, “The Buddhadharma isn’t like that.”
Finally, Fayan said, “I’ve run out of words and ideas.”
Dizang said, “If you want to talk about Buddhadharma, everything you see embodies it.”
At these words Fayan experienced great enlightenment.
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 342-343)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 27th, 2022 at 5:23 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Imagining that there are sentient beings and buddhas out there somewhere, how is that not delusion? Huineng said it clearly:

"Good friends, the ‘sentient beings of our own minds’ are the mental states of delusion, confusion, immorality, jealousy, and evil. All these are sentient beings, and we must all [undergo] automatic salvation of the self-nature. This is called true salvation.
What is ‘automatic salvation of the self-nature’? It is to use correct views to save the sentient beings of false views, afflictions, and stupidity within our own minds. Having correct views, we may use the wisdom of prajñā to destroy the sentient beings of stupidity and delusion, automatically saving each and every one of them.When the false occurs, it is saved by the correct. When delusion occurs, it is saved by enlightenment. When stupidity occurs, it is saved by wisdom. When evil occurs, it is saved by good. Salvation such as this is called true salvation."
(Platform Sutra, ch 6, BDK ed, p 48-49)

In summary:

Someone asked, “If one kills one’s father and mother, one can repent in front of the Buddha. Where does one repent if one kills the Buddha and the patriarchs?”
The Master said, “Exposed!”
(Record of Yunmen, no. 48)

To clarify:

“If you say ‘this very mind is buddha,’ you provisionally accept the slave as master and life-and-death (samsara) as nirvana. This is precisely like cutting off one’s head in pursuit of life. Talking about buddhas and founders and their respective intentions is just like snatching away your own eyeballs while looking for soap berries.”
(Record of Yunmen, no. 148)

In more words:

'It is like the warrior who was deluded regarding the pearl within his forehead and who searched for it elsewhere. He traveled about all the ten directions but was ultimately unable to recover it, whereupon a wise person pointed it out and he [then] saw for himself that the pearl [was on his forehead] as it had always been. Thus it is that students of the Way are deluded as to their own fundamental mind, not recognizing it as Buddha. They search for it outside [of their own minds], generating effortful practices and depending on graduated increases in realization. They pass through eons of diligent seeking but never achieve enlightenment. This is not equal to right now achieving no-mind.'
(Essentials of the Transmission of Mind, ch 3, in Zen Texts, BDK ed, p 18-19)

Returning to Huineng:

'Good friends, ordinary people are buddhas, and the afflictions are bodhi. With a preceding moment of deluded thought, one was an ordinary person, but with a succeeding moment of enlightened thought, one is a buddha. To be attached to one’s sensory realms in a preceding moment of thought is affliction, but to transcend the realms in a succeeding moment of thought is bodhi.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 30)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 27th, 2022 at 3:41 PM
Title: Re: Thereavada vs Mahayana Buddhist Goal
Content:
Zhen Li said:
The successive rise and fall of the aggregates constitutes suffering itself, so ending them is of prime importance.

Astus wrote:
It's not the aggregates on their own but the aggregates grasped at what consitutes suffering.

Zhen Li said:
Neither Theravāda nor Mahāyāna suggests that nirvāṇa is a "blank," which would be the extreme of annihilationism (which assumes that with the aggregates, there is personhood and self-hood, which there isn't in the first place), but that its description defies attempts to pin it down. The Nirvāṇa sūtra indicates that nirvāṇa is Buddha-nature, which, when manifest in the world appears as a compassionate activity to relieve the suffering of others. So, nirvāṇa, by its nature, helps others—and ultimately impersonal and not-self.

Astus wrote:
Nirvana is not a thing or entity but the final extinction of ignorance and craving, so to say nirvana has any activity is at best metaphorical.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 26th, 2022 at 8:07 PM
Title: Re: Will all eventually become Buddhas?
Content:
Astus wrote:
In the Saccasaṁyutta there are a series of suttas (SN 56.61-131) on the rarity of the https://www.shambhala.com/precious-human-birth/, like how few are born as humans (SN 56.61; see also the blind turtle simile: SN 56.47-48), not in a borderland (SN 56.62), and with wisdom (SN 56.63), and among those passing away as humans many are reborn in the lower realms and few in the heavens (SN 56.102-107). On the other hand, attaining insight is supremely difficult (SN 56.45) but without it there is no liberation (SN 56.44). At the same time, speculating about various matters of the world is not beneficial for the path, rather one should get busy with understanding the Dharma (SN 56.41).

The Buddha was asked (AN 10.95): 'when Master Gotama teaches in this way, is the whole world saved, or half, or a third?'
And Ananda explained: 'it’s not the Realized One’s concern whether the whole world is saved by this, or half, or a third. But the Realized One knows that whoever is saved from the world—whether in the past, the future, or the present—all have given up the five hindrances, corruptions of the heart that weaken wisdom. They have firmly established their mind in the four kinds of mindfulness meditation. And they have truly developed the seven awakening factors. That’s how they’re saved from the world, in the past, future, or present.'


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: Sotapannas and killing
Content:
Astus wrote:
It might also be noted that a bodhisattva from the second bhumi does not commit any of the ten bad actions, as stated in https://read.84000.co/translation/toh44-31.html#UT22084-036-002-459 chapter.

'The bodhisattva abiding on this ground
naturally abstains from engaging in bad actions.
Because he deeply delights in good dharmas,
he naturally practices the courses of good karmic action.'
(Nāgārjuna's Treatise on the Ten Bodhisattva Grounds, ch 28, p 490)

'Since they have the abundant qualities of discipline,
They refrain from faulty discipline even in their dreams.
Because the movements of their body, speech, and mind are pure,
They accumulate the actions of the genuine ones’ tenfold path.'
(Madhyamakavatara 2.1, in The Karmapa's Middle Way, p 610)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 23rd, 2022 at 8:05 PM
Title: Re: What exactly is it that leads to Enlightenment? (arhat and buddhahood)
Content:
Nalanda said:
What I meant to say is what is it 'technically' that generates the enlightenment.

Astus wrote:
It is the elimination of clinging by the realisation of emptiness.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 23rd, 2022 at 7:59 PM
Title: Re: Did Buddha really teach the Middle Way?
Content:
Realmwalker said:
I find it interesting that Buddha's Middle Way, if I understand your explanations correctly, is actually not about bringing a balance between two opposite extremes.

Astus wrote:
How so? The extremes - as identified by the Buddha on various levels - are both faulty, wrong, and harmful. What sort of balance should there be? That's why they should equally be avoided and left behind.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 23rd, 2022 at 5:34 AM
Title: Re: Did Buddha really teach the Middle Way?
Content:
Realmwalker said:
Did Buddha really teach the Middle Way?

Astus wrote:
It was among the first things he taught.

'Mendicants, these two extremes should not be cultivated by one who has gone forth. What two? Indulgence in sensual pleasures, which is low, crude, ordinary, ignoble, and pointless. And indulgence in self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and pointless. Avoiding these two extremes, the Realized One woke up by understanding the middle way of practice, which gives vision and knowledge, and leads to peace, direct knowledge, awakening, and extinguishment. And what is that middle way of practice? It is simply this noble eightfold path, that is: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn56.11/en/sujato )

Realmwalker said:
Celibacy and total detachment seem to be an extreme.

Astus wrote:
The common life story of the Buddha illustrates the extremes of indulgence and self-mortification. One of the basic sources of the Buddha's life ( https://suttacentral.net/mn26/en/sujato ) is very explicit how lay life is the ignoble way, while renunciate life is the noble one. The distinction between the extreme ways and the middle way is more about what various renunciates do. There is for instance https://suttacentral.net/an3.156-162/en/sujato on what the extreme ways are and what the middle way is. In https://suttacentral.net/mn45/en/sujato on different paths the Buddha categorises the paths where people indulge in sensual pleasures as the one that is pleasurable now but painful later, while self-mortification as painful both now and in the future. And before it's assumed that these don't apply to Mahayana, see chapter 4 of the Siksasamuccaya for instance, where it's explained in detail how sensual indulgence should be avoided.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 21st, 2022 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Every school/tradition's most effective method/practice to reach enlightenment...
Content:
Nalanda said:
I wonder what others really has as their tradition's most effective tool to gain enlightenment...

Astus wrote:
It's everywhere the same triple training: morality, meditation, wisdom. The apparent differences are merely a matter of style and branding.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 19th, 2022 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: So Many Mahayana Sutras - Do They All Agree - Why So Many?
Content:
Nalanda said:
Oh ok then. I just like his take on Early Buddhist Schools. That's all

Malcolm said:
There is no reason to criticize early Buddhist schools.

Astus wrote:
'There will be twenty schools that will keep the Dharma in existence for my future disciples. Members of all those twenty schools will attain the four realizations, and their tripiṭakas will be equal, without being inferior, intermediate, or superior. It is like the water of the ocean that is undifferentiated in taste. It is as if a man had twenty sons. This is truly what the Tathāgata has preached! Mañjuśrī, the two original schools derive from the Mahayana and from the perfection of wisdom. Mañjuśrī, just as earth, water, fire, wind, and space are that upon which all sentient beings reside, so is the perfection of wisdom. The Mahayana is the place from which all the śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas derive.'
(The Sutra of Mañjuśrī’s Questions, ch 15, BDK ed, p 97)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 19th, 2022 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: So Many Mahayana Sutras - Do They All Agree - Why So Many?
Content:
Nalanda said:
Are these two Sutras universally accepted valid within Mahayana?

Astus wrote:
The Vajrasamadhi Sutra also exists in Tibetan and is quoted sometimes, like in Gampopa's Jewel Ornament of Liberation. As for the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, I don't know.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 18th, 2022 at 6:54 PM
Title: Re: So Many Mahayana Sutras - Do They All Agree - Why So Many?
Content:
Nalanda said:
These are Chinese and Korean sutras? 6th and 8th century CE?

Astus wrote:
According to scholars, yes, quite clearly they are. Otherwise, no.

Nalanda said:
Do these have Indian origin?

Astus wrote:
If you mean whether there is a known Sanskrit version, then no. There are many sutras like that.

Nalanda said:
Which translation is best?

Astus wrote:
Pick whichever you like, especially at first reading it's all OK. If you want to get deeper, there are commentaries in English.

http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/sutra_of_perfect_enlightenment.html
https://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra49.html
http://www.buddhism.org/Sutras/2/Sutras31.htm
The Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment translated by Peter N. Gregory in https://www.bdk.or.jp/document/dgtl-dl/dBET_ApocryphalScriptures_2005.pdf, p 43ff.

https://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra53a.html
http://www.buddhism.org/Sutras/2/Sutras9.htm (mostly Buswell's translation)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 18th, 2022 at 4:56 PM
Title: Re: So Many Mahayana Sutras - Do They All Agree - Why So Many?
Content:
Nalanda said:
I learned that there are over 6,000 Mahaya Sutras. Can this be boiled down to 100, 50, 25, 10, 5, 1. For the purpose of managing / prioritizing what to study? I'm guessing Prajnaparamita at the top. But what would be the top 5 or 10 to study in sequence ideally?

Astus wrote:
If it's one sutra, make it the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutra_of_Perfect_Enlightenment, it's a nice summary. For two, you can add the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajrasamadhi-sutra. To make it five, add the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_Sutra, the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Sutra, and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimalakirti_Sutra Sutra.

Also, it's good to keep in mind the following case:

Zhaozhou asked a monk, “How many sutras do you read in one day?”
The monk said, “Sometimes seven or eight. Sometimes ten.”
Zhaozhou said, “Oh, then you can’t read scriptures.”
The monk said, “Master, how many do you read in a day?”
Zhaozhou said, “In one day I read one word.”
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 159)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 14th, 2022 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?
Content:
Dgj said:
Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven?

Astus wrote:
It is false for every ordinary being who assume a self.

Dgj said:
Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?

Astus wrote:
It is not grasped as true by noble beings.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 12th, 2022 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: How does general Mahayana see Vajrayana claims of being X?
Content:
Nalanda said:
Does Zen have Rinzai 1, Rinzai 2 Rinzai 3, etc.

Astus wrote:
The Lankavatara Sutra (2.37 / T16n671p533a2 / T16n672p602a10) talks of four types of dhyāna (sizhong chan 四種禪). Then there are various divisions and schemes that were taught, like the five grades by Zongmi that's based on the view that 'those training in the three vehicles [of the hearer, private buddha, and bodhisattva] who wish to seek the path of the noble ones must practice dhyana. Apart from dhyana there is no gate, in the absence of dhyana no road.' (Zongmi on Chan, p 103 / T48n2015p399b9-10). Both of these two sources refer to dhyana/chan in a general sense, and then the tradition of Bodhidharma is naturally identified with the highest form of dhyana. When it comes to the internal categorisation of various branches of Zen (chanzong 禪宗) itself, there can be many categories, like wild fox Chan (yehu chan 野狐禪), literary Chan (wenzi chan 文字禪), Tathagata Chan (rulai chan 如來禪), and patriarchal/ancestral Chan (zushi chan 祖師禪).

One simple way the Chan school distinguished itself from other Buddhists was the distinction between doctrine (jiao 教) and chan (禪), that is, others who relied on scriptures and the separate transmission outside scriptures (jiaowai biechuan 教外別傳). But then of course there were some debates and controversies about what it actually means to be separate from scriptures. Here's one modern take on the question:

'Among the eight Mahāyāna schools in China, the approach of the Consciousness-only school resembles science, and that of the Three Treatise school resembles philosophy. The Huayan and Tiantai schools’ approaches resemble literature, and the approaches of the Mantra [Esoteric] and Pure Land schools resemble aesthetics. The Chan school embodies the core teaching of Buddhism. Master Taixu once said, “The defining characteristic of Chinese Buddhism lies in [its emphasis on] chan [meditation].” The essence of any of the other schools can be reduced to the spirit of Chan.'
(Orthodox Chinese Buddhism by Ven. Sheng-yen, p 128)

And here's a classical one:

Someone asked, “What is that which is transmitted separately from the teachings of the three vehicles?”
The Master said, “If you don’t ask me I won’t answer. But if you do, I go to India in the morning and return to China in the evening!”
The questioner said, “Please, Master, point it out to me!”
The Master replied, “Hopeless case!”
(Record of Yunmen, section 112, tr Urs App)

And to explain that:

'Followers of the Way, don’t seek within words, for when the mind is stirred you become wearied, and there’s no benefit in gulping icy air. It’s better, by the single thought that causal relations are [fundamentally] birthless, to surpass the bodhisattvas who depend upon the provisional teaching of the Three Vehicles.'
(Record of Linji, p 32, tr Sasaki)

To combine all sides:

'To use no words to reach the wordless is Seon; to use words to reach the wordless  is Doctrine. So then the mind is the Seon dharma (method) and language is  the Doctrine dharma. Although the Dharma is of only one taste, the views  and interpretations are as far apart as heaven and earth.'
(Seonga Gwigam by Hyujeong, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 3, p 59)

Further elaborated:

'But when the buddhas preach the sutras they first discriminate the dharmas and then preach the ultimate emptiness, whereas when the patriarchal teachers indicate via sentences, if they eliminate the traces from the ground of thought, they reveal the principle in the source of the mind.'
(Seonga Gwigam by Hyujeong, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 3, p 67)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 12th, 2022 at 6:34 AM
Title: Re: How does general Mahayana see Vajrayana claims of being X?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Clearly, Dogen never encountered any Tibetan Buddhists during his sojourn in China. I think the "no true Scotsman" fallacy might apply to this statement.

Astus wrote:
Surely he was aware of the various classifications of the teachings that are found in any Mahayana school, so his response was quite intentionally like that.

'Further, Mahamati, if a man becomes attached to the [literal] meaning or words and holds fast to their agreement in regard to the original state of Nirvana which is unborn and undying, the Triple vehicle, the one vehicle, the five [Dharmas], mentation, the [three] Svabhavas, etc., he will come to cherish views either affirmative or negative. As varieties of objects are seen in Maya and are discriminated [as real], statements are erroneously made, discriminations erroneously go on.'
(Lankavatara Sutra 3.65, tr D.T. Suzuki)

As for a modern take on the matter, here's what Yinshun wrote:

'All the Buddhist scriptures from India transmitted in each period, whether from Early Buddhism, Early and Late Mahayana Buddhism, or from Esoteric Mahayana Buddhism, declare themselves to be the most profound, complete and the ultimate teaching. For example, the Saddharma-puṇḍarīka Sūtra (Lotus Sūtra) proclaims itself to be the king of all sutras; likewise the Suvarṇa-prabhāsottama Sūtra (Golden Radiance Sūtra) makes the same claim. Some Esoteric Mahayana scriptures are titled the Great Tantra King, the Great Ritual King (translated in Chinese as the Great Doctrine King). Some scriptures use the metaphor of the five grades of cow milk products, lauding their doctrines with a comparison to the ghee being the best. The Mahā-parinirvāṇa Sūtra compares itself to the ghee, and in the Mahayana Doctrinal Objectives of Six Paramitas Sūtra, the Dhāraṇi Piṭaka is compared to the ghee. To sum up, the scriptures from each period proclaim themselves to be the most profound, the most perfect. But which of the scriptures is indeed the most profound? That depends on the differences in understanding of each believer.'
(Human-Centered Buddhism, p 13-14)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 12th, 2022 at 4:36 AM
Title: Re: How does general Mahayana see Vajrayana claims of being X?
Content:
Nalanda said:
I would like to hear the perception of general Mahayana (historically and in the precent) to Vajrayana's view of itself as X...

Astus wrote:
The idea of 'general Mahayana' is an abstract one, just as the idea of 'general Hinayana', or even 'general Vajrayana'. Dogen had this to say on the matter:

'Remember, among Buddhists we do not argue about superiority and inferiority of philosophies, or choose between shallowness and profundity in the Dharma; we need only know whether the practice is genuine or artificial. Some have entered into the stream of the Buddha’s truth at the invitation of grass, flowers, mountains, and rivers. Some have received and maintained the stamp of Buddha by grasping soil, stones, sand, and pebbles. Furthermore, the vast and great word is even more abundant than the myriad phenomena. And the turning of the great Dharma wheel is contained in every molecule. This being so, the words “Mind here and now is buddha” are only the moon in water, and the idea “Just to sit is to become buddha” is also a reflection in a mirror. We should not be caught by the skillfulness of the words.
...
Disciples of the Buddha should just learn the Buddha-Dharma. Furthermore, we should remember that from the beginning we have never lacked the supreme state of bodhi, and we will receive it and use it forever. At the same time, because we cannot perceive it directly, we are prone to beget random intellectual ideas, and because we chase after these as if they were real things, we vainly pass by the great state of truth. From these intellectual ideas emerge all sorts of flowers in space: we think about the twelvefold cycle and the twenty-five spheres of existence; and ideas of the three vehicles and the five vehicles or of having buddha[-nature] and not having buddha[-nature] are endless. We should not think that the learning of these intellectual ideas is the right path of Buddhist practice.'
(Bendowa, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 1, p 9-10)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: True Mind is No Mind
Content:
SilenceMonkey said:
How knowledgeable were the Chan patriarchs of Indian Buddhism?

Astus wrote:
If by Indian Buddhism you mean scriptures from India available in Chinese, then normally quite knowledgable.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Is there a 'true self'?
Content:
KeithA said:
even injecting the word "self" into the mix is a hindrance.

Astus wrote:
Agreed, it makes things unnecessarily confusing. From The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Zen Buddhism:

'According to the Buddhist understanding of Anatman, the true self can be understood as the ever-changing configuration of five elements, known as the five skandhas. Rather than possessing an eternal and unchanging soul, the individual is actually an on-going process of transformation.'
(p 7)

'The five skandhas are characterized by impermanence and suffering. Although there is no permanent self or soul that exists outside or beyond the ongoing physical and mental processes referred to as the five skandhas, human beings create the notion of such a self. The fundamental attachment to a false sense of self is the basic cause of suffering. The true self is nothing other than a convenient label for the process of changing configurations.'
(p 94)

Another problematic sounding one is self-nature (zixing/jisho 自性). From the Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism:

'A Chan soteriological term referring to a person’s Buddha-nature. It does not denote any self-existence or any changeless essence existent in and by itself. No such metaphysical meaning is involved in the original use of this term. A notable case of the traditional Chan usage of this term is in the Platform Sutra, where Buddha-nature is equivalent to self-nature (zixing) in the sense that Buddha-nature cannot be objectified and realized outside each person. Seeing or realizing the Buddha-nature is the existential transformation of the human mind and entire  personhood, being able to understand and appreciate what constitutes a person — elements of impermanence and non-abiding — and then accordingly. The realization of self-nature thus requires the accomplishment of action, the practical-behavioral carrying out of non-attachment, rather than identifying a metaphysical object or discovering subjectivity throught knowledge. The usage also indicates the Chan appropriation of positive or kataphatic language in its teachings without abandoning the use of negative or apophatic language: the Chan walk on two roads.'
(p 201)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 8:37 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Queequeg said:
The Lotus is an overview teaching, not minutiae.

Astus wrote:
That I can see. When it comes to the topics of upaya and ekayana the Lotus Sutra is a good source.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 7:00 PM
Title: Re: Is there a 'true self'?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Although there are teachings about 'true self' and other self-like expressions, if one knows that whatever quality or meaning one may come up for anything that can be called a self falls within the categories of the five aggregates that are impermanent and empty, then it can be understood in the right context.

'It’s the self that is connected with the universe. It’s “the four seasons come around” and “in spring, flowers. In summer, cuckoos. And in fall, maple leaves.” This self is not the I that is jealous of others’ happiness and glad at their sadness, thinking, “Thankfully that didn’t happen to me.” Rather, our true self rejoices over others’ happiness from the bottom of our hearts and truly shares their sorrows.'
(Kosho Uchiyama, in Homeless Kodo, ch 65)

'Our zazen practice is essentially a matter of awakening to the true Self. This true Self cannot be perceived. It is vast and without limit. To awaken to this true Self is also expressed as awakening to "No-Self,", or "No-Mind," or "Emptiness," or "to forget the ego-self."
All things, including people, are never fixed in the same condition from moment to moment. In the midst of this constant change, there is no central thing, nothing we can perceive as the ego-self. The teaching of Buddhism is the matter of awakening to the fact that originally there is no self. "No-Self" means to awaken to a self that is so vast and limitless that it cannot be seen. Something that can be seen has a limit - it is small.'
(Sekkei Harada, in The Essence of Zen, p 80)

'The essential teaching of Mahayana is, as the Heart Sutra says, “The five aggregates are empty.” This means that I and its objects are productions of the five aggregates: form (in our case, body), sensation, perception, formation, and consciousness (that is, the functions of our mind). Therefore I does not exist independently. Not only I but also objects (things) are empty, meaning without fixed identity.
Because of negative-sounding expressions such as emptiness, Buddhism is sometimes considered a pessimistic or nihilistic religion. But this is only a partial understanding. Emptiness, or the lack of fixed entities existing independently of others, means we’re connected with everything in the universe. This interconnectedness is called true self, so in fact no self and true self are the same.'
(Shohaku Okumura, in Homeless Kodo, ch 61)

'It’s a mistake for a common person to try to become a buddha. If an ordinary person tries to become a buddha by means of practice, trying to awaken to the true self, then a great mistake arises. What I want to say is that an ordinary person should truly be an ordinary person, completely giving up seeking mind and practice, and then just to be truly ordinary. That is enough. That is why we say, ‘Don’t be fooled by others.’ If you are too impressed and inspired by the great teachings of Buddha or in worshipping wonderful images of Buddha, you will lose your self. And that is no good. To be really ordinary is to be a buddha. That is ‘the awakened self’. This is the teaching of Zen.'
(Sekkei Harada, from https://buddhismnow.com/2013/05/21/the-awakened-self-harada-sekkei-roshi/ )


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 5:13 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Queequeg said:
Have you read the lotus? It's more or less the story explaining this.

Astus wrote:
I have, but I don't think I see your point here. How is it explaining it?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 5:09 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Minobu said:
When one chants Om Mani Padme Hum they are generating certain qualities.
Same with Buddha Manjushri mantra , or Vajrayogini mantra.
We chant the title of the Lotus sutra in much the same way. It's a Buddha.

Astus wrote:
Different buddhas highlight different qualities of buddhahood. What are the emphasised qualities of the Lotus Sutra?

Minobu said:
Historically what other Sutra is ever presented and practiced in The Way The Lotus Sutra has.

Astus wrote:
Do you mean the same way it is used by the followers of Nichiren? Probably none, as it is only Nichiren's tradition where the focus is on a single scripture that has survived until now.

Minobu said:
It enabled the common folk to meld with Buddha.  Fantastic !

Astus wrote:
I don't have exact numbers, but apparently the Pure Land teachings had and still have a much larger impact than Nichiren's teachings. But that doesn't mean it isn't fantastic.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 10th, 2022 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Books/papers on the spread of Vajrayana from India to Far East
Content:
Astus wrote:
Lehnert, Martin: Tantric Threads between India and China. In: Heirman, Ann; Bumbacher, Stephan Peter (eds.) : The Spread of Buddhism. Leiden: Brill. pp. 247-276


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 9th, 2022 at 8:12 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
illarraza said:
Examples are: Four Noble Truths and Twelve Linked Chain of Causation in Chapter 7, Parable of the Phantom City; non-substantiality or the Law of Emptiness found in the Specific Teachings, such as the Wisdom Sutras, is found in almost every chapter of the Lotus Sutra; likewise the Buddha's powers are illucidated in almost every chapter of the Lotus Sutra;

Astus wrote:
One common summary of the teachings is the 'thirty-seven helpful ways to attain the Dharma' (LS ch 27, BDK ed, p 307), but although it's mentioned once like that, its contents are not provided. There are also common Mahayana doctrines too, like the two truths, 10 bhumis, and alayavijnana that are not mentioned.

illarraza said:
by treasure houses and aspects, I assume you mean the Three Jewels which, of course, are also illucidated throughout the Lotus Sutra.

Astus wrote:
I was simply referring to the four things mentioned in ch 21 (BDK ed p 272): 'To sum up, in this sutra I have clearly revealed and taught all the teachings of the Tathāgata, all the transcendent powers of the Tathāgata, all the treasure houses of the hidden essence of the Tathāgata, and all the profound aspects of the Tathāgata.'


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 9th, 2022 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Minobu said:
So I believe if you view this Sutra which appeared in our history as being authentique and directly from the Buddha, then it is Buddha . Even though more than likely by proxy.

Astus wrote:
Almost all the sutras were taught by the Buddha, and for that all could be called a buddha, but only in the sense of representing his words. Otherwise, it'd be somewhat confusing to say that the Buddha taught the Buddha. And to return to the original question of how the Lotus Sutra contains all the teachings, if that's because it was taught by the Buddha, then all the others also contain all the teachings. But it still does not explain how would one video include many other videos simply because they were made by the same person.

Minobu said:
Hence a living Buddha , in the form of Sutra,emerged in this way . It's the nature of this Eternal Buddha.

Astus wrote:
That seems quite metaphorical.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 8th, 2022 at 4:50 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Minobu said:
Obviously because The Sutra IN and of Itself is Buddha .

Astus wrote:
In what sense? The sutra, like other sutras, was taught by Shakyamuni Buddha, and before him by other buddhas, so in a way it's a representation of buddhas. But how is it itself a buddha?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 7th, 2022 at 7:20 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
illarraza said:
My question is why would you find it necessary for "Zhiyi (to) explain in detail how the specific teachings, powers, treasure houses, and aspects can be found in the Lotus Sutra?" when the Lotus Sutra itself has already delineated that it has?

Astus wrote:
Because while there is a statement that it contains all the teachings, since the sutra does not literally contain them - otherwise instead of 7 volumes it should be many hundreds of volumes bigger - it should be explained how and in what way could it still encompass all the teachings.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 7th, 2022 at 4:48 PM
Title: Re: True Mind is No Mind
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Great collection of quotes, Astus - thanks - but I particularly liked the bit I have bolded, since it seems to make explicit a connection between Taoism and Chan/Zen which I have always felt must exist, but haven't seen in print anywhere.

Astus wrote:
The term used there is rudao 入道, literally 'enter the path', and usually it is an expression for becoming a monk, as a short version of chujia rudao 出家入道, i.e. 'to leave home and enter the path'. But in the next paragraph it is explained what was actually meant.

In The Gates of Chan: “Facing a wall”, means to connect with the Tao, it is only the starting point.
In 入禅之门: 那叫入道，仅仅是个起点而已。- It's called entering the path, it's just the beginning and nothing more.

In this context it should also be noted that the title of Bodhidharma's treatise contains the same term (rudao 入道) with the meaning of entering the path of Mahayana, and the text begins with (in Guo Gu's translation from The Essence of Chan) 'There are many ways to enter the Path. In summary, there are two'.

So, there's no reason to assume any connection here with Taoism.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 6th, 2022 at 6:16 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Queequeg said:
I am sure that at least some comments on this can be found in Miao-fa Wenju, Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra, his commentary on the text. I've never tried to read the Chinese, only bits and pieces that were translated into English; I think someone is working on a translation of this text, as well as a complete translation of the Xuan-i.

Astus wrote:
Thank you for the information. Maybe something will turn up eventually.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 6th, 2022 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Queequeg said:
He speaks of the benefits of all teachings and practices being included in the Lotus Sutra, and more specifically, in the title, which embodies the entire text.
...
The four "transcendent" powers of the tathagata in this passage is considered by Zhiyi to be the most important in the whole text. Nichiren bases his teachings on the benefits of the Daimoku on this passage.

Astus wrote:
By the four powers are you referring to this sentence?

'To sum up, in this sutra I have clearly revealed and taught all the teachings of the Tathāgata, all the transcendent powers of the Tathāgata, all the treasure houses of the hidden essence of the Tathāgata, and all the profound aspects of the Tathāgata.'

Does perhaps Zhiyi explain in detail how the specific teachings, powers, treasure houses, and aspects can be found in the Lotus Sutra?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 6th, 2022 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: True Mind is No Mind
Content:
LastLegend said:
You meant to use Nagarjuna to end grasping, why leaves one statement to grasp to? Lankavatara Sutra (affiliated with Bodhidharma too) says everything lacks self-existence is non-arising? So how do you understand that?

Astus wrote:
Your quote from the Lankavatara Sutra (2.27) answered the question: 'What lacks self-existence is momentary and in continuous flux and manifests different states of existence but without possessing any existence of its own.' Or in Suzuki's translation: 'That all things are devoid of self-nature means that there is a constant and uninterrupted becoming, a momentary change from one state of existence to another; seeing this, Mahamati, all things are destitute of self-nature.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 5th, 2022 at 11:48 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
illarraza said:
Singlemindedness, awareness of the breath, calmness and tranquility, insight, and danaparamita are incorporated into the Gohonzon because Gohonzon is the Eternal Buddha at the Ceremony in the Air. The Lotus Sutra Chapter 17, Distinction of Benefits, teaches that one moment of joyful faith signifies having performed all the meditations and other paramitas (save for the paramita of wisdom) for quintillians of lifetimes or one would be unable to encounter the Gohonzon and Namu Myoho renge kyo.

Astus wrote:
That section (BDK ed, p 237) talks of the mundane merit collected by various methods does not equal accepting the great length of the Buddha's lifespan, which seems logical to me, since without prajnaparamita all meritorious actions are worldly and limited. Later (p 241) the same chapter says that preserving the sutra and practising all six paramitas is the highest form of merit. I wonder if the presence/fulfilment of all six paramitas in the Odaimoku is addressed by Nichiren or later teachers?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 5th, 2022 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren Shonin's teachings
Content:
Minobu said:
If one understand the Gohonzon one sees that every aspect of Buddhism is right there , in front of you and inside you. It's the make up of the Buddhist world in Samsara. Total and complete.

Astus wrote:
Are there some treatises explaining how specific practices (śamatha-vipaśyanā, ānāpānasmṛti, smṛtyupasthāna, dānapāramitā etc.) are incorporated in the Gohonzon and/or the Odaimoku?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 4th, 2022 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Lidai fabao ji by Wuzhu
Content:
fckw said:
How does he mean "no-thought" in this context? I guess not simply absence of thoughts, right?

Astus wrote:
That might be up for debate. Zongmi criticised Wuzhu for teaching pure extinguishing of thought, but his opinion could have been a misrepresentation. Although no-thought was the central teaching of Wuzhu, it's other things (i.e. disregard of many common Buddhist customs) the Baotang school was viewed as controversial. Wuzhu might have also just meant no-thought in the same sense as Shenhui and thus no different from Zongmi. The below passages suggest to me that it's the latter case.

The Venerable replied, “This seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing  [that you are getting at] is worldly seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing.  The Vimalakīrti-sūtra says, ‘If you go about seeing, hearing, perceiving,  and knowing, then this is seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing. The  Dharma transcends seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing.’ No-thought is thus no-seeing, no-thought is thus no-knowing. It is because  beings have thought that one provisionally teaches no-thought, but at the  time of true no-thought, no-thought itself is not.” He went on to quote  the Vajrasamādhi-sūtra, “ ‘The Most Honored Greatly Enlightened One  expounded the Dharma of producing no-thought. [Regarding] the mind  of no-thought and non-production, the mind is constantly producing and  never extinguished.’ Further, the Vimalakīrti-sūtra says, ‘Not-practicing  is bodhi, because it is without recollection.’ ‘Always seek no-thought,  the wisdom characterized by actuality.’ The Lankā-sūtra says, ‘The Holy  One’s inner reference point is to constantly abide in no-thought.’ The  Śūraṃgama-sūtra says, ‘Ānanda, if you initiate the mind [even] for a short  time, the suffering due to defilements will have [already] arisen first.’ Further, it says, ‘So long as sight is separate from seeing, then seeing cannot be 
attained.’ The Viśeṣacinta-sūtra says, ‘How is it that all dharmas are true,  and how is it that all dharmas are wrong? If one makes distinctions with the  mind, then all dharmas are wrong. If one does not make distinctions with  the mind, all dharmas are true. In the midst of no-mind dharmas, once  one gives rise to distinctions of mind everything is wrong.’ The Lankā-sūtra says, ‘Seeing the Buddha and hearing the Dharma is your own mind 
 making distinctions. One for whom ‘seeing’ does not arise—this is called  seeing the Buddha.’ ”
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 20, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 361-362)

The Venerable said, “Tell me about your own stage of practice.” Master Zhiyi revealed the teachings of his original master and 
said, “Viewing purity.”
The Venerable then expounded the Dharma for him: “The Dharma has  neither stain nor purity, how does one ‘view purity’? Right here purity  was never established, why would there be stains? Viewing purity is in  fact stains, viewing stains is in fact purity. Delusive thinking is stains, no-delusive thinking is purity. Grasping ‘I’ is stain, not grasping ‘I’ is purity.  No-thought is thus no-stain, no-thought is thus no-purity. [No-thought  is thus no-true,] no-thought is thus no-false. No-thought is thus no-self, no-thought is thus no-other. If you transcend both self and other you achieve Buddha-awakening. At the time of true self, self itself is not.”
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 26, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 374-375)

The Venerable said, “ ‘The existence of dharmas is conventional truth,  and no-nature is the cardinal meaning.’ Verbal explication is thus attachment, and mental brilliance is a demonic device. No-thought is thus  no-attachment, no-thought is thus no-bondage. No-thought is nirvāṇa, thinking is birth and death; no-thought is mental brilliance, thinking is  dullness. No-thought is thus no ‘that,’ no-thought is thus no ‘this.’ No-thought is thus no Buddha, no-thought is no beings. In the great compassionate wisdom of prajñā, there are no Buddhas and no beings. ‘There is  neither nirvāṇa-Buddha nor Buddha-nirvāṇa.’ Those who understand  this explication are the true explicators. If you do not explicate like this,  then you are just a common fellow attached to characteristics.”
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 28, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 377)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 3rd, 2022 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: Lidai fabao ji by Wuzhu
Content:
fckw said:
Does anyone know the text "Lidai Fabao Ji" and can provide a summary of its philosophical view?

Astus wrote:
"All beings are fundamentally pure and fundamentally complete. From the Buddhas at the upper end down to sentient beings, all are of the same pure nature. However, with a single thought  [produced by] the deluded mind of beings, the Three Worlds are dyed. It  is because beings have thought that one provisionally teaches no-thought,  but if there is no presence of thought, then no-thought itself is not. No-thought is thus no-birth, no-thought is thus no-extinction. No-thought is  thus no-love, no-thought is thus no-hate. No-thought is thus no-grasping,  no-thought is thus no-abandoning. No-thought is thus no-high, no-thought is thus no-low. No-thought is thus no-male, no-thought is thus  no-female. No-thought is thus no-true, no-thought is thus no-false. At  the time of true no-thought, no-thought itself is not. ‘When the mind is  produced then the various dharmas are produced, when the mind is extinguished then the various dharmas are extinguished.’ ‘As one’s mind  is, so also are the stains of wrongdoing, so also are all dharmas.’ At the  time of true no-thought, ‘all dharmas are the Buddha-Dharma,’ there is not a single dharma separate from bodhi."
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 21, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 364-365)

"If there is but one thing in your mind, you will not depart from the Three Worlds.  ‘The existence of dharmas is conventional truth, and no-nature is the  cardinal meaning.’ ‘Transcending all characteristics is called the Buddhas.’ No-thought is thus no-characteristics, presence of thought is thus 
 empty delusion. No-thought departs the Three Worlds, thought remains  in the Three Worlds. No-thought is thus no-true, no-thought is thus no-false. No-thought is thus no-self, no-thought is thus no-other. If you transcend both self and other you achieve Buddha-awakening.⁵⁴² At the time  of true no-thought, no-thought itself is not."
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 25, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 374)

"‘The Most Honored Greatly Enlightened One expounded the Dharma of producing  no-thought. [Regarding] the mind of no-thought and non-production, the mind is constantly producing and never extinguished.’ At all times self-present, do not retreat and do not turn. Not sinking and not floating, not flowing and not fixed, not moving and not shaking, not coming and  not going, lively like a fish jumping! ‘Walking and sitting, everything is  meditation.’"
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 27, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 376)

"The [Vajracchedikā] sūtra says, ‘Transcendence  of all characteristics is precisely called the Buddha.’ ‘Someone who sees  ‘I’ through form and seeks ‘I’ through sounds is taking a false path, and  is unable to see the Tathāgata.’ The words of this scripture are none other than this mind. Seeing the nature is the Way of becoming a Buddha.  No-thought is thus seeing the nature, no-thought is no-defilements. Nothought is thus no-self, no-thought is thus no-other. No-thought is thus  no-Buddha, no-thought is no-beings. At the time of true no-thought, no-thought itself is not."
(Lidai Fabao Ji, section 41, in The Mystique of Transmission, p 400)

fckw said:
Did Wuzhu's thoughts and views ever have show any substantial influence over other forms of Chan and Buddhist practice?

Astus wrote:
'The Lidai fabao ji modified received genres or introduced new stylistic features in ways that would shape the standard genres of Song Chan literature—chuandeng lu, yulu, and zhenzan. Furthermore, the Lidai fabao ji version of the Indian line of patriarchs was  the source for the version that became official. Many anecdotes that have  their origins in the Lidai fabao ji found their way into the official annals  of Chan, yet the Lidai fabao ji itself was repudiated and all but forgotten.'
(The Mytique of Transmission, p 293)

'Bao Tang antinomianism was lost in the mainstream of Chan. Repudiated,  it nevertheless imparted a subtle pervasive flavor, and perhaps a warning  about the necessary limits of the ultimate teaching. Wuzhu and his robe  would seem to be not-recollected, only to reappear in surprising guises.'
(The Mytique of Transmission, p 296)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 31st, 2021 at 4:35 AM
Title: Re: Where did the Buddha go after death? Where is the Buddha now? Where do Buddhas go after death?
Content:
Nalanda said:
How is it explained in our tradition?

Astus wrote:
'How can “It is eternal,” “It is noneternal,” and the rest of this tetralemma apply [to the Tathāgata], who is free of intrinsic nature?
And how can “It has an end,” “It does not have an end,” and the rest of this tetralemma apply [to the Tathāgata], who is free of intrinsic nature?
But one who has taken up a mass of beliefs, such as that the Tathāgata exists,
so conceptualizing, that person will also imagine that [the Tathāgata] does not exist when extinguished.
And the thought does not hold, with reference to this (Tathāgata) who is intrinsically empty,
that the Buddha either exists or does not exist after cessation.
Those who hypostatize the Buddha, who is beyond hypostatization and unwavering,
they all, deceived by hypostatization, fail to see the Tathāgata.'
(MMK 22.12-15, tr Siderits; cf. https://suttacentral.net/sn22.85/en/sujato & https://suttacentral.net/sn22.86/en/sujato; https://suttacentral.net/mn72/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 30th, 2021 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Posture
Content:
yinyangkoi said:
How important is posture?

Astus wrote:
It is important to the extent it allows you the desired state of mind.

yinyangkoi said:
However I read that for dogen zazen was all about assuming the correct posture and keeping it.

Astus wrote:
Have you read it about Dogen or from Dogen? Quite a difference.

yinyangkoi said:
So should I focus more on posture?

Astus wrote:
Since you are already in a sangha, why not seek advice from more experienced members and/or the teacher? Anyhow, if you keep to your meditation and you pay attention to your body, your mind, and how they interact, you should eventually feel how to do it.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 20th, 2021 at 3:29 PM
Title: Re: Are there English translations of extant Sarvastivadin and Dharmaguptaka texts?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There are some translated abhidharma texts: Abhidharmakosa by Vasubandhu, Abhidharmavatara (Entrance Into the Supreme Doctrine) by Skandhila, Abhidharmahrdaya (The Essence of Scholasticism) by Dharmasri, Amrtarasa (La saveur de l'immortel / The Taste of the Deathless) by Ghosaka. Also the book Sarvastivada Abhidharma by K.L. Dhammajoti is highly recommended.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 12th, 2021 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Often in Vasubandhu and earlier Abhudharma texts references are made to doctrines belonging to sutras not found one or another canons, like the bardo, for example, or in sutras that did not survive at all. The best you can say is that YOU personally don’t see such evidence; others, such as myself, disagree. The difference, I suspect, is how much credibility one wants to lend buddhologusts as being the final arbiters of Buddhism.

Astus wrote:
I see it more like a matter of either being able to provide a clear source or not, like with quotes around the internet attributed to the Buddha.

'Pārśva, one of the authors of the Sarvāstivāda School’s Mahāvibhāṣā, replied to a criticism made by the Sautrāntikas (whose name means “those who rely on sūtra as final”). They said that certain abhidharma doctrines had no justification in the sūtras. To meet this criticism, Pārśva made the extraordinary claim that the reason these matters could not be found in the sūtras must be because they had been in sūtras that the Buddha had preached, but that had been subsequently lost.'
(Echoes from an Empty Sky, p 28)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 12th, 2021 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Any good Zen Mindfulness in everyday situations when you are not sitting meditating?
Content:
2ndchance said:
Any good Zen Mindfulness in everyday situations when you are not sitting meditating?

Astus wrote:
Zen mindfulness is principally no mindfulness (wunian 無念). If that is still too obscure then one can always watch a phrase (kanhua 看話), i.e. a word head (huatou 話頭). In case that proves to be difficult for the moment, it is best to be mindful of the Buddha (nianfo 念佛) as much as possible. That can lead to asking 'Who is mindful of the Buddha?' (nianfo shi shei 念佛是誰), and with that may come the realisation of no mind (wuxin 無心).


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 11th, 2021 at 4:08 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Again, uncertain. Face it Astus, you just don’t have very strong evidence to be making the confident statements you’ve been making on this subject.

Astus wrote:
Let's put it this way then: there is no evidence so far of the existence of the two truths doctrine in the sutras or the main 7 abhidharma texts, only in somewhat later works like the Mahavibhasa. To maintain that nevertheless there is would need finding such references.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 11th, 2021 at 6:27 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Astus wrote:
On the issue of two truths and Nagarjuna: https://fh.pku.edu.cn/docs/2018-11/20181119234424438102.pdf


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, December 11th, 2021 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
You are certain of this?

Astus wrote:
'There can be no doubt that the theory of momentariness cannot be traced back to the beginnings of Buddhism or even the Buddha himself. It does not fit the practically orientated teachings of early Buddhism and clearly bears the mark of later doctrinal elaboration. Thus in the Nikayas/Agamas there are many passages which attribute duration to material and even mental entities, whereas there is, at least to my knowledge, no passage which testifies to the stance that all conditioned entities are momentary.'
(The Buddhist Doctrine of Momentariness, p 15)

Malcolm said:
Again, this is uncertain. Walser claims that Ratnavali was written between 175-225. But it could easily have been written 50 years earlier. The Mahāvibhasa was supposedly compiled during the Reign of Kanishka (127-151 CE) in Bactria. This is 24 year period is a pretty narrow window to compose such a monumental text and then distribute it across India to Andhra Pradesh, to be received and studied by Nāgārjuna.

Astus wrote:
Can be uncertain, sure. However, the Mahavibhasa is a compendium, and the information contained therein most likely predates it, so it still allows Sarvastivadin ideas of the two truths to be general knowledge in Nagarjuna's time. Also, it looks like when it comes to tracing the origins of the two truths so far, it's been the same Mahavibhasa section brought up by Yinshun (An Investigation into Emptiness) and Buescher (Echoes from an Empty Sky).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
It must be accepted because of what's in the sūtras, hence the notion of "Sautrantikas," and so on. If the two truths had no basis in the agamic sūtras, for what reason then did the Sautrantikas accept it without question?

Astus wrote:
Sautrantikas accepted momentariness and had their karmic seed theory, but neither of them are found in the sutras.

Malcolm said:
If as you imply, Nāgārjuna was a species of Sautrantika, why would he accept and promote the two truths? After all, the term "two truths" does not occur in the PP in 8000 lines either, assuming this is one of the earliest and it was before Nāgārjuna. But it discusses dharmas as being mere conventions and names. It also mentioned pāramārtha five times only.

Astus wrote:
Nagarjuna lived after the creation of the Mahavibhasa, so the two truths doctrine was already an established one among the Sarvastivadins. As for his sources for the two truths teaching, he does not actually specify, does he?

Malcolm said:
Are you suggesting that the idea of two truths in Mahāyāna also comes from Abhidharma commentaries, which we have no evidence of?

Astus wrote:
The svabhava of dharmas is an Abhidharma theory of the Sarvastivadins, not a sutra teaching. What's the problem with saying what's written, that is, that the two truths doctrine is found only in treatises like the Mahavibhasa?

Malcolm said:
Its unclear which sūtras Nāgārjuna has before him, other than a PP sūtra and probably the Kāsyapaparivarta, but given that he and Lokaṣema were contemporaries, it is reasonable to assume at least he had these sūtras in front him.

Astus wrote:
Nagarjuna was familiar with various abhidharma works, as discussed in chapter 7 of Nagarjuna in Context.

Malcolm said:
Now if your position is that the two truths are not found in either seven-text Abdhidharma collections, and only appears in commentaries substantially dated after Nāgārjuna, then you have to accept, by your own reasoning, that the "two truths" as a term occurs only in Mahāyāna, and that its presence in śrāvaka sources after Nāgārjuna are polemical response against emptiness as ultimate truth.

Astus wrote:
The Mahavibhasa precedes Nagarjuna. Beyond that, it would take some further research to identify early occurrences of the two truths doctrine.

Malcolm said:
If on the other hand one accepts that the notion of two truths is discernible in agamic sūtras, no such admission is required, and the two truths doctrine can be seen to develop along different lines in Abhidharma and Mahāyāna, since it is certainly the case that Nāgārjuna cites it as a basic fact which no one would question at all. And there is the possibility, quite distinct and equally remote, that a text like the Pitāputrasamāgamana was "converted" into a Mahāyāna text.

Astus wrote:
The idea that there are just two truths is not that fixed, as the Pudgalavadins had a threefold division (Pudgalavada Buddhism, p 105), Yogacara also has a threefold version, and the Mahavibhasa notes the existence of twofold, threefold, and fivefold divisions according to different interpreters (Sarvastivada Abhidharma, p 77-78). So, if the two truths doctrine were such a clear case in the sutras, there would be no reason for differences.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 6:26 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
So do you not think it reasonable that Māra, when he suggested that "There is a being" or "There are beings" (有衆生), that he was taking the sattva as the ātma? Ven Vajrā responds to this by deconstructing the being into the five aggregates, where there is no being.

Astus wrote:
Mara asked about the origin and end of her, to that was the answer that there is nobody actually coming and going in line with e.g. SN 12.20 (SA 296). But at the same time the term 'being' is not useless or false, but rather it refers not to a constant entity.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
Is Māra just using a worldly convention, or is his usage of "sentient being" different from the Buddha's usage of "sentient being?" That was what I was getting at.

Astus wrote:
It's usage according to convention. As for the Buddha's usage, that's not necessarily a fixed thing, although it can very much mean a 'fixed thing'. See SN 35.65-66 where Mara and a being are defined the same way, and compare SN 23.2 and SN 22.63 for another connection between Mara and a being.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
What Astus is looking for is the term "satyavidhaṃdvaya" in a sūtra in the same way we find "catursatya" in order to confirm the Buddha taught two truths. What I am pointing out is that term needn't be there for the intention to be there. And the intention is clearly there.

Astus wrote:
If taken very liberally it's possible to come to find some basis for the eventual development of the two truths, just as there is basis for the development for the Abhidharma, and practically the whole of Buddhism. But that's not the same as saying that the Buddha of the Agamas/Nikayas can be shown to have two distinct levels of truths in mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
As something to NOT follow.

Astus wrote:
Not follow?

'Of that which the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists.' (SN 22.94, tr Bodhi)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 4:54 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
You are speculating. It’s very clear the two truths are the Buddha’s teaching, as Nagarjuna proclaims. If there was any disagreement at all, it would be evident in polemics against his assertion, but none can be found anywhere. All there there is pushback against his, and one presumes, his teachers formulation of ultimate truth, and none against his formulation of mundane convention, which also is found  in sutra.

Astus wrote:
Why would anyone disagree when the doctrine of two truths is accepted by practically everyone? But it doesn't mean it's accepted because of what's in the sutras. Nagarjuna argues against ideas that are rather Abhidharma based, like the whole dharma-theory.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 4:49 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
In the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, that all empty compounded phenomena are known by designatory labels is identified with "the middle way," not with "the conventional." Arguably, as when Bhikṣuṇī Vajrā scolds Māra, "a sentient being" is not a merely designatory label in the way that he uses it. It's not necessarily a convention that designatory labels are used. Sometimes it's a misapprehension that designatory labels are used, like when the rūpa of a rope is mistaken for the rūpa of a snake. Māra is using the convention of "a being" as more than a designatory label. Do you agree?

Astus wrote:
Not sure what to agree with there. The Agama/Nikaya sutras talk of worldly conventions (and there aren't that many sutras like that anyway) as normal manner of speaking, not as some special truth to be analysed or considered. Beyond that, conventional truth is merely conceptual (prajnapti).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
I understand that it might be Karunadasa's view, but can you cite anywhere that he demonstrates this instead of just asserting it?

Astus wrote:
From the chapter on two truths:

'As F. Edgerton observes, in Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit literature, “a nītārtha text … is recommended as a guide in preference to one that is neyārtha.” As he further observes, “In Pāli neither is ipso facto preferred to the other; one errs only in interpreting one as if it were the other.”'
source: Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, see nītārtha.

'Statements referring to convention-based things (saṅketa) are valid because they are based on common agreement; statements referring to ultimate categories (paramattha) are valid because they are based on the true nature of the real existents.'
source: AA. I, 54; KvuA. 34; DA. 251; SA. II, 77; SS. v. 3.

'As pointed out by K. N. Jayatilleke in his Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, one misconception about the Theravāda version of double truth is that paramattha-sacca is superior to sammuti-sacca and that “what is true in the one sense, is false in the other.” This observation that the distinction in question is not based on a theory of degrees of truth will become clear from the following free translation of the relevant passages contained in three Pāli commentaries:
Herein references to living beings, gods, Brahma, and so on, are sammuti-kathā, whereas references to impermanence, suffering, egolessness, the aggregates of the empiric individuality, the bases and elements of sense perception and mind cognition, bases of mindfulness, right effort, and so on, are paramattha-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of generally accepted conventions, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on sammuti-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of ultimate categories, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on paramattha-kathā. To one who is capable of awakening to the truth through sammuti-kathā, the teaching is not presented on the basis of paramattha-kathā, and, conversely, to one who is capable of awakening to the truth through paramattha-kathā, the teaching is not presented on the basis of sammuti-kathā.
There is this simile: Just as a teacher of the three Vedas who is capable of explaining their meaning in different dialects might teach his pupils by adopting the particular dialect which each pupil understands, even so the Buddha preaches the doctrine adopting, according to the suitability of the occasion, either the sammuti- or the paramattha-kathā. It is by taking into consideration the ability of each individual to understand the four noble truths that the Buddha presents his teaching either by way of sammuti or by way of paramattha or by way of both (vomissakavasena). Whatever the method adopted, the purpose is the same: to show the way to immortality through the analysis of mental and physical phenomena.'
source1: Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, 364.
source2: AA. I, 54–55; DA. I, 251–52; SA. II, 77.

'What is more, as the commentary to the Aṅguttaranikāya states specifically, whether the Buddhas preach the doctrine according to sammuti or paramattha, they teach only what is true, only what accords with actuality, without involving themselves in what is not true (amusā’va).'
source: DA. I, 251; see also SA. II, 72.

'Convention requires the use of such terms, but as long as one does not imagine substantial entities corresponding to them, such statements are valid. On the other hand, as the commentators observe, if for the sake of conforming to the ultimate truth one would say, “The five aggregates eat” (khandhā bhuñjanti), “The five aggregates walk” (khandhā gacchanti), instead of saying, “A person eats,” “A person walks,” such a situation would result in what is called vohārabheda — that is, a breach of convention resulting in a breakdown in meaningful communication.'
source: SA. I, 51.

'Hence in presenting the teaching, the Buddha does not exceed linguistic conventions (na hi Bhagavā samaññam atidhāvati) 287 but uses such terms as “person” without being led astray by their superficial implications (aparāmasaṃ voharati).288 Because the Buddha is able to employ such linguistic designations as “person” and “individual” without assuming corresponding substantial entities, he is called “skilled in expression” (vohāra-kusala).289 The use of such terms does not in any way involve falsehood (musāvādo na jāyati).290 As one commentary says: “Whether the buddhas speak according to conventional truth or whether the buddhas speak according to absolute truth, they speak only what is true and only what is actual.”291 Skillfulness in the use of words is the ability to conform to conventions (sammuti), usages (vohāra), designations (paññatti), and turns of speech (nirutti) in common use in the world without being led astray by them.292 Hence in understanding the teaching of the Buddha, one is advised not to adhere dogmatically to the mere superficial meanings of words (na vacanabhedamattam ālambitabbaṃ).293'
287 KvuA. 103.
288 VsmṬ. 346; KvuA. 103: Atthi puggalo ti vacana-mattato abhiniveso na kātabbo. Cf. AA. I, 54–55: Lokasammutiñ ca
Buddhā Bhagavanto nappajahanti, lokasamaññāya lokaniruttiyā lokābhilāpe ṭhitā yeva dhammaṃ desenti.
289 SA. I, 51.
290 Cf. MA. I, 125: Tasmā vohāra-kusalassa lokanāthassa satthuno, / sammutiṃ voharantassa musāvādo na jāyati.
291 DA. I, 251–52.
292 DA. I, 351.
293 Abhvt. 88: Na ca daḷhaṃ mūlhagāhinā bhavitabbaṃ.

In summary for the above references:

'The foregoing observations should show that according to the Theravāda version of double truth, one kind of truth is not held to be superior or inferior to the other. In this connection, one important question arises. If no preferential evaluation is made in respect to the two truths, what is the justification for calling one the absolute or ultimate truth and the other the conventional truth? Here what should not be overlooked is that if one truth is called absolute or ultimate it is because this particular kind of truth has for its vocabulary the technical terms used to express what is ultimate — that is, the dhammas into which the world of experience is ultimately resolved. Strictly speaking, the expression paramattha (absolute/ultimate) does not refer to the truth as such, but to the technical terms through which it is expressed. Thus paramattha-sacca really means the truth expressed by using the technical terms expressive of the ultimate factors of existence. In like manner, sammuti-sacca or conventional truth means the truth expressed by using conventional or transactional terms in common parlance.'


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Who cares what what Theravada thinks? Their tradition has no observable influence on this topic.

Astus wrote:
Assuming that Sarvastivadins worked from generally the same sutras, since their version of the two truths is somewhat different, if the origin of the two truths doctrine is the sutras, there should be some sutras not found in the Theravada canon to explain the discrepancy.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 10th, 2021 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
It must be, otherwise you'd have absurd consequences, such as the Buddha teaching a self because he uses the word "atta."

Astus wrote:
If the mere fact of being a worldly expression rendered something false, then there could be no correct speech in the world and the Buddha would have been lying. But the Buddha did teach correct speech and also taught noble expressions (AN 8.68). Saying that the usage of personal pronouns is the way a sentence is normally formed is not saying it's false but rather not misapprehending, not grasping at it as if it signified something more than it does. How noble expressions are not misapprehended/grasped (aparāmasana/anupādā) is clarified in MN 74 and MN 112.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Define canon, and for whom it was canonical.

Astus wrote:
As they're Theravadin commentaries, it's their canon, in particular a set of discourses they took as buddhavacana.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 8:19 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Two truths are specified, seeing correctly and seeing falsely. That’s enough.

Astus wrote:
However, that's not how the two truths are understood in Theravada. At least we'd need some identifiable agamas to say that conventional language is false.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 8:15 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
The word "Abhidharma" means 'highest dharma'. Therefore the idea of a higher dharma, that is above the dharma of ordinary language, is present in the very conception of  Abhidharma.

Astus wrote:
'we need to understand the significance of the commentarial statement that the Buddha sometimes teaches the Dhamma according to conventional truth, sometimes according to ultimate truth, and sometimes through a combination of both. As one Pāli commentary says, it is like a teacher choosing different dialects to teach his pupils who speak different dialects. There is absolutely no implication here that one dialect is either higher or lower than another.'
(Theravada Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa, introduction)

'This does not mean, as some are inclined to think, that the teachings in the Abhidhamma Piṭaka represent a higher set of doctrines. The distinction drawn should be understood in the same way as that between the two kinds of truth. Understood in that way, it does not in any way refer to two kinds of doctrines of which one kind is higher than the other. All that it does is to bring into focus two different ways of presenting the same set of doctrines. In the Sutta Piṭaka more use is made of conventional and transactional terms in ordinary parlance, whereas in the Abhidhamma Piṭaka more use is made of specific, technical terms that directly refer to the ultimate categories of empirical existence. It is a question pertaining to methodology and not a question pertaining to content.'
(Theravada Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa, ch 3)

Aemilius said:
There certainly were commentaries before Buddhaghosha, he didn't invent the genre.

Astus wrote:
It still leaves them to be post-canonical.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 8:00 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
The Buddha is very clear in a passage that appears in Śamathadeva's commentary [mngon, ju 47a (Toh. 4094)] that one is not to have attachment to the etymologies (nirukti) of the people (jānapada), one is not to hasten to mundane names. It is because they are false.
Prior to this, [mngon, ju 40b (Toh. 4094)], the Buddha is quoted as "Bhikṣus, the supreme (mchog) falsity is the phenomena that are false and deceptive. Bhikṣus, the supreme truths are like this, this is how they are. Therefore, the bhikṣus who posses that possess, the supreme blessings of truth." Moreover, there is a whole section later, where he discusses that which is empty as being false, deceptive, etc.

Astus wrote:
Are there any specific sutras named/known as the sources for those quotes?

Malcolm said:
So you really just have not looked well enough, because of a literal mindedness you have been infected with through reading too much text critical literature. To insist that the two truths are not in the agamas because the term "satyadvaya" does not explicitly occur is very myopic. But the two truths are there, you just have to know to see them. Maybe you should get your eyes checked again.

Astus wrote:
To identify two truths there have to be two ways of perception and expression specified, for instance to say that 'self' is conventional (as in the Vajirāsutta) but then also to say that expressions like aggregates and no-self are ultimately real. The second part is absent from the sutras. Compare that to the pairing of conditioned-unconditioned, that's fairly straightforward.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Arguing that the Sarvastivadins did not have a concept of two truths derived from sūtras, is, frankly just dumb.

Astus wrote:
The reason it practically cannot be derived from the sutras is that the definition of the two truths requires the ideas that come from the Abhidharma, that is, the distinction between truly existing dharmas and nominally existing worldly conventions. Such linguistic separation is not found in the sutras, rather speech is measured by veracity (difference between noble (ariyavohāra) and ignoble expressions (anariyavohāra): DN 33, AN 4.250-253, AN 8.67-68), and a liberated one would not misapprehend it by clinging (MN 74, MN 112, SN 1.25, SN 5.10).

Malcolm said:
the fact is that it is discussed by Vasubandhu, and earlier, etc.

Astus wrote:
It is discussed in fascicle 77 of the Mahavibhasa (T27n1545, p399b-400b; see its summary in Sarvastivada Abhidharma, p 65-67), and that might be the earliest example.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
The two truths in Abhidharma is there, but different, and necessarily a Śrāvaka presentation of them.

Astus wrote:
If by Abhidharma you mean the various treatises like the Sangaha and the Kosa, then yes. If you mean the basic canonical works like the Vibhanga and the Jnanaprasthana, then no.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
They most certainly did derive or have their idea of the two truths from their sūtras. Those passages prove it.

Astus wrote:
How so? Neither the idea of there being two truths, nor the definition of those truths are found there.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 1:35 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
Do you mean to say that things appear consistent with the way things are in the Suttas, and/or that language is non-deceiving?

Astus wrote:
No, simply that the doctrine of the two truths is not found in the agamas/nikayas but in post-canonical works.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 8th, 2021 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
This is not true. For example. Śamathadeva's commentary on the Kośa preserves in its entirety an agamic text called the don dam stong pa nyid kyi mdo. There is another text which provides a canonical source for the term kun rdzob.

Astus wrote:
That sutra was mentioned by Aemilius, and so I linked its English translation. See https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=610404#p610404. On terminology https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=610610#p610610.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 8th, 2021 at 8:16 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
The principle of two truths is present in the early sutras

Astus wrote:
Where? There's only one short sutta talking of neyyattha and nitattha, and the way they're interpreted by later authors is a retrospective projection of the two truths idea found nowhere in the suttas themselves. The mere presence of reference to conventional ways of talking is not equivalent of talking of two truths, nor is it called conventional truth.

'Considering what we have said so far regarding language  and truth in early Buddhism, it would be possible to give a  totally different explanation of the two terms nitattha and  neyyattha without introducing two levels of truth. The past  participle nita (from the toot ni, nayati, 'to lead') means that to  which one "has been led" and the term neyya (a potential  participial form of the same verb) implies that to which one  "ought to lead." When these two terms are prefixed to the term attha or meaning, we have a meaning that has been led to, that  is, a meaning (temporarily) completed, and a meaning that  ought to lead, that is, a meaning stretched into the future. This  is not the least different from the distinction that we have  noticed so far between 'the dependently arisen' and 'dependent  arising' or 'the become' and 'becoming.' One is a conception  of truth formulated on the basis of information available so far  and the other is a conception of truth grounded on the  information available and extended into the unknown future.  As such, these two types of discourses have nothing to do with conventional and ultimate truths.'
(The Buddha's Philosophy of Language by David J. Kalupahana, p 82-83)

Aemilius said:
it acts as a basis for the development and arising  of  the Abhidharma

Astus wrote:
Not even the seven Abhidhamma texts talk of two truths. They also contain nothing on neyyattha and nitattha.

Aemilius said:
Abbhidharma is regarded a higher Dharma or highest Dharma,  because it is higher than the Dharma that uses  only conventional expressions and conventional language.

Astus wrote:
Not in Theravada where the two truths are not seen as higher and lower, unlike in Sarvastivada.

Aemilius said:
Two truths appear in the sutta commentaries according to K. N. Jayatilleke, which makes it a lot earlier than the time of Buddhaghosha.

Astus wrote:
The basic commentary (atthakatha) to the Anguttara Nikaya is attributed to Buddhaghosa.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 8th, 2021 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
No, it is found in Mahāyāna Sūtras. After all, the thread is called "The Two Truths in Mahāyāna Buddhism."

Astus wrote:
It is found in Mahayana Sutras ( https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=610404#p610404 ), and the statement regarding its presence in the commentaries was about what https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=610356#p610356 as a development from the Buddha's teachings in the four schools. In other words, the Sarvastivadins and the Sautrantikas (and Theravada) did not have the idea of two truths from their sutras, nor from their (7 canonised) abhidharma texts, but it is found in commentaries and later treatises.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 8th, 2021 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
In this way the idea of a conventional language/expression/truth is quite clearly expressed and implied by the Buddha himself.

Astus wrote:
The terms sammuti, vohāra, paramattha, and sacca do appear in the suttas, but not in the combination to state a doctrine of two truths, nor one half of the two.

'Applied to the theme of vohāra, the early Buddhist attitude towards language need not be interpreted in the light of the theory of two truths. That is, truth would not depend on the type of language used to express it.'
( https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/encyclopedia-entries/vohara.pdf )

'The conception of two truths, the  conventional and the ultimate were appearing on the scene  during the period represented by the Middle and Late Upaniṣads as well as in Jainism and Ājīvika doctrines some of  which were contemporary with the Buddha. In spite of the total absence of such a dichotomy in the early discourses, the  interpreters of the early doctrine who relied heavily on the commentaries of Buddhaghosa have continued to attribute two truths to the Buddha himself.'
(The Buddha's Philosophy of Language by David J. Kalupahana, p 81-82)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 7th, 2021 at 8:10 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
"The two truths—.... are implied in a sutta-distinction of ‘explicit (or direct) meaning’ (nītattha, q.v.) and ‘implicit meaning (to be inferred)’ (neyyattha)."

Astus wrote:
Not implied by the sutta (since to imply something one would need that thing to be known by the one who implies it) but interpreted as an implication by Buddhaghosa about a thousand years after the Buddha. It's like reading the https://suttacentral.net/sn22.22/en/sujato as if it were implying the existence of a pudgala.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 6th, 2021 at 4:51 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
You misrepresent grossly the intention and meaning of Nyanatiloka

Astus wrote:
How so? He presents the current Theravada view there, and that's not been questioned. He also agrees that the teaching of the two truths is factually post-canonical.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 6th, 2021 at 3:05 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm said:
Yes, it is certainly found in the Kośabhaṣya.

Astus wrote:
Right, I meant Abhidharma as the 7 canonical texts.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 6th, 2021 at 5:49 AM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary has a longish entry about Paramartha satya in the Pali texts. He says that conventional and ultimate truths are implied in many places by the Tathagata, when he says that he uses the ordinary language of common people, but he knows what the words really mean.

Astus wrote:
It can't be implied, only retrospectively interpreted so, since the very idea of two truths are not just later than the Buddha, but later than the Tipitaka, as https://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_p.htm in that very same entry: 'The two truths - ultimate and conventional - appear in that form only in the commentaries'.

Aemilius said:
Vasubandhu discusses the absolute truth (paramartha-satya) and conventional truth (samvriti-sattya) in AKB p. 910.. 911, and 1108. Vasubandhu mentions Paramartha-shunya sutra that is included  Samyukta Agama.

Astus wrote:
The AKB is a relatively late summary work. The 'Paramartha-shunya sutra' says nothing about the two truths. See its English translation https://suttacentral.net/sa335/en/choong.

Aemilius said:
Two truths are mentioned in Samdhi-nirmocana sutra, Lankavatara and other mahayana sutras, which are regarded a teaching of Buddha by the Mahayana.

Astus wrote:
And the two truths doctrine is generally used in Mahayana, no doubt about it.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 5th, 2021 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
The basic terms of Madhyamaka exist already in the Sravakayana sutras

Astus wrote:
Except that neyartha and nitartha are not equivalents of conventional and ultimate truths, only that the later tradition (i.e. Buddhaghosa) interpreted neyartha teachings as those that talk about self and beings, while nitartha as those that talk of no self and emptiness. See also Ven. Analayo's entry on https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/encyclopedia-entries/vohara.pdf (on p 723-724 / PDF p 1-2) that states how the two truths doctrine are projected on the sole sutta containing those terms retroactively.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 5th, 2021 at 5:07 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
zerwe said:
When the Buddha taught the 4NT's, each of the Tenet schools developed as a result of a difference in interpretation of the meaning of the statement that "one should understand suffering even though 'there is no suffering'." This eventually would lead to differing presentations or concepts regarding the "Two Truths" as held by the Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Cittamatra, and Madhyamka schools, as well as, their respective sub-schools.

Astus wrote:
The two truths doctrine is a commentarial development, not found in the agamas or even in the abhidharma texts. The idea that "even though 'there is no suffering'" is from the Prajnaparamita sutras.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 5th, 2021 at 5:04 PM
Title: Re: Two truths in Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
rybackbob said:
1.Do all Mahayana schools / sects accept two truths?

Astus wrote:
In some form, yes.

rybackbob said:
2. Why is conventional / relative truth still called temporary?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine#:~:text=The%20Buddha%27s%20teaching%20of%20the,understand%20the%20Buddha%27s%20profound%20truth.&text=The%20world%2Densconced%20truth%20and,which%20is%20the%20highest%20sense.
Is the conventional truth being abolished over time?

Astus wrote:
I don't see 'temporary' stated there.

rybackbob said:
3. Does absolute truth deny and cancel conventional truth? As far as I know, two truths are true and valid at the same time?

Astus wrote:
If conventional truth is interpreted as the veiled, mistaken perception, it is abandoned. If understood as conventional, then no.

rybackbob said:
4. On this website:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lionsroar.com/what-are-the-two-truths/amp/

It is pointed out that two truths is a temporary doctrine and in fact there is only one final truth. What happens to all conventional phenomena after two truths come together?

Astus wrote:
Would you specify what statement you refer to regarding the conventional being temporary?

rybackbob said:
5. Do Buddhas and enlightened Buddhists also believe in conventional truth?

Astus wrote:
What is conventional should be seen as just that, conventional. If mistaken as absolute, then there is a problem.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 3rd, 2021 at 5:05 AM
Title: Re: Looking for formal "How things exist" analyses
Content:
Astus wrote:
Thrangu Rinpoche: Opening the Door to Emptiness https://web.archive.org/web/20200219095155/http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/Open%20Door%20to%20Emptiness/opendoor1.htm, https://web.archive.org/web/20200219095735/http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/Open%20Door%20to%20Emptiness/opendoor2.htm, https://web.archive.org/web/20200219095317/http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/Open%20Door%20to%20Emptiness/opendoor3.htm, https://web.archive.org/web/20200217212027/http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/Open%20Door%20to%20Emptiness/opendoor4.htm

Some good and short ones on Lotsawa House in the categories of https://www.lotsawahouse.org/topics/middle-way/ and https://www.lotsawahouse.org/topics/buddhist-philosophy/, like https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/four-great-logical-arguments, https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/patrul-rinpoche/two-truths-view-mahayana, and https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/wheel-of-analytical-meditation


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 30th, 2021 at 4:31 PM
Title: Re: Realization and realized masters
Content:
clyde said:
According to Huangpo those who “attain awakening by hearing the teachings are called ‘śrāvakas.’”

Astus wrote:
That's more like a play with words: sound/voice of the teaching (sheng jiao 聲教) and sound/voice hearer (sheng wen 聲聞), the latter being a term for sravaka. It's also about emphasising awakening by insight into one's own mind. Huangbo also says, 'There are those who, on hearing the dharma, attain no-mind in a single moment of thought.' And more interestingly, 'The dharma he preaches is neither preached nor revealed, and those who hear that dharma neither hear nor attain anything. It is as if a magician preaches the dharma to people he has conjured. How can I say that I comprehended or awakened to this dharma upon hearing the words of a spiritual mentor (kalyāṇamitra)?'

clyde said:
Does this mean that Huineng was a śrāvaka?

Astus wrote:
No.

'Good friends, if you wish to enter into the profound dharmadhātu and the samādhi of prajñā, you must cultivate the practice of prajñā and recite the Diamond Sutra. Thus will you attain seeing the nature.'
...
'If a person of the Mahayana or a person of the Supreme Vehicle hears this explanation of the Diamond Sutra, his mind will open forth in enlightened understanding.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 31)

The main point is that one should put the words of the teachings into action, i.e. actively look into one's own nature as the teachings instruct everyone.

'To recite it orally without practicing it in the mind is [as unreal] as a phantasm or hallucination, [and as evanescent] as dew or lightning. To recite it orally and practice it mentally is for mind and mouth to correspond. The fundamental nature is buddha. There is no other buddha apart from this nature.'
(ch 2, p 28)

Also, Huineng said about one of his poems (but can be applied to the whole scripture):

'Good friends, you should all recite this. If you practice according to it, you will see the nature through hearing these words. Although you may be a thousand li away from me, it will be as if you are constantly by my side. If you do not become enlightened through these words, then why have you gone to the trouble of coming a thousand li to see me?'
(ch 6, p 53)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 30th, 2021 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Realization and realized masters
Content:
Astus wrote:
Pratyekabuddhas don't matter much, as their realisation is a limited one.

From Huangbo:

'Those who for the most part attain awakening by hearing the teachings are called “śrāvakas.” Those who attain awakening by contemplating causes and conditions are called “pratyekabuddhas.” Even though you reach the attainment of buddhahood, if that does not derive from awakening to your own mind, you would also be called a “śrāvaka buddha.” Many of you practitioners of the Way awaken to the doctrinal teachings but have not awakened to the mind dharma. Even if you practice in this way for successive kalpas, this will never be the original buddha.'
...
'Śrāvakas see the production of ignorance and the extinction of ignorance. Pratyekabuddhas see only the extinction of ignorance but not the production of ignorance, so they realize tranquil extinction thought after thought. All the buddhas see sentient beings produced all day long without ever being produced and extinguished all day long without ever being extinguished. To be free from both production and extinction is the fruition of the Mahāyāna.'
(A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, 1.7; 2.43)

Regarding Huineng's awakening, both before and after meeting Hongren it was the Diamond Sutra that brought him realisation. As the story is told in the first chapter of the Platform Sutra:

"At one time, a customer bought some firewood and had me deliver it to his shop, where he took it and paid me. On my way out of the gate I saw someone38 reciting a sutra, and as soon as I heard the words of the sutra my mind opened forth in enlightenment. I then asked the person what sutra he was reciting, and he said, ‘The Diamond Sutra.’"
...
"The patriarch kept his robe (kaṣāya) hidden and would not let anyone see it. He preached the Diamond Sutra for me. When he reached the words ‘responding to the nonabiding, yet generating the mind’56 I experienced a great enlightenment, [realizing that] all the myriad dharmas do not transcend their self-natures."
(BDK ed, p 17 & 23)

The story of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongjia_Xuanjue, who attained awakening by reading the Vimalakirti Sutra, is a good example of the general view on the role of teacher in most Chan literature. It's not really about transmitting but rather verifying awakening.

Chan Master Yongjia Xuanjue was from the Zai family of Wenzhou (Yongjia Xian, Zhejiang). When he was young, he studied the sutras and śāstras and trained in the teaching of cessation and contemplation (i.e., concentration and insight meditation) of Tiantai. Through reading the Vimalakīrti Sutra he illuminated his mind-ground. Coincidentally, he visited and discussed [the Dharma] with the master’s student Xuance. Everything he said was in implicit accord with the [teachings of the] patriarchs.
Xuance said, “From whom did you attain the Dharma?”
[Xuanjue] said, “I heard that there is a succession of teachers for the Mahayana sutras and śāstras. Later I became enlightened to the central doctrine of the mind of the Buddha [by reading] the Vimalakīrti Sutra. As yet, no one has verified [my realization].”
Xuance said, “‘Attained prior to King Sounds of Dignity; becoming enlightened oneself without a teacher after King Sounds of Dignity.’ In both cases, this was the heretical path of naturalism.”
[Xuanjue] said, “May I request that you verify [my realization]?”
Xuance said, “My words carry no weight, but in Caoqi there is the Sixth Patriarch, Great Master [Huineng]. [Students] assemble there from the four directions like clouds. You would certainly receive his Dharma, and if you would go there I will accompany you.”
(Platform Sutra, ch 7, BDK ed, p 67-68)

On the expression yixin yinxin 以心印心 (lit. 'stamp (yin) mind with mind') the Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism has this:

'The crucial element in this expression is the word yin. As a verb, yin involves the meanings “to accord or to harmonize with each other,” “to verify each other,”  and so forth. For Huangbo Xiyun, the transmission from mind to mind must be understood as the mutual realization or verification of enlightenment. The mind of the master and the mind of the disciple are brought into harmony or accord by each one’s enlightenment. This is the true meaning of transmission. The verification (yin) of enlightenment cannot be understood as merely interior. It must be characterized as neither interior nor exterior, since it can never be cut off from, or confined to, one side or the other. It is the existential-practical transformation of the entire personhood through everyday activities.'


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 29th, 2021 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Thrangu R. on prayer and deities, etc.
Content:
Astus wrote:
Blessings are the inspiration gained by devotion to progress on the path.

'Sometimes people think that blessings are something that will  make them shake, tremble, and even levitate. But that is not what blessings are. Blessings are the power of the Dharma. When we encounter the power of the Dharma, we start to feel faith, and then we  become diligent. We feel love and compassion, and we develop tranquility and insight. This is what blessings are. They are the absence of  greed, aversion, and delusion. If we can entirely rid ourselves of those three things right away, that is wonderful, but even if not, we can  decrease and suppress them. That is blessings.'
(Vivid Awareness by Thrangu Rinpoche, p 41)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 28th, 2021 at 4:51 AM
Title: Re: Realization and realized masters
Content:
LucasGP said:
can one achieve realization in Zen even if one cannot find any realized teacher?

Astus wrote:
It's not the teacher who makes the disciple realised, but by practising the six paramitas with bodhicitta one attains liberation. So the question is if a teacher imparts correct knowledge and whether the disciple learns and applies the correct path.

'In all cases, whether alone or with a group, whether as a householder or home-leaver, it is better to practice under a qualified master. Practice without the guidance of a master will probably not be too fruitful. Practicing with a master can save you time. A master's understanding and experience can help you firmly grasp the essentials of practice and cultivate a correct view of Buddhadharma. This enables you to more quickly free yourself from the vexations of body and mind. With a master, time otherwise spent studying sutras and worrying about following the right path, can be devoted single-mindedly to practice.'
( http://old.ddc.shengyen.org/mobile/text/09-06/18.php )

'The most important thing in recognizing masters is to be able to judge whether they have a correct view of Buddhadharma. If their views of the Dharma are correct, then even if their behavior reveals some weaknesses, they should not be considered false masters. On the other hand, if teachers do not have a correct view of the Dharma, they cannot be considered authentic or virtuous masters.
Of course, this presupposes that the person making the judgment has some understanding of correct Dharma. Without an understanding of the Dharma, there is no way a practitioner can tell if a teacher is genuine or false.'
( http://old.ddc.shengyen.org/mobile/text/09-06/27.php )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 26th, 2021 at 7:10 PM
Title: Re: Question about dependent origination
Content:
Astus wrote:
'Since things devoid of intrinsic nature are not existent,
“This existing, that comes to be” can never hold.'
(MMK 1.10, tr Siderits)

Intrinsic nature (svabhāva) is the key term that should be further clarified first, and how central it is to Sarvastivadin Abhidharma.

'A dharma is defined as that which holds its intrinsic characteristic (svalakṣaṇa-dhāraṇād dharmaḥ — § 1.2). The intrinsic characteristic of rūpa, for example, is the susceptibility of being molested (rūpyate), obstructability and visibility; that of vedanā is sensation, etc. And for a dharma to be a dharma, its characteristic must be sustainable throughout time: A rūpa remains as a rūpa irrespective of its various modalities. It can never be transformed into another different dharma (such as vedanā). Thus, a uniquely characterizable entity is a uniquely real (in the absolute sense) entity, having a unique intrinsic nature (svabhāva): "To be existent as an absolute entity is to be existent as an intrinsic characteristic (paramārthena sat svalakṣaṇena sad ityarthaḥ)"'
(Sarvastivāda Abhidharma by Bhikkhu K.L. Dhammajoti, 2.3.1, 3rd ed, p 23)

'The most notable and representative view of the Sarvastivāda is that what is real is what abides uniquely in its intrinsic nature: What is real is what has a svabhāva. Among the various synonyms of svabhāva is the term avayava, 'part'. A 'part' here refers to the smallest possible unit which cannot be further analyzed; it is the ultimate real. Whatever can be further analyzed either physically or mentally — a composite (e.g., a person) — is 'having a part' (sāvayava); it is a relative real, superimposed on the ultimate reals (e.g., the five skandha-s). This also means that what is real or what exists truly is what exists from the highest or ultimate standpoint (paramārtha-sat), as opposed to what exists relatively/conventionally (saṃvṛti-sat).'
(Sarvastivāda Abhidharma by Bhikkhu K.L. Dhammajoti, 3.5.1, 3rd ed, p 77)

So what is refuted is what is held to be verifiable in Abhidharma, the unique characteristics of those things that exist ultimately, i.e. the dharmas. Mundane things like tables and people are understood as purely conventional, nominal, conceptual even in Abhidharma teachings. Here's a commentary on Nagarjuna's argument presented above:

'As explained earlier, to an opponent for whom the absence of nature is not established, this absence will be proven by presenting dependent origination as evidence. Indeed, when nature as such has been invalidated by this evidence, the idea that being produced by ruling conditions is the nature of things will have been invalidated as well. However, just as one may negate the presence of an aśoka tree by referring to the absence of any tree, using the absence of nature as evidence to refute this convention does not pose a problem.
The unproblematic character of the argument is clarified further by considering how, in this particular context, this functions to disprove the argument advanced by the opposition. Our opponents may say that because the characteristics of ruling conditions do exist, things arise from something other than themselves. In reply, we may say that, for those of us who assert that things have no nature, such characteristics are not established.'
(Ornament of Reason by Mabja Jangchub Tsondru, comm. to MMK 1.10)

In other words, dependent origination refutes the possibility of an own nature because everything depends on others, i.e. cannot be established on their own, and because there is no own nature, there is nothing that can be called existent or even non-existent. So even dharmas are like everyday things, mere conceptual fabrications.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 20th, 2021 at 12:50 AM
Title: Re: An Important Reminder
Content:
Astus wrote:
Sharing secret teachings has been around for over a thousand years: https://earlytibet.com/2008/04/09/why-should-the-secret-mantra-be-secret/

Calling something secret only makes it more interesting. It is a skilful means that worked well.

'Indeed, the overwhelming success of the Secret Path has propelled it into a position where it has become perhaps the least secret of all the Buddhist meditative systems.'
(Indian Esoteric Buddhism by Ronald M. Davidson, p 339)

Just as fake news and pseudo-science is not defeated by no news and no science, false Dharma should be answered by correct Dharma, not trying to hide it. After all, 'The teaching and training proclaimed by a Realized One shine in the open, not under cover.' ( https://suttacentral.net/an3.131/en/sujato ).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 16th, 2021 at 6:31 AM
Title: Re: Repentance practices
Content:
Astus wrote:
Repentance (chanhui http://www.buddhism-dict.net/ddb/pcache/61id%28b61fa-6094%29.html ) is quite central all over in East Asian Buddhism, including Chan.

'What is it that is called ‘repentance’ (chan)? What is it that is called ‘remorse’ (hui)? Repentance is to repent past licentiousness. One should repent completely for all one’s evil actions from the past, one’s transgressions of stupidity, pride and deception, jealousy, and so on, so that they will never arise again. This is called ‘repentance.’ Remorse is to have remorse for future errors, those from now on. Since you have become enlightened [to them] now, all one’s evil actions from the past, one’s transgressions of stupidity, deceitfulness, jealousy, and so on, are eradicated forever, never to be committed again. This is called ‘remorse.’ Therefore, it is called ‘repentance and remorse’ (chanhui).
Ordinary people are stupid and only know they should repent for their past licentiousness—they do not know they should feel remorse for future errors. Because they do not have such remorse, their previous licentiousness is not extinguished and future errors continue to be generated. With previous licentiousness not extinguished and future errors continuing to be generated, how can this be called repentance?'
(Platform Sutra, ch 6, BDK ed, p 48)

'If subsequent sentient beings of the degenerate age of dull faculties desire in their hearts to attain the Way, but somehow always fall short of their goal, it is because of karmic hindrances from the past. They must strive for penance and confession and continuously re-arise their hopes. They must first sever love and hatred, jealousy, envy, flattery and calumny and strive for the unsurpassed state of mind. Since the three types of meditation are all the investigation of the same single matter, if one meditation doesn't work, try again with one of the others. Don't let your mind dissipate, and gradually strive for actualization.'
( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/sutra_of_perfect_enlightenment.html#div-11 )

'The function of repentance is to initiate a relentless process of self-reflection and self-discipline, to develop vigilance based on selfawareness, and to purify one’s mind with self-respect, so as to prevent the occurrence of the same mistake. As long as one has the determination to start afresh, and realizes that the past is gone and there is no point in dwelling on it, one’s mind will be relieved from the feeling of guilt and will regain serenity. This is the function of repentance. The wrongdoing has to be honestly revealed (to the community, or to several persons, or to one person, or to one’s own conscience, in accordance with the category and degree of wrongdoing, followed by genuine regret and a resolution   ​not to repeat it).26* Otherwise the shadow of the misdeed will be hidden permanently in the mind, and will develop into karmic seeds that invite retribution later. Repentance immediately dissolves from one’s consciousness the seeds produced by the misdeed.
However, the purpose of repentance is to cleanse one’s mind to prevent reoccurrence of wrongdoing. If one repeatedly misbehaves, repents, and then misbehaves again, then the efficacy of repentance will be lost. Moreover, the repentance of Buddhists is quite different from that of Christians, who pray to God for absolution. Buddhists do not believe any god has the power to absolve sin. To Buddhists, the real meaning of repentance is to cleanse the contaminated mind in order to restore its purity.'
(Orthodox Chinese Buddhism, p 46)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 16th, 2021 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Commentaries on the Canonical Sutras?
Content:
Nalanda said:
Is there something like that I could check whenever I read the agamas?

Astus wrote:
According to https://sites.google.com/site/frankkpublic/agama-commentaries-parallel-to-pali-commentaries there are fragments in Sanskrit and almost none in Chinese except a brief one (5 fascicles) on parts of the Ekottarikagama (51 fascicles) called https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/en/T25n1507 of what there's a study and synopsis in English by Antonello Palumbo ( http://www.indologica.de/drupal/?q=node/3032 ). Otherwise you can search abhidharma works and treatises like the Dazhidulun and Yogacarabhumisastra for some references.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 13th, 2021 at 8:30 PM
Title: Re: Is Sunyata beyond or the same as "neither positive nor negative"
Content:
Heimdall said:
In the Theravada system, there are three "realms" of existence - the Desire Realm, the Form Realm, and the Formless Realm.

Astus wrote:
The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailokya are found in all Buddhist schools.

Heimdall said:
In the Theravada system, the last one - the "infinity of neither being nor non-being" - is the closest realm to Nirvana and the least connected to Samsara, and beings who incarnate in that realm have achieved some significant level of Enlightenment and are guaranteed Nirvanna in the near future. Nirvanna in the Theravada system is identical with Arhantship and being "blown out", ceasing to reincarnate.

Astus wrote:
There is no realm closest to nirvana, because nirvana is not a realm to be close to. Non-returners are born in the five heavens of the Pure Abodes (Suddhāvāsā) that are the highest heavens of the form realm, and that's where they attain complete liberation.

Heimdall said:
the Heart Sutra which seem to suggest that emptiness is the highest possible thing, and emptiness is identical with being "neither positive nor negative"

Astus wrote:
One way to understand emptiness is freedom from conceptual grasping. If one were to identify emptiness with "positive", "negative", "positive and negative", or "neither positive nor negative", then that would be conceptual grasping.

Heimdall said:
I also wonder how one reconciles this with Mahayana goal of Buddhahood or the Bodhisattva path and the differing schools of thought for the Mahayana pathway on this issue, including becoming a Buddha or even the perpetual Bodhisattva path altogether.

Astus wrote:
Reconcile what?

Heimdall said:
Is Buddha-nature beyond even the dichotomy of "neither positive nor negative"?

Astus wrote:
Buddha nature refers to the wisdom of the buddhas that is free from grasping and full of compassion. So it could be said that on the one hand it's like emptiness, beyond categories, and on the other hand it's 100% positive.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 13th, 2021 at 4:34 AM
Title: Re: I'm confused about Buddhist arguments against a creator God and what that entails for buddha activity?
Content:
Astus wrote:
'In Chan, we practice sitting meditation so we can maintain a level of focus and centeredness associated with samadhi. But you have to practice in order to maintain this stability of mind. If you stop meditating, it disappears.
This is not the case with wisdom. When you have wisdom, it is always there. Once you see something, you see it. And wisdom constantly deepens and clarifies.
Before Buddha became awakened, he was able to reach the highest or eighth level of samadhi where there is neither perception nor nonperception. And yet the Buddha was not liberated. When he came out of this state of samadhi, he still felt vexed. Buddha did not become awakened or liberated because of samadhi but because of wisdom.
So why do we practice meditation if Chan is about wisdom? Because without a certain foundation—samadhi—the mind will be scattered. If we light a candle in a room where the doors and windows are open and the wind blows through, the candle will flicker. It will not shine. The room will be dark.
Samadhi is the stillness of a sealed room—a state of peace and calm without disturbances that allows the light of wisdom to glow. It doesn’t flicker. Slowly and steadily it becomes shining bright.
Wisdom is experiential. In Chan, we say it comes from returning again and again to the present moment. It comes from the experience of always returning. It comes from living this, from experiencing it for yourself.
Wisdom in Chan, and in Buddhism generally, is often divided into four stages. The first stage is wisdom from acquisition. This occurs through listening or reading. Then there is the wisdom of knowledge—to reflect on and digest what has been acquired. Practicing or putting into action the wisdom you have acquired is the wisdom of practice or cultivation. When you are able to fully experience what was been taught, this is called the wisdom of attainment.'
(Essential Chan Buddhism by Guo Jun, ch 9)

'People on the mundane level meditate on tranquil absorption, such as the four kinds of concentration, but tranquility by itself cannot destroy clinging to a self, which is the root of cyclic existence. The power of self-delusion causes the root and attendant defilements to arise, which, in turn, lead one to commit harmful deeds and consequently to wander in the lower realms. The analogy for this is to be found in the meditation of such ascetics as Udraka, who believed in an external creator. On the other hand, the determination of nonselfhood [in one’s psychophysical aggregates] through discerning intellect, followed by meditation, will result in attaining permanent peace. No other means can completely eliminate misery and defilement.'
(Mahamudra: the Moonlight, p 178)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 12th, 2021 at 6:01 PM
Title: Re: If there's no self, why does karma matter?
Content:
Nalanda said:
Without the self/person, why does karma matter? Upon rebirth, how does this karma connect or transfer to that new person? Isn't that unfair? How does it even connect the previous person's karma to the reborn person?

Astus wrote:
Karma is the person, i.e. we are what we do. If there was somebody else apart from what we did, an independent self, then actions wouldn't matter. But because there is no independent, separate self, it matters. Also, it makes little sense to talk of a yesterday's self as if it were disconnected from today's self. What we did yesterday defines what we have today. Same applies to larger periods of time.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 12th, 2021 at 3:32 PM
Title: Re: Maha Prajnaparamita Sastra
Content:
Leo Rivers said:
Just found this.... I think it's the whole thing.

Astus wrote:
It's the whole of what Lamotte translated, but as it says on the first page: 'This edition represents only the first part containing the translation of 34 of 100 fascicles of the original work.'


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 12th, 2021 at 5:39 AM
Title: Re: Question about awareness
Content:
Rick said:
I'm referring to the approach to meditation that Mingyur Rinpoche teaches and his father taught before him.

Astus wrote:
In that case awareness is not about being behind or front, but about the absence of fixation through the recognition of emptiness. That's where the difference between buddhas and sentient beings lie.

'This is what we actually are: empty in essence, cognizant by nature, able to perceive, with no barrier between these two aspects. This empty quality is called dharmakaya. But we are not only empty unlike space, we possess a knowing quality. This is what is described as cognizant nature, sambhogakaya. The capacity is the unity of these two, suffused with awareness. 'Capacity' here means being empty or being cognizant cannot be separated; they are an original unity. And 'suffused with awareness' refers to rigpa. The minds of all sentient beings are the unity of empty cognizance, but because they are not suffused with awareness, they don't know this. Although their minds are the unity of empty cognizance as a unity, they are suffused with unawareness, with unknowing. The very moment we recognize our nature as empty cognizance, it becomes empty cognizance suffused with awareness, with knowing.
The difference between buddhas and sentient beings is the difference between knowing and not knowing. 'Knowing' means knowing one's own nature, one's natural face. This present wakefulness that is uncorrected or uncontrived is the true Samantabhadra which has never been apart from you. While recognizing, rest naturally. When this present wakefulness recognizes itself, there is nothing whatsoever to see. That is the empty essence that is dharmakaya. However, along with the realization that there is nothing to see, is some knowing or seeing that this is so. That is the cognizant nature, sambhogakaya. This empty essence and cognizant nature are forever indivisible. That is the unity, nirmanakaya.'
(As It Is, vol 1, p 58-59)

'Dharmakaya is in ourselves, but since we have not stabilized the recognition of it, we get caught up in thoughts. Yet the essence of thoughts, when acknowledged, is dharmakaya. A thought is simply the extroverted expression of knowing, of awareness. In the moment of recognizing the nature of what thinks, there is no way for this expression, the thought, to remain. Your naked essence is then an actuality. In this experience, there is no way for a thought to remain, just as a drop of water cannot remain in mid-air. Once you are familiar with this way of dealing with a thought, you do not need to suppress thinking. You do not need to correct it. You do not need any hope of gaining or fear of losing the awakened state. That is why it is said that 'the confidence of the view is free of hope and fear'. You do not have to hope for freedom or fear having thoughts, because in the moment of seeing the essence, the thought has dissolved. Do you understand this? Is it clear?
Don't ever expect that anything spectacular will be experienced. Honestly, there is nothing more amazing than this recognition of rigpa in which no thought can remain. The five poisons and habitual tendencies lose their power to rigpa. If we do not know this, we become caught up in thought. Most sentient beings do not know how to recognize; they are carried away by thoughts. In the moment you remind yourself to recognize mind nature, you have already seen the essence. "Seeing no thing is the sublime sight." This is so close that it is hard to believe. It is not an act of imagining. It's because it's so easy that it is hard to trust in! There is not even as much as a hair-tip to cultivate by meditating. But we need to grow used to it; we need to grow used to recognizing this nature of empty cognizance.'
(As It Is, vol 2, p 149-150)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 12th, 2021 at 4:40 AM
Title: Re: Is impermanence the same or different than emptiness?
Content:
Queequeg said:
How far can this inquiry go before the Dharma is exhausted? And isn't this line of inquiry actually a necessary part of the path at advancing levels?

Astus wrote:
“In the same way, reverend, purification of ethics is only for the sake of purification of mind. Purification of mind is only for the sake of purification of view. Purification of view is only for the sake of purification through overcoming doubt. Purification through overcoming doubt is only for the sake of purification of knowledge and vision of the variety of paths. Purification of knowledge and vision of the variety of paths is only for the sake of purification of knowledge and vision of the practice. Purification of knowledge and vision of the practice is only for the sake of purification of knowledge and vision. Purification of knowledge and vision is only for the sake of extinguishment by not grasping. The spiritual life is lived under the Buddha for the sake of extinguishment by not grasping.”
( https://suttacentral.net/mn24/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 12th, 2021 at 3:52 AM
Title: Re: Question about awareness
Content:
Rick said:
Some schools of Buddhism teach that awareness is “what we truly are” and that being fully aware of the awareness ‘behind’ what we sense, feel, do is enlightenment.

Astus wrote:
What schools specifically? Any sources maybe?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 11th, 2021 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Is impermanence the same or different than emptiness?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Space is something that has neither
existence or non-existence, because it isn’t phenomenal.

It’s simply the context in which everything else occurs.

Astus wrote:
There are two types of space (ākāśa) in Sarvastivada abhidharma: as one of the three unconditioned dharmas (AKB 1.5) and as a conditioned element (AKB 1.28).
It is as an unconditioned dharma that it has the function of not hindering (anāvṛti) all the other material dharmas. As a conditioned element it refers to gap or cavity (chidra) between matter and interpreted as a category of colour because it can be light or dark.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 11th, 2021 at 3:24 PM
Title: Re: Is impermanence the same or different than emptiness?
Content:
Astus wrote:
'Those who imputes arising and disintegration 
With relation to conditioned things, 
They do not understand well the movement 
Of the wheel of dependent origination.
That which has originated due to “this” and “that,” 
That has not done so as its own being; 
And that which has not arisen as its own being, 
How can it be called “arisen”? 
The tranquility derived from extinction of  cause, 
This is understood to be a cessation; 
That which is not extinguished through its intrinsic nature, 
How can that be called an “extinguishment”? 
Since there is nothing that arises, 
There is nothing that disintegrates; 
Yet the paths of  arising and disintegration 
Were taught [by the Buddha] for a purpose. 
By understanding arising, disintegration is understood; 
By understanding disintegration, impermanence is understood; 
By understanding how to engage with impermanence, 
The sublime dharma is understood as well. 
Those who understand the dependent origination 
To be utterly devoid of  arising and disintegration, 
Those who have such knowledge will cross 
The ocean of samsara of dogmatic views.'
(Sixty Stanzas of Reasoning, v 18-23, tr Thupten Jinpa)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 10th, 2021 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: I'm confused about Buddhist arguments against a creator God and what that entails for buddha activity?
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
As presented by Khenpo Tsultrim, Shentong absolutely accepts Prasangika Madhyamaka as valid. However it does not apply to Wisdom Mind/Buddha Nature. From his “Progressive Stages” book:
Khenpo Tsultrim said:
This non-conceptual Wisdom Mind is not the object of the conceptualizing process and so is not negated by Madhyamaka reasoning. Therefore, it can be said to be the only thing that has absolute and true existence.

Astus wrote:
From Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje:

'Though there is no contradiction in applying terms such as “subtle” to buddha nature, it is not tenable to posit it in the context of analysis as the self or to say that it exists in a certain way even when analyzed. If it were tenable to do so, it would absurdly follow that the self can withstand analysis. What could be worse than pretending to fi rst refute the selves of persons and phenomena and then positing them in the end? Furthermore, who would place any trust in the statement, “Under thorough analysis, there is no establishment of a true self: this is the system of the Middle Way as asserted by Chandrakīrti”?
We do posit the causal, coemergent buddha nature as the person from the unanalyzed perspective. However, we also accept that buddha nature is not established as the person or the self in either of the two truths. You, on the other hand, say that buddha nature is established as the self in the relative truth. Therefore you hold a view of self.
When the noble beings of the Vajrayāna engage in the unanalyzed, worldly, relative truth, they use the terms of “person” and “self ” in reference to buddha nature. Using terms in this way can only be done by those who have realized the objects of knowledge of the Vajrayāna—the uncommon presentation of the worldly relative truth, which consists of cause, path, and result. Using terms in this way is not to be attempted by those who have not comprehended these points.'
(The Karmapa's Middle Way: Feast for the Fortunate, p 398)

'The Jonangpas say that the self of ultimate truth exists and is permanent, whereas the relative imputation of the self is, like the horns of a rabbit, utterly nonexistent. In this way they refute even on the conventional level the mere self of no analysis renowned in the relative truth. They also affirm through analysis something that is, actually, utterly nonexistent: a self of the ultimate truth. They commit superimpositions and denigrations in relation to both of the two truths.'
(p 400)

'If an ultimate self existed, sentient beings would either have no chance whatever of gaining liberation from saṃsāra or would gain liberation without any effort at all. One of those two situations would absurdly follow. For, firstly, due to the ultimate existence of the self, some beings would be bound in saṃsāra while others would be liberated in nirvāṇa—desire to change this would be impossible. And, secondly, the ultimate self is perceived, according to you, by the perception of a correct consciousness, unlike the self of the relative. Your assertion resembles that of Īshvara!'
(p 402)

And from Karmapa Düdül Dorje:

'[To say on the one hand that] the qualities of a Buddha are inconceivable for minds on this shore
And that, without analysis, these qualities are described by following his words,
While saying [on the other hand] that wisdom exists and that it is the perfect [nature], is not contradictory.
However, I understand that if such is held at the end of analyzing
For the ultimate through reasonings, the ultimate has become an object for the mind,
Thus being [in itself nothing but] a portion of the cognitive obscurations.
Hence, the following words by the lord of dharma from Tagpo are the remedy for this.
He says: "Throw the views of [intellectual] understanding behind you
And destroy the foundation of meditative experiences!"
...
Secondly, [the system of] Asanga and his brother who follow the final wheel [of dharma]
Is known as "False Aspectarian Mere Mentalism" in the land of the noble ones
And as "Centrism of other-emptiness" in Tibet.
The meaning of these two names is the same.
This is the completely pure system that,
Through mainly teaching the luminous aspect of the mind,
Holds that the result—kayas and wisdoms—exist on their own accord.
As for its necessity, it is asserted that it is taught in order to
Relinquish any arising of fear of emptiness and to awaken those with indefinite disposition.
When commenting on its meaning, honorable Rangjung [Dorje] says
That it is one with the system of Candrakirti.
Others assert that the ultimate is existent and really established
And that emptiness is really established.
As for the great vehicle's sutra portion, both the middle and the final wheel [of dharma]
Have the purport of the Sugata-Heart, the unity of emptiness and luminosity.
The middle [wheel] explains this by mainly teaching emptiness,
While the final [wheel] elucidates it by mainly teaching luminosity.
I understand that, in actuality, these are not contradictory.
...
Therefore, except for the difference in terms of which topic is mainly taught
And the superiority in means, the essence [of the mantra vehicle]
Is always in accord with the view of Centrism.
As it is said in [Nagarjuna's] Collection of Reasonings:
"For whom emptiness is possible,
Everything is possible.
For whom emptiness is not possible,
Nothing is possible."'
(A Song on the View [Arising from] Understanding and Experience in Songs & Instructions of the Karmapas, p 34-35, p 36-37, p 38)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 9th, 2021 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: True Mind is No Mind
Content:
LastLegend said:
Nagarjuna won’t allow us to say conditioned because if it lacks self-existence it is not a thing in itself

Astus wrote:
What is conditioned is exactly not a thing in itself, because if a thing were in itself, it wouldn't be conditioned.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 9th, 2021 at 10:03 PM
Title: True Mind is No Mind
Content:
Astus wrote:
'What is called no-mind is nothing other than a mind free from deluded thought.'
( https://terebess.hu/zen/bodhidharma-eng.html#app, 17; T85, no. 2831, p. 1270a15)

'We have to come to a clear understanding as to the true nature and Absolute Existence of Dharma. This truth is that “as all  phenomena are strictly dependent, conditioned, and relative,  they are therefore impermanent.” This is the Absolute  Existence of Dharma. If we have such a penetrative  understanding of the nature of phenomena, of the notion of  emptiness, we will enter the gateway of Chan, or align  ourselves with the Tao. This is what Bodhidharma’s first  formula, “facing a wall is the way to pacify the Mind”,  teaches us.'
( http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/gates_of_chan.pdf ( http://fo.sina.com.cn/zt/jhrczm/index.shtml ), p 33)

Absolute Existence is the translation of 实相 (實相 tattvasya-lakṣaṇam), defined in MMK 18.9:
"To know for oneself, not following others, 
Calm extinction, without sophistries, 
No differences and no distinctions; 
This is termed the 'true character'."
(T30, no. 1564, p. 24a7-8; tr Bocking)

The quote (“缘生无自性、无自性故空”) is from the commentary to MMK 7.17:
'dharmas arising from causal conditions have no self-nature, and having no self-nature are empty'
(T30, no. 1564, p. 10c20-21, tr Bocking)

'But what is this “nature”? If we are to use words and concepts, we can call it the buddha-nature, which is our original nature. This is the nature of awakening, the nature of emptiness or selflessness. Emptiness means relationships, connectedness. Because all things are connected, nothing is fixed, and everything is free.'
(The Essence of Chan by Guo Gu, 1.2)

"But how could one [even] gain the ability to know that it is no-mind [that sees, hears, feels, and knows]?"
"Just try to find out in every detail: What appearance does mind have? And if it can be apprehended: is [what is apprehended] mind or not? Is [mind] inside or outside, or somewhere in between? As long as one looks for mind in these three locations, one's search will end in failure. Indeed, searching it anywhere will end in failure. That's exactly why it is known as no-mind."
(Treatise on No-Mind, 6; T85, no. 2831, p. 1269b9-13)

'it is possible to directly comprehend  a thing’s nature and its Absolute Existence, that is, we can  know this teacup as the combination of all its necessary  conditions. After stripping all those conditions away one by  one, we may ask: “Where then is the teacup?” It has no self-identity; it is simply a combination of causative  conditions. In this way we can see through to the absolute  nature of the thing. Such insight is wisdom. What we observe  when looking with such an insight is “suchness” itself, the true actuality, the ultimate truth and Absolute Existence.'
(Gates of Chan, p 146)

'Emptiness is relationships, which means that there is no separation between self and other. Instead of seeing ourselves in the center of everything, we see the connectedness of everything. Selflessness is one of the core teachings that free us from attachments and suffering. It is the realization that all things— including us—are related, that they have no permanent, separate, independent self. This does not mean that we have no personality; we always have one, even after enlightenment. It is not that we do not know our name, or do not recognize anyone, or that our mind is blank—enlightenment is not that at all. What is absent in the enlightenment of selflessness is the fundamental assumption of a permanent, separate, independent self within us and within all things. What we consider as separate, independent, permanent, and solid is actually the coming together of everything else.'
(The Essence of Chan by Guo Gu, 2.4)

'Question. – It is quite possible that the saṃskṛtadharmas, coming from the complex of causes and conditions (hetupratyayasāmagrī), are without intrinsic nature (niḥsvabhāva) and therefore empty (śūnya). But the asaṃskṛtadharmas, which are themselves not dharmas coming from causes and conditions, are indestructible (akṣaya), inalterable (abhedya), eternal (nitya) and like space (ākāśasama). How would they be empty?
Answer. – As I have just said, outside of the saṃskṛtas, there are no asaṃskṛtas, and the true nature (bhūtalakṣaṇa) of the saṃskṛtas is exactly asaṃskṛta. The saṃskṛtas being empty, etc., the asaṃskṛtas themselves also are empty, for the two things are not different.
Besides, some people, hearing about the defects of the saṃskṛtadharmas, become attached (abhiniveśante) to the asaṃskṛtadharmas and, as a result of this attachment, develop fetters.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc226205.html; T25, no. 1509, p. 289b5-11)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 8th, 2021 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
LastLegend said:
In the mental process, do you agree that there is an imagined part (mental image), there is a part that actively causes that imagined to arise, and there is a part that knows those two parts. Do you agree? Just like a car operates because of parts and each part has its function.

Astus wrote:
Normally in an instance of thought all four aggregates are present: there is a basic feeling (vedana), there is a recognition (samjna), there is an intention, a relating (samskara), and there is an awareness or consciousness (vijnana). As a fifth contact (sparsa), or in other words impression can be mentioned, that the four are caused by and relate to.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 8th, 2021 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
LastLegend said:
There are five skandhas why only thought being mentioned here?

Astus wrote:
Thought was mentioned because of the section from the sutra that was asked about. Also, thought did not stand for a specific skandha.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 8th, 2021 at 4:36 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
If your goal was to communicate its essence in one sentence using common (non-jargon) and simple words, what would you say?

Astus wrote:
Whatever one conceives is a thought, and if instead of further thinking about it one looks directly to see what a thought is, there is nothing to hold on to.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 7th, 2021 at 9:04 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
LastLegend said:
Mañjuśrī replied, “The conceivable samādhi has an appearance that can be captured while the inconceivable samādhi has no appearance to be captured. All sentient beings have attained the inconceivable samādhi. Why? Because all mental appearances are not the [true] mind. Therefore, the [mental] appearances of all sentient beings and the appearance of the inconceivable samādhi are the same, not different.”

Rick said:
Could someone please use nice simple language to explain what this means. Thanks!

Astus wrote:
Conceivable (思議) means there is a characteristic, a quality, a mark (相) that can be identified. When there is nothing to grasp as a signifying quality of something, then there is no conception of that object, hence inconceivable (不可思議). What are imagined to be the characteristics of mind are not actually the mind, as the mind is assumed to be a continuous knower but there's no such thing, as Manjusri stated right before this ('Not seeing a mind that can conceive', cf. http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-19 ). This is a way to express emptiness, that characteristics - marks grasped as defining qualities, thus making the appearance of a real entity - are made up: 'All things that have characteristics are false and ephemeral. If you see all characteristics to be non-characteristics, then you see the Tathāgata.' ( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-6 ).

In the first fascicle of the sutra there is a section that might help understand it better:

'Śāriputra, the appearance of the dharma realm is bodhi. Why? Because in the dharma realm sentient beings have no appearances, as all dharmas are empty. The emptiness of all dharmas is bodhi, which is non-dual and free from differentiation. Śāriputra, without differentiation, there is no knower. Without a knower, there are no words. Without words, there is neither existence nor nonexistence, neither knowing nor not knowing. This is true for all dharmas. Why? Because dharmas cannot be identified by places, which imply a definite nature.'

Go backwards. Things cannot be found here or there, if one analyses them properly and tries to identify them directly in one's experience there is nothing to obtain. That means all things are mere words and ideas that are made up, they have no actual basis or object. As the object conceived does not exist, there is no basis for one who conceives them in any way. It's like the metaphor of the snake and the rope: when there is no snake there is no longer fear. Being free from both subject and object, that is liberation.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 7th, 2021 at 6:18 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
Does the mysterious or unfathomable or unknowable play a role in Buddhist dharma? Because it sure does in the Vedas!

Astus wrote:
Being readily visible (sāṃdṛṣṭiko/sandiṭṭhiko) is one of the main qualities of the Dharma.

'Those who explained to me previously,
before I encountered Gotama’s teaching,
said ‘thus it was’ or ‘so it shall be’.
All that was just the testament of hearsay;
all that just fostered speculation.

Alone, the dispeler of darkness
is splendid, a beacon:
Gotama, vast in wisdom,
Gotama, vast in intelligence.

He is the one who taught me Dhamma,
visible in this very life, immediately effective,
the untroubled, the end of craving,
to which there is no compare.'
( https://suttacentral.net/snp5.19/en/sujato )

How so? See e.g.: https://suttacentral.net/sn1.20/en/sujato, https://suttacentral.net/sn35.70/en/sujato, https://suttacentral.net/an3.53/en/sujato, https://suttacentral.net/an6.47/en/sujato.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 8:34 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
The Vedas say something like: You cannot know brahman, but you can know that you are brahman. That's Advaitin enlightenment in a nutshell.

I know what you're thinking: "To know that you are <the unknowable> doesn't make sense!" When I asked my teacher how this knowing happens, he said it is an event in the mind that comes from the practice of shravana (listening), manana (clarifying doubts), and nididhyasana (contemplating, meditating, assimilating).

Astus wrote:
If it is accepted that atman is brahman, then knowing one's self is knowing brahman. Despite playing around the words that the self cannot know itself as an object, it is still the main soteriological theory of Vedanta that it's possible to arrive at consciousness that is the self.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Were/are Zen monastery time schedules liberal with regard to meal and dharma talk timing?
Content:
czf said:
I have also heard from other sangha members that some Zen monasteries have a dinner in the early evening (16-17) which would contrast with the Theravada and Tibetan approaches of not having any meals after noon.

Astus wrote:
evening meal (yakuseki kittō 藥石喫湯, yakuseki 藥石)
Literally "medicine" (yakuseki 藥石) and "drinking decoctions" (kittō 喫湯). According to the Indian Vinaya, Buddhist monks were not permitted to take solid food after midday, but drinking liquids was allowed. For monks who were ill, however, solid food was permitted at any time of day for medicinal purposes. In the Chinese Buddhist monasteries of the Song and Yuan dynasties that served as the model for Japanese Zen monasteries, an evening meal was routinely served to all the monks in residence, but it was euphemistically called "medicine."
( https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/glossary/individual.html?key=evening_meal )

'The Chinese maintained, however, that because the work of the monastery continued into the evening, monks could not do without an evening meal. Supper was eaten in most Chinese monasteries, although there were usually a few monks who preferred to follow the rule strictly and eat nothing solid later than 12:00. They were free to do so, but according to one informant they were still expected to come to the refectory along with everyone else unless their age or status excused them.'
(The Practice of Chinese Buddhism by Holmes Welch, p 111)

czf said:
Are those aspects of the time schedule considered traditional in Zen monastic life? Is there more material on the subject of the practical everyday aspects of Zen monastic conduct that I could read?

Astus wrote:
What I could quickly come up with:

The Practice of Chinese Buddhism by Holmes Welch
Buddhist Monasticism in East Asia ed. by James A. Benn, Lori Meeks, and James Robson
The Origins of Buddhist Monastic Codes in China by Yifa
Japanese Temple Buddhism by Stephen G. Covell


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 3:55 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
As I said, the Vedantin 'answer' to this is that The Truth was communicated directly by Ishvara, who unlike humans is not blind.

Astus wrote:
If it's a truth only because the source that is unknown is believed to be correct, and nobody has actually seen that truth personally, it is still baseless. Also, what would be the value in communicating something that nobody can comprehend?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 6:26 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
And the final straw for me was learning that the only definitive 'proof' of the reality of brahman is the word of Ishvara in the scriptures. It's tough for a recovering Catholic to feel comfortable with that!

Astus wrote:
Well, at least Catholics try to put in some logic as proof. If, as you say, there's only the scriptures as proof, then it's like in the https://suttacentral.net/mn95/en/sujato:

“Master Gotama, regarding that which by the lineage of testament and by canonical authority is the ancient hymnal of the brahmins, the brahmins come to the definite conclusion: ‘This is the only truth, other ideas are silly.’ What do you say about this?”
“Well, Bhāradvāja, is there even a single one of the brahmins who says this: ‘I know this, I see this: this is the only truth, other ideas are silly’?”
“No, Master Gotama.”
“Well, is there even a single teacher of the brahmins, or a teacher’s teacher, or anyone back to the seventh generation of teachers, who says this: ‘I know this, I see this: this is the only truth, other ideas are silly’?”
“No, Master Gotama.”
“Well, what of the ancient hermits of the brahmins, namely Aṭṭhaka, Vāmaka, Vāmadeva, Vessāmitta, Yamadaggi, Aṅgīrasa, Bhāradvāja, Vāseṭṭha, Kassapa, and Bhagu? They were the authors and propagators of the hymns. Their hymnal was sung and propagated and compiled in ancient times; and these days, brahmins continue to sing and chant it, chanting what was chanted and teaching what was taught. Did even they say: ‘We know this, we see this: this is the only truth, other ideas are silly’?”
“No, Master Gotama.”
“So, Bhāradvāja, it seems that there is not a single one of the brahmins, not even anyone back to the seventh generation of teachers, nor even the ancient hermits of the brahmins who say: ‘We know this, we see this: this is the only truth, other ideas are silly.’
Suppose there was a queue of blind men, each holding the one in front: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. In the same way, it seems to me that the brahmins’ statement turns out to be like a queue of blind men: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. What do you think, Bhāradvāja? This being so, doesn’t the brahmins’ faith turn out to be baseless?”


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Malcolm said:
So what?

Astus wrote:
So he advocated a view that was not in harmony with the Dharma, and was quite open about it too.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 6th, 2021 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Rick said:
In fact, nothing can be said about nirguna brahman, even though Advaita teachers do, because how else are you going to clue your students in on the fact that there is something 'beyond' vyavahara?

Astus wrote:
First stating that nothing can be said about something, and then giving all sorts of definitions and explanations about it makes the first statement a pointless excuse for failing to put together a coherent argument. Or one can be like Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta and practise equivocation (amarāvikkhepavāda, cf. DN 1). Neither of them really work. Also, I don't see this type of evasion in the works of Shankara and his followers trying to avoid being explicit that they believe in a self that is the sole existing consciousness.

Rick said:
“Only an entity which is an object of sense-knowledge can become an object of affirmative predication of the form ‘it is’ or an object of negative predication of the form ‘it is not’. Reason also proves that Brahman cannot be expressed by words denoting existence (sat) or non-existence (asat).” — Shankara

Astus wrote:
That quote well points to the usual negation of objects, but at the same time indicates the adherence to the idea of a really existing subject. If only they'd drop the whole absolute consciousness business, then they could be Buddhists.

Rick said:
something that is taught and then later un-taught.

Astus wrote:
And then what? If you think Vedanta teaches letting go of self, why do they argue for it to be the one true being and call Buddhists nihilist?

'Likewise, the Self and the non-Self would both be non-existent if they were similarly superimposed on each other through Ignorance. But that is not desirable as it is the position of the Nihilists.'
( https://shankaracharya.org/upadesa_sahasri.php; in Mayeda tr: II.2.55, p 236)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 5th, 2021 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Malcolm said:
And thus, Śantarakṣita mocks Advaitans who assert an ajativāda without also accepting the teaching of the Tathāgata, and likewise, the reason that Śankarācārya is mocked by later Vedantins for being a crypto-buddhist.

Astus wrote:
I think Shankara was aware of some Buddhist teachings, and has differentiated his view from them intentionally. Already Gaudapada did so in his closing words:

'The knowledge of the wise one, who is all-light, is ever untouched by objects. All the entities as well as knowledge (which are non-djfferent) are also ever-untouched by any object. This is not the view of the Buddha.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/mandukya-upanishad-karika-bhashya/d/doc143804.html )

And to elaborate further the same point, what I think points to the basic difference:

'The Vedantins refute them by saying that there can be no illusion without a substratum which is not an illusion. The existence of the Atman must be admitted. Even the void has a witness; if not, it would be impossible to say, 'There is a void'.'
( https://www.shankaracharya.org/panchadasi_trans_6.php )

Also this:

'O you ignorant one ! Why do you assert the blissful, ever-existent Atman, which resides in your own body and is (evidently) different from it, which is known as Purusha and is established (by the Shruti as identical with Brahman), to be absolutely non-existent ?
O you ignorant one ! Try to know, with the help of Shruti and reasoning, your own Self, Purusha, which is different from the body, (not a void but) the very form of existence, and very difficult for persons like you to realize.'
( https://www.shankaracharya.org/aparokshanubhuti.php )

And this:

'The disciple questioned: After these five sheaths have been eliminated as unreal, I find nothing, O Master, in this universe but a Void, the absence of everything. What entity is there left forsooth with which the wise knower of the Self should realise his identity.
The Guru answered: Thou has rightly said, O learned man ! Thou art clever indeed in discrimination. That by which all those modifications such as egoism as well as their subsequent absence (during deep sleep) are perceived, but which Itself is not perceived, know thou that Atman - the Knower - through the sharpest intellect.
That which is perceived by something else has for its witness the latter. When there is no agent to perceive a thing, we cannot speak of it as having been perceived at all.
This Atman is a self-cognised entity because It is cognised by Itself. Hence the individual soul is itself and directly the Supreme Brahman, and nothing else.
That which clearly manifests Itself in the states of wakefulness, dream and profound sleep; which is inwardly perceived in the mind in various forms as an unbroken series of egoistic impressions; which witnesses the egoism, the Buddhi, etc., which are of diverse forms and modifications; and which makes Itself felt as the Existence-Knowledge-Bliss Absolute; know thou this Atman, thy own Self, within thy heart.'
( http://www.shankaracharya.org/vivekachudamani3.php )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 5th, 2021 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Matt J said:
The point isn't that Brahman is never described as having qualities. The point is that when Brahman is described with qualities, it is saguna Brahman. It is a tortured reading to read "nirguna" as meaning with characteristics and a basic error.

Astus wrote:
But existence, consciousness, and bliss are not characteristics but the substance of Brahman. Otherwise if even being were a characteristic there simply wouldn't be a Brahman at all, thus nirguna would mean sunya and would be quite preferable to us Buddhists.

'Who has ever denied that the Bliss (Ānanda) which in its nature admits of no difference whatever is the"same as Brahman? Bliss is verily the essential nature of the Supreme Self (Paramātman). But that bliss which manifests itself as love and so on cannot be identical with the Supreme Brahman. We call that Bliss Brahman, in which such distinctions as love and so on have no place, and which is quite beyond the reach of manas.'
...
'As the object of genuine love, the Self is in his essential nature the true Bliss itself; and as dwelling in each body .eparately, the Bliss-Ātman becomes divided as it were. As the genuine Bliss, the Bliss-Ātman is the original, whose reflections enter into tranquil states of the mind when thinking of agreeable objects such as wealth, sons, etc. These reflections are as false as the images reflected in water or in a mirror; and though the bliss which has become separated by the upādhis is real, still, it has the fault of limitation. Consequently, neither the reflected image of Bliss nor its detached bits can constitute the genuine Bliss. On the contrary, that Bliss is real which constitutes the essential nature of Brahman, and which is not subject to any kind of limitation.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-taittiriya-upanishad/d/doc79821.html )

Later there's a section on the issue of defining Brahman that is concluded with the following:

'Though birth, &c., inhere elsewhere, Brahman may be defined indirectly as the cause of the birth, etc., this causality being falsely ascribed to Brahman. We say, for instance, “(what appeared to be) the serpent is this garland.” So it is possible to define Brahman through what is ascribed to Him, thus: Brahman is that which is the cause of the universe. Just as it is not incompatible that one single person, Devadatta, should be spoken of as father, son, brother, son-in-law, etc., though these words have quite distinct meanings, so also the words “Real, Consciousness” etc., which, as understood in their ordinary sense, convey distinct meanings and refer to distinct things, may point to the indivisible non-dual Brahman and thus constitute the direct definition (svarūpa-lakṣaṇa as opposed to taṭastha-lakṣaṇa) of Brahman.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-taittiriya-upanishad/d/doc79852.html )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 5th, 2021 at 4:51 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Matt J said:
Saguna means literally with gunas, or more generically with characteristics. Here, Shankara is saying that the descriptions of Brahman apply only the experience of limited human beings. In fact, some refer to the experience of Brahman as Brahman-vritti. Neither of these is actually Brahman, since Brahman is nirguna, literally without gunas or generically without characteristics. Shankara essentially is trying to reconcile the two descriptions of Brahman as given in the Upanishads.

Astus wrote:
That's not all there is to it. As he says in the same section:

'According to its essence it will be concluded in the subsequent portion of this Upanishad that it is unknown to those who know, and known to those who do not know."

And then a little later:

'In the case of those who find the Atman in the conditioned organs of sense, mind and intelligence, the false notion ‘I know Brahman’ is quite possible, because they cannot discriminate between Brahman and these conditions and because the conditions of intelligence, etc., are known to them. It is to show that such knowledge of the Brahman is fallacious that the latter half of the text is introduced. Or, the latter half ‘Avijnatam, etc..’ may be construed as furnishing a reason for the view propounded in the former.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/kena-upanishad-shankara-bhashya/d/doc145050.html )

Clarified in the next part:

'To say that It is unknown to those who know is also a contradiction, how then could that Brahman he well-known? This is explained in this text, ‘Pratibodhaviditam’ means ‘known in respect of every state of consciousness.’ By the word ‘bodha’ is meant ‘mental perception.’ That by which all states of consciousness are perceived like objects is the Atman. He knows and sees all states of consciousness, being by nature nothing hut intelligence and is indicated by these states of consciousness, as blended with every one of them. There is no other way by which the inner Atman could be known. Therefore when the Brahman is known as the witness of all states of consciousness, then it is known well. Being the witness of all states of consciousness, it will be clear that it is intelligence in its essence, subject to neither birth nor death, eternal, pure, unconditioned, and one in all things, because there is no difference in its essence, just as in the essence of the Akasa, in a vessel or mountain cave, etc.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/kena-upanishad-shankara-bhashya/d/doc145051.html )

From this it can be seen that it's not the case that Brahman is not consciousness, but that as long as one interprets those words as referring to objects one remains mistaken.

For the Brhadaranyaka commentaries:

'How through these two terms ‘Not this, not this’ is it sought to describe the Truth of truth? By the elimination of all differences due to limiting adjuncts, the words refer to something that has no distinguishing mark such as name, or form, or action, or heterogeneity, or species, or qualities. Words denote things through one or other of these. But Brahman has none of these distinguishing marks. Hence It cannot be described as, ‘It. is such and such,’ as we can describe a cow by saying,. ‘There moves a white cow with horns.’ Brahman is described by means of name, form and action superimposed on It, in such terms as, ‘Knowledge, Bliss, Brahman’ (III. ix. 28), and ‘Pure Intelligence’ (II. iv. 12), ‘Brahman,’ and ‘Atman.’ When, however, we wish to describe Its true nature, free from all differences due to limiting adjuncts, then it is an utter impossibility. Then there is only one way left, viz. to describe It as ‘Not this, not this,’ by eliminating all possible specifications of It that one may know of.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc117948.html )

'Moreover, if Brahman ever knows Its own bliss, it is superfluous to distinguish between awareness and unawareness. If It is constantly aware of this bliss, then that is Its nature; hence there is no sense in maintaining that It cognises Its own bliss. Such a view would be tenable if ever there was the possibility of Its not knowing that bliss, as for instance a man knows himself and another (by an act of will). There is certainly no sense in distinguishing between a state of awareness and one of unawareness in the case of a man whose mind is uninterruptedly absorbed in an arrow, for instance. If, on the other hand, Brahman or the Self is supposed to be knowing Its bliss interruptedly, then in the intervals when It does not cognise Itself, It must know something else; and the Self would become changeful, which would make It non-permanent. Hence the text, ‘Knowledge, Bliss,’ etc., must be interpreted as setting forth the nature of Brahman, and not signifying that the bliss of the Self is cognised.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc118360.html )

This is from a couple of centuries after Shankara, but is from a generally well regarded text:

'Reality is Brahman which is without a second and is Existence, Consciousness and Bliss. Unreality is Nescience and all other material objects.'
( https://www.swamij.com/Vedantasara-Sadananda.htm; for some footnotes: https://estudantedavedanta.net/Vedantasara-Nikhilananda.pdf, p 21)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 5th, 2021 at 5:26 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Matt J said:
Will I spend an hour combing through sources to to find such a citation to a statement universally accepted by Vedanta teachers (at least IME) and will not likely be accepted?
Yes.

Check out Shankara's Bhyasa on Kena Upanishad, verse 9.

Astus wrote:
It begins at verse 3 that the known is rejected, then verse 4 discusses the problem with words, with verses 5-8 pointing to the knower as Brahman, then in verse 9 again the inadequacy of mere words is discussed (like in Brhadaranyaka 2.3.6 commentary (Madhavananda, 3rd ed, p 344-345)). Then for verses 11-12 it is explained that Brahman can be known as the ultimate consciousness. Also on consciousness and bliss being its nature and not characteristic see Brhadaranyaka 3.9.28.7 (p 566-567) where Shankara wrote: "Hence the text, 'Knowledge, Bliss,' etc., must be interpreted as setting forth the nature of Brahman, and not signifying that the bliss of the Self is cognised."


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 5th, 2021 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Matt J said:
Sat chit ananda is literally saguna Brahman. This is basic Vedanta.

Astus wrote:
Do you know any texts that state so?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 3rd, 2021 at 6:47 AM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Matt J said:
Sounds saguna to me.

Astus wrote:
It isn't. I was simply paraphrasing saccidananda that is considered the essence (svarupa), for instance in the first stanza of Nirguna Manasa Puja, or in stanzas 36, 56, and 64 in Atmabodha.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 2nd, 2021 at 5:24 PM
Title: Re: Nirguṇa Ultimates
Content:
Caoimhghín said:
What, to you, is the meaningful key distinction between dharmatā and nirguṇabrahman?

Astus wrote:
Dharmata refers to the general characteristics of all things that can be summed up as emptiness. Nirgunabrahman is the mistaken idea that there is one ultimately existing consciousness that is happy on its own.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 2nd, 2021 at 5:19 PM
Title: Re: I'm confused about Buddhist arguments against a creator God and what that entails for buddha activity?
Content:
yagmort said:
imho it is of direct import to the OP's question because i got the impression that the whole idea of creator God of Christianity has been misunderstood. when people say "god", "creator" we immediately drowning in the ocean of semantic problems. i got no idea why people assume every one got the same meaning about these 2 words.
as i pointed out in the example above, christians do not think of God as some sort of highest, supreme,  separate creator entity which governs this universe. just saying.

Kim O'Hara said:
"christians do not think of God as some sort of highest, supreme,  separate creator entity which governs this universe" is way too broad - so broad it's far more wrong than right.
A few (very few) christians do not think of God as some sort of highest, supreme,  separate creator entity which governs this universe.
Most (nearly all) christians do think of God as some sort of highest, supreme,  separate creator entity which governs this universe.

Astus wrote:
It's probably easier to just look up commonly provided definitions:

'What idea of the essence and essential attributes of God may be derived from divine revelation?
That God is a Spirit, eternal, all-good, omniscient, all-just, almighty, omnipresent, unchangeable, all-sufficing to himself, all-blessed.'
( http://www.pravoslavieto.com/docs/eng/Orthodox_Catechism_of_Philaret.htm )

'What can we learn from Scriptures? We can learn some of the attributes of God. We will point out how Scripture tells us that God is Spirit, Eternal, Good, Omniscient, All-Righteous, Omnipresent, Unchangeable and Unity.'
( https://www.stgeorgegreenville.org/our-faith/catechism/who-is-god/ )

'We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.'
( http://ww1.antiochian.org/content/nicene-creed )


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 2nd, 2021 at 5:01 PM
Title: Re: I'm confused about Buddhist arguments against a creator God and what that entails for buddha activity?
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
if the Dharmakaya is unconditioned and this is the ultimate mind of all buddhas (I understand its individual and somewhat unreal)then how can they project emanations ,purelands,intentions and actions?if it is unconditioned wouldn't it be inert?

Astus wrote:
The dharmakaya is unconditioned because it's not a thing, rather it refers to the complete absence of obscurations, or from another perspective it's emptiness just like the emptiness of everything else (i.e. dharmadhatu). The form bodies have the dharmakaya as their essence, so to speak, but it's not like that the dharmakaya is some sort of creator. Not unlike all other phenomena, a buddha is without substance/self and appears because of various conditions. For a short summary you can look up the last two chapters of The Jewel Ornament of Liberation by Gampopa.

Artziebetter1 said:
if one can say that a being can be eternal but not permanent,then what is the objection to the theist that can claim his God is eternal but not unchanging

Astus wrote:
The problem starts with the idea of a 'being'. To say there is one and the same being who continues to exist from one moment to the next, that is basically the view of a permanent self/soul/being/entity/substance.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 31st, 2021 at 2:09 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
I meant to say that you can’t establish even a view or a statement to be true. Like the view, “everything lacks self-existence,” do you hold this to be absolutely true? At which point this view is also dropped or you have to think about it constantly? You can’t retain a view to be true to be grasped.

Astus wrote:
It depends on the criteria of truth. Also, what's the line between absolute and relative truths? These can be relevant questions, but usually one just works with one's already existing assumptions in order to eliminate all identifications and attachments. The point is not really to claim some idea as the best, but to be free from suffering.

LastLegend said:
Would you say that conception can be pure? Or conception is always with grasping?

Astus wrote:
Conceptions here is about sticking to assumptions and ideas as truth. There are good conceptions in the sense of leading to good births, but there's always grasping and identifying with it.

LastLegend said:
This depends on how one takes the analysis: or they observe it directly in their mind? Or they playing philosophy.

Astus wrote:
Analysis means applying the teachings to observe phenomena.

LastLegend said:
Has the view of dependently arisen taken care of grasping, since pure and unpure are still distinguished? When unpure arises, how is it dealt with?

Astus wrote:
Based on understanding one can observe dependent arising, and with that remove the root of attachment, the taints of taking things to be self or belonging to self. That's because one can then confirm that things are not reliable, pleasurable, or controllable to be taken as one's identity or possession.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 31st, 2021 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
How do you drop your own statement because a statement cannot established to exist, yet you still have mind phenomena arise as pure and unpure?



Astus wrote:
Do you mean that if one believed there was a tiger in the room but when looking into it no tiger was found, how is it possible that one no longer believed in one's previous idea?

'Conceptions will occur if things are held to exist,
But how things do not exist has been thoroughly analyzed.
When things are seen not to exist, conceptions about their existence will not arise,
Just as fire will not burn without fuel.
Ordinary beings are bound by conception,
And yogins, free from conception, are liberated.
The wise ones teach that the reversal of conception
Is the result of analysis.'
(Madhyamakavatara 6.116-117, tr T. Dewar)

'Those who do not meditate with wisdom by analyzing the entity of things specifically, but merely meditate on the elimination of mental activity, cannot avert conceptual thoughts and also cannot realize identitylessness because they lack the light of wisdom. If the fire of consciousness knowing. phenomena as they are is produced from individual analysis of suchness, then like the fire produced by rubbing wood it will burn the wood of conceptual thought. The Buddha has spoken in this way.'
(Bhavanakrama in Stages of Meditation, p 134)

LastLegend said:
Do you want to say pure and unpure cannot established either?

Astus wrote:
Established as ultimate entities? No. All phenomena are dependently arisen, don't you agree?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 31st, 2021 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Why did Buddhism take a drastic focus into emptiness at the turn of the new era? (1st century CE)
Content:
Astus wrote:
'It is noteworthy that in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijnanakaya, the Sarvāstivādins never call themselves as such. When arguing against the Vibhajyavādins, they refer to themselves as the Yukta-vādins (應理論者); against the Pudgalavādins, as the Śūnyatā-vādins (性空論者). It was perhaps later, in the course of doctrinal confrontation with rival schools and being hard pressed to articulate their position, that the term “Sarvāstivāda” came distinctly to be insisted upon.'
(Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma by Bhikkhu KL Dhammjoti, 4th edition, p 59)

Then later we have Prajnaparamita sutras and Madhyamaka arguing against the Sarvastivadin idea of svabhava.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 30th, 2021 at 5:10 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Malcolm said:
No, it is the view of Candrakīrti, but perhaps it's too subtle for some people to grasp.

Astus wrote:
Do you know perhaps others who picked up that interpretation? On the other hand, wouldn't it be quite close to what Gorampa criticised in Tsongkhapa interpreting conventional phenomena as purely designations?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 30th, 2021 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Malcolm said:
The imputation itself is the agent and recipient of action, that's the point.

Astus wrote:
That is more likely the view of Gorampa.

'In the Madhyamaka system, it is not feasible for the skandhas to be the agent of actions and the experiencer of results, because neither the self nor the skandhas exist when analyzed, and the self appears as the agent and the experiencer at the conventional level, not the skandhas.'
(Distinguishing the Views, p 75)

As for Candrakirti's own explanation of 6.162 and other commentators I checked (Mikyö Dorje (p 417), Wangchuk Dorje (p 393), Tsongkhapa (p 466), Mipham (p 303), Jamyang Khyentse (p 285)), they simply explain it in the context of the relationship between the self and the aggregates as appopriator and appropriated. This is in line with the teachings on the 20 types of identity view (e.g. SN 22.47, AKB 5.7), where the self is simply a wrong view that assumes identity with or ownership of an aggregate. That agrees with the conventional mind where self is always a shorthand for 'I am this' and 'this is mine'. In other words, just as a car is imaginable only with its parts present, a self is always conceived of as an aggregate, therefore saying that the appropriator self is the doer and enjoyer of actions, as if it could be something apart from the aggregates, sounds like assuming an appropriator without the appropriated.
By the way, if the self were to be used as the agent and experiencer by Candrakirti (despite teachings like SN 12.12), then it would have been a simple way to explain karma, but he did not do so at for instance MA 6.39.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 29th, 2021 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
When Buddha nature is not recognized, and call it just a concept is really doing a disservice to Buddhas and Patriarchs.

Astus wrote:
As long as it's not recognised, how could it be anything else but a concept? And after it is recognised, do you assume it is it?

Since you brought up the patriarchs, do you think Linji was wrong?

'All phenomena worldly and world-transcending are without a real fixed identity of their own, they have no inherent nature. There are just empty names, and names are empty too.'
(The Recorded Sayings of Linji, in Three Chan Classics, BDk ed, p 29; T47n1985p499c15-16)

And was Shenhui right after all?

'One day the master announced to the assembly, “I have a thing without head or tail, without name or title, without front or back. Do you know what it is?”
Shenhui came forth and said, “It is the fundamental source of the buddhas. It is my buddha-nature.” 
The master said, “I told you it was without name or title, but you have called it the fundamental source, the buddha-nature. You’ve just covered your head with thatch. You’ve become a follower with only discriminative understanding.”'
(Platform Sutra, ch 8, BDK ed, p 78)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 29th, 2021 at 3:43 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
It’s the same that sunlight is what brightens the sky and thus enables us to see sunlight. Actually, when you are seeing, you do see that you are seeing.

Astus wrote:
Sunlight is not lit by sunlight, sunlight is already light.

'The Guardian of the World himself has said
That mind cannot be seen by mind.
In just the same way, he has said,
The sword’s edge cannot cut the sword.
“But,” you say, “it’s like the flame
That perfectly illuminates itself.”
The flame, in fact, can never light itself.
And why? Because the darkness never dims it!'
(Bodhicaryavatara 9.17-19, tr Padmakara)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 29th, 2021 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:


Astus wrote:
'Our mortal nature is our buddhanature. Beyond this nature there's no buddha.'
(Bloodstream Sermon, p 17, tr Red Pine; X63n1218p2c20-21)

PadmaVonSamba said:
What Bodhidharma is saying (that’s a really great book, btw!) is that realization can be had, here and now, in this body.

Astus wrote:
What do you base that interpretation on? It's a recurring topic in that text and in Chan in general that 'this mind is buddha' (即心是佛 / 心即是佛).

'The mind is the buddha, and the buddha is the mind. Beyond the mind there's no buddha, and beyond the buddha there's no mind.'
(Bloodstream Sermon, tr Red Pine, p 11; X63n1218p2b11-12)

Sikong Benjing:
"The master replied, ‘If there is a wish to seek for Buddha, then “Heart is Buddha”. If there is a wish to understand Dao, then the “Empty Heart is Dao”.’
‘What is meant by saying “Heart is Buddha”,’ asked the Envoy.
‘Buddha awakens by means of the heart,’ replied the master, ‘and the heart manifests through Buddha. When the empty heart is awakened then even Buddha does not exist.’
Guangting asked further, ‘What is meant by saying that the empty heart is Dao?’
‘Dao is originally the empty heart and the name for empty heart is Dao,’ replied the master. ‘When the empty heart is understood then the empty heart is Dao.’"
(Records of the Transmission of the Lamp, vol 2, 5.86; T51n2076p242b27-c2)

Mazu: 'All of you, each one should have the faith that your own heart is Buddha, that this heart is the Buddha-heart. ... Apart from heart there is no other Buddha and apart from Buddha there is no heart.'
(Records of the Transmission of the Lamp, vol 2, 6.91; T51n2076p246a4-5, a10)

Huangbo: 'This mind is the Buddha; the Buddha is the sentient being.'
(Essentials of the Transmission of Mind, in Zen Texts, BDK ed, p 13; T48n2012Ap379c26)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
That inherent ability is synonymous with original mind. Inherent means that beings don’t have to acquire it from anywhere.

Astus wrote:
If you call buddha nature the ability to realise buddha nature that would mean the ability to realise the ability, which seems as senseless as saying that seeing means seeing the seeing, or that eating means eating the eating. If you were to say that buddha nature is both emptiness and the ability to realise emptiness, maybe better, but then there's still the question of what that ability consists of, and why it's a special point to consider.

PadmaVonSamba said:
Without tathagatagharba, if the mind’s original nature wasn’t already buddha-mind, there would be no way to return to that, no way to liberation. Beings would simply wallow in appearances (and most do) with no basis for doing otherwise.

Astus wrote:
The doctrine of buddha mind is not universal among all Buddhist schools, and its interpretation also varies, so it's hard to say why it's necessary to posit it when others can do just fine without it.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 8:45 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Buddha nature is referred to as aware nature in Bodhidharma’s blood stream sermon. Aware nature is not aggregates.

Astus wrote:
Looking for something outside this body and mind is a mistake.

'Our mortal nature is our buddhanature. Beyond this nature there's no buddha.'
(Bloodstream Sermon, p 17, tr Red Pine; X63n1218p2c20-21)

The only difference to consider is whether there is or is not any attachment.

'Your mind is basically empty. All appearances are illusions. Don't hold on to appearances. ... If you seek direct understanding, don't hold on to any appearance whatsoever, and you'll succeed. I have no other advice. The sutras say, "All appearances are illusions." They have no fixed existence, no constant form. They're impermanent. Don't cling to appearances and you'll be of one mind with the Buddha.'
(p 27; p3c10-14)

See also the final paragraphs from 'But this mind isn't somewhere outside the material body of four elements.' until 'But once you know that the nature of anger and joy is empty and you let them go, you free yourself from karma.' (p 43-45; p5a8-a22)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 7:02 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
But what I’m saying is that Buddha-nature, or unborn mind, tathagatagharba, Buddha mind, etc. Are all terms that refer to mind’s original state. That original state itself isn’t a concept. Yes, you can have concepts about it, labels for it, but the mind’s original state is just that.

Astus wrote:
The mind is the four mental aggregates, so the mind's nature is the nature of the mental aggregates, in other words, what they are like in general, what their characteristics are. Unborn is a synonym for the characteristic of emptiness, therefore buddha nature refers to the aggregates being empty, i.e. insubstantial, not self. To name the absence of self-nature as buddha nature is a skilful means, but just as emptiness is not a thing, not even in conventional terms, buddha nature, being a sort of rebranding of emptiness, is merely a concept without any actual referent.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 5:17 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
The reason why Buddha nature is concealed it’s because of aggregates.

Astus wrote:
Do you have any source for that? Also, if the aggregates conceal buddha nature, that means buddha nature is not just without a body, it is also without consciousness and all mental functions. What good is buddha nature for that is practically less useful than a piece of rock?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
I don’t know who labels the emptiness of the aggregates Buddha-nature. Maybe you are mixing a bunch of different stuff together.

Astus wrote:
Didn't you agree https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=605487#p605487 that "it is 'the mind’s original unborn state free of craving' that you call buddha nature, in other words that the mind is empty and pure"?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Buddha-nature is what all beings possess.
They also possess the potential to realize that Buddha nature.

Astus wrote:
Labelling the emptiness of the aggregates buddha nature can be inspirational (as it's supposed to be according to https://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=record&vid=1125&mid=1944007 ), but other than that it literally does not stand for anything, so how could it be more than a concept?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Malcolm said:
No, it is an imagined, nonexistent self that causes and experiences everything, for example, when a car is in accident, it is the imagined car for which one pays the damages, not the wrong view of the imagined car. But perhaps this is a special point of Candrakīrti's Madhyamaka, unlikely to be found the Visuddhimagga.

Astus wrote:
In one manner of speaking it can be said so that it's the self/car that acts or is damaged, but at the same time, any type of self-view is imputed in dependence on the aggregates (according to Candrakirti too: MA 6.150 and 6.162-164), just as a car is imputed in dependence on its parts. And just as if the windshield is broken then saying 'the car is damaged' is talking in general terms, similarly, whatever actions and results occur are the causal events of the aggregates, even if commonly it can be said to be that of a self or being.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 7:00 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
To say you don’t function is to say you are not sentient basically like a rock.

Astus wrote:
However, it matters whether you attribute function to some sort of unconditioned self/mind, or conditional phenomena, because what is unconditioned cannot function.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 6:57 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Buddha nature, the mind’s original unborn state free of craving, is inherent in all beings.
All beings possess the potential to eventually realize it. Another word for potential is possibility.

Astus wrote:
So, if I understand you correctly, it is 'the mind’s original unborn state free of craving' that you call buddha nature, in other words that the mind is empty and pure.

PadmaVonSamba said:
What is that inherent quality?
If you ask a Theravadin, it’s the possibility of attaining nibbana. If you ask a Mahayana Buddhist, it’s the possibility of becoming a Bodhisattva and/or attaining the omniscient state of buddhahood. A Pure-Land Buddhist will tell you it’s the possibility to be reborn in Sukhavati. It all basically boils down to one way or another becoming free from the cycle of samsara.

Astus wrote:
But here you say that the inherent quality that can be potentially realised is the possibility of realisation. That seems to disagree with the statement above on original purity, and at the same time makes the strange claim that one can realise that one can realise something, like saying that the qualities of a Dharma teacher is the possibility to know the possibility that one can become a Dharma teacher. That is not saying what a Dharma teacher is like.

Is buddha nature then original purity of the mind that can be realised, or is it a possibility that can be realised? Or do you mean perhaps that the mind is not originally pure, only potentially it can become pure?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 5:09 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Malcolm said:
Well, actually the I-making habit, the basic knowledge obscuration, has no real existence as a self, but it functions as an agent of karma and a recipient of karma, so there is that, even though the "I" it imputes does not exist at all.

Astus wrote:
While in some contexts calling self-view the subject of karma may go well, but it is not an imagined self that causes or experiences anything, rather the mistaken view is what defines intention and action and experiences are generated by them.

As this nice stanza from the Visuddhimagga (XIX.20) says it:

'There is no doer of a deed
Or one who reaps the deed’s result;
Phenomena alone flow on—
No other view than this is right.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
When you finely see that which sees or knows, and realize it’s not anything either. Yet it’s functions it knows, quite clearly it knows that means you are touching pure consciousness.

Astus wrote:
There is no knower/seer (i.e. self) to be found, but to say that what cannot be found (i.e. does not exist) can nevertheless function is like saying that the daughter of a barren woman is a good singer. Consciousness of any type is a conditioned phenomenon, as https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=604890#p604890.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 27th, 2021 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
You are regarding an inherent quality and something to be realized as two mutually exclusive things.

Astus wrote:
Not at all. Impermanence is a quality of the aggregates that is not realised by common beings. But when I asked you to tell what quality buddha nature was in beings, you https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=605059#p605059 it's a potential and as such it couldn't be defined in relation to the five aggregates.

PadmaVonSamba said:
The point is, all beings have the potential to realize the inherent quality (Buddha-mind) that they already possess, but don’t yet realize. That’s why realization is something you attain, and not obtain.

Astus wrote:
What is that inherent quality in beings that they can potentially attain? For instance, is it emptiness?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 26th, 2021 at 7:02 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
When someone refers to Buddha nature as a concept, there are two possible situations: 1) they don’t believe in Buddha nature and haven’t  recognized it 2) If Buddha nature is a concept, what isn’t a concept? Everything else is a concept. Are aggregates concepts too? Because they still have a name. Now if you want to blow everything out of the pool why leave anything in it? If everything isn’t real so is grasping, then the question is if everything is blown out of the pool how is mind at this point? Is it not empty.

Astus wrote:
Can you specify what buddha nature is in beings (five aggregates)? If not, what else is it but a mere fabrication, a simple expression?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 26th, 2021 at 6:52 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
All beings possess the potential to eventually realize the mind’s true nature.

Astus wrote:
All beings also have the potential for many other things. https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=604998#p604998 you stated that buddha nature was a quality that beings can realise. If it is not an already existent quality but rather just the possibility to become a buddha sometime in the future, then it is currently nothing more than a concept of future buddhahood, just as a burning paper remains an idea until it is actually set afire.

PadmaVonSamba said:
Mind isn’t a continuous entity.
It’s a continual process.

Astus wrote:
A continuity is a conventional view nevertheless.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 26th, 2021 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
One’s mind would need to be very quiet to recognize Buddha nature…

Astus wrote:
What sort of buddha dislikes noise?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 26th, 2021 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Tathagatagharba is always there, just as the Sun is always giving off heat and light.

Astus wrote:
Always where exactly? In the body, the mind, or both?

PadmaVonSamba said:
“Buddha” is already the mind’s original state, it’s original nature.

Astus wrote:
If by mind you mean its conventional version that is equivalent to the soul/self, then it being a mere concept without any actual referent, looking for the original nature of something fictional seems futile. Or if by mind you mean the six consciousnesses or the four mental aggregates, then they are quite temporary and it sounds difficult to put the idea of 'original nature' on them. The third version might be is how the two truths are used, in which case mind is the conventional idea of a continuous entity and its original nature is the ultimate reality of it being momentary and impersonal.

PadmaVonSamba said:
But it is our habitual grasping and other negative actions of body, speech, and mind which make us unable to realize the Buddha-mind.

Astus wrote:
Seems to fit the third version.

PadmaVonSamba said:
Buddha-mind isn’t conditional; our realization of it is conditional.

Astus wrote:
Although there can be various unconditioned dharmas depending on the system one prefers, they all agree in calling only 'non-things' as unconditioned, like various forms of cessation.

PadmaVonSamba said:
My understanding is that the way to resolve it is to examine the true nature of the obscurations. We have to determine if all those clouds have any substance to them or not. And that’s where understanding emptiness comes in.
So, we observe thoughts that arise during meditation, and we see they have no substance. We examine conflicting thoughts and emotions such as anger or impatience when they arise during the day (“off the cushion”) and determine that they are in fact, nothing. They have no substance.
Gradually, we stop giving rise to the obscuring clouds altogether. Then the mind’s true nature and the potential for full realization become clear.

Astus wrote:
That is the standard method in Buddhism, with or without the concept of buddha-nature. One has to purify the mind, so to say. But whether one believes that it is already pure but still needs some cleaning, or that it simply needs some cleaning, if approached properly, makes no difference in the end. Still, believing that one is already a buddha can help sometimes.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 25th, 2021 at 2:15 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
When conditions are such that the allergic person eats strawberries, and has a reaction, yes, that is an event, as is one’s moment of realization.

Astus wrote:
If so, then what has the potential to react in a certain way to specific conditions? If it's not the aggregates nor something other, then what sort of conditions could exist in such an unspecified realm?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 25th, 2021 at 4:23 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
It’s a potential.
The potential to become fully awakened.
A potential isn’t made or not made of aggregates.

Astus wrote:
A potential is not a quality but a hypothesised event, and although beings have a higher likelihood of becoming hell-dwellers than buddhas, I don't see much talk of our hellish nature. Also, imagining a future possibility is very much conceptual.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 25th, 2021 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Since you said Buddha nature is a concept, so then what is grasping itself? Or how does it work in mind?

Astus wrote:
If you're looking for more in depth explanations, you can start with the Abhidharmakosabhasya for instance.

'Craving ("thirst") (tṛṣṇā) is the state [of the five aggregates] of those who desire enjoyments and sexual union. Grasping (upādāna) is to be distinguished [from craving]: it is the state [of the five aggregates] of those who run around in search of the enjoyments.'
(AKB 3.23, tr Gelong Lodrö Sangpo, for more see 5.38-40)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 7:27 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Buddha nature itself is a quality that all beings have the potential to realize. It was there even before anyone had any concept of it.

Astus wrote:
What is that quality? Is it a quality of the aggregates or not? If it is of the aggregates, it is just as impermanent and empty as they are. If it is not a quality of the aggregates, what would it have to do with beings?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 7:15 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
What is grasping?

Astus wrote:
'There are these four kinds of grasping. Grasping at sensual pleasures, views, precepts and observances, and theories of a self. Grasping originates from craving. Grasping ceases when craving ceases. The practice that leads to the cessation of grasping is simply this noble eightfold path'
( https://suttacentral.net/mn9/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 2:46 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Would you say Buddha nature is only the object of consciousness?

Astus wrote:
Buddha nature is a concept, and whatever is not an object of consciousness is unknown. Assuming something beyond awareness is itself a conjecture formed in the mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Then when consciousness arises, does it have any appearance characteristics?

Astus wrote:
'Then the Buddha said to the mendicants, “Mendicants, do you understand my teachings as Sāti does, when he misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and makes much bad karma?”
“No, sir. For in many ways the Buddha has told us that consciousness is dependently originated, since without a cause, consciousness does not come to be.”
“Good, good, mendicants! It’s good that you understand my teaching like this. For in many ways I have told you that consciousness is dependently originated, since without a cause, consciousness does not come to be. But still this Sāti misrepresents me by his wrong grasp, harms himself, and makes much bad karma. This will be for his lasting harm and suffering.
Consciousness is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it arises. Consciousness that arises dependent on the eye and sights is reckoned as eye consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the ear and sounds is reckoned as ear consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the nose and smells is reckoned as nose consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the tongue and tastes is reckoned as tongue consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the body and touches is reckoned as body consciousness. Consciousness that arises dependent on the mind and thoughts is reckoned as mind consciousness.
It’s like fire, which is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it burns. A fire that burns dependent on logs is reckoned as a log fire. A fire that burns dependent on twigs is reckoned as a twig fire. A fire that burns dependent on grass is reckoned as a grass fire. A fire that burns dependent on cow-dung is reckoned as a cow-dung fire. A fire that burns dependent on husks is reckoned as a husk fire. A fire that burns dependent on rubbish is reckoned as a rubbish fire.
In the same way, consciousness is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it arises.”'
( https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato )

LastLegend said:
Before consciousness arise, what is there?

Astus wrote:
'consciousness exists dependent on a duality. And what is that duality? Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. ... Ear consciousness … Nose consciousness … Tongue consciousness … Body consciousness … Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn35.93/en/sujato )

See also from a commentary to MMK ch 9:

'The one who sees form cannot exist before - that is, independent of - the experience of seeing the form, for if she did, it would absurdly follow that she would always see that form. The reason for this is that if an individual is called a "seer of form," it is obviously because she actually sees some form, and thus if the seer of form existed independent of the experience of seeing it, the self who was called the seer of form would always see the form in order to earn that name. The same would be true with the other objects of the senses and the ones who experience them-if the experiencer existed before the experience itself, it would follow that the experiencer would always have that experience.'
(The Sun of Wisdom, p 60)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
If you examine your mind, you would need to what are thoughts, and what arises before thoughts, and what spontaneous knows before all of that happen.

Astus wrote:
Mind is what is aware of something. If there is nothing to be aware of, there is no mind to talk of either.

'If the hearing consciousness is permanent,
It follows that it’s hearing all the time.
And if there is no object, what does it cognize?
On what grounds do you call it consciousness?
If something that’s unconscious knows,
It follows that a stick has knowledge also.
Therefore in the absence of a thing to know,
It’s clear that consciousness will not arise.'
(Bodhicaryavatara 9.60-61, tr Padmakara)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 24th, 2021 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
You are confusing real and basic needs with endless desires. Therefore banks are still banks and  money is still money. On the gut level: do you use money, pay the rent and buy goods yourself? Or are they just "empty" for you?

Astus wrote:
Emptiness is not a negation or denial of conventional reality, rather the understanding that they are merely conventional designations.

'The Inquiry of Ugra also says, “By correctly giving wealth to sons, wives, male and female servants, employees, and hired laborers.” In this way, whether you have renounced possessions or not, they will not create obstacles to the study and other practices that are conducive to the Awakening of yourself and others. And if renouncing, or not renouncing, would create obstacles to the achievement of an equal or greater good by a bodhisattva of greater power to help sentient beings, or equal power, you should not do it.'
(The Training Anthology of Santideva, ch 7, p 139)

'Renunciation is born when you know that there is ultimately no satisfaction in samsaric life. Since ordinary joys are short-lived dreams, there is no reason to long for success or to fear failure. If you happen to grow rich, there is no reason to feel attached or proud; simply use your wealth positively and meaningfully. Whatever power you gain, use it to serve the Three Jewels and the great teachers, and whatever land you own, make it available for the benefit of the sangha; in short, whatever you acquire, use it to preserve the Dharma and to benefit others. Used in this way, your dreamlike wealth and influence will bring you more and more dreamlike merit, which in tum will bring you closer and closer to the threshold of dreamlike enlightenment.'
(The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones, p 102)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 23rd, 2021 at 3:43 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
…in direct traditions you recognize spontaneous nature and that’s the king.

Astus wrote:
All things are conditioned. What do you call spontaneous?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 23rd, 2021 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Non-arising is unborn mind. Non-arising of mental appearance, and mental appearance is what we can (‘see’, feel, sense, etc) specifically because appearance is what appears what comes to being, including the ‘seeing’ is appearance of being. That’s what born. Mahaprajnaparamita Sutras say Buddha nature is non-appearance (which refers to the non-characteristics, specifically of mental appearance including all aggregates their functions).

Astus wrote:
Eliminating appearances is not the correct way.

“Master Gotama, it’s when the eye sees no sight and the ear hears no sound.That’s how Pārāsariya teaches his disciples the development of the faculties.”
“In that case, Uttara, a blind person and a deaf person will have developed faculties according to what Pārāsariya says. For a blind person sees no sight with the eye and a deaf person hears no sound with the ear.”
( https://suttacentral.net/mn152/en/sujato )

'there are deluded people who empty their minds and sit in quietude without thinking of anything whatsoever, claiming that this is great.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 29)

Rather, as Huineng taught:

'Nonthought is to be without thought in the context of thoughts.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 43)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 22nd, 2021 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Lankavatara Sutra said non-arising means everything extinguished in Samadhi. Non-arising = Samadhi. Even the ‘seeing’ is extinguished. Then when not in Samadhi, everything functions just as it is. The reason why it needs to be extinguished is because karma will continue to cloud our mind.

Astus wrote:
Karma and suffering does not come from phenomena but from ignorant craving and clinging. If it were things themselves that caused suffering, then no liberation would be possible.

'Reverend Koṭṭhita, the eye is not the fetter of sights, nor are sights the fetter of the eye. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them. The ear … nose … tongue … body … mind is not the fetter of thoughts, nor are thoughts the fetter of the mind. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn35.232/en/sujato )

'Q: What does "to perceive without perceiving any object whatsoever" mean? 
A: Perceiving all sorts of things without grasping -- that is, not being clouded by the arising of any thought of love or hate, etc. -- is perceiving without any objects. If one can see without seeing any object whatsoever, that is using the Buddha-Eye, which is like no other eye. On the other hand, if one sees all sorts of things that cause thoughts of love and hate, etc., to arise, that is known as "perceiving objects" with ordinary eyes, and sentient beings have no other kind of eyes. This is true, likewise, with all of the other sense organs.'
( https://www.ymba.org/books/entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment/treatise-entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 22nd, 2021 at 7:01 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
Why was Shakyamuni  upset when some of his followers had flocked to the congregation of Devadatta, if "Devadatta" is a mere expression without basis?

Astus wrote:
Why do you say the Buddha was upset? Do you think he failed in patience, was driven by the eight worldly concerns, and has not removed completely the three poisons?

'Subhūti, in a former lifetime my body was cut into pieces by the Rājah Kaliṅga. At that time, I was not abiding in the notions of self, person, sentient being, or life span. And why not? If, at the time my body was cut into pieces, I had been holding to the notions of self, person, sentient being, or life span, I would have felt ill-will [toward Kaliṅga]. Subhūti, I also remember some five hundred lifetimes ago having practiced forbearance as a renunciant sage. At that time I was also free from the notions of self, person, sentient being, and life. Therefore, Subhūti, the bodhisattvas should free themselves from all notions and arouse the aspiration for peerless perfect enlightenment. They should not arouse this aspiration while abiding in form, and they should not arouse this aspiration while abiding in sound, odor, taste, touch, or conceptualization. They should give rise to the aspiration that has no abode. If the mind abides, then this is not abiding.'
( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-15 )

Aemilius said:
It does not really change anything, banks are still banks and money is still money, even if they are mere words and worldly conventions. Economists know that "money" is a convention or a contract, and yet everything functions as if money was a real existent. That is the nature of things.

Astus wrote:
'“Even if we know that all is like illusion,
How,” you ask, “will this dispel afflictive passion?
Magicians may indeed themselves desire
The mirage-women they themselves create.”
The reason is they have not rid themselves
Of habits of desiring objects of perception;
And when they gaze upon such things,
Their aptitude for emptiness is weak indeed.
By training in this aptitude for emptiness,
The habit to perceive real things will be relinquished.
By training in the thought “There isn’t anything,”
This view itself will also be abandoned.'
(Bodhicaryavatara 9.30-32, tr Padmakara)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 22nd, 2021 at 2:33 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
It’s still going in circle…even when at calmest and empty, there is still a sense of being. Even you sense there is no being, that’s still being.

Astus wrote:
No matter what one senses or what it's perceived as, just as they arise according to conditions so do they pass quite rapidly. But unless one pays close attention, feelings can seem constant and personal.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 22nd, 2021 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
How can we go beyond dual of grasping and identifying versus not grasping and identifying?

Astus wrote:
As long as there is the assumption of a being who can grasp or not gasp, there is duality of self and other. To recognise that all assumptions are conditioned thoughts is one way to go beyond.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 21st, 2021 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
So then you say it’s not cessation of the five aggregates rather not identifying with self? Cessation or not identifying with thoughts. Which one? If whatever slightest arises is still self because you know that…which means identifying then that’s not true cessation.

Astus wrote:
It's not phenomena themselves that cause suffering, it's grasping at them and identifying with them. Cessation of becoming means ending attachment, ending concocting a self.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 21st, 2021 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
I don’t see how having the view not identifying with thoughts take care of karma unless you are always meditating.

Astus wrote:
Liberation is not limited to meditation. Of course, if one is not liberated, then there is also becoming.

LastLegend said:
Also when not identifying, how do you know that’s not becoming if you agree becoming is another the word for movement or arising?

Astus wrote:
Becoming is not the same as movement. See https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=603720#p603720.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 21st, 2021 at 7:42 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
LastLegend said:
Then you have no thought? Because a thought is a becoming.

Astus wrote:
A thought is a becoming when it is taken as "my thought" or "I am thinking this thought". The Buddha stated of himself:

'He thinks what is to be thought, but does not identify with what is thought, does not identify with what is not thought, does not identify with what is to be thought, and does not identify with a thinker. '
( https://suttacentral.net/an4.24/en/sujato, cf. MN 1)

And as presented in Chan:
'What is nonthought? If in seeing all the dharmas, the mind is not defiled or attached, this is nonthought. [The mind’s] functioning pervades all locations, yet it is not attached to all the locations. Just purify the fundamental mind, causing the six consciousnesses to emerge from the six [sensory] gates, [causing one to be] without defilement or heterogeneity within the six types of sensory data (literally, the “six dusts”), autonomous in the coming and going [of mental phenomena], one’s penetrating function without stagnation.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 2, BDK ed, p 33)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 21st, 2021 at 5:11 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
The world of becoming also exists from moment to moment. Shakyamuni and other enlightened persons were, and are, part of it.

Astus wrote:
The becoming of what/who? Do you take Shakyamuni to be the rupaskandha, or the owner of the rupaskandha? If so, isn't that exactly the assumption of a self? If not, then what is becoming?

Aemilius said:
Later in his life Shakyamuni walked from place to place, for example on his last teaching tour, consumed food and drink, used beds, and used medicine (at least a couple of times, if I right remember, and had for example indigestion).

Astus wrote:
“Subhūti, if someone says that the Tathāgata (‘Thus-come One’) comes, goes, sits, or lies down, this person does not understand the point of my teaching. Why? The Thus-come One has no place from whence he comes, and no place to go. Therefore he is called ‘Thus-come.’”
( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-30 )

Aemilius said:
Shakyamuni and Devadatta could both be found and pointed out, like "this is Shakyamuni" and "that is Devadatta". This means they had distinct identities.

Astus wrote:
“Someone who has given up conceit has no ties, the ties of conceit are all cleared away. Though that clever person has transcended identity, they’d still say, ‘I speak’, and also ‘they speak to me’. Skillful, understanding the world’s conventions, they’d use these terms as no more than expressions.”
( https://suttacentral.net/sn1.25/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 21st, 2021 at 3:24 AM
Title: Re: Is there a bodhisattva that particularly helps animals?
Content:
Meido said:
Bato Kannon [馬頭觀音]

Astus wrote:
Side note, https://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/kannon.shtml#batou is identified with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayagriva_%28Buddhism%29, and of the https://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/kannon.shtml#sixkannon originally in the Mohezhiguan it is a different incarnation.

'The Fearless Lion-like Avalokiteśvara 師子無畏觀世音 destroys the three obstacles in the destiny of beasts. The king of beasts is majestic and fierce [and can thus face the untamed ferociousness of beasts] - therefore it is appropriate to apply fearlessness.'
(Clear Serenity, Quiet Insight, vol 1, p 341; T46n1911p15b4-5)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 20th, 2021 at 7:23 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
Nagarjuna (or some other liberated person) who says this perceivably exists. That is why it is misleading.
Nagarjuna, Shakyamuni, Bodhidharma and others became old, therefore the becoming de facto continued.
In a sutra Shakyamuni says, in the last part of his life, that his body is old and worn out like an old and many times repaired chariot. Did becoming really end?

Astus wrote:
To assume existence is the ignorance about the nature of things that perpetuates becoming. With awakening there is no one to label as existent or non-existent, and that is the end of life and death. See e.g.: MN 72, SN 22.85-86, MMK 22.

‘Reverend Ānanda, the tathāgatas have the body of the Dharma‍—not a body that is sustained by material food. The tathāgatas have a transcendental body that has transcended all mundane qualities. There is no injury to the body of a tathāgata, as it is rid of all defilements. The body of a tathāgata is uncompounded and free of all formative activity. Reverend Ānanda, to believe there can be illness in such a body is irrational and unseemly!’
( https://read.84000.co/translation/toh176.html#UT22084-060-005-149 )


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 20th, 2021 at 3:49 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
"The ending of bhava or becoming" creates a misleading image.

Astus wrote:
What is that misleading image? The ending of the whole cycle of birth and death is liberation. With the cessation of becoming, or any other of the other eleven elements of the twelvefold chain, there is freedom (see e.g. MMK 26.12). When the five aggregates are realised to be empty, that is, without self and what belongs to a self, then there is no longer any becoming of a self. Then it can be rightly stated that "There is no decay and death, no extinction of decay and death".

Aemilius said:
If you consider that all teachings (sutras etc) are precepts or practice instructions, then the instruction of "casting away bhava" must refer to something that one actually experiences. The only plausible explanation is the thoughts and volitions about the present and future. This kind of instruction is  found in the Mahamudra, where it is said that one should cease thinking or even cut off thoughts of past, present and future.

Astus wrote:
There is no such instruction to "cast away bhava". Becoming comes to an end through proper cultivation, and correct practice depends on correct knowledge of the teachings. Thinking of the three times may be suspended for a short while, but only when their insubstantiality is seen can they cease to be an issue (see e.g. Mahamudra: the Moonlight, 2.5.3.1, p 244).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 19th, 2021 at 9:56 PM
Title: Re: “Bodhisattva Gaia” and “Vairocana Sun”
Content:
Astus wrote:
Apparently "Bodhisattva Gaia" in Chinese is Qīngliángdì púsà 清涼地菩薩 (see https://plumvillage.org/zh-hant/%E6%96%87%E7%AB%A0/%E4%B8%8A%E9%A6%99%EF%BC%8C%E7%A6%AE%E6%95%AC%E4%BD%9B%E8%8F%A9%E8%96%A9/ and https://plumvillage.org/zh-hant/%E6%96%87%E7%AB%A0/%E8%AE%9A%E9%A0%8C%E5%A4%A7%E5%9C%B0%E6%AF%8D%E8%A6%AA/ ). Qīngliángdì púsà 清涼地菩薩 (means something like "Cool Earth Bodhisattva") occurs in some common ceremonial texts (e.g. "Pure and Cool Land Bodhisattva-Mahasattva" on p 67 https://www.houstonbuddhism.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/20200524-%E9%87%91%E5%89%9B%E7%B6%93%E4%B8%AD%E8%8B%B1%E6%96%87%E9%9D%88%E5%89%8D%E5%9B%9E%E5%90%91-%E4%B8%AD%E8%8B%B1%E6%96%87.pdf, "Bodhisattvas Mahasattvas of the cool and refreshing land" on p 2 https://chungtai.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Sutra-8-The-Universal-Gateway-of-Bodhisattva-Guan-Shi-Yin-Ceremony.pdf ), but that's all I could find.
It matches its Vietnamese format Bồ Tát Thanh Lương Địa, as found https://langmai.org/phat-duong/thien-mon-nhat-tung/danh-le-va-tan-duong/ and on page 5 https://deerparkmonastery.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/CHANTING-BOOK-3.pdf.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 17th, 2021 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Theravadin Looking to Learn
Content:
friarzero said:
I just want a primer or intro to better understand these ideas and where they fit into Mahayana.

Astus wrote:
This series of articles is a great source: http://www.buddhistdoor.com/OldWeb/bdoor/archive/nutshell/index.htm

Ven. Sheng-yen's http://www.108wisdom.org/html/OTH_03.pdf covers many topics by answering common questions. There are also https://www.shengyen.org/eng/free-book-for-download.html available online.

Ven. Hsing Yun's https://archive.org/details/TheCoreTeachingsBuddhismMasterHsingYun/page/n9/mode/2up is another good summary. And there are https://www.fgsitc.org/booklets/ covering a wide variety of topics.

Thich Nhat Hanh's https://plumvillage.org/books/the-heart-of-the-buddhas-teaching/ is a wonderful introduction too.

The https://www.namsebangdzo.com/Three-Vehicles-of-Buddhist-Practice-p/5920.htm by Thrangu Rinpoche is a short and practical overview.

https://www.shambhala.com/daring-steps-2199.html by Ringu Tulku is also recommended.

https://www.routledge.com/Buddhist-Thought-A-Complete-Introduction-to-the-Indian-Tradition/Williams-Tribe-Wynne/p/book/9780415571791 by Paul Williams, Anthony Tribe, and Alexander Wynne has some fine chapters on Mahayana.

And for a philosophical approach see https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780198732662.001.0001/oso-9780198732662 by Jan Westerhoff.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 15th, 2021 at 7:47 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
How can you get beyond becoming? Please tell me. What is left when you are beyond becoming, or beyond living? Death?

Astus wrote:
The ending of becoming (bhavanirodha) is exactly the goal of Buddhism.

'When a noble disciple has thus understood being, the origin of being, the cessation of being, and the way leading to the cessation of being…he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view…and has arrived at this true Dhamma.'
(MN 9.31 (p 137))

The cessation of becoming should not be confused with non-existence (vibhava), that is, the belief that an existing self becomes non-existent (see Iti 49), still, that is called the best outsider view (AN 10.29). What bhavanirodha means is nirvana in this life (AN 10.7), and even if one has doubts one should choose that as the right view:

'Now as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is certainly still possible that I might reappear [after death] among the gods of the immaterial realms who consist of perception. But as to the recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is a cessation of being,” if their word is true then it is possible that I might here and now attain final Nibbāna. The view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is no cessation of being” is close to lust, close to bondage, close to delighting, close to holding, close to clinging; but the view of those good recluses and brahmins who hold the doctrine and view “there definitely is cessation of being” is close to non-lust, close to non-bondage, close to nondelighting, close to non-holding, close to non-clinging.’ After reflecting thus, he practises the way to disenchantment with being, to the fading away and cessation of being.'
(MN 60.34 (p 517))

What should be recognised is that a being (satta) exists as craving and clinging (SN 23.2), and becoming is about deluded identification that is an outflow/defilement (āsava).

'How can one be certain here and now that this existence has ceased? This might sometimes appear as a big puzzle. But all the same, the arahant experiences the cessation of existence as a realization. That is why he even gives expression to it as: Bhavanirodho Nibbānaṃ, "cessation of existence is Nibbāna".
It comes about by this extinction of influxes. The very existence of 'existence' is especially due to the flowing in of influxes of existence. What is called 'existence' is not the apparent process of existing visible to others. It is something that pertains to one's own mental continuum.
For instance, when it is said that some person is in the world of sense desires, one might sometimes imagine it as living surrounded by objects of sense pleasure. But that is not always the case. It is the existence in a world of sense desires, built up by sensuous thoughts. It is the same with the realms of form and formless realms. Even those realms can be experienced and attained while living in this world itself.
Similarly, it is possible for one to realize the complete cessation of this existence while living in this very world. It is accomplished by winning to the realization that the influxes of sense desires, existence, and ignorance, no longer influence one's mind.'
( https://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Mind-Stilled_HTML.htm#Mindstilled05, by Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda)

Aemilius said:
Beyond thinking there are the higher dhyanas. And they are accessible for at least some people.

Astus wrote:
However, bhava does not mean thinking.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 15th, 2021 at 3:29 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Aemilius said:
Anguttara Nikaya, Ekaka-nipata, XVI Ekadhammapali, 3.Tatiyavagga:
320. Bhikkhus, just as a little bit of excreta smells and should be got rid of, I do not specify thinking even for the fraction of a second.

Astus wrote:
'I do not specify thinking' is at least a misleading translation of AN 1.328 by http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html.

Bodhi (p 121): 'I do not praise even a trifling amount of existence'
https://suttacentral.net/an1.316-332/en/sujato: 'I don’t approve of even a tiny bit of continued existence'
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN1_329.html: 'I don’t praise even a tiny amount of becoming'
https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/bd/an/01_ones/an01.296-393.olds.bd.htm#p328: 'I do not recommend living, even if for only so short a time'
https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/bd/an/01_ones/an01.296-393.olds.bd.htm#p328: 'so likewise do I not favour becoming even for a trifling time'

See also discussions on that passage https://bswa.org/forum/forum/discussion/sutta-vinaya-and-pali/1352-translation-of-a-passage-in-an-1-18 and https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=19997.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 at 4:12 PM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Rick said:
Wouldn't a study of the skandhas, particularly sankhara and vijnana, address the mental objects Hazel is describing?

Astus wrote:
If by study you mean abhidharma literature, based on the dharmas enumerated in them I doubt it.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Making sense of types of thought
Content:
Hazel said:
I'm trying to make sense of how they fit into the Buddhist view of the mind.

Astus wrote:
I can't recall even meditation manuals discussing mental activities in such a format. I guess it could fall into general https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auddhatya. When it comes to categorising mental factors the basic distinction that should be kept in mind are skilful (kuśala) and unskilful (akuśala), then the rest can be taken care of (e.g. MN 19, MN 117).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 7th, 2021 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Dependent Origination in One Sentence
Content:


Queequeg said:
I suspect you guys are comparing different descriptive formulations that use common vocabulary with different meanings.

Malcolm said:
We are talking about aggregates here. The Manovijnana includes all minds, citta, etc.

But at base I am right, as a quick perusal of the dhatu chapter of the Kosha will show.

Astus wrote:
Vasubandhu wrote:

'What is consciousness? It is awareness of an object. It is also [referred to as] thought and mind, because it is diverse and because mind serves as its support.' (Inner Science of Buddhist Practice, p 239)
vijñānaṃ katamat | ālambanaṃbijñaptiḥ | cittamanasī vijñānaparyāyau sanirvacano taccitaṃ mano'pi citrīkāratā manoniśrayatāṃ ca upādāya | ( http://www.dsbcproject.org/canon-text/content/334/1380 )
Xuanzang: 「云何識蘊？謂於所緣境了別為性。亦名心意，由採集故、意所攝故。」(T31n1612p849c27-28)
Divākara: 「云何識蘊？謂於所緣了別為性。亦名心，能採集故。亦名意，意所攝故。」(T31n1613p854b28-29)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 7th, 2021 at 2:17 PM
Title: Re: Dependent Origination in One Sentence
Content:
Gregory Wonderwheel said:
I'd put it as "When consciousness (vijnana) is conditioned...."  Mind (citta) is unconditioned, does not increase or decrease, is not born or annhilated, etc.

Astus wrote:
Changing the English word for vijnana is no problem as long as the meaning is clear. Just as the mind is unconditioned, so are everything else, as everything are ultimately unborn, i.e. insubstantial. But if you mean there is a special mind apart from other phenomena that is uniquely unconditioned, that would be a soul/self theory that contradicts the general doctrine of conditionality.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 4th, 2021 at 6:09 PM
Title: Dependent Origination in One Sentence
Content:
Astus wrote:
When a mind (vijñāna) conditioned (saṃskāra) by ignorance (avidyā) conceives (nāmarūpa) an impression (sparśa) through the six senses (ṣaḍāyatana) that feels (vedanā) pleasant/unpleasant, then it craves (tṛṣṇā) for its continuation/discontinuation, attempts to keep (upādāna) and identify (bhava) with it, but with its birth (jāti) comes its decay and demise (jarāmaraṇa).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, September 24th, 2021 at 2:02 PM
Title: Re: Reflections and conclusions
Content:
Astus wrote:
Zen is not about reducing everything to silent sitting, that would be fairly meaningless, but rather all Zen schools and lineages are based on the whole of Buddhism and accept the Tripitaka as the true words of the perfectly awakened Buddha. From a Soto perspective look at this short text that is used as a summary of the teachings made up mainly of quotes from Dogen: https://www.sotozen.com/eng/practice/sutra/pdf/03/c02.pdf.

On the topic of taking refuge in the Three Jewels there is a complete chapter in the Shobogenzo titled Kie-sanbo in vol. 4 of BDK ed. p. 235ff.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, September 18th, 2021 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Rock & Metal
Content:
Astus wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifcFGuLek-M - Japanese Buddhist rock song by The Namuzu / THE 南無ズ, a "Buddhist entertainment group" consisting of a monk, a funeral director, a Buddhist komuso, and a kimono girl.  The theme is comedy, music, and Buddhism.
The band's https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKgoRPEs0r01H3d7bwd19gg and https://namuzu.net/.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, September 17th, 2021 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: words in Lotus sutra
Content:
Riju said:
There are a certain words in English translation of  Lotus sutra by Burton Watson. Discussion on them will help me a lot.

1. Tranquil extinction.
2. Voice hearers and Buddhas both end their journey  at Nirvan.
3 One vehicle , not two nor three.

Astus wrote:
They look to me fine as translations. The second I could not find as a sentence.

tranquil extinction - 寂滅, another term for nirvana


Watson:
Or there are bodhisattvas
who expound the Law of tranquil extinction,
giving different types of instruction
to numberless living beings.

BTTS:
There are Bodhisattvas who
speak of still extinction’s Dharma
with various instructions teaching
living beings without number.

Bunno Kato:
Moreover, there are bodhisattvas
Who preach the Law of tranquillity,
Teaching in various ways
The numberless living beings.

BDK:
There are also bodhisattvas
Who are teaching innumerable sentient beings
The Dharma of tranquility
In various ways.

或有菩薩，說寂滅法，種種教詔，無數眾生。

Watson:
All phenomena from the very first
have of themselves constantly borne the marks of tranquil extinction.

BDK:
Every existing thing from the very beginning
Has always had the mark of quiescence.

諸法從本來，常自寂滅相。

Law of the one vehicle, there are not two, there are not three - 一乘法，無二亦無三, a basic theme of the Lotus Sutra

Watson:
In the Buddha lands of the ten directions
there is only the Law of the one vehicle,
there are not two, there are not three,
except when the Buddha preaches so as an expedient means,

BDK:
In the buddha worlds of the ten directions
There is only the Dharma of the single vehicle.
Apart from the skillful means of the buddhas,
There is neither a second nor a third [vehicle].

十方佛土中，唯有一乘法，無二亦無三。除佛方便說。


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, September 6th, 2021 at 4:20 PM
Title: Re: The Noble Truths as Skillful Means
Content:
Astus wrote:
Trying to figure things out straight from old Chan texts is a particularly difficult task that requires a lot, simply because those works were mainly written in a milieu that was already knowledgeable not just about Buddhist teachings but also Chinese literary culture. Learning from the writings of modern teachers like Ven. Shengyan is an easier approach, but then it should be noted that he relied not just on Chan texts but also the larger corpus of Buddhist scriptures, treatises, plus his own experience (important note: he was a monk who spent years in retreat and studied under various teachers).

Although there is said to be the direct way to realisation, but that simply does not work for most people, mainly because of all the attachment to ideas and emotions. So the initial steps are gradually building a correct understanding and a stable, calm mind. As long as one does not settle in some delusion about one's own correctness but continues to cultivate the factors of awakening there will be good results (diminishing of the unskilful qualities, growth of skilful qualities).


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, September 6th, 2021 at 2:52 PM
Title: Re: What are texts in the Agamas that are not in the Nikayas?
Content:
Padmist said:
And are there books in the Nikayas that are not in the Agamas?

Astus wrote:
You can look into the literature dealing with comparative studies, like Ven. Analayo's work on the https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compstudyvol1.pdf, or just browse https://suttacentral.net/.

Padmist said:
What do other Buddhists today (Tibetans/Theravadins) think of the books that are in the Agamas but aren't in their Canon?

Astus wrote:
Tibetans never had anything more than a dozen or so agama sutras available in their canon, and I guess they don't really miss the rest because of believing that the Abhidharmakosabhasya is representative of everything there is to know of Hinayana. Theravadins would generally say they have the complete and authentic canon, and those few people working with other sources, i.e. mainly Chinese, can have varying opinions. It is rather in East Asia (as the agamas are found in Chinese) that you can find people studying the agamas, like Ven. Yinshun.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, August 30th, 2021 at 8:20 PM
Title: Re: The attaintment in chan according to ten bhumis standard
Content:
KeithA said:
Yes, expedient teachings and all.

Astus wrote:
All teachings are expedients with the primary goal of liberating beings.

Zen master Yangshan entered the hall and addressed the monks, saying: “Each and every one of you, turn the light inward! Don’t try to remember what I’m saying! For a beginningless eon you have faced away from the light and been shrouded in darkness. The roots of delusion are deep. They’re difficult to cut off and uproot. So [the Buddha] established expedient means to grab your attention. These are like showing yellow leaves to a crying child, who imagines they’re gold and thus stops crying. You act as though you’re in a shop where someone sells a hundred goods made from gold and jade, but you’re trying to weigh each item. So you say that Shitou has a real gold shop? Well in my shop there’s a wide range of goods! If someone comes looking for mouse turds then I give him some. If someone comes looking for real gold then I give it to him.”
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 187)

KeithA said:
I don't feel it's an essential part of Zen practice, though.

Astus wrote:
It depends on the practitioner whether it's important or not. Eventually, even practice is non-essential.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, August 29th, 2021 at 4:36 PM
Title: Re: The attaintment in chan according to ten bhumis standard
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
Wonderful.  What stage was Linji on?  Or Huangbo?  Could Dogen manifest simultaneously in one million Buddha realms, or just ten thousand?  Do you have a citation for that?

Astus wrote:
For Linji such terms are empty names to use according to circumstances, for Huangbo gradual and sudden equally ends in buddhahood, and Dogen saw all realms in a blink of an eye.

'Followers of the Way, if you take my viewpoint you’ll cut off the heads of the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya buddhas; a bodhisattva who has attained the completed mind of the tenth stage will be like a mere hireling; a bodhisattva of equivalent enlightenment or a bodhisattva of marvelous enlightenment will be like pilloried prisoners; an arhat and a pratyekabuddha will be like privy fi lth; bodhi and nirvana will be like hitching posts for asses. Why is this so? Followers of the Way, it is only because you haven’t yet realized the emptiness of the three asamkhyeya kalpas that you have such obstacles.'
(Record of Linji, p 10, tr Sasaki)

'If someone comes and asks about seeking buddha, I immediately appear in conformity with the state of purity; if someone asks about bodhisattvahood, I immediately appear in conformity with the state of compassion; if someone asks me about bodhi, I immediately appear in conformity with the state of pure mystery; if someone asks me about nirvana, I immediately appear in conformity with the state of serene stillness. Though there be ten thousand different states, the person does not differ.'
(p 16)

'Followers of the Way, make no mistake! All the dharmas of this world and of the worlds beyond are without self-nature. Also, they are without produced nature. Th ey are just empty names, and these names are also empty. All you are doing is taking these worthless names to be real. Th at’s all wrong! Even if they do exist, they are nothing but states of dependent transformation, such as the dependent transformations of bodhi, nirvana, emancipation, the threefold body, the [objective] surroundings and the [subjective] mind, bodhisattvahood, and buddhahood. What are you looking for in these lands of dependent transformations! All of these, up to and including the Three Vehicles’ twelve divisions of teachings, are just so much waste paper to wipe off privy fi lth. Th e Buddha is just a phantom body, the patriarchs just old monks.'
(p 19)

'There are those who, on hearing the dharma, attain no-mind in a single moment of thought. But there are also those who attain no-mind after progressing through [the extended bodhisattva path, that is] the ten faiths, ten abodes, ten practices, and ten dedications; there are even those others who attain no-mind only after arriving at the ten stages (bhūmi) [the culmination of the bodhisattva path]. Whether long or short, if you achieve no-mind, then it will be right there; there is nothing more you need to practice or realize. In reality, there is nothing to attain — this is true, not false. Whether you attain it in a single moment of thought or only after mastering the ten stages, both approaches are equally effective. There is no distinction in their depth or shallowness; [prolonging practice] merely entails sequential kalpas of needless bitterness and hardship.'
(Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace, ch 2)

'“Buddha lands” means the inside of the eyes. If, when we see and hear the words “illuminating the East,” we assume and learn that it is as if a line of white silk were extending to the East, that is not learning of the truth. The whole universe in ten directions is nothing other than “the East.” “The East” is called “the whole universe in ten directions.” On this basis the whole universe in ten directions exists. And the words by which it proclaims itself as the whole universe in ten directions, we hear as the sound of “the eighteen thousand buddha lands.”'
(Komyo, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 2, p 295)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, August 29th, 2021 at 5:47 AM
Title: Re: The attaintment in chan according to ten bhumis standard
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
The bhumis are not a framework that is recognized within Chan/Zen.

Astus wrote:
First of all, since it is taught in the sutras it is necessarily recognised and accepted. Furthermore, where gradual cultivation follows sudden awakening, the stages of cultivation are those of the 52 levels of bodhisattvas.

'Clearly remember: in the Buddhist patriarchs’ learning of the truth, to awaken the bodhi-mind is inevitably seen as foremost. This is the eternal rule of the Buddhist patriarchs. “To awaken” means to be clear in; it does not refer to the great realization of the truth itself. Even those who have suddenly experienced the ten states are still bodhisattvas. The twenty-eight patriarchs of India, the six patriarchs of China, and all the other great ancestral masters are bodhisattvas: they are not buddhas; and they are not śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, or the like. Among practitioners of this age there is not one person who clearly knows that [these patriarchs] are bodhisattvas, not śrāvakas. [Practitioners of this age] just randomly call themselves patchrobed monks and patch-robed disciples without knowing the reality of the matter, and so they have created confusion. It is pitiful that in a decadent age the truth of the patriarchs has degenerated.'
(Hotsu-bodaishin, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 3, p 354-355)

'As for “gradual cultivation,” although he has awakened to the fact that his original nature is no different from that of the buddhas, the beginningless proclivities of habit (vāsanā) are extremely difficult to remove suddenly. Therefore he must continue to cultivate while relying on this awakening so that this efficacy of gradual suffusion is perfected; he constantly nurtures the embryo of sanctity, and after a long, long time he becomes a sage. Hence it is called gradual cultivation. It is like the maturation of an infant: from the day of its birth, [an infant] is endowed with all its faculties, just like any other [human being], but its physical capacities are not yet fully developed; it is only after the passage of many months and years that it will finally mature into an adult.'
(Moguja’s Secrets on Cultivating the Mind, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 216-217)

'In Chinese Chan Buddhism, a sudden awakening means a sudden apprehension of a Buddha’s perception of reality. ... Entering into a Buddha’s perception of reality occurs when one reaches the level of a noble bodhisattva of the first ground or above, for only such a bodhisattva is able truly to eliminate ignorance bit by bit and attain enlightenment bit by bit. ...
We see that sudden awakening is just the beginning of the awareness regarding the underlying, essential principle of all dharmas, or buddhanature, and is not the same as becoming a Buddha. Gradual practice is the cultivation of merit through concrete actions. Only through accumulating merit through gradual practice can one actually become a Buddha: so “sudden awakening to principle but gradual practice with regard to actions” is another way to clarify sudden and gradual. This explanation shows us what sudden awakening in Chan Buddhism means.
The interpretation above is based on interpretation of doctrine. Some Chan practitioners may disagree, and claim that the sudden awakening they speak of is simply sudden awakening, and is basically unrelated to any stages or gradual practice. In this conception, when a practitioner is suddenly awakened, she sees the fundamental, real nature of Suchness right then and there. To do this, however, is beyond the capability of most people.'
(Orthodox Chinese Buddhism, p 126)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, August 29th, 2021 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: The attaintment in chan according to ten bhumis standard
Content:
KeithA said:
There are no levels in Zen. Just delusion/enlightenment.

Astus wrote:
There are various levels used by various groups/teachers, including the standard 52 levels, and also levels used exclusively in Chan, like Dongshan's five ranks, or Seung Sahn's Zen circle.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, August 28th, 2021 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: A Master in Zen
Content:
Ivan A said:
the practice of Buddhism as such is impossible without a teacher?

Astus wrote:
Not at all. If you have the intention to awakening (bodhicitta), that already puts you on the path to buddhahood, and the cultivation of the six paramitas is what any Mahayana follower does, no matter the tradition. Even if you eventually want to study under a Zen teacher, there is a lot you can do before, and it will also greatly benefit your Zen practice.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, August 26th, 2021 at 2:08 AM
Title: Re: What is not delusion
Content:
yinyangkoi said:
What is not delusion? Is there anything? Are the phenomena that happen every moment delusion? The sounds and smells and so on.

Astus wrote:
"The mind can be spoken of [in terms of its two aspects]: birth and death, and suchness. The mind as suchness is like a clear mirror which can reflect images. The mirror symbolizes the mind; the images symbolize the dharmas. If the mind grasps at dharmas, then it gets involved in external causes and conditions, which is the meaning of birth and death. If the mind does not grasp at dharmas, that is suchness."
(The Record of Ma-tsu, in Sun-Face Buddha, p 67)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 17th, 2021 at 8:02 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Matylda said:
第七不自讃毀他戒 no 7th

Astus wrote:
How praising oneself and disparaging others is sharing what happened during a sanzen/dokusan? Where is oneself praised in that? Where is someone else disparaged?

The Brahma's Net Sutra (BDK ed, p 46) teaches:

'My disciples, if with your own mouth you praise yourself and disparage others, or if you encourage people to praise themselves and disparage others, then you have the causes of disparagement of others, the conditions of disparagement of others, the method of disparagement of others, and the act of disparagement of others. On behalf of sentient beings, bodhisattvas should receive their blame and reflect on their own wrongdoings, and attribute good works to others. If you proclaim your own merits and cover up other people’s good works, causing them to be disparaged, this constitutes a bodhisattva pārājika offense.'


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, August 16th, 2021 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Malcolm said:
It’s clearly just against the rules in Japanese Zen, according to Matylda and Meido, etc. It is probably is considered idle speech.

Astus wrote:
In Japan they use the bodhisattva precepts of the Brahmajala Sutra. No idle speech included there.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, August 16th, 2021 at 3:33 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Matylda said:
Moreover talking about koans-dokusan, even talking about ones own practice is considered to be serious breach of Jukai vows.

Astus wrote:
Which precept is it against?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, August 14th, 2021 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Malcolm said:
I don’t see how these charming anecdotes relate to your previously stated position about the self sufficiency of autodidact Dharma.

Astus wrote:
Those stories illustrate the importance given to books, and to secret ones in particular (see Meido's explanation https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=593638#p593638 about shitsunai). Both stories are about important ancestors: Yangshan was one of the founders of the Guiyang school known for its use of symbols; Shoju was the one whom Hakuin named as his primary teacher. Both stories allow the emergence of new traditions, where Yangshan and Hakuin are not required to possess old papers but are allowed (and even mandated for Yangshan) to present new ones.
As for an example of the sufficiency of autodidact Dharma that is relevant to this topic: Jinul introduced hwadu/koan practice to Korea based only on reading the works of Dahui.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, August 13th, 2021 at 7:37 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Malcolm said:
Astus does not believe this, and thinks that reading things in books is sufficient.

Astus wrote:
Danyuan greatly esteemed Yangshan, and said to him, “Previously the National Teacher Huizhong received the transmission of a total of ninety-seven symbolic circles from the Sixth Ancestor. He in turn passed these to me, saying, ‘Thirty years after I’ve died, a novice monk will come from the South who will greatly revive this teaching. When that time comes, pass the teaching on to him and don’t let it end.’ Today I transmit them to you. You must uphold and preserve them.”
When he had finished speaking he passed the secret text to Yangshan. After receiving and examining the text, Yangshan burned it.
One day Danyuan said to Yangshan, “The symbols that I gave you are extremely rare, esoteric, and precious.”
Yangshan said, “After I examined them I burned them.”
Danyuan said, “This Dharma gate of ours can’t be understood by most people. Only the Buddha, the ancestors, and all the holy ones can fully understand it. How could you burn it?”
Yangshan said, “After examining it, I fully comprehended its meaning. Then there was no use keeping the text.”
Danyuan said, “Even so, when transmitting this to disciples, people of future times won’t believe it.”
Yangshan said, “If you would like another copy that won’t be a problem. I’ll make another copy and give it to you. Then it won’t be lost.”
Danyuan said, “Please do.”
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 186)

Many centuries later in Japan:

The Zen master Mu-nan had only one successor. His name was Shoju. After Shoju had completed his study of Zen, Mu-nan called him into his room.
"I am getting old," he said, "and as far as I know, Shoju, you are the only one who will carry on this teaching. Here is a book. It has been passed down
from master to master for seven generations. I also have added many points according to my understanding. The book is very valuable, and I am
giving it to you to represent your successorship."
"If the book is such an important thing, you had better keep it," Shoju replied. "I received your Zen without writing and am satisfied with it as it is."
"I know that," said Mu-nan.
"Even so, this work has been carried from master to master for seven generations, so you may keep it as a symbol of having received the teaching. Here."
The two happened to be talking before a brazier. The instant Shoju felt the book in his hands he thrust it into the flaming coals. He had no lust for possessions.
Mu-nan, who never had been angry before, yelled: "What are you doing!"
Shoju shouted back: "What are you saying!"
(Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, p 80-81)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, August 13th, 2021 at 6:59 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Meido said:
at this point I've expressed as much as seems useful as well.

Astus wrote:
Thank you for doing so.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, August 12th, 2021 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Meido said:
This is something like saying, "It has been asserted that soup should be served in bowls, not on plates. But so far no such rules have been brought forth." If one understands the general mechanism of wato/koan practice - in Chan, Son, and Zen - one realizes why the private nature of teacher-student encounter is maintained. Looking for instances in which someone like Daito Kokushi needed to say "Hey, sanzen is private" is just not going to bear fruit. It was not something necessary to say. And the living traditions today that maintain these practices may be relied upon.

Astus wrote:
If keeping communication on one's koan practice is an important rule, and as once mentioned by Matylda its disregard could even result in expulsion from the temple, it seems logical to me that it is noted as such at least within the temple rules where all sorts of behavioural matters are regulated.

Meido said:
We might more fruitfully ask what compelling reason there could be to ignore such traditional prohibitions, that is, by what valid need those prohibitions are here outweighed.

Astus wrote:
I'm not saying it is not prohibited at some places, I just so far fail to see if there is actually a tradition of such a restriction or if it is more a modern phenomenon. As for whether one should keep to oneself one's experiences, that I see as a personal choice, although certainly there are many factors one may consider, especially the social context. For instance, a good number of koans are supposed to be conversations between teacher and student.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, August 12th, 2021 at 7:50 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
reiun said:
If these streams you refer to do not condemn discussing confidential student/teacher sanzen, and specifically koan work, and they are Zen/Chan/Seon, is it their position to encourage it?

Astus wrote:
Perhaps start with establishing what confidentiality means. There are a number of easily findable guides from various Zen centres (e.g. https://mzg.org.au/group-meditation/dokusan/, https://austinzencenter.org/practice-discussion/, https://www.redcedarzen.org/resources/Documents/practice/PracticeDiscussion.pdf, https://www.mountaincloud.org/about/guidelines-for-members-and-students/, https://throssel.org.uk/obc-policy-on-confidentiality/ ) that stipulate that dokusan is confidential within certain limits. The confidential nature of such private discussions are meant that a student can safely and openly discuss personal matters. There is no rule mentioned that a student cannot talk to others about what was talked about. At https://zenways.org/attend-sanzen-in-person-or-remotely/, however, there is such a rule.
Apart from contemporary examples, it would be good to find traditional rules concerning such restrictions, but so far none has been brought forth.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, August 12th, 2021 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Questions on Amitabha Buddha, and Faith/Other Power
Content:
carvahlo19 said:
1) On the Amitabha Buddha: could he be identified with Dharmakaya/Buddha-nature? Is he a literal material being or could he just be a thought-form that exists in way similar to the Platonic notion of ideas? I'm not asking or insinuating the Amitabha Buddha is NOT real, but rather if his reality is material or immaterial.

Astus wrote:
A buddha has https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trikaya: Dharma-body, enjoyment-body, and manifestation-body. There are various doctrines assigning/emphasising one of those three as being Amitabha. From a Pure Land perspective it is more common to say Amitabha is an enjoyment or a manifestation body, because the Dharma-body often seems too abstract, and practically meaningful only when one engages in insight meditation.

carvahlo19 said:
2) On Faith/Other Power: Seeing that Buddhism adheres to the notion of no-self and is non-dualistic, could other power just be understood to be a expedient form of self power by "moving" it to an external agency. In other words, could other power be a mental power to reorient one's will in a way that self power might not be able to due to people living in mappo?

Astus wrote:
What makes it 'other' is that it is the vow of Dharmakara fulfilled in the buddhahood of Amitabha that allows even ordinary beings to be born in Sukhavati. It's not that Amitabha, or any buddha, can just pluck beings out of samsara, otherwise we'd all be liberated already. There are still the three minds one needs to attain birth, or to put it another way: faith, vows, and practice.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, August 11th, 2021 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Matylda said:
The breach of this iron rule ends in extirpation of one who made this vilation. One could get drunk or do some other stupid thing and it may be still forgiven, but never disclosing dokusan/private interview secret. and there are many many reasons for this.

Astus wrote:
Is there any particular source or basis of that rule, like in specific temple rules, or perhaps in Baizhang's or Dogen's pure rules?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, August 11th, 2021 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: An Interpretation of: ‘To Turn Around’
Content:
JimTempleman said:
I think your refering to a book by Robert Buswell that gives these two translations, but I don’t know the title of the book?

Astus wrote:
The second quote is from his introduction, you can download the whole book from http://www.koreanbuddhism.net/bbs/board.php?bo_table=5040&wr_id=46&sca=Collected+Works+of+Korean+Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, August 11th, 2021 at 3:31 AM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
reiun said:
it happens in private, and is intended to be confidential.

Astus wrote:
Sure, it is private and confidential, and it's up to each person whether they want to discuss their private matters. For instance, the modern classic Three Pillars of Zen by Kapleau contains several private interviews and accounts of enlightenment.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, August 11th, 2021 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
yinyangkoi said:
Is it a good idea to read this? Or will it hinder my practice? Will it just delude me more and move me further from the answer?

Astus wrote:
If you want to learn how some people a century ago approached koan practice, then it is a useful source. But it is probably not that relevant for anyone just starting to learn Buddhism. As for getting the answer to the original question, you already have it, as the point is to recognise how one's thoughts and feelings react. KeithA gave good advice.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 10th, 2021 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
KathyLauren said:
Writing about a koan, and especially asking for help with one, encourages the OP to try intellectual solutions, or else to repeat someone else's rehearsed non-intellectual solution.  The whole point of a koan is to avoid doing either of those things.

Astus wrote:
One goes through all sorts of ways one can come up with before all efforts are exhausted and one gets stuck with pure doubt, if one is actually persistent enough. In the meantime, to learn a thing or two about Zen and the specific koan one works with is no obstacle, especially if the teacher does not approve whatever clever looking solution one comes up with. As long as one puts one's faith in a teacher's judgement, no solution can be found on one's own or from others.

Hyujeong warns:

'There are ten kinds of faults for the points of stories (hwadu): to ponder it with the faculty of intention (manas); to estimate (subtle movements of the mind such as) where you raise eyebrows and blink eyes; to seek your livelihood on the path of language; to draw evidence from writings; to try to be enlightened only where it is raised up; to toss it away into a casket of no concerns; to make understanding (of it in terms) of (it as) existence or non-existence; to make an understanding of (it as) the truly non-existent; to make an understanding of it as reason; and to hold onto delusion and wait to be enlightened. Those who are divorced from these ten kinds of faults, when they simply raise the story, they remove the spirit (of troubles) and just doubt, “What is this?”'
(Seonga gwigam, section 16, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 3, p 80)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 10th, 2021 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Matylda said:
it is very very wrong to write about koan practoce one is doing

Astus wrote:
What is wrong in it?

Maybe you already know this one, or its Japanese original: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Sound_of_the_One_Hand/2Yc-DwAAQBAJ


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 10th, 2021 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: How to figure out the soluton to a koan
Content:
Astus wrote:
'Lu Geng first asked Nanquan, "I've raised a goose in a bottle, and it gradually grew too big to get out; now, without damaging the bottle or injuring the goose, how would you get it out?" 
Nanquan called to him, "Sir!" 
Lu Geng responded, "Yes?" 
Nanquan said, "It's out."
Lu Geng was awakened at this.'
(Book of Serenity, commentary to case 91)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 10th, 2021 at 3:31 PM
Title: Re: An Interpretation of: ‘To Turn Around’
Content:
JimTempleman said:
The question (for me) then becomes: Does ‘the shifting of awareness from the guests to the host’ trigger the “perishing of both the objective sphere and the faculty of knowing”? Based on my own limited experience, I’d say that this happens when a samadhi opens to (help) ‘clear things up.’

Astus wrote:
The position of the host is where there is no subject and object, where there is no abiding. The host does not mean the owner of the inn watching guests going around, rather it is the realm of the whole inn.
Also, on the matter of the meaning of turning the light and reflecting back (回光返照) or simply reverse-illumination/tracing back the radiance (返照), two important authors should be looked into: Dahui Zonggao and Bojo Jinul. They explain it quite well, plus check Prof. Buswell's explanations found in the introductions to his translations.

'You yourself say that your faculties are “dull”; so try this sort of reverse-illumination: the one who has the ability to know dullness — is he, after all, dull-witted? If you don’t turn the light backwards and do a reverse-illumination, and you merely perpetuate the dull-wittedness, your production of more worry and distress is piling illusion on top of illusion, adding more [unreal] flowers in the sky on top of the [unreal] flowers in the sky. Just listen to me: the one who has the ability to know that his disposition is dull is most definitely not dull. Although you must not perpetuate this “dull-wittedness,” you also must not discard this “dull-wittedness practice” [i.e., doing a reverse-illumination on dullness]. Seizing and discarding, sharpness and dullness, lie in people, not in [the true] mind. This [true] mind, and the buddhas of the three times, are of a single substance: they are non- dual. If they were to be dual, then dharma wouldn’t be the same everywhere. Receiving the teaching and transmitting mind are both unreal [i.e., students can’t receive this true mind from teachers, and teachers can’t transmit it to students]. You are seeking the true and real, but going ever more amiss. If you merely come to know that the [true] mind of the single substance and of nonduality definitely does not lie in [discriminations such as] sharp and dull, seizing and discarding, then you will see the moon and forget the finger [pointing at the moon], decisively severing [all discriminations] at the single stroke of the sword. If you further hesitate, thinking about “before” and calculating upon “after,” then it’s calculating that something “really” exists in the empty fist;385 vainly “adoring the odd and playing with strangeness” in the midst of the sense organs, sense objects, and dharmas; and falsely imprisoning oneself in the midst of the five aggregates and eighteen elements [which produce sensory experience]. You’ll never put an end to it!'
(Letters of Dahui, 14.3, p 121-122)

'The viability of all approaches to meditation, in Chinul’s view, ultimately derives from the process of tracing the radiance emanating from the mind back to its source (hoegwang panjo 廻光返照), or simply “tracing back the radiance” (panjo 返照). This concept is an essential element of the processes especially in the Hwaŏm-oriented approach of faith and understanding according to the complete and sudden teaching. Chinul employs a variety of complementary designations for this aspect of contemplation: “trace the radiance back to one’s own mind” (panjo chasim 返照自心); “trace the radiance back to one’s own nature” (panjo chasŏng 返照自性); “in one thought-moment, trace the light back and see one’s own original nature” (illyŏm hoegwang kyŏn chabonsŏng 一念廻光見自本性); “trace back and observe the qualities and functions of your own mind” (pan’gwan chasim chi tŏgyong 返觀自心之德用); “to observe and reflect on your own mind” (kwanjo chasim 觀照自心); “reflect on and view your own mind” (chogyŏn chasim 照見自心); “mirror your own mind” (kyŏng chasim 鏡自心); or simply “trace back the radiance” (panjo 返照), “contemplative reflection” (kwanjo 觀照), or even “introspection” (naejo 內照).98 Although the term hoegwang panjo can be interpreted as “reflection,” “introspection,” “counterillumination,” or even “meditation,” the more dynamic renderings I adopt here better convey, I believe, a sense of the actual gnoseological process involved. 
Chinul’s Chosŏn-dynasty commentator, Yŏndam Yuil 蓮潭有一 (1720-1799), gives a succinct and precise definition of the term: “ ‘To trace back the radiance’ means to trace the radiance back to the numinous awareness (yŏngji 靈智) of one’s own mind; for this reason, it is called ‘trace back the radiance.’ It is like seeing the radiance of the sun’s rays and following it back until you see the orb of the sun itself.”'
(Introduction: Chinul’s Life, Thought, and Writings, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 62-64)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, August 9th, 2021 at 3:55 PM
Title: Re: An Interpretation of: ‘To Turn Around’
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let's step back and turn one's attention around to the origins of the idea of turning around, which I take to be the method known as the mindfulness of breath in six aspects coming from the Sarvastivada tradition (more on that: https://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/mindfulness-of-breathing-in-the-dhayana-sutra_florin-deleanu_1992.pdf ). An easy reference for it is the Abhidharmakosabhasyam VI.12, where the fifth aspect is given (Poussin-Sangpo tr, vol 3, p 1905 (Pruden, vol 3, p 923)):

'Modifying (vivartana). - The practitioners modify the cognition which had the wind for its cognitive object and apply the cognition onto more and more superior wholesome roots up to and including the supreme mundane factors.'

It means that the object changes from the breath to higher qualities/dharmas, taking one to the doorstep of attainment that is the sixth aspect. Here's its description in The Sutra on the Concentration of Sitting Meditation (BDK ed, p 29-30):

'One dispenses with abiding at the gates of wind (i.e., the nostrils) and gives up the method of coarse contemplation. When one gives up the method of coarse contemplation, one knows the impermanence of the breath. This is called the “shifting” contemplation. One contemplates the impermanence of the five aggregates and also reflects on the impermanence of inhalation and exhalation. One sees that the initial breath does not come from anywhere and observes that the subsequent breath also leaves no trace. They come into being because [their] causes and conditions meet, and they cease to exist because [their] causes and conditions disperse. This is called the method of “shifting” contemplation, which removes the five obstacles [of meditation] and various defilements.'

Then we can come to Zhiyi's description that can be presumed to be the antecedent of its Chan version (The Six Dharma Gates to the Sublime, ch 2):

'As for the cultivation of turning, once one has realized that contemplation itself arises from the mind and once one has also understood that, if one continues to follow along with analysis of the objective sphere, this does not by itself directly bring about convergence with the original source, one should then turn back the direction of one’s contemplation so that one now contemplates that very mind that is engaged in contemplation.
As for this mind which engages in contemplation, from what does it arise? Is it generated by contemplative thought or is it generated by something other than contemplative thought? If it is the case that it is generated by contemplative thought, then it should also be the case that there was a pre-existing contemplation process already underway. But in the present situation, this is certainly not the case. Why not? Because there was not yet anything in the midst of the three [immediately preceding] dharmas of “counting,” “following,” “stabilization,” and so forth that was identifiable with this [process of] “contemplation.”
If it is the case that [contemplative thought] arose from a mind not involved in contemplation, is it the case that the mind not involved in contemplation generated it when [that non-contemplating thought] had already ceased or instead produced it when [that non-contemplating thought] had not yet ceased? If it is the case that it produced it when [that non-contemplating thought] had not ceased, then this would be a case of two thoughts existing simultaneously.
If [one were to posit that] it was generated by a dharma which had already ceased to exist, [one should realize that], once an extinct dharma has already disappeared, it is no longer able to generate any contemplative [thought process]. 
If one were to claim that it was generated from that which had ceased and yet not ceased, or if one were to go so far as to claim that it was generated from that which had neither ceased nor not ceased, in all such cases, those [antecedent causes] cannot ultimately be apprehended. One should therefore realize that the contemplative mind itself was originally unproduced. Because it was unproduced, it does not exist. Because it does not exist, it is just “empty” [of any inherent existence]. Because it is empty [of any inherent existence], there is no mind engaged in the process of contemplation.
If there is no contemplative mind, how could there be an objective sphere which serves as the object of contemplation? This perishing of both the objective sphere and the faculty of knowing is the essential factor in turning back to the source. This is the characteristic feature of the cultivation of turning.

As for the characteristic feature of the realization of turning, the wisdom of the mind opens forth and develops in a way no longer requiring one to bring to bear additional skillful effort. It carries on in a way allowing one to naturally be able to invoke analyses, turn back towards the origin, and return to the source. This is what is meant by the realization of turning.
The practitioner should realize that, if he desires to retreat into [a circumstance involving] an absence of both objective sphere and knowing faculty utterly apart from an objective sphere and a knowing faculty, he would thereby fail to leave behind being tethered to [the duality inherent in] an objective sphere and a knowing faculty. This is because, in such a case, one would still simply be coursing along in the sphere of duality-based extremes. At just such a time, one should then relinquish the gateway of turning and establish the mind in the path of purification.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, August 4th, 2021 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: Highest form of meditation?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Vajropama-samādhi is the nirvikalpa samādhi of an ārya, someone who has realized emptiness already. Ordinary nirvikalpa samādhi merely leads to birth in the realm of unconscious devas.

Astus wrote:
Would you perhaps have some sources in mind for the above conenction between nirvikalpa and vajropama samadhi? I couldn't find much on nirvikalpa samādhi by a search of various possible translations (無分別三昧/三摩地/定), unless you meant nirvikalpa jñāna (無分別智). As for the samadhi leading to the heaven of unconsciousness (無想天), that's usually called asaṃjñi samāpatti (無想定).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, August 3rd, 2021 at 9:54 PM
Title: Re: Highest form of meditation?
Content:
Malcolm said:
The answer is simple, and not sectarian at all, since it is mentioned in every sūtra and tantra that discusses Buddha's awakening.

The highest meditation is Vajropama Samadhi, since only it has the ability to obliterate all traces of the two obscurations in their entirety.

Seitaka said:
But what is the specific methodology or meditative practice by which such a samadhi can be attained? Obviously following the Buddhist path as a whole, but any particular practice which was seen as especially effective in attaining such?

Astus wrote:
There is a very nice sutra on that topic: http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra53a.html, or in another translation: http://www.buddhism.org/Sutras/2/Sutras9.htm.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, July 31st, 2021 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Help me understand Anatta
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Buddhism argues that awareness isn’t a self, it is simply awareness, and that if you examine awareness, that ultimately you cannot find anything in that awareness that constitutes self, atman, some kind of specific entity that is even reborn.

Astus wrote:
Buddhism also shows that awareness is a conditioned, momentary phenomenon.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, July 31st, 2021 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: Help me understand Anatta
Content:
Seitaka said:
Let's put it a different way, what is the ultimate difference between saying someone/something never existed to begin with and a someone/something is annihilated at death? The latter involves something that was and is lost and becomes nothing, the former simply states that there was nothing to begin with. In both cases the ultimate truth or end is nothing, namely nihilism.

Astus wrote:
There are the five aggregates: form, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness. That covers the entire spectrum of human experience. The lack of self means that there is no experience anywhere that can rightly be called a self. But as long as one assumes any experience as one's own or as oneself, for that long there are craving and hatred, and from craving and hatred come the perpetuation of suffering. Recognising that there is no entity behind experience, no ultimate doer or experiencer, does not change reality, but changes how experience operates: not based on ignorance, craving, and hatred, but based on wisdom, generosity, and kindness. Seeing only the concept of self and claiming that it's nihilism is disregarding the entirety of reality and worrying about a fictional concept.

Seitaka said:
What exactly about that view corresponds to some of these words used in the Pali to describe Nirvana:

Astus wrote:
That when there is no longer all the worry and anxiety about oneself, there is peace.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, July 31st, 2021 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Vipassanā in Zen Buddhism
Content:
Nicholas2727 said:
Don't want to take this too far from the original post but are Kumarajiva works studied and practiced still in East Asian Buddhism?

Astus wrote:
There sure are some who study them.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, July 30th, 2021 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Help me understand Anatta
Content:
Seitaka said:
The result is still the same, with the annihilation I described in my initial post there is absolute negation after extinguishing karmic conditions for future rebirth whereas in your scenario there is absolute negation simply from the start and we just don't know it.

Astus wrote:
Both the Buddha and his numerous completely liberated disciples continued to live as other human beings, except they were without the suffering part. The assumption that when skandhas no longer regenerate is annihilation is an incorrect one that identifies the skandhas as self. The skandhas are of course often mistaken for a self, but if looked at correctly, they are seen as very much impermanent even now. To point to a specific event (death) as the end is the idea that until death there is someone/something that suddenly ceases to exist.

Seitaka said:
That also makes one wonder, who or what realizes or knows there has never been a person? If there is no metaphysical entity that transcends the casually conditioned and impermanent person, how can this be known? Is this not a self-negation paradox?

Astus wrote:
Realisation and knowing can happen only within a consciousness that changes, not within a permanent entity that cannot change.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, July 30th, 2021 at 2:05 PM
Title: Re: Help me understand Anatta
Content:
Seitaka said:
If the skandhas are the totality of a sentient being and no metaphysical entity or otherwise transcends them and nirvana is simply the elimination of future rebirth, how is this not nihilism or annihilationism? Since by definition there is nothing "outside" the skandhas and they are by nature suffering and impermanent, their final end cannot be anything but absolute negation correct?

Astus wrote:
The extreme view of non-existence or annihilationism means that there is somebody/something that ceases to exist, and that there are actions without consequences.

As Nagarjuna summarises (MMK 15.10-11; cf. SN 12.15):

'To say that things exist means grasping at their permanence;
To say they don’t exist implies the notion of annihilation.
Thus the wise should not remain
In “this exists” or “this does not exist.”
Something that exists by its intrinsic being,
Since it cannot not exist, is permanent.
To say that what once was is now no more
Entails annihilation.'

Annihilation does not apply to what happens to a liberated person after death, because there has never been any entity to cease in the first place.

Nagarjuna's summary (MMK 22.12-14; cf. MN 27, SN 22.85-86)

'Permanence, impermanence—all the four alternatives:
Where are they in the Peaceful One?
Finite, infinite—all the four alternatives:
Where are they in the Peaceful One?
Those who crudely think:
“The Tathagata does exist,”
Will think, regarding his nirvana,
“He does not exist.”
Regarding Buddha, who is empty of intrinsic being,
It’s untenable to think
That, having gained nirvana,
He exists or else does not exist.'

Here's also Gampopa's explanation for refuting grasping at non-existence (Jewel Ornament of Liberation, p 242-243):

'Since the two selves do not exist in any form of existent things, it might be said that they are therefore nonexistent. However, they are not nonexistent either. How is this? Because the two selves or mind could only be said to be nonexistent if they had previously existed and then later ceased to exist. Yet, since phenomena, which are called the "two selves" or "mind," have from the very beginning had no inherent existence, they are beyond the extremes of existence and nonexistence.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, July 28th, 2021 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Vipassanā in Zen Buddhism
Content:
Ivan A said:
Is there a practice of analytical meditation in Zen Buddhism? Do they practice vipassanā?

Astus wrote:
The methods of calming (zhi 止) and insight (guan 観) are not unknown, but mainly from sutras like https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-sutra-on-the-concentration-of-sitting-meditation/, treatises like https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-awakening-of-faith/, and the manuals of the Tiantai and the Huayan schools. But as the Platform Sutra (ch 4, BDK ed, p 41-42) puts it:

'Good friends, our teaching takes meditation (ding 定 - concentration) and wisdom (hui 慧) as its fundamental. Everyone, do not say in your delusion that meditation and wisdom are different.
Meditation and wisdom are of one essence, not different. Meditation is the essence of wisdom, and wisdom is the function of meditation. At times
of wisdom, meditation exists in that wisdom; at times of meditation, wisdom exists in that meditation. If you understand this doctrine, this is the equivalent study of meditation and wisdom. All you who study the Way, do not say that they are different, with meditation prior to and generating wisdom or with wisdom prior to and generating meditation. If your view of them is like this, then the Dharma would have two characteristics. This would be to say something good with your mouth but to have that which is not good in your minds. It is to make meditation and wisdom falsely existent to consider them as not equivalent.'

As for Dogen, in Bendowa he is asked about Tendai practice (SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 1, p 16):

[Someone] asks, “Is there nothing to prevent a person who practices this zazen from also performing mantra (shingon 眞言) and quiet-reflection (shikan 止觀) practices?”
I say: When I was in China, I heard the true essence of the teachings from a true master; he said that he had never heard that any of the patriarchs who received the authentic transmission of the Buddha-seal ever performed such practices additionally, in the Western Heavens or in the Eastern Lands, in the past or in the present. Certainly, unless we devote ourselves to one thing, we will not attain complete wisdom.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, July 23rd, 2021 at 6:50 PM
Title: Re: Tendai and Zen comparison
Content:
Seishin said:
The Six Gates are a theme that regularly appears in Mahayana texts, such as those by Vasubhandhu (Abhidharmakośakārikā) and Asaṇga, in Pali texts (Digha Nikaya ii.291 and Majjhima Nikaya i.425) as well as the Dhyāna Sutras (Agamas from the Sarvāstivāda school) the latter of which list counting (ganana), following (anugamah), stabilizing (sthapana), contemplation (upalaksana), turning away (vivarta), and purification (parisuddhi), which is the same list used in this text. Zhiyi states that the Six Gates as outlined in his text is the same practice the Buddha used to achieve nirvana under the Bodhi Tree.

Astus wrote:
Side note about the six gates occurring in the Nikayas and Agamas: they do not. It is found only in the later (commentarial) tradition.
See:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343212498_The_Doctrine_of_the_Six-stage_Mindfulness_of_Breathing
https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/howmindfulnessbreathing.pdf


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, July 12th, 2021 at 2:22 PM
Title: Re: Daily Routine for the Laity in Sutras, Tantras or Texts
Content:
Astus wrote:
Chapter 11 ( https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/en/T0279_014 / Cleary: Purifying Practice / http://www.cttbusa.org/avatamsaka/avatamsaka11.asp.html ) of the 80 volume Avatamsaka Sutra (T279) has a collection of verses for various situations on daily bodhisattva practice. You can find something similar in the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh, e.g. https://mindfulnessacademy.org/en/mindfulness-essentials/79-teachings/52-verses-gathas-for-mindfulness-practices.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, July 3rd, 2021 at 6:58 PM
Title: Re: Mahayana Tripitaka
Content:
thebuddhajourney said:
What about Abhidharma resources? Of the Tripitaka, the Abhidharma section seems to be the only one that's mostly nonexistent in English. Even the individual analyses and commentaries are often hard to find, or at least a good translation.

Astus wrote:
All seven books of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma_Pi%E1%B9%ADaka have been translated to English at least once, and even some commentaries. The main abhidharma texts used in Mahayana (Abhidharmakosabhasya & Abhidharmasamuccaya) are also available in translation. Beyond that, unless one counts Madhyamaka and Yogacara works as Abhidharma, there are a couple of handbooks in English, in particular: Abhidharmavatara (Entrance Into the Supreme Doctrine) by Skandhila, Abhidharmahrdaya (The Essence of Scholasticism) by Dharmasri, Amrtarasa (La saveur de l'immortel / The Taste of the Deathless) by Ghosaka. Also the book Sarvastivada Abhidharma by K.L. Dhammajoti is highly recommended.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, July 2nd, 2021 at 2:35 PM
Title: Re: Mahayana Tripitaka
Content:
Astus wrote:
Apart from the wonderful 84000.co there are other great resources for Mahayana sutras:

https://bdkamerica.org/tripitaka-list/
http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra0.html
http://www.cttbusa.org/sutratexts.asp.html or https://www.buddhisttexts.org/collections/free-english-ebooks
http://www.fodian.net/world/
http://www.huzheng.org/en/mtlee/


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 10:59 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
Try here, Astus:
SN 12:64.

Astus wrote:
The suttas are quite clear on the matter that consciousness is one of the aggregates and it is very much impermanent. SN 12.64 itself states that "for the nutriment consciousness, if there is no delight, if there is no craving, consciousness does not become established there and come to growth." (Bhikkhu Bodhi translation), that is, there is no consciousness to talk about without nutriment. On the concept of unestablished consciousness mentioned there, see e.g. https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/7139/4835 by Bhikkhu Brahmāli, p 47ff.

Also, regarding consciousness, see chapter 4 of Theravada Abhidharma by Y. Karunadasa:

"Early Buddhism recognizes three basic psychological principles. The first is the dependent arising of consciousness, expressed in the well-known saying: “Apart from conditions, there is no arising of consciousness.” (M. I, 256: Aññatra paccayā natthi viññāṇassa sambhavo.) Consciousness is not some kind of potentiality residing in the heart and becoming actualized on different occasions. Nor is it a static entity that runs along and wanders without undergoing any change, a kind of permanent soul entity that transmigrates from birth to birth. (M. I, 256)"

And chapter 5:

"In the Abhidhamma psychology, bare consciousness, that which constitutes the knowing or awareness of an object, is called citta. It can never arise in its true separate condition. It always arises in immediate conjunction with mental factors, the factors that perform more specialized tasks in the act of cognition. In the books of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka the individual nature of consciousness is often sought to be described by positioning it in relation to other basic factors (dhamma) into which individual existence is analyzed.
...
As a basic factor of actuality (dhamma), consciousness is the mere occurrence due to conditions. (VsmṬ. 462: Yathāpaccayaṃ hi pavattimattam etaṃ sabhāvadhammo. See also Abhvk. 116; VśmS. V, 132.) It is not an entity but an activity, an activity without an actor behind it. The point being emphasized is that there is no conscious subject behind consciousness."

For Karunadasa on the subject of nirvana see chapter 10 of https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp438s_Karunadasa_Early-Buddhist-Teachings.pdf.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
The interesting thing about Abhidharma is that consciousness is placed on its own as opposed to the other three elements which constitute the aggregates and Nirvana, thus allowing for the theory of cessation.

Astus wrote:
Theravada abhidharma distinguishes 4 primary dharmas: citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana. Consciousness (vinnana) is citta, not a 5th "element".

A commonly used introductory handbook for abhidhamma studies in Theravada, with Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentaries is https://store.pariyatti.org/Comprehensive-Manual-of-Abhidhamma-A--eBook-Mobi-ePub-PDF_p_4628.html ( https://download.pariyatti.org/_xUn1HgkZ/Comprehensive%20Manual%20of%20Abhidhamma.pdf ). Nina van Gorkom's https://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm ( http://www.abhidhamma.org/development/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/abhidhamma-in-daily-life.pdf ) is also recommended.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
Yes, Abhidharma introduces the idea of the four dharmas. Nirvana is the fourth and is used interchangeably with the term nirodha, 'cessation'. The first three elements are the aggregates. When consciousness no longer clings to them, what remains is Nirvana.

Astus wrote:
Consciousness is one of the five aggregates. If the aggregates would have to disappear for nirvana to appear, then there could be no consciousness of nirvana. Furthermore, it would have to mean that there could be no nirvana in this life, since a living being is the aggregates.


Supramundane said:
http://www.en.dhammadana.org/dhamma/nibbana.htm

Astus wrote:
That's not a quote from the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidhamma_Pi%E1%B9%ADaka, not even from a commentary, a treatise, or a well known teacher. If you didn't like the previous reference to Phra Payutto, try maybe this work by Mahasi Sayadaw: http://www.aimwell.org/natureofnibbana.html, or this shorter one from Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: https://www.suanmokkh.org/books/84.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 3:59 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
I read MN52 to start, and i note that liberation, Nirvana, enlightenment and deliverence are all used interchangeably.
Do you equate them? Or are they different in meaning?

Astus wrote:
The terms used in MN 52 are equivalents: ending of defilements (āsavakkhaya; cf. SN 56.25; Iti 102), complete extinction (parinibbāyati; see https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=parinibb%C4%81yin&searchhws=yes 2.a), liberated mind (cittaṁ vimuccati; cf. vimoceti in AN 4.194), supreme security from bondage (anuttara yogakkhema; cf. SN 16.2), deathless (amata).
You can find a long list of synonyms collected by Phra Payutto https://buddhistteachings.org/the-state-of-nibbana/.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 3:11 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
We are referring in our discussion to Abhidharma where it is stipulated in this manner.

Astus wrote:
What abhidharma teaches such an idea that nirvana means the absence of the aggregates? Do you have a reference?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 29th, 2021 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: Tendai and Zen comparison
Content:
Astus wrote:
I presume this might be more on the Japanese schools, still, as a side note it is worth mentioning that the methods and teachings of both traditions can work well together, as exemplified by Ting Chen in https://ymba.org/books/fundamentals-meditation-practice and Thích Thanh Từ in https://thientruclam.info/ht-thich-thanh-tu/keys-to-buddhism-%28chia-khoa-hoc-phat%29. Ven. Sheng Yen also talks of Tiantai in http://www.108wisdom.org/html/OTH_03.pdf.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, June 28th, 2021 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
KathyLauren said:
When the aggregates do not appear, what is left is Nirvana.  It doesn't have to appear, since it is the true nature of reality.  Consciousness does not attach to Nirvana.  Nirvana is non-attachment.  So when consciousness does not attach to the three elements, what is left is Nirvana.

Astus wrote:
There is no consciousness apart from the aggregates (SN 22.53). It's not appearances but clinging that causes suffering (SN 35.191), and when there is no clinging, nirvana is attained in this life (SN 35.118).


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, June 28th, 2021 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Nirvana: posited or indicated
Content:
Supramundane said:
Early Pali sutras in the Nikaya discourage speculation about Nirvana;

Astus wrote:
Not exactly. The Buddha pointed out that making fabricated ideas about nirvana is a misunderstanding of its meaning (AN 4.174), just making assumptions about the state of a liberated person is mistaken (MN 72; SN 22.85).

Supramundane said:
when asked directly about Nirvana, the Buddha simply smiles or says: ‘go find it’.

Astus wrote:
Said where? Rather, the Buddha taught a single path (AN 10.095) consisting of the realisation of the four noble truths (SN 56.44). The Buddha described the path on many occasions from the beginning (SN 56.11) to the end (DN 16), providing various methods (MN 52; AN 7.46). He also explained nirvana as freedom from the three unskilful roots (SN 43) and as bliss (AN 9.34).

Supramundane said:
There could be a very simple explanation for this, namely, that Nirvana is posited as a logical consequence of samsara.

Astus wrote:
There is no such logical consequence. At the same time, both the Buddha and many of his disciples experienced liberation first hand.

Supramundane said:
Therefore, if we can break this dynamic, whereby this interplay does not occur, we will experience Nirvana. It follows that Nirvana does not appear or disappear, but it is right now all around us --- it is empty but not emptiness. It is a very specific element. When the aggregates do not appear, this ‘something else’ appears.

Astus wrote:
Nirvana is the cessation of the cause of suffering, not the absence of appearances.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, June 19th, 2021 at 1:25 AM
Title: Re: If its just a story...
Content:
Astus wrote:
"the Tathāgata always teaches: ‘Monks, understand my correct teachings to be like a raft.’ If even my correct teachings are to be abandoned, how much more incorrect teachings?"
http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-7


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, June 18th, 2021 at 3:16 PM
Title: Re: If its just a story...
Content:
Astus wrote:
One of the wonderful qualities of the Dharma is that it is readily visible (sāṃdṛṣṭiko/sandiṭṭhiko), just as one can discern the presence or absence of greed in oneself (SN 35.70, AN 6.47-48), and how from greed come evil actions (AN 3.53-54). Seeing it now is better than looking for pleasant results in the future, as it's been explained to both a deva (SN 1.20) and a mara (SN 4.21), and it's even better than ruling the four continents (SN 55.1). The Dharma can be readily perceived on various levels through absorption (AN 9.46), and it is best taught with the understanding that the Dharma itself is excellent and out of compassion (SN 16.3).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 1st, 2021 at 5:59 PM
Title: Re: Shinjin as the Third Noble Truth
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Because it’s bestowed by the Buddha’s power, it involves no effort, working, or calculation on our part. Shinjin doesn’t so much lead as ensure with no turning back.

Astus wrote:
It is still not the goal, but what leads one to the goal. Like in the example of the boat, the boat is not the other shore, even if we're not the ones rowing.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 1st, 2021 at 5:17 PM
Title: Re: Shinjin as the Third Noble Truth
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Shinjin is not a means to an end because it is the Buddha’s mind.

Astus wrote:
Buddhahood is not attained in this life, but shinjin is attained. It is shinjin that leads one to be born in the Pure Land where awakening is attained. How is it not a means to an end then?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 1st, 2021 at 4:46 PM
Title: Re: Shinjin as the Third Noble Truth
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I’m not claiming in anyway that buddhahood is attained in this life. Shinjin is attained without severing blind passions, but after we die we are born in the Pure Land which is nirvana. It’s like fire and wood. Although the wood is on fire, it is not the same as the fire, and yet the fire turns the wood into fire.

Astus wrote:
And that's why shinjin rather belongs the fourth noble truth, not the third.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, June 1st, 2021 at 3:26 PM
Title: Re: Shinjin as the Third Noble Truth
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Tathāgatagarbha is Shinjin,

Astus wrote:
Metaphorically speaking. If literally 'who attains shinjin ... / Is ... equal to the Tathagatas.' ( http://shinranworks.com/hymns-in-japanese/hymns-of-the-pure-land/hymns-to-amida-based-on-various-sutras/, 94), then shinjin itself becomes meaningless, as a buddha doesn't need birth in anyone's land but rather establishes his own. Recognising that we are totally foolish beings is part of shinjin, as Shinran quotes (KGSS 3.15): 'Second [of the three minds] is deep mind, which is true and real shinjin. One truly knows oneself to be a foolish being full of blind passions, with scant roots of good, transmigrating in the three realms and unable to emerge from this burning house.'


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, May 31st, 2021 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Shinjin as the Third Noble Truth
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I came across this gem in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra today:

Astus wrote:
How does that relate to shinjin? Shinjin itself does not eliminate one's defilements. Also: 'Good man, it is like an intoxicated man trying to walk down a road that he can barely see in his blurred vision. Bodhisattvas at the ten stages who have discerned only a small part of the tathāgata-nature are in a state like this.' (Nirvana Sutra, BDK ed, vol 1, p 249)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, May 31st, 2021 at 6:41 PM
Title: Re: "Which has primacy, Buddha or Dharma"?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Thus, what we are going for refuge in is the actual realization of a buddha, who has benefited themselves and is capable of benefitting us, and not some abstract doctrine we ourselves have not realized.

Astus wrote:
Being uncompounded, it cannot even be comprehended, unlike an abstract doctrine. Being effortless ("naturally perfected"), nobody has anything to do with it, unlike with a teaching. Being personally realised, one has to realise it for oneself and others cannot help, unlike with a teaching. The path that is demonstrated, that is the teaching, and it is through the path that afflictions are abandoned. So, taking refuge in the true buddha, the dharmakaya, means taking the ultimate truth (wisdom, dharma as reality) as shown in the teaching demonstrating reality (compassion, dharma as doctrine) and applying it, since there is actually nothing else to take refuge in.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, May 31st, 2021 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: "Which has primacy, Buddha or Dharma"?
Content:
Malcolm said:
One, your reference to SN 6.2 is far too narrow, since in the Pali canon the Buddha has also declared in various places he had no teacher at all, and that he had teachers in past lives.

Astus wrote:
Apart from the Jataka, Buddhavamsa, and Cariyapitaka, there aren't many discourses dealing with the idea of the past lives of the Buddha. On the other hand, the instruction to take the Dharma as one's refuge is repeated several times: DN 16, DN 26, SN 22.43, SN 47.9, SN 47.13-14.

Malcolm said:
Second, no, the UT really doesn’t “practically combine all three refuges into one.” It points out that the Dharma and the Sangha are compounded and impermanent. This is the context in which Maitreya declares the Buddha to be the true refuge, Dzongsar’s apologetics notwithstanding.

Astus wrote:
The Buddha is called the ultimate refuge for its permanence, thus actually meaning the dharma kaya. In a similar fashion is Dharma itself described in the Pali Canon, that it is true and present regardless of a buddha arising or not arising (SN 12.20, AN 3.136; cf. MMK 18.12).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, May 30th, 2021 at 8:45 PM
Title: Re: "Which has primacy, Buddha or Dharma"?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Even the Buddha revered the Dharma as his teacher (SN 6.2). The Uttaratantra Shastra (3.21) calls the Buddha the ultimate refuge, it also practically combines all three into one, as Dzongsar JK Rinpoche commented: 'But ultimately, Buddha is not other than the Dharma and the Sangha, because the ultimate Dharma is the absence of attachment. And that’s what Buddha has achieved. And since Buddha is the result of end point of all the bhumis, the Buddha is also the essence, the quintessence of the Sangha.'


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, May 30th, 2021 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Reading suggestions to learn about Soto
Content:
Nicholas2727 said:
Does anyone have any reading suggestions that go into detail about the Soto tradition, it's views, practices, etc?

Astus wrote:
You can start with the https://www.sotozen.com/eng/. It has a fair amount of introductory materials.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, May 28th, 2021 at 2:55 PM
Title: Re: How does mantra purify past negative karma?
Content:
Padmist said:
How does mantra purify past negative karma?

Astus wrote:
Since prayers and wishes are of no use (SN 42.6, AN 5.43), and one does not know what actually to purify (MN 101), nor can what has already happened be changed (SN 42.8), it is changing the present mind that really matters (AN 3.99). In other words, it is in changing the present course of thoughts where mantras can make a difference.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, May 27th, 2021 at 2:53 PM
Title: Re: "Chain of Causation" Question
Content:
Subcontrary said:
Is Kamalasila indicating then, in the paragraph on p313, that this is all Uddyotakara's incorrect interpretation of the Buddhist view? That is to say, is he paraphrasing Uddyotakara here: "that 'Chain' which is liable to be snapped cannot serve as the 'Cause,'"? That would make more sense.

Astus wrote:
It is meant to establish causality between momentary phenomena, and to prove that impermanence is not contrary to karma. See also text 530 on page 309 about causal chain.

Subcontrary said:
That the chain of cause and effect continues between moments is difficult to reconcile with momentariness; it would seem that by existing from moment to moment it does adopt some character of permanence, and if we relegate this permanence to being merely a "conventional" but not ultimate truth (it's not literally a chain at all), I have trouble determining how the ultimate truth of karma can be reliant on it: if the link between an action in one moment and a result in the next doesn't ultimately exist, that seems to imply that the result of an action is ultimately random, but I am quite sure this can't be the case...!

Astus wrote:
Causality, momentariness, karma - these are not ultimate realities in Madhyamaka. The argument that causality and momentariness work together is discussed in the same chapter. There is no randomness in causality.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, May 26th, 2021 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: Hello From An Amateur Madhyamaka Scholar!
Content:
Astus wrote:
A course in Madhyamaka with Thomas Doctor has started this month: https://dharmasun.org/courses/middleway/


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, May 24th, 2021 at 5:21 PM
Title: Re: "Chain of Causation" Question
Content:
Subcontrary said:
Kamalasila can't possibly believe in "the permanence of the 'Chain'"; he describes it as liable to be snapped -- I am having trouble following this metaphor. Much of this chapter is devoted to the momentariness of reality, how a thing ceases to exist after a moment, and gives rise to another thing; and yet the 'chain' seems to persist from moment to moment -- indeed, it seems that it is merely what links each moment together. How is it 'liable to snap'? What is the most literal explanation of Kamalasila's reasoning here?

Astus wrote:
Here (Tattvasamgraha, vol 1, p 313) he means that cause and effect works with the mind-continuum that consists of momentary mind-moments. It is stated against Uddyotakara's claim that if mind is a "fleeting entity" there can be no karma ("affected (impressed) by Actions"). The chain (mind-continuum) is labelled permanent only because it is continuous.

Subcontrary said:
Is Kamalasila describing the same 'Chain' in this passage as above? It seems not, since in the first passage he says the 'Chain' isn't the substratum of the impression leading to the result of an action, and in the second passage he says that impressions resulting from acts (of charity etc) appear "in a mutually intervolved 'Chain' or 'Series'." I imagine that even if Kamalasila is referring only to one sort of chain the passages are reconcilable, but I am having trouble reconciling them on my own. It is possible, for example, though I don't know what it means exactly, for the impressions to 'appear' in the chain, without the chain being the substratum of the impressions.

Astus wrote:
He talks (p 314) of those who recognised no-self can and do act morally because they also see how causality/karma works. The 'Chain' refers to the mind-continuum as before. It is actually argued that the chain is not snapped, hence it is a valid "substratum of the 'impression' leading to such a result".


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, May 12th, 2021 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: So are Sutras really from the Buddha, or just fiction
Content:
Astus wrote:
Yixuan has a solution:

"Followers of the Way, make no mistake! All the dharmas of this world and of the worlds beyond are without self-nature. Also, they are without produced nature. They are just empty names, and these names are also empty. All you are doing is taking these worthless names to be real. That’s all wrong! Even if they do exist, they are nothing but states of dependent transformation, such as the dependent transformations of bodhi, nirvana, emancipation, the threefold body, the [objective] surroundings and the [subjective] mind, bodhisattvahood, and buddhahood. What are you looking for in these lands of dependent transformations! All of these, up to and including the Three Vehicles’ twelve divisions of teachings, are just so much waste paper to wipe off privy filth. The Buddha is just a phantom body, the patriarchs just old monks.
But you, weren’t you born of a mother? If you seek the Buddha, you’ll be held in the grip of Buddha-Māra. If you seek the patriarchs, you’ll be bound by the ropes of Patriarch-Māra. If you engage in any seeking, it will all be pain. Much better to do nothing.
There are a bunch of shavepate monks who say to students, ‘The Buddha is the Ultimate; he attained buddhahood only after he came to the fruition of practices carried on through three great asaṃkhyeya kalpas.’ Followers of the Way, if you say that the Buddha is the ultimate, how is it that after eighty years of life the Buddha lay down on his side between the twin śāla trees at Kuśinagara and died? Where is the Buddha now? We clearly know that his birth and death were not different from ours."
(Record of Linji, p 19, tr Sasaki)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, May 11th, 2021 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Zen beliefs.
Content:
Zenny said:
My problem with this is that this means that certain beliefs are upheld as something to "discover" rather than being Innate and natural. And that is the way that many religions try to get people to accept beliefs that are not felt/natural. Thus one can never criticise a "belief" as the reply would be "you haven't progressed enough". Which smacks of complacency and authority.

Astus wrote:
In Zen what one has to believe in foremost is one's own ability to realise buddha-nature, simply because otherwise one would lack the motivation to continue with the practice. It does not matter if you believe that there is or isn't something or anything. The main point is to work towards awakening. Don't get bogged down by ideas of there is or there isn't. Those are just passing thoughts anyway.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, May 11th, 2021 at 6:38 PM
Title: Re: Zen beliefs.
Content:
Zenny said:
Why the need for non experiential beliefs in an otherwise perfect religion?

Astus wrote:
Buddhist teachings are experience based and to be experienced for oneself. It is a matter of one's level of progress how much one can learn, comprehend, and eventually verify personally.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, May 10th, 2021 at 3:03 PM
Title: Re: Origin of the Four Seals?
Content:
Malcolm said:
The formula, "all compounded phenomena...nirvana is peace" is found in Sthiramati's commentary on the Mahāyānasūtralaṃkara, which was translated in either the 11th century by an obscure translator named Che Tashi (Lce bkra shi) with an Indian.

Astus wrote:
The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra was translated to Chinese in the early 7th century by Prabhākaramitra, and it uses the term four Dharma seals (四法印; T31n1604_p0646a15). The same term is also found in the Vimalakirti sutra commentary (T38n1776_p0442a25) by Huiyuan 慧遠 (523~592, a disciple of Kumarajiva), and that seems to be the earliest occurrence of 四法印 based on a simple CBETA search, but probably there are texts preceding it.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, May 9th, 2021 at 8:14 PM
Title: Re: Origin of the Four Seals?
Content:
manjusri said:
Does anyone know when these were first formulated and by whom? I am also curious if they can be found in the Theravada? I believe I was introduced to them through a teaching given by HHDL. Thanks, everybody.

Astus wrote:
They are mentioned in the Ekottaragama, scroll 18, chapter 26.1, in sutras numbered 8 and 9 (T125, p639a2-12, p640b5-18), as the four fundamental dharmas (四法本末: all compounded are (all) impermanent (一切諸行(皆悉)無常), all compounded are suffering (一切諸行苦), all compounded are without self (一切諸行無我),  nirvana is rest/eternally tranquil (涅槃休息/為永寂)).  Suttacentral gives AN 4.185 and SN 47.13 as parallels, but they do not contain those four.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, May 7th, 2021 at 2:19 PM
Title: Re: Indian Buddhist music
Content:
mabw said:
Hmm, I have on occasions tried looking for classical Sinhalese music on Youtube. Not very successful though, not at least when I type in English. A lot of material in Sri Lanka seems locked in Sinhalese.

Astus wrote:
You can try https://www.shraddha.lk/english/ and its https://www.youtube.com/user/shraddhatv, they have https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARd_hSTb5b0&list=PLaIyA_suCnHxm6qpbU-N7zyiTtTpuoNQt.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, May 7th, 2021 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Indian Buddhist music
Content:
Astus wrote:
Should check Sinhalese music.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, May 6th, 2021 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
Malcolm said:
It emphasized the fact that in many respects, in Zen temples in Japan, there was a lot of less meditation than one might expect, and that a large portion of temple activities were oriented towards ministering to the needs of the lay population with various kinds of rituals.

Astus wrote:
'In Japan today, seated meditation is only practiced in a few large monasteries. In most Zen temples, as in the temples of other sects, priests spend most of their time carrying out funeral rituals for their parishioners. With the spread of Zen Buddhism throughout Europe and the United States, there has been a trend towards ignoring the more religious and ritualistic aspects of Zen and focusing instead on its technical aspects, thereby subjecting zazen to the same treatment as Indian yoga.'
(Unmasking Buddhism by B. Faure, p 78)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, May 6th, 2021 at 2:43 PM
Title: Re: Lack of Mahayana monasteries in the US?
Content:
Astus wrote:
Some that are listed under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Buddhist_monasteries_in_the_United_States:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuang_Yen_Monastery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_Bosatsu_Zendo_Kongo-ji
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyobutsuji_Zen_Monastery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Mahayana_Temple
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shasta_Abbey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tassajara_Zen_Mountain_Center
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_Mountain_Monastery

Lists of monasteries/temples:
http://www.sfzen.org/all-other-usa-american-chinese-buddhist-temples
http://middleland.org/chung-tai-branches/
http://truclamminhchanh.org/en/links.aspx
https://whiteplum.org/membership-list-public/


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 19th, 2021 at 7:25 PM
Title: Re: An intersubjective experience in Yogacara
Content:
Astus wrote:
Any Buddhist teaching can be put in the frame of the four noble truths and see where it belongs to. So for instance the doctrine of consciousness only is a part of the fourth, the noble truth of the path, as it is meant to be a teaching (sruti/prajna) or view (drsti/darsana) to be applied (bhavana) in meditation (samadhi), and with that attain non-conceptual wisdom (nirvikalpajnana) and reach the first bhumi. This should help with not mistaking the Dharma as some sort of mundane philosophy/science.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 15th, 2021 at 4:41 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
LastLegend said:
What if one doesn’t have doubt?

Astus wrote:
It has to be generated.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Great_Doubt.html?id=172yDAAAQBAJ by Boshan Yuanlai
Talks by Jeff Shore on Boshan's text: https://beingwithoutself.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/exhortations-for-those-who-do-part-1.pdf, https://beingwithoutself.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/exhortations-for-those-who-do-part-2and3.pdf
https://www.google.com/books/edition/%E7%A6%AA%E9%97%9C%E7%AD%96%E9%80%B2/y2LDBAAAQBAJ by Yunqi Zhuhong


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 15th, 2021 at 2:20 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
Astus wrote:
On the practice of huatou/hwadu, that has become the main form of Chan practice since the 12th century, there are some good introductory texts:

https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/HanshanDeqing.html#c by Hanshan Deqing.
https://www.emptycloud.net/articles-2/chan-meditation-%E7%A6%85/the-chan-training/ by Xuyun.
http://ftp.budaedu.org/ebooks/pdf/EN375.pdf by Guo Ru.
http://www.koreanbuddhism.net/bbs/board.php?bo_table=3020


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 15th, 2021 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
RonBucker said:
Can Chinese Buddhists teach Japanese Buddhists how to meditate or will Chinese people think that the Japanese will disagree with their teachings?

Astus wrote:
It depends on who teaches whom, not their nationality.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 15th, 2021 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
RonBucker said:
This means that there will be no disagreement between Chinese, Japanese and Korean Buddhists if they all come to the same church.

Astus wrote:
It depends on what sort of disagreement you mean.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 14th, 2021 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
RonBucker said:
So the most popular Buddhism in China, Japan and Korea is Pure Land Buddhism and Chan / Zen?

Astus wrote:
The most popular form of Buddhism in East Asia is Pure Land. It is only in Japan where distinct organisations exist for Pure Land practice, and there they (mainly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo-sh%C5%AB and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Ddo_Shinsh%C5%AB ) are the biggest Buddhist churches. Similarly, it is in Japan where you find individual churches for Zen. There is no such organisational separation based on school affiliation in other countries. Also, when there is talk of 'Chan school', 'Pure Land school', or 'Tiantai school', that's not an either/or situation, but more of a set of ideas and methods that can be studied and applied easily by the same person.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 14th, 2021 at 6:46 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
RonBucker said:
What is the most popular school of Buddhism in China and Japan?

Astus wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Land_Buddhism.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 14th, 2021 at 3:03 PM
Title: Re: How difference between Chan and Zen.
Content:
RonBucker said:
Are these two schools very similar? For example, Chan Buddhists can teach Zen Buddhists, and Zen Buddhists may teach the practice of Chan Buddhists.
Or do Chan Buddhists think Zen Buddhists have a slightly different mindset about practice?

Astus wrote:
The sole unique identifying element of all Chan/Zen groups is their ancestral https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lineage_%28Buddhism%29#Chan_and_Zen_lineages where the last common ancestor is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huineng (638-713).
The two main groups in Japan are https://www.sotozen.com/eng/, that is quite centralised, and http://zen.rinnou.net/index.html, that is more of an association of several organisations.
I cannot speak for Mainland China, but as for the Republic three of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Mountains_%28Taiwan%29 were founded by members of a Chan lineage: https://www.fgs.org.tw/en/, https://www.dharmadrum.org/, https://www.ctworld.org.tw/english-96/html/.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 11th, 2021 at 6:24 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
because of being described subsequent to those [cognitions]. The argument takes aim at the Geluk idea that appearances are derived from conventions themselves.

Astus wrote:
Both Jnanagarbha and Gorampa state that conventional truth include not just words or labels but the whole cognitive process of perception. I did not equate conventions with just words.

What the Satyadvayavibhangavrtti says:

'This is why the sutra says:
What is relative truth? All ordinary designations, syllables, utterances, and words. Ultimate truth cannot even be known, let alone conveyed in syllables.
An ordinary designation (loka-prajnapti) is an ordinary activity that is cognitive in nature (jnana-jneya-laksana) rather than verbal in nature (abhidhana-laksana), since [syllables] are mentioned later [in the quotation]. The word "all" is meant to be inclusive. This means that items cognized by perceptions (pratyaksa) that are nonconceptual (nirvikalpa), such as perceptions of form (rupa) or pleasure (sukha), are only relative truth. [The word "all"] is also to be taken with the subsequent [terms in the sentence]. Thus it applies to [the phrase "ordinary designations"], which has just been quoted from the sutra, and to syllables, utterances, and words.'
(Jnanagarbha on the Two Truths, p 74)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 11th, 2021 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
Satyadvayavibhaṅgavṛitti states:

“Mundane conventional designations are engagements of the mundane, that is to say, having the characteristics of cognitions and objects of cognition, but do not have the characteristic of verbalizations because of being described subsequent to those [cognitions].”

Gorampa adds:

Therefore all those objects and everything defined on those from the perspective of appearing to a mundane mind is said to be the meaning of defining the relative through the perspective of convention.

Astus wrote:
How does that support the claim that first there are appearances and only then conventions? Appearances are conventional according to Jnanakirti, he simply makes a distinction there between cognition and verbalisation.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, April 11th, 2021 at 3:51 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
In brief, conventions do not generate appearances, for example, calling the appearance of sand “water” does not change that appearance into water. First there an appearance, then there is a conventional designation.

Astus wrote:
How is that not like the Abhidharma view that takes dharmas as paramartha, and how is it consolidated with statements like this one:

'Since the Buddhas have stated
That the world is conditioned by ignorance,
So why is it not reasonable [to assert]
That this world is [a result of] conceptualization?'
(Yuktisastika 37, tr Geshe Thupten Jinpa; cf. Yuktisastika 33-34; Acintyastava 6, 35, 44; Lokatitastava 19)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 10th, 2021 at 9:10 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
Wrong answer.

Astus wrote:
Which appearance isn't a convention? Which convention isn't an appearance?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 10th, 2021 at 6:16 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
Do appearances arise from conventional designations, or are conventional designations made on the basis of appearances?

Astus wrote:
Without further specifications they are practically synonyms, so one preceding the other is not an option.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 10th, 2021 at 5:02 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
So which comes first, appearance or convention?

Astus wrote:
First for what?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 10th, 2021 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Matt J said:
It sounds to me like Astus is following the Gelug view of stating that things exist conventionally.

Astus wrote:
I'd rather put it as: whatever can be called existent is just a convention, a conceptual fabrication. Not because it is ontologically meaningful, but because taking one's ideas to be real is the root of suffering.

'Since external appearances are confusion, know them to be unreal.
Since the internal mind itself is without a self, know it to be empty.
Since the thoughts in between arise conditionally, know them to be adventitious.'
(Precious Garland by Gampopa, ch 6, p 167-168)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, April 10th, 2021 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: Modern Chinese Chan Buddhism and Modern Psychology
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
That is, monks and Chan Buddhism masters can help people cope with their mental disorders, anxiety and stresses?

Astus wrote:
Buddhism and psychology may be somewhat related, but as Chan is not a training to cure mental disorders it follows that those proficient in Chan may not be fit to be considered therapists, just as a psychologist is not automatically a Dharma teacher.

Arnold3000 said:
And the customary believers of Chan Buddhism who have enlightened their minds can help the minds of other people to come to enlightenment or is it only a master or a monk can?

Astus wrote:
One can receive beneficial teachings from anyone, but it's up to each person to put them into practice and thus gain the results.

As for the Chan way of fixing one's mind:

Bodhidharma sat facing a wall. Huike [who would be his successor] stood in the snow and cut off his arm, saying, “My mind is not at peace. Please, Teacher, pacify my mind.”
Bodhidharma said, “Bring out your mind and I will pacify it for you.”
Huike said, “When I search for my mind, ultimately it cannot be found. ”
Bodhidharma said, “I have already pacified your mind for you. ”
(Wumen's Gate, case 41, in Three Chan Classics, BDK ed, p 102)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: Modern Chinese Chan Buddhism and Modern Psychology
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
Does this mean that the practitioner first brings his mind to enlightenment and then helps other minds to come to enlightenment?
Is it like when a psychologist first studies at the university and then helps patients deal with their stress and anxiety?

Astus wrote:
Sure. How else could it be?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
To say something is real, in English, means to have objective, independent existence. Thus, one cannot say conditions are real.

Astus wrote:
I see. I try to keep that in mind. Still, if I look at the definition from https://www.lexico.com/definition/real as 'Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.'; or from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/real as 'existing in fact and not imaginary', then it doesn't have to have such a connotation, but rather something's factual nature is what makes it real, that it can be perceived as occurring or happening, that it is a factor. Anyhow, do you have perhaps some better words to use then?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: Modern Chinese Chan Buddhism and Modern Psychology
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
"It would be wonderful if they could read their own minds."
what does it mean?

Astus wrote:
Chan Buddhism is about seeing into the mind we use all the time, that is the primary goal. Worrying about the minds of others can only come later.

Arnold3000 said:
Does Chan Buddhism have telepathy?
How is the psychology of Chan Buddhism different from modern psychology?

Astus wrote:
You can read these two booklets by Ven. Hsing Yun:
https://www.fgsitc.org/the-buddhist-perspective-on-the-supernatural/
https://www.fgsitc.org/buddhism-and-psychology/


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
You used the word “real”.

Astus wrote:
Yes, but "real in the sense of " functional, conditioned, causally relevant, and not as "real in the sense of existing in and of themselves".


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 7:40 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
Conventional truths are derived from observing functional appearances. Falsehoods are derived from observing nonfunctional appearances. Example, lake vs. mirage.

Astus wrote:
And by functional do you mean causally effective? If so, what's wrong with saying that phenomena are conditional?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 7:38 PM
Title: Re: Modern Chinese Chan Buddhism and Modern Psychology
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233645610_Psychological_attachment_no-self_and_Chan_Buddhist_mind_therapy

Astus wrote:
That's only an abstract, but the paper is from 2008. Any follow up studies?

Arnold3000 said:
Chan Buddhism is most popular school in Modern Chinese Buddhism.

Astus wrote:
How do we know that? Also, it's probably not true.

Arnold3000 said:
Modern psychology believes that the masters and monks of Chan Buddhism can better treat people from mental illness because they know better how other people's minds work?

Astus wrote:
Unlikely.

Arnold3000 said:
Are there monks with special psychic abilities who can read the minds of others?

Astus wrote:
It would be wonderful if they could read their own minds.

Arnold3000 said:
It would be useful for psychology to be able to read the minds of other people.

Astus wrote:
Parapsychology is supposed to deal with telepathy. Psychology not so much.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 1:47 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
That question is incoherent, it assumes that conditions can bear analysis. They can't. They are just relative appearances upon which designations are made.

Astus wrote:
If so, how can any valid statements be made? No difference between ordinary true and false?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 5:30 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
No, because conditions also cannot be found upon analysis, exactly like material and mental appearances, the former are no more real than the latter. They have the same amount of reality, they are unable to bear ultimate analysis.

Astus wrote:
Do say that conventionally things exist independently?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Malcolm said:
No, not even that.

Astus wrote:
No, because there are no appearances, or because they are not dependent, or maybe both?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 9th, 2021 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Könchok Chödrak said:
Can we respect constructs as form, then form as Emptiness, then Emptiness as the basis for who we are, without saying we don’t exist just because we are infinite?

Astus wrote:
Emptiness is not a basis of anything, it rather means baselessness, that there is no ultimate substratum behind phenomena. We are certainly not infinite, but finite and dependent entities.

Könchok Chödrak said:
Isn’t what really doesn’t exist the material aspect of this world, the non-Nirvanic, non-Buddhic dream of craving, but all the while, all the while Love and Compassion are real—?

Astus wrote:
Neither the material, nor the mental appearances are real in the sense of existing in and of themselves, but real in the sense of conditioned conditions. Emotions like love and compassion are very much temporary composite phenomena.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 8th, 2021 at 8:04 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Könchok Chödrak said:
We say “we all have Buddha Nature”.

Astus wrote:
Such is the nature of skilful means, intended to make people maintain a hopeful outlook towards a great realisation, only to find out in the end that there has never been anything to realise.

Könchok Chödrak said:
What is this ”we”? After we erase the “I” are we going to erase the “we”?

Astus wrote:
'These mere appearances are not a real unity, because they possess many parts. Each of these parts can in turn be broken down into many subparts. Since this process can be infinitely repeated, there is not a single smallest particle that is a really existent and indivisible unity. Without even one real building block, how could you put together many so as to create a really existent thing? Consequently, there can be nothing that is a real multiplicity, because there is no real unity to begin with that could build up such a multiplicity. To be sure, this reasoning does not negate the mere conventionality that one thing has many parts. The point here is that neither the thing in question nor its parts really exist by themselves. Thus, what is denied is not the mere appearance of unity and multiplicity on the level of seeming reality but the existence of any unity or multiplicity that is really established and findable as such.'
(Center of the Sunlit Sky, p 237)

Könchok Chödrak said:
Eventually it must be understood that there are Real Transcendental activities for the individual after liberation, and that there still is an individual, even after many lifetimes of self-negation.

Astus wrote:
'“Are the dharmakāyas of the buddha bhagavāns said to be different or said not to be different?” They are said not to be different since their support, intention, and enlightened activity are not different. [However,] they are said to be different since innumerable bodies [of bodhisattvas] become fully and perfectly awakened. Just as the dharmakāya, the sambhogakāyas [of buddhas] are not different because their intention and enlightened activity are not different. However, since their supports are different, it is not that they are without difference because they arise with innumerable supports. The nirmānạkāyas are to be regarded in the same way as the sambhogakāyas.'
(Mahayanasamgraha X.8, tr Brunnhölzl)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 8th, 2021 at 7:53 PM
Title: Re: Are there any precedents that allow for 'developments' of Buddhism after the Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
I wonder if the term translated here as "faith and understanding" is 信解.

Astus wrote:
Yes.

Queequeg said:
I'm not quite sure that passage lines up with the process I'm talking about. This passage seems to be comparing methods, not quite an active dialogue between sutras and commentary and the tension that results.

Astus wrote:
True, it's about living the Dharma, having direct insight of the meaning gained from learning. The way I take it is that commentaries and treatises are meant to express the understanding of the sutras in order to allow an easier comprehension of them. But in a few decades and centuries those explanations can sound as foreign as the sutras themselves, so there appear sub-commentaries. And the process goes on (e.g. for Theravada: sutta -> abhidhamma (dhammasanga -> vibhanga -> dhatukatha) -> atthakatha -> tika), then summaries are produced, then commentaries on the summaries. Or there is another route, at some point returning to the sutras, or some treatise, and writing new commentaries/treatises (or even new sutras), especially if one wants to diverge from the accepted interpretations.

Queequeg said:
Being honest, I have to admit I don't understand Zen discourse. Its tropes, ideas, and terminology just present a wall that resists my penetration.

Astus wrote:
This points quite well to the matter at hand. Zongmi wrote:

'The teachings are the sutras and treatises left behind by the buddhas and bodhisattvas. Chan is the lines of verse related by the various good friends [on the path]. The buddha sutras open outward, catching the thousands of the beings of the eight classes, while Chan verses scoop up an abridgment, being oriented to one type of disposition found in this land [of China]. [The teachings,] which catch [the thousands of] beings [of the eight classes], are broad and vast, and hence it is difficult to rely upon them. [Chan,] which is oriented to dispositions, points to the bull's-eye and hence is easy to use.'
(Chan Prolegomenon, in Zongmi on Chan, p 105)

For Zongmi - who was a well respected "scholar-practitioner" monk in 9th century China - Chan teachings meant the simple, direct, easy to understand presentation of the Dharma. Naturally Chan over the centuries developed into something quite complex (e.g. Blue Cliff Record), and at the same time what was once ordinary talk for us now is an obscure ancient dialect filled with references that take dozens of footnotes to explain.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 8th, 2021 at 4:04 PM
Title: Re: Are there any precedents that allow for 'developments' of Buddhism after the Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
Isn't this tension interesting? In a sense, this uncertainty, and vacillation between source and commentary, meandering back, etc. could be seen, as a whole, as the process by which the tradition keeps to the Buddha's teaching - keeping the teaching vital as a living discourse. I'm wary when I see attempts to limit the teaching too strictly and literally. The discussion and argument itself is both a practice and a means of establishing authority.

Astus wrote:
A sutra can and should be read with the other sutras. Commentaries and treatises can help with understanding. However, what makes the teachings alive is going through all three stages of learning (sruti), understanding (cinta), and applying (bhavana), or sometimes they talk of it in Zen as using live words instead of (or after) dead ones. As Jinul wrote:

'In the Sŏn school, all these true teachings deriving from the faith and understanding of the complete and sudden school, which are as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, are called dead words (sagu 死句) because they induce people to generate the obstacle of understanding. But they also may help neophytes who are not yet able to investigate the live word (hwalgu 活句) of the shortcut approach by instructing them in complete descriptions that accord with the nature in order to ensure that their faith and understanding will not retrogress.'
(Treatise on Resolving Doubts about Observing the Keyword, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 319)

Queequeg said:
That's probably not quite acceptable if one demands absolute certainty.

Astus wrote:
One arrives at certainty at the stage of insight, where there is direct seeing into the validity of the Dharma. Until then one can have faith and understanding, but that's still not an unshakeable ground.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 8th, 2021 at 2:20 PM
Title: Re: Brunnhölzl on Buddha Nature as a radical teaching.
Content:
Könchok Chödrak said:
Can anyone go into detail here how Buddha-Nature is not an Atman?

Astus wrote:
The Atman is a stand alone pure consciousness, never an agent. Buddha-nature is a reference to innumerable buddha-qualities that manifest when the obscurations are completely removed through the full realisation of twofold emptiness.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 8th, 2021 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Are there any precedents that allow for 'developments' of Buddhism after the Buddha?
Content:
avatamsaka3 said:
That's interesting. Examples?

Astus wrote:
The general refutation of svabhava is one. Related to that, the practice of prajnaparamita as non-abiding is another.

'All conditioned phenomena
Are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow
Like the dew, or like lightning
You should discern them like this'
( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-33 )

'Form is like a lump of foam,
Feeling like a water bubble;
Perception is like a mirage,
Volitions like a plantain trunk,
And consciousness like an illusion,
So explained the Kinsman of the Sun.
However one may ponder it
And carefully investigate it,
It appears but hollow and void
When one views it carefully.'
( https://suttacentral.net/sn22.95/en/bodhi )


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 7th, 2021 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: Are there any precedents that allow for 'developments' of Buddhism after the Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
That's well and good, but if you take that too strictly, commentary is technically barred, and all you can have is the Pali texts. Not even sure you could have Abhidhamma. You might find yourself going down the originalist rabbit hole.  The question is, what is elaboration and explanation and what is just fabricated. How much latitude is permitted in commentary?

Astus wrote:
It depends on the type of commentary, how far it diverges from what are found in the discourses. Presumably a commentator's intent is not to add something to the Buddha's teaching but rather to make it clearer to the readers. And that's what all Buddhist teachings are supposed to be, just relaying what the Buddha himself taught. It is another thing that during the process it can change in may ways, like in the Āṇisutta eventually nothing remains of the drum. Look at this passage from Dogen:

'In the lesser vehicle, people used counting to regulate their breath. However, the buddha ancestors’ engaging of the way always differed from the lesser vehicle.
A buddha ancestor said, “Even if you arouse the mind of a leprous wild fox, never practice the self-regulation of the two vehicles.” The two vehicles refer to such as the school of the four-part vinaya, and the [Abhidharma] Kosa school, which have spread in the world these days. In the Mahayana there is also a method for regulating breath, which is knowing that one breath is long, another breath is short. The breath reaches the tanden and comes up from the tanden. Although exhale and inhale differ, both of them occur depending on the tanden. Impermanence is easy to clarify, and regulating the mind is easy to accomplish.'
(Eihei Koroku 5.390, p 348-349)

The interesting thing is of course that the method of counting (following, fixing, etc.) is not a method taught in the discourses, but what is taught as the 16 steps breath mindfulness in teachings like the Anapanasati Sutta is what Dogen suggests. It's also possible to find other cases where while Mahayana rejects teachings found in Abhidharma and commentarial works what is proposed instead is more in line with the early scriptures.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, April 7th, 2021 at 2:55 PM
Title: Re: Are there any precedents that allow for 'developments' of Buddhism after the Buddha?
Content:
Padmist said:
Are there any precedents from the Buddha himself from canon (preferably the Pali Canon) that show the Buddha expected his later followers to 'develop' various teachings beyond the ones he explicitly taught as recorded in the canon?
I mean, are there statements or teachings of the Buddha that show he welcomes or expects later developments, discoveries, additions, reformulations, of his teachings?

Astus wrote:
Rather the opposite, expecting disciples to preserve it correctly. See e.g. https://suttacentral.net/sn20.7/en/sujato, https://suttacentral.net/dn33/en/sujato.

'you should remember what I have not declared as undeclared, and what I have declared as declared.'
( https://suttacentral.net/mn63/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, April 6th, 2021 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Rock & Metal
Content:
Malcolm said:
Let's not and say we did.

Astus wrote:
You don't like the genre? Maybe some original Tibetan by Alan Dawa Dolma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LStBIUEUOrM? Or the https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=1062571790823049&ref=watch_permalink (the https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Safeguard/05-Upagantho-12.htm ) as sung in the movie Yasodhara (බිම්බා දේවී හෙවත් යශෝධරා)?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, April 5th, 2021 at 8:53 PM
Title: Buddhist Rock & Metal
Content:
Astus wrote:
Let's share Buddhist metal, rock, and other modern music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi8HnW-SHf4 - A one of a kind song by the Chinese band Yaksa (夜叉), the lyrics is based on the dharani (Niepan xiangmo zhou 涅槃降魔咒) recited by Manjusri to save Ananda from 64000 billion maras in the last chapter of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (T374p602/T375p850).

Dharma (達摩樂隊) - Buddhist death metal from Taiwan, they growl mantras
Videos available at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCi1eseuCuPIozZK6tTcqCzg
Sample song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC6Tc3y1icM

Shamon (沙門) - Futuristic Buddhist Pop (進化系仏教ポップ), a band of Buddhist priests from Japan, they also have some songs in English
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCZm7X9tqCJCeoOIZN0psCQ
Sample English song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ-cAgsKQkI

Nam Jazz Experiment (南無ジャズ・エクスペリメント) - Sutra chanting combined with Jazz from Japan
Videos available at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAGbI6vuwZg3_FbEMAc7DeA ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijiyBbi8jnQ&list=PLEl752UqQLKWLZrPBCGwuL4T-ivPhzXrW )
Sample song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijiyBbi8jnQ


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 2nd, 2021 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: An intersubjective experience in Yogacara
Content:
Queequeg said:
Seems a bad idea to even entertain the concept of "collective karma."

Astus wrote:
Generally yes, I agree.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 2nd, 2021 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: An intersubjective experience in Yogacara
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
but what about the fact that there are no external objects, karma is collective, and consciousness is intersubjective?

Astus wrote:
There is the habit of projecting one's concepts as if they were independent, real entities on their own. This is easily observable in how one assumes of another person various attributes as definitive of their being, like 'my brother is lazy', and 'the teacher is too strict'.
Karma is collective in the sense of a shared culture, language, and view, not in the sense of individual intentional actions.
Intersubjectivity is our social existence. Just consider the significant influence parents have on their children, or friends on each other.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 2nd, 2021 at 4:11 PM
Title: Re: An intersubjective experience in Yogacara
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
that is, it’s just a matter of perception? for example, everyone perceives the same person differently?

Astus wrote:
Indeed, a matter of perception, like one can be the daughter for her parents, the wife for her husband, and the mother for her children.

Arnold3000 said:
does this sound like epistemology idealism?

Astus wrote:
It is not about defining whether what one perceives is real or imagined, but about showing how one's own thoughts can generate attachment and suffering, and then how to be free from the defilements.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, April 2nd, 2021 at 3:30 PM
Title: Re: An intersubjective experience in Yogacara
Content:
Arnold3000 said:
According to Yogacara, all the objects that I see exist only in my mind.

Astus wrote:
That objects exist in one's mind means that things are defined by concepts, particularly defined in terms of self/essence/substance. Just consider how people perceived as one's family are quite different from how the same people appear to those who perceive them as colleagues, friends, enemies, or strangers. Same applies to insentient things.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, April 1st, 2021 at 5:02 PM
Title: Re: What's the source of this lines?
Content:
JoaoRodrigues said:
I was wondering what's the source, the text, from which this was taken.

Astus wrote:
What the monk says at the beginning ( https://blog.daum.net/ibakdal/17372311 ):

무시무종(無始無終)에
본래무일물(本來無一物)이라.
시작도 끝도 없잖아.
나지도 죽지도 않은 이 한 물건.

The first two lines are the original Chinese, presumably reading from that book. The second two lines are the same but in modern Korean.

無始無終 (무시무종 / mu sim mu jong) - no beginning, no end; very common expression, found in numerous sutras and treatises
本來無一物 (본래무일물 / bon rae mu il mul) - originally not a thing; most well known source is Huineng's poem in the Platform Sutra

The two phrases do not seem to occur together in the canonical texts.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 31st, 2021 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: We need sources that say that discriminating is the hinayana method
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Limiting Zen to a particular method or approach is IMO ... completely missing the point.

Astus wrote:
Zen is such a generic term that there are even those who limit it to a single method, like zazen or ganhwa.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 30th, 2021 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Do I understand correctly that Zen teaches not to check?
Content:
Russian said:
For Zen, to distinguish is the Hinayana method.

Astus wrote:
Wisdom is the goal of all Buddhists, because that is what brings liberation. It is of no use to merely suspend one's cognitive faculties, that would be just a temporary state that solves nothing, like shutting one's eyes but still being hit by the train. Not discriminating in Zen means freedom from grasping at the extremes of being and nonbeing, freedom from taking things personally as I and my. Actually it is very much in line with what you find in other schools, to eliminate ignorance and realise emptiness. The method and style is somewhat different, however.

Russian said:
according to Zen, karma does not accumulate, does not arise if there is no checking mind, that is, if the mind does not create anything?

Astus wrote:
It is when there is no attachment that the chain of dependent origination is severed, so it is in that way that there is no karma accumulated. But it's certainly not some sort of blank mind with no comprehension of what is going on, quite the opposite actually.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 30th, 2021 at 3:06 PM
Title: Re: Does the Tathagata reside in Dhyana?
Content:
Owlsd said:
Koans are castle studies of real interactions Zen Masters engaged in. Why would you dismiss what they say?

Astus wrote:
Koans are not records of historical events but religious literary products. They can be used in various ways and with various approaches. But they are definitely not the whole picture of what went on in various communities over the centuries.

Owlsd said:
I’m well aware they are part of Buddhist doctrine. I didn’t ask about Buddhist doctrine, I asked about the Buddhadharma.
Let me rephrase as another question. Do you think the Buddhadharma is found in the teachings?

Astus wrote:
The Buddhadharma is what the Buddha taught, and what the Buddha taught are found in the sutras. Without the sutras even the word Buddhadharma is meaningless. That does not mean it is enough to just know the sutras, and that is something the sutras themselves agree on.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 30th, 2021 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: Does the Tathagata reside in Dhyana?
Content:
Owlsd said:
Still I’m talking about how they taught when people made serious inquiry into the Buddhadharma. When Emperor Wu questioned Bodhidharma he was told “No Merit.”
This isn’t a teaching on the basis of right and wrong.

Astus wrote:
Koan is a specific genre of literature. If you want to see what teachers taught it's better to look at their recorded teachings and writings. One example would be Yongming Yanshou's Wanshan tonggui ji, in English see The Meaning of Myriad Good Deeds by Albert Welter, that discusses the importance of meritorious action. There are also some chapter in Dogen's Shobogenzo on the topic of karma, like Shinjininga and Sanjinogo.

Owlsd said:
Does the Buddhadharma and discussion of it, include relative affairs?
If I speak of sex, right and wrong, money, karma, reincarnation, Buddha’s and devils, anything at all in the realm of relative affairs, am I still expressing the true Buddhadharma?

Astus wrote:
The teachings of karma and rebirth are central in all Buddhist schools, while the training in moral discipline is essential for any progress on the path. So yes, those topics are expressing the true Buddhadharma.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 29th, 2021 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Does the Tathagata reside in Dhyana?
Content:
Owlsd said:
Dhyana as I understand it, can be, (usually is) translated as meditation, but I think a more accurate term is probably clearly seeing, clear sight, something like that.

Astus wrote:
From the Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism:

dhyāna. (P. jhāna; T. bsam gtan; C. chan/chanding; J. zen/ zenjō; K. sŏn/sŏnjŏng 禪/禪定). In Sanskrit, “meditative absorption,” specific meditative practices during which the mind temporarily withdraws from external sensory awareness and remains completely absorbed in an ideational object of meditation. The term can refer both to the practice that leads to full absorption and to the state of full absorption itself.

For more on the general concept of dhyana, you can look into the Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra's relevant chapter: https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc82350.html

Owlsd said:
I also understand Dhyana to be the origin of the word Chan and therefore Zen. ... Buddha nature is Dhyana, which is Chan, Zen, etc.

Astus wrote:
Better not project the idea of Chan/Zen back to what is taught as dhyana in Buddhism in general based simply on etymology.

Owlsd said:
Is it true that Zen Masters don’t talk about relative affairs, or teach on the basis of relative affairs?

Astus wrote:
Not true at all. Chan/Zen monasteries even had/have a whole extra set of rules, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chanyuan_Qinggui. Many of the famous Chan teachers were also abbots charged with leading and organising monasteries. It was their duty not only to regulate monastic affairs, but also to cooperate with the laity.

Owlsd said:
To my understanding Zen Masters taught on the basis of pointing to the mind, not positing right and wrong action and further deluding being in samsaric affairs.

Astus wrote:
That's a sort of idealised picture of a fictional 'Zen Master' based on a limited reading.

Owlsd said:
Truly the only desire I have is clarifying this issue. I want to understand the Buddhadharma to the best of my ability and to stop being misled by people clinging to beliefs.

Astus wrote:
Besides reading Zen works you should take a broader view of Buddhism, like reading about its history, and the teachings found in the sutras and treatises. Practically all Zen teachers were very knowledgeable about the whole of the Buddhist tradition. You can look at modern examples, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheng-yen and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sh%C5%8Dhaku_Okumura.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 29th, 2021 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Does the Tathagata reside in Dhyana?
Content:
Owlsd said:
Does the Tathagata abide in Dhyana?

Astus wrote:
Dhyana usually signifies the eight levels of absorption, and in that sense it is not true that a buddha always abides in them. If by Dhyana you actually mean Chan/Zen as it is understood in the Chan school (and has practically nothing to do with dhyana as absorption/concentration/meditation), then it rather stands for buddha-nature, and of course a buddha is one who always abides in the buddha-nature.

Owlsd said:
My understanding stems from reading the bloodstream sermon:

Astus wrote:
Your quote is from the beginning of Red Pine's translation of the Wuxinglun 悟性論 he rendered as 'Wake-Up Sermon'.

Owlsd said:
Since the Tathagata essentially has no divisions and makes no distinctions, and since it essentially doesn’t move or change when it goes from one state to another, doesn’t that mean that anger/wisdom greed(desire)/morality and delusion/meditation(Dhyana) are essentially the same thing? If I see them as separate things isn’t that delusion?

Astus wrote:
The three poisons (greed, anger, delusion) do not differ from the three trainings (morality, meditation, wisdom) in the sense that their nature are buddha-nature (佛性), that is: no-nature ('no nature of their own' 無實性); in other words, they are empty.

Owlsd said:
So Samsara is Nirvana, and the mind’s Dhyana is the very delusions that constitute Samsara?

Astus wrote:
Nagarjuna wrote:

'Samsara does not differ
Even slightly from nirvana.
Nirvana does not differ
Even slightly from samsara.
The ultimate nature of nirvana
Is the ultimate nature of samsara;
And between these two, the slightest difference,
Even the most subtle, is not found.'
(MMK 25.19-20, tr Padmakara)

I do not know what you mean by the 'mind's Dhyana', but certainly it is delusion that is the source of samsara, and the nature of delusion is nirvana. Liberation is then to see the nature of one's delusion.

Again from Nagarjuna:

'One is not freed by existence;
One does not transcend samsara through non-existence;
It’s through understanding existence and non-existence
That the great beings are liberated.'
(Yuktisastika, v 4, tr Thupten Jinpa)

And Bodhidharma:

'Whoever realizes that the six senses aren't real, that the five aggregates are fictions, that no such things can be located anywhere in the body, understands the language of Buddhas. The sutras say, "The cave of five aggregates is the hall of Zen. The opening of the inner eye is the door of the Great Vehicle." What could be clearer?
Not thinking about anything is Zen. Once you know this, walking, standing, sitting, or lying down, everything you do is Zen. To know that the mind is empty is to see the Buddha. The Buddhas of the ten directions have no mind. To see no mind is to see the buddha.'
(Wake-Up Sermon)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, March 25th, 2021 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: The Four Foundations of Mindfulness
Content:
Astus wrote:
It is the practice of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satipatthana. You can find plenty of materials on it from Theravada and Mahayana sources.

Some examples:
The Four Foundations of Mindfulness in Plain English by Bhante Henepola Gunaratana
Satipatthana: The Heart of Buddhist Meditation by Nyanaponika Thera
The Progress of Insight: A Treatise on Satipatthana Meditation by Mahasi Sayadaw
Transformation and Healing: Sutra on the Four Establishments of Mindfulness by Thich Nhat Hanh
Minding Closely: The Four Applications of Mindfulness by B. Alan Wallace

For a comparison of the Abhidharma and Mahayana approaches, see the Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra:
https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc225570.html
https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc225580.html

And for an in depth study of the Satipatthana Sutta, there are three works of Bhikkhu Analayo (all available https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/personen/analayo.html ):
Satipaṭṭhāna, the Direct Path to Realization
Perspectives on Satipaṭṭhāna
Satipaṭṭhāna Meditation: A Practice Guide


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 24th, 2021 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Please give a comment on the Xūyún (虛雲) gath
Content:
Astus wrote:
The poem gives a standard Zen teaching that by not grasping at the six sensory inputs with mistaken concepts (being/nonbeing, self/other, etc.), there is complete awakening.

靈光獨耀 Divine light shines alone - this refers back to the discourse between Jiexian and Shenzan about the Dharma hall, and at the same time introduces the topic as the liberated mind of the buddhas
逈脫根塵 Free from all sensory dust - it is free from the appearances in the six senses; dust (塵) referring both to sensory objects and to defilements
體露真常 The essence shows true permanence - it is buddha-mind that shows the ultimate reality
不拘文字 Not bound to letters - the nature of mind is not discovered with concepts, not learnt from books, also a reference to Jiexian's reading habits
心性無染 Mind's nature is untainted - there are no defilements in the nature of mind
本自圓成 Originally perfect and complete - no qualities need to be developed or added to it
但離妄緣 Just leave false conditions - one only has to let go of fictional concepts that condition the mind
即如如佛 That is buddha as such - it is suchness and buddhahood


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 24th, 2021 at 8:30 PM
Title: Re: Please give a comment on the Xūyún (虛雲) gath
Content:
Astus wrote:
The poem is actually by Guling Shenzan of Fuzhou ( https://authority.dila.edu.tw/person/search.php?aid=A019867 ), an heir of Baizhang Huaihai (百丈懷海), and the verse itself, what was quoted by Xuyun, is found in fascicle 9 of the Jingde Chuandeng Lu (T51n2076_p0268a21-23):

靈光獨耀逈脫根塵。
體露真常不拘文字。
心性無染本自圓成。
但離妄緣即如如佛。

https://www.emptycloud.net/articles-2/chan-meditation-%E7%A6%85/daily-lectures-at-two-chan-weeks-week-2/7/:

Spiritual light shines on in solitude
Disentangling the sense organs from sense data.
Experience of true eternity
Depends not just on books.
Mind-nature being taintless
Fundamentally is perfect.
Freedom from falsehood-producing causes
Is the same as absolute Buddhahood.

Garma C. C. Chang translation (The Practice of Zen, p 20):

Singularly radiating is the wondrous Light;
Free is it from the bondage of matter and the senses.
Not binding by words and letters,
The Essence is nakedly exposed in its pure eternity.
Never defiled is the Mind-nature;
It exists in perfection from the very beginning.
By merely casting away your delusions
The Suchness of Buddhahood is realized.

Translation from https://www.globaljikji.org/en/sub.do?menukey=4301&no=45:

Spiritual light shines by itself and has transcended the world of consciousness.
Essence is exposed and not confined by words.
The mind is not tainted and is complete in itself.
Thus, if it can free itself from false conditions, it will be the true Buddha.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Minobu said:
And most important you are like recieving direct everything you need from Lord Sakyamuni Buddha.

Astus wrote:
Receiving what from Shakyamuni? If the Dharma, then what about what we have at hand from him, that is, the sutras themselves?

Minobu said:
It's spelled out clearly in The Lotus sutra and  verified and put to the test by such Masters as Zhiyi and Venerable Mai Lo and Venerable Dengyo the Great and Finally from the life of Bodhisattva Jogyo in the body  of Nichiren DaiShonin.

Astus wrote:
As far as I know, the masters Zhiyi, Zhanran (Miaole), and Saicho (Dengyo) taught mainly the practices of calming and insight, like the contemplation on the three thousand worlds in a single thought. If theirs are valid teachings, how do those relate to chanting the title of the Lotus Sutra?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Is the concept of amalavijnana characteristic of Zen, or not?
Content:
Russian said:
Question: Does Zen Buddhism adhere to the concept of the ninth consciousness-amalavijnana, or does it not? Does Zen recognize the concept of amalavijnana?

Astus wrote:
It is not much of a Zen idea. A quick search for https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/search/?q=%E9%98%BF%E6%91%A9%E7%BE%85%E8%AD%98&lang=en showed that only 1 author ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongming_Yanshou ) used it in two of his works (Zongjinglu 宗鏡錄 and Wanshan tonggui ji 萬善同歸集) from all the Zen texts (Chanzong bulei 禪宗部類), while there are 29 texts by 10 authors in the Yogacara category (Yujia bulei 瑜伽部類) and 13 texts by 3 authors in the Huayan category (Huayan bulei 華嚴部類).

The idea of amalavijnana has been raised before on DW https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?t=1367 and https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=7126.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021 at 4:53 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Minobu said:
This quest for wisdom noble as it may feel to you , has nothing to do with the actual ability to awaken our innate Buddha nature, with this practice in Mappo.

Astus wrote:
The root cause of samsara is ignorance, to achieve permanent liberation one needs to eliminate ignorance, and wisdom is the antidote for that. If you say that wisdom is not needed for awakening, then do you also say ignorance is not the root cause? If ignorance is not the cause of samsara, what is? But if ignorance is the ultimate source, how could anything but wisdom overcome it?

Minobu said:
case in point no one you know or will ever know experiences the realizations you and Malcolm claim to be the gold standard in Buddhism

Astus wrote:
Does that mean that Nichiren did not aim for liberation and buddhahood, because those were impossible to achieve in his opinion?

Minobu said:
A mere uneducated illiterate peasant can awaken their innate Buddha Nature...Why...
Because their teacher is The Eternal Buddha ...what you see as some calming effect in chanting is like one fleck of ice crystal on the iceberg...

Astus wrote:
If buddhahood is the goal and the result of practice, then all practitioners should show the qualities of a buddha (see e.g.: https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/E/22 ), shouldn't they?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021 at 4:31 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
tkp67 said:
Thus for that brief period a person chants daimoku they actually hold the whole of this experience within their mind stream. There is no practice that takes all of the requirements to fulfill the lotus sutra so one might gain the benefits therein.

Astus wrote:
Just to see if I understand you correctly. Is it the case that chanting the daimoku means that purely because of those words the Buddha's complete awakening is present in one's mind, rendering the mind of the chanter equal to that of a buddha, therefore nothing else is needed since just by chanting one has perfected everything there is to attain? Or is it that the chanting connects somehow one to the Buddha's awakening and it gradually purifies the mind over time simply by the force of that connection?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Minobu said:
Then if I say something about every day life it becomes "OH you want to answer your earthly desires and not consummate Buddhahood  in your life."
how do you separate everyday life from Buddhahood...

Astus wrote:
There can be different goals and accordingly there are different means to reach them. Accumulating merit is an important and widespread practice in Buddhism, and it can give one all sorts of benefits in this life, in the next life, in the human and the heavenly realms, and can help not only oneself but others too. It is no small thing at all. It can also assist in attaining liberation, however, the one thing it cannot generate is liberation itself, because that requires wisdom. I have no doubts about reciting the title of the Lotus Sutra has immeasurable merits. What I fail to see is how one can also accumulate wisdom with it.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 22nd, 2021 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Minobu said:
We see the emptiness of anger and know it is just but one factor in the whole 3000 world thing..So we get to sit back and view it as such and don't act on it.
I actually meditate on higher worlds whilst chanting ODaimoku after one of these episodes of anger or hunger nature etc..and it allows me to move on..
So we use the knowledge to adjust our daily living. Also it shows me my life condition and we then must acknowledge our passing into the lower worlds and we must work on it.

Astus wrote:
Are there teachings and techniques taught for such alleviation of impulses by Nichiren, or is it something you learnt on your own or from somewhere else?

Minobu said:
in our school people develop better lives and learn to work on their lives which are marred by negative Karma.

Astus wrote:
I think it's what everyone tries to do. The question is about how that is achieved and to what extent, like actually awakening to buddha-nature.

Minobu said:
when you say how is wisdom developed.
The approach is much different.
It's like this ....you chant to call forth the ultimate Reality inside you ..and you promise to keep this practice for your entire life and pray to meet up again in future rebirths... so your life becomes one of being,student , and a son or daughter, and a subject of Sovereign Lord Sakyamuni Buddha..

Astus wrote:
Would you say then that the goal is not much about accomplishing the bodhisattva path by becoming a buddha, but more earthly ones?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 22nd, 2021 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
tkp67 said:
The Teacher of the Law chapter of the Lotus Sutra explains the benefits of those who chant daimoku.

Astus wrote:
The quoted section talks of what a teacher should do or have as prerequisites (similarly to chapter 14), not what the benefits of expounding are (as given in chapter 19 for instance). So it seems like a valid question to me to ask how one can actually have the mentioned qualities of compassion, gentleness, forbearing, and the wisdom of emptiness in order to be able to then expound the sutra.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 22nd, 2021 at 7:52 PM
Title: Re: What is self-nature (self-essence) in the Altar Sutra of the sixth Patriarch?
Content:
Astus wrote:
There is a fine definition of self-nature (zixing 自性 - also used as a translation of svabhāva, but its Chan usage should not be confused with those found in other schools) in the https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Historical_Dictionary_of_Chan_Buddhism.html?id=uicnDwAAQBAJ:

'A Chan soteriological term referring to a person’s Buddha-nature. It does not denote any self-existence or any changeless essence existent in and by itself. No such metaphysical meaning is involved in the original use of this term. A notable case of the traditional Chan usage of this term is in the Platform Sūtra, where Buddha-nature is equivalent to self-nature (zixing) in the sense that Buddha-nature cannot be objectified and realized outside each person. Seeing or realizing the Buddha-nature is the existential transformation of the human mind and entire personhood, being able to understand and appreciate what constitutes a person—elements of impermanence and non-abiding—and then accordingly. The realization of self-nature thus requires the accomplishment of action the practical-behavioral carrying out of non-attachment, rather than identifying a metaphysical object or discovering subjectivity through knowledge. The usage also indicates the Chan appropriation of positive or kataphatic language in its teachings without abandoning the use of negative or apophatic language: the Chan walk on two roads.'


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 22nd, 2021 at 6:43 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Minobu said:
How does one incite Emptiness ? what does that even mean.

Astus wrote:
Methods to gain insight is given in the works of Zhiyi for instance.

Minobu said:
thats a TenDai thing i believe.
We don't actually contemplate the three thousand realms we are just made aware of them.

Astus wrote:
Yes, it is the first of the https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/T/59 in the Mohezhiguan of Zhiyi. So, you say then that it is used as a purely theoretical background and not for actual meditation? If so, how is wisdom developed?

Minobu said:
you are now looking at the whole matter from a provisional methodology

Astus wrote:
According to Zhiyi ( http://kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_excerpts/EBM_excerpts/EBM_X-16_X-00.pdf ): 'Insight (vipaśyanā) is the primary essential through which one is able to cut off the delusions.' If that is not how Nichiren understood it, then what can remove ignorance according to him?
Although https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=573819#p573819 quoted https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/1 that points to polishing the mirror of the mind with recitation, but then the text also mentions looking into the mind to see the meaning of myō, so that seems like an act of contemplation to gain insight. Or is that not how it is interpreted?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 22nd, 2021 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
tkp67 said:
When one chants Nam(u) Myoho Renge Kyo one actually evokes Shakyamuni's supreme, complete and perfect enlightenment within their own life for that moment.

Astus wrote:
Do you mean like the practice of mindfulness of the Buddha ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddh%C4%81nusm%E1%B9%9Bti )?

tkp67 said:
The more one chants with deep faith in this teaching one can eradicate every illness the buddha was capable of healing.

Astus wrote:
How can mindfulness of the Buddha (or recitation of the title of the Lotus Sutra) generate insight into emptiness? It can serve as a method to calm the mind, but where is the wisdom coming from? Where does the contemplation on the three thousand realms in one thought come up?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 8:36 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
narhwal90 said:
what the practice may do is remove fear and uncertainty, remove grasping, promote confidence, courage, empathy.   Perhaps something akin to the Upaddha sutra's "holy life"- I'm not in a position to distinguish.

Astus wrote:
If practice means recitation, how does it do all those removals? Generally there are methods to alleviate defilements, like contemplation of the four immeasurables to counter things like anger and jealousy, and ultimately it is through insight that one can gain wisdom to remove ignorance. The Upaddha Sutta presents the good friend as the source of one's mastery of the eightfold path, but it is the practice of the eightfold path that eliminates the defilements. If one were to just recite the eightfold path, I don't see how that could be equal to actually putting it into practice.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
tkp67 said:
Chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo

Astus wrote:
How does that remove craving, hatred, and delusion?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 6:58 PM
Title: Re: Does Zen teach that true nature has an independent self-existence?
Content:
Russian said:
Question: According to Zen, the state of the Buddha is causal, or is it rather the image of the sun hiding behind the clouds?

Astus wrote:
Zen, like other East Asian schools (Tiantai, Huayan, Jingtu), accepts the tathagatagarbha doctrine. Where one gets easily mistaken is taking buddha-nature as a distinct object (or subject), some sort of soul or atman. The practical relevance of the idea of tathagatagarbha is that once the defilements are gone the buddha qualities are present, therefore one does not develop them but rather lets them appear. That's how prajnaparamita can be sufficient on its own, and that's why sudden awakening to buddhahood becomes an option. But it does not mean buddha-nature should be conceived as a thing, or a special state of mind. Quite the opposite actually, with totally abandoning attachments there is nothing left to affirm or deny.

'Followers of the Way, make no mistake! All the dharmas of this world and of the worlds beyond are without self-nature. Also, they are without produced nature. They are just empty names, and these names are also empty. All you are doing is taking these worthless names to be real. That’s all wrong! Even if they do exist, they are nothing but states of dependent transformation, such as the dependent transformations of bodhi, nirvana, emancipation, the threefold body, the [objective] surroundings and the [subjective] mind, bodhisattvahood, and buddhahood. What are you looking for in these lands of dependent transformations! All of these, up to and including the Three Vehicles’ twelve divisions of teachings, are just so much waste paper to wipe off privy fi lth. The Buddha is just a phantom body, the patriarchs just old monks.'
(Record of Linji, p 19, tr Sasaki)

Note that in the Treatise on Awakening of Faith itself it is explicitly stated so:

'All explanations by words are provisional and without validity, for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable [of denoting suchness]. The term suchness likewise has no attributes [which can be verbally specified]. The term suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words. But the essence of suchness itself cannot be put an end to, for all things [in their absolute aspect] are real; nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of suchness. It should be understood that all things are incapable of being verbally explained or thought of; hence, the name suchness.'
'If they understand that, concerning all things, though they are spoken of, there is neither that which speaks, nor that which can be spoken of, and though they are thought of, there is neither that which thinks, nor that which can be thought of, then they are said to have conformed to it. And when they are freed from their thoughts, they are said to have entered into it.'
(BDK ed, p 13, 14)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 5:25 PM
Title: Re: Able to awaken to our innate Buddha-nature through our actual practice?
Content:
Astus wrote:
How does one actually awaken to buddha-nature according to Nichiren's teachings? Does one realise the emptiness of self and dharmas? If so, how? If not, how are defilements eliminated?


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Does Zen teach that true nature has an independent self-existence?
Content:
karmanyingpo said:
doesn't Zen have more Cittamatra or Yogacara influence? So might this influence description of ultimate reality in a way that focuses more on is-ness?

Astus wrote:
If anything, it was influenced more by Madhyamaka ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_M%C4%81dhyamaka ) in its early phase.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, March 21st, 2021 at 5:05 AM
Title: Re: Does Zen teach that true nature has an independent self-existence?
Content:
Astus wrote:
From the Record of Mazu (Sun-Face Buddha, p 78):

A monk asked, "Why does the Venerable say that mind is Buddha?"
The Patriarch said, "To stop small children's crying."
The monk asked, "What do you say when they have stopped crying?"
The Patriarch said, "It is neither mind nor Buddha."
The monk asked, "And when you have someone who does not belong to either of these two, how do you instruct him?'
The Patriarch said, "I tell him that it is not a thing."
The monk asked, "And how about when you suddenly meet someone who is there?"
The Patriarch said, "I teach him to directly realize the Great Way."

From the Record of Yunmen (section 193):

Once the Master said, “As long as the light has not yet broken through, there are two kinds of disease: (1) The first consists in seeing oneself facing objects and being left in the dark about everything; (2) The second consists in having been able to pierce through to the emptiness of all separate entities (dharmas)—yet there still is something that in a hidden way is like an object.
“[Views about] the body of the teaching also exhibit two kinds of disease; (1) Having been able to reach the body of the Buddhist teaching, one still has subjective views and is at the margin of that teaching because one has not gotten rid of one’s attachment to it; (2) Even though one has managed to penetrate through to the body of the Buddhist teaching, one is still unable to let go of it. But if one examines this [teaching] thoroughly, it’s stone-dead. That’s also a disease!”

Case 30 of the Book of Serenity:

A monk asked Dasui, "When the fire at the end of an aeon rages through and the whole universe is destoryed, is this destroyed or not?"
Dasui said, "Destroyed."
The monk said, "Then it goes along with that?"
Dasui said, "It goes along with that."
A monk asked Longji, "When the fire ending the aeon rages through and the whole universe is destroyed, is this destroyed or not?"
Longji said, "Not destroyed."
The monk said, "Why is it not destroyed?"
Longji said, "Because it is the same as the universe."


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 20th, 2021 at 9:00 PM
Title: Re: Does Zen teach that true nature has an independent self-existence?
Content:
Russian said:
In general, the question is: this suchness, which on the one hand is empty, and on the other hand is not empty, because it has qualities, it is conditioned, does this suchness have a cause, or is it not conditioned, has no cause? Is it causal, or causeless?

Astus wrote:
You might want to look into the second chapter of the Samdhinirmocana Sutra:

"Good son, the term 'conditioned' is a provisional word invented by the First Teacher. Now, if it is a provisional word invented by the First Teacher, then it is a verbal expression apprehended by imagination. And if it is a verbal expression apprehended by imagination, then, in the final analysis, such an imagined description does not validate a real thing. Therefore, the conditioned does not exist. Good son, the term 'unconditioned' is also invented from language [and it also validates nothing real]."
( https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-scripture-on-the-explication-of-underlying-meaning/, p 11)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, March 20th, 2021 at 7:41 PM
Title: Re: Does Zen teach that true nature has an independent self-existence?
Content:
Russian said:
From the Zen point of view, does true nature have an independent existence, or is it still dependent, has causality?

Astus wrote:
There is no Zen point of view. There were/are teachers who emphasise(d) emptiness/nonbeing (wu 無), while others emphasise(d) existence/being (you 有). From this you get in Zen:

A monk asked Zhaozhou: 'Does a dog have (you 有) buddha-nature or not (wu 無)?'
Zhou said: 'No' (wu 無).

If you are interested in some Mahayana background on the matter, start with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awakening_of_Faith_in_the_Mahayana:

'suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty (sunya), for [this aspect] can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty (asunya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities.'
( https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-awakening-of-faith/, p 14)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, March 17th, 2021 at 5:49 PM
Title: Re: Has anyone read On Realizing There is Only the Virtual Nature of Consciousness
Content:
Manjushri said:
By the way, are there other translations of this text from, say, Shambhala, Wisdom, or some other Buddhist publishers?

Astus wrote:
There's a good translation by Wei Tat, and one by Francis Cook published by BDK.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, March 1st, 2021 at 4:05 PM
Title: Re: Are there any realist schools (mind independent reality exists conventionally) in Mahayana or Vajrayana?
Content:
Dgj said:
Like someone modern, or someone ancient like Chandrakirti or Tsongkhapa.

Astus wrote:
It could rather be turned around and considered if there is actually anyone who says that conventionally there are no external objects. It seems to be a common mistake to read 'mind only' as if it meant some sort of divine force where people can literally create objects by their magical mental power.

Anyhow, it is emphasised by Gelugpas that (their version of) Prasangika asserts outer objects. See https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/abhidharma-tenet-systems/the-indian-tenet-systems/the-four-buddhist-tenet-systems-regarding-the-two-truths/svatantrika-and-prasangika-the-two-truths and https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/abhidharma-tenet-systems/the-tibetan-traditions/special-features-of-the-gelug-tradition.

Longchenpa is also known for a similar position, see e.g. https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/the-great-chariot/d/doc212949.html: 'but those who grasp the exaggerated conception that objects that appear are mind are exponents of a truly serious illogic.'


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 28th, 2021 at 4:35 AM
Title: Re: Are there any realist schools (mind independent reality exists conventionally) in Mahayana or Vajrayana?
Content:
Dgj said:
Sorry, I meant from Buddhists, my fault for not being clear. Like someone modern, or someone ancient like Chandrakirti or Tsongkhapa.

Astus wrote:
I reckon it is scientific knowledge currently that represents the commonly accepted truths of intelligent people, so it is what defines the content of valid worldly conventional truth.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, February 28th, 2021 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Are there any realist schools (mind independent reality exists conventionally) in Mahayana or Vajrayana?
Content:
Dgj said:
Could you please provide some quotes demonstrating conventional mind independent reality, or where rupa is explained as mind independent conventionally, or anything like this?

Astus wrote:
Any scientific periodical or book that discusses objective physical reality.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 27th, 2021 at 6:25 AM
Title: Re: Chant Namo Amida Butsu or Nam Myoho Renge Kyo?
Content:
coldbeer said:
Which of these two can bring a person faster towards buddhahood? I will like to hear arguments from both sides.

Astus wrote:
Buddhahood is attained through the practice of the six paramitas. Chanting can be used as part of one's practice, but it's insufficient on its own to bring about realisation, much less complete awakening.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 26th, 2021 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: Are there any realist schools (mind independent reality exists conventionally) in Mahayana or Vajrayana?
Content:
Dgj said:
Defining "realist" at a minimum, as: There exists, at least conventionally, mind independent reality.

Astus wrote:
As far as I'm aware, all schools accept the basic doctrines of the five aggregates and six sensory areas, meaning that there is a rupaskandha apart from the mental aggregates, and there are the five physical senses and sense objects separately from the mental one. But that is already a Dharmic analysis (ultimate reality in abhidharma) of the conventional reality where it is clear to everyone that the body is not the mind, and that all outer objects are neither one's body nor one's mind. As Asanga put it: 'The imagined pattern is the appearance of nonexistent objects, which are only conscious constructs, as real.' (Mahayanasamgraha 2.1.3, BDK ed, p 38)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 13th, 2021 at 3:40 AM
Title: Re: 4 principles
Content:
Astus wrote:
Looks like a weird rendition of the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Dharmadh%C4%81tu.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 11th, 2021 at 6:12 PM
Title: Re: "there is nothing to teach here" said the master
Content:
master of puppets said:
What does it mean?

Astus wrote:
It is standard Mahayana that samsara comes from conceptual attachment, that the teachings are only of relative value, and that a bodhisattva should not conceive anything as existing or not existing, thus relinquishing all grasping at ideas.

The Buddha said to Subhūti, “What do you think? When the tathāgata studied under Dīpaṃkara Buddha, did he gain any attainment in the dharma?”
“World-honored One, when the Tathāgata studied under Dīpaṃkara Buddha, there was, in reality, nothing that he attained in the dharma.”
( http://www.acmuller.net/bud-canon/diamond_sutra.html#div-11, tr C. Muller)

'And, Mahamati, the Tathagatas do not teach the doctrine that is dependent upon letters. As to letters, their being or non-being is not attainable; it is otherwise with the thought that is never dependent on letters. Again, Mahamati, anyone that discourses on a truth that is dependent on letters is a mere prattler because truth is beyond letters. For this reason, Mahamati, it is declared in the canonical text by myself and other Buddhas and Bodhisattvas that not a letter is uttered or answered by the Tathagatas. For what reason? Because truths are not dependent on letters. It is not that they never declare what is in conformity with meaning; when they declare anything, it is according to the discrimination [of all beings]. If, Mahamati, the truth is not declared1 [in words] the scriptures containing all truths will disappear, and when the scriptures disappear there will be no Buddhas, Sravakas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas; and when there is no one [to teach], what is to be taught and to whom? For this reason, then, Mahamati, the Bodhisattva-Mahasattva is not to become attached to the words of the canonical texts. Mahamati, owing to the functioning of the minds of sentient beings, the canonical texts sometimes deviate from their straightforward course; religious discourses are given by myself and other Tathagatas, Arhats, Fully-Enlightened Ones in response to varieties of faiths on the part of beings, in order to remove them from [the bondage of] the Citta, Manas and Manovijnana, and not for the attainment and establishment of self-realisation which issues from noble wisdom. When there is the recognition of the fact that all things are characterised with imagelessness and that there is nothing in the world but what is seen of the Mind itself, there is the discarding of the dualistic discrimination.'
(Lankavatara Sutra, 3.76, tr D.T. Suzuki)

'This halting of cognizing everything, the halting of hypostatizing, is blissful.
No Dharma whatsoever was ever taught by the Buddha to anyone.'
(Mulamadhyamakakarika 25.24, tr M. Siderits & S. Katsura)

One day the Councilor Wang visited the master. When he met the master in front of the Monks’ Hall, he asked, 
“Do the monks of this monastery read the sutras?”
“No, they don’t read sutras,” said the master.
“Th en do they learn meditation?” asked the councilor.
“No, they don’t learn meditation,” answered the master.
“If they neither read sutras nor learn meditation, what in the world are they doing?” asked the councilor.
“All I do is make them become buddhas and patriarchs,” said the master.
The councilor said, “‘Though gold dust is valuable, in the eyes it causes cataracts.’”
“I always used to think you were just a common fellow,” said the master.
(Record of Linji, p 38, tr R. F. Sasaki)

'I have no choice; if I tell you that right now nothing is the matter, I have already buried you. However much you want to make progress and seek intellectual understanding by looking for words and chasing after phrases and setting up questions and inquiries by means of a thousand differences and myriad distinctions: it just brings you a glib tongue and leads you further and further from the Way. Where is there an end to this?'
(Record of Yunmen, 1.22, tr U. App)

'There is not much to Buddhism; it only requires you to make a statement plainly and simply, that is all. But what is a plain and simple statement? If someone asked me, I’d say, “ It’s already become two statements.” Understand?
An ancient said, “The Buddhas and Zen masters have given a clear and detailed explanation of what is beyond words, but most of those who get here are confused, muddled, and uncomprehending.”
If you don’t see this, you are asleep on your feet. You are always in the light, and yet do not know it, even with your eyes open. How do you expect me to do anything for you?'
(Foyan Qingyuan, in Instant Zen, p 28, tr T. Cleary)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 9th, 2021 at 4:35 PM
Title: Re: What is and isn't Yogacara?
Content:
mabw said:
I suppose step 1 is to ask What exactly is "visaya"?

Astus wrote:
When one sees a bar of chocolate and intends to eat it commonly it is assumed that there is real (not just imagined/conceived/thought) chocolate to eat, and that one wants to eat it because chocolate is tasty. Yogacara points out that the bar of chocolate exists only as a mental image (the object/visaya), in other words, it is because one has the idea of a tasty bar of chocolate that one can have any intentions (artha) towards it. Even in common parlance it is quite well known that what is tasty for one person is disgusting for another, in other words, the aesthetic quality of an object is subjective (that is: imagined/conceived/thought). Yogacara goes a little further by saying that what is assumed to be out there (outside mind, not as a mere concept) is actually nothing more than an idea, a conceptual image of a thing, and not a "real" thing.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2021 at 6:05 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Just like the limpid quality of water when it is undisturbed, remain relaxed without mental contrivances.
Just as a bird in the sky leaves no tracks, consciousness remains without support.
Just like the sun not concealed by clouds, remain in one’s own unobstructed state relaxing into the objects of the six sense organs.
Just like water always falling, remain undistracted at all times and in all activities.
Dombhi Heruka

Astus wrote:
The bird leaving no tracks is a good old metaphor for coursing in emptiness (Thag 1.92; Dhp 7.92-93), and at least the bird and the fish come up in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zazen_shin, where a poem of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongzhi_Zhengjue is quoted, commented upon, and then replied to in verse by Dogen. Here are the last two stanzas from each:

Hongzhi (SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 2, p 124; T2582_.82.0119c18-21):
'There has been no discriminating thought:
The sensing, without any duality, is singular.
There has been not the slightest dawning:
The illumination, without any grasping, is complete.
The water is clean right to the bottom,
Fishes are swimming, slowly, slowly.
The sky is wide beyond limit,
And birds are flying, far, far away.'

Dogen (p127-128; T2582_.82.0120c25-28):
'There has been no tainting of the immediacy:
That immediacy is without reliance yet it gets free.
There has been no rightness or divergence in the experience*:
That state of experience is without design yet it makes effort.
The water is clean, right down to the ground,
Fishes are swimming like fishes.
The sky is wide, clear through to the heavens,
And birds are flying like birds.'

*shou 證: realisation, verification

Malcolm said:
Other robes and bone ornaments, do you really see any difference between this and Dogen?

Astus wrote:
I'd say all three poems convey the same intention but with different emphasis. Dombipa gives awareness-emptiness, Hongzhi appearance-emptiness (or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huayan#Li_and_Shi 理事), and Dogen dependence-emptiness (or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence-Function 體用).


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2021 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Have you ever tried to hold onto a thought? I think you will find it slips right through your fingers.

Astus wrote:
Isn't it truly unattainable (mushotoku 無所得) then?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2021 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matt J said:
I don't think it is possible, unless one is of the highest capacity.

Astus wrote:
Apparently Dogen believed zazen to be applicable to everyone.

'Ejo asked, “If so, what thing or what practice should we choose to devote ourselves to among the various ways of practice of the buddha-dharma?”
Dogen replied, “It depends upon one’s character or capability, however,  up to now, it is  zazen  which  has  been  handed  down  and  concentrated  on  in  the  communities  of the patriarchs. This practice is suitable  for all people and can be practiced by those of superior, mediocre, or inferior capabilities.'
(Shobogenzo Zuimonki 1.14)

'If one concentrates on practicing zazen continuously, even an ignorant person, who does not understand a single question, can be superior to an intelligent person who has been studying for a long time.'
(5.23)

'The sages in the past did not necessarily have golden bones. Ancient practitioners did not all have superior capabilities. Not such a long time has passed since the Buddha’s death. Even in the age of the Buddha not everyone was sharp witted. Some were good and others were not. Among the monks, there were some who did incredibly evil things, and others who had a very low intellect. None of them, however, demeaned themselves or failed to arouse bodhi-mind; none failed to study the Way on the grounds of not being a vessel of the dharma.'
(6.2)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 5th, 2021 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
More words = more proliferation.

Astus wrote:
Okumura roshi on Dogen:

'Although he advised his students not to waste time arguing or criticizing, and he himself tried not to argue, he was not able to follow his own advice. I rather like his inconsistency on this point. I feel like he was an actual human being.'
(The Mountains and Waters Sūtra: A Practitioner's Guide to Dōgen's "Sansuikyo", 2-2)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 5th, 2021 at 4:49 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Looks like we didn’t need any of this Zen stuff to begin with: Nagarjuna writes, “Nothing here to establish, nothing to remove, when reality is truly seen, liberation.”

Astus wrote:
From Nagarjuna this fits nicely:

'Then again, if the bodhisattva refrains from taking up the practice of any particular dharma, because he does not apprehend (futoku 不得) any dharma whatsoever, he may thereby succeed in realizing prajñāpāramitā.'... 'If one is able to practice the dharma of “no practice” in this manner, in every case, nothing whatsoever is gained (mushotoku 無所得). Inverted views, falseness, and afflictions are finally not produced at all. Because one remains as pure as empty space, one succeeds then in realizing the true character of dharmas. One takes having nothing whatsoever which is gained (mushotoku 無所得) as that which is gained.'
( http://kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_excerpts/N6P_excerpts/N6P_X-Bk4_X-15.pdf; T25n1509p197a12-13, 24-26)

Malcolm said:
“Let go of letting go.” Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen

Astus wrote:
That's a proliferation of ideas about letting go, nevertheless, Baizhang Huaihai taught a version of it with three stages:

'If one no longer loves or grasps, and yet abides in not loving or grasping and considers it correct, this is the elementary good; this is abiding in the subdued mind. This is a disciple; he is one who is fond of the raft and will not give it up. This is the way of the two vehicles. This is a result of meditation.Once you do not grasp any more, and yet do not dwell in nonattachment either, this is the intermediate good. This is the half-word teaching.This is still the formless realm; though you avoid falling into the way of the two vehicles, and avoid falling into the ways of demons, this is still a meditation sickness. This is the bondage of bodhisattvas.Once you no longer dwell in nonattachment, and do not even make an understanding of not dwelling either, this is the final good; this is the full-word teaching. You avoid falling into the formless realm, avoid falling into meditation sickness, avoid falling into the way of bodhisattvas, and avoid falling into the state of the king of demons.'
(Sayings and Doings of Pai-Chang, p 30-31)

But something more pertinent from him:

'Question: What is the essential method for sudden enlightenment in the great vehicle? 
The master said, You all should first put an end to all involvements and lay to rest all concerns; do not remember or recollect anything at all, whether good or bad, mundane or transcendental - do not engage in thoughts. Let go of body and mind, set them free.With mind like wood or stone, not explaining anything with the mouth, mind not going anywhere, then the mind ground becomes like space, wherein the sun of wisdom naturally appears. It is as though the clouds had opened and the sun emerged.'
(p 77-78)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, February 5th, 2021 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matt J said:
By working with Buddhist practices, we actually come to see that what we thought was solid is not solid, what we though was graspable is not graspable, and what we thought was fulfilling is not fulfilling. In this way, a natural type of letting go occurs.

Astus wrote:
How about going directly to letting go of thoughts ( https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/key_terms/pdf/key_terms08.pdf )?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 4th, 2021 at 9:47 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
And yet Dogen  talks about gaining thorough understanding, what maddening inconsistencies.

Astus wrote:
The thorough understanding of what?

' What is sudden awakening (tongo 頓悟)? Answer: Sudden is to suddenly remove false thoughts (muunen 妄念). Awakening is to awaken to nothing to gain (mushotoku 無所得).'
( https://ymba.org/books/entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment/treatise-entering-tao-sudden-enlightenment; X63n1223p18a10)

'Additionally, if a person retaining the concept of there being anything to be gained (ushotoku 有所得) generates the bodhi resolve and then proceeds to cultivate kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, equanimity, giving, moral virtue, patience, vigor, dhyāna absorption, and wisdom, doing so for an incalculable number of asaṃkhyeyas of kalpas, one should realize that, on account of retaining the concept of something to be gained, such a person will not succeed in leaving behind birth and death and will not succeed in progressing towards bodhi.'
( http://kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_excerpts/V-Bcitta_excerpts/VBcitta_X-21_X-10.pdf; T32n1659p515c12-15)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 4th, 2021 at 5:32 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Sure, but at this point, it is not really insight since there is nothing left for a buddha to do.

Astus wrote:
Just as there is nothing left to be done in zazen, or as it is sometimes put: http://www.sanshinji.org/sanshin-style-blog/why-zazen-is-good-for-nothing-1 (mushotoku 無所得 - anupalabdha).


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, February 4th, 2021 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
LastLegend said:
Flesh it out! How is emptiness abided? What you mean born!? Or how is born born ?

Astus wrote:
For an extensive treatment of the topic see chapters 4-7 of https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compassionemptiness.pdf, and for a shorter one chapter 21 of https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/meditatorslifebuddha.pdf by Bhikkhu Analayo.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
The Buddha has no further need of insight, since in a buddha śamatha and vipaśyāna are in union. This is not the case for others.

Astus wrote:
The Buddha has also regularly abided in emptiness (suññatāvihāra) and recommended others to do the same: '"This field of perception is empty of the perception of the defilements of sensuality, desire to be reborn, and ignorance. There is only this that is not emptiness, namely that associated with the six sense fields dependent on this body and conditioned by life." That’s how emptiness is born in them—genuine, undistorted, and pure. Whatever ascetics and brahmins enter and remain in the pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness—whether in the past, future, or present—all of them enter and remain in this same pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness.' ( https://suttacentral.net/mn121/en/sujato )


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
You quote below is a recognition that the Buddha continued to practice shamatha, which is true.

Astus wrote:
If zazen meant only samatha, then why would it ever turn into insight? Then it should be rightfully called the 'teaching for humans and gods' (人天教) that can bring about birth in those realms but not any liberation, as Guifeng Zongmi wrote (Treatise on the Origin of Humanity, in Three Short Treatises, BDK ed, p 153; T45n1886p708c20-21) 'if a person practices the four kinds of meditation and the eight kinds of concentration, he or she will be reborn in the heavens of form and formlessness.'

Malcolm said:
Clearly, in the passage I provided before, Dogen acknowledged that there is a liminal point of understanding.

Astus wrote:
If there were such a point, then he would be contradicting himself not just vis-a-vis his other works, but even in the same chapter ( https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=568052#p568052 ).

Malcolm said:
One certainly can’t expect that a beginner is going to have this understanding immediately merely because they sit in a stiff posture.

Astus wrote:
It is not the posture that matters much, but the mind.

From https://antaiji.org/en/dharma/okumura-mind-and-zazen/:

'If you are able to sit in a cross-legged position during zazen that is fine, but if it that is too painful for you it is alright, too; sitting cross-legged is not strictly necessary for meditation.'
...
'Dogen Zenji said we should give up even the aspiration to become Buddha in our zazen. And this is the meaning of just sitting. When we practice in this way, just aiming at and letting go even of the aspiration to be enlightened, then Buddhahood is there. When we are actually doing that letting go, then Buddha nature is truly revealed. When we give up our gaining mind, then our true life force arises and is actualized.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 8:02 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
I disagree.

Astus wrote:
As you like. Just some extra:

'Not accompanied by the ten thousand things, what stages could there be? What do you use this for?'
(Eihei Koroku 4.301, p 281)

'These [family instructions] are simply the sitting cushions and Zen boards of the seven buddhas, and the source of the life root of the ancestors. Therefore, this is not in the realm of the four dhyanas or eight samadhis. How could it be measured in terms of the three wise or ten sacred stages? Every day just sit, dropping off body and mind. Do not be worried with a scene of laughable confusion about [comparisons between] barbarians or the civilized. Do not vainly waste a moment, but always cherish time.'
(8.1.12, p 487)

'Such examples as [Jinhua] Juzhi’s one finger, Huangbo’s sixty hits, Baizhang’s whisk, Linji’s shout, Dongshan [Shouchu]’s three pounds of sesame, and Yunmen’s dried shitstick are not caught up in the stages from living beings to Buddha, and they already transcend the boundaries of delusion and enlightenment.'
(8.2.11, p 519)

'This practice is the effort of zazen. It is customary that such practice is not abandoned, even after reaching buddhahood, so that it is [still] practiced by a buddha. Teaching and verification should be examined in the same way. This zazen was transmitted from Buddha to Buddha, directly pointed out by ancestors, and only [transmitted] by legitimate successors. Even when others hear of its name, it is not the same as the zazen of buddha ancestors. This is because the principle of zazen in other schools is to wait for enlightenment. For example, [their practice] is like having crossed over a great ocean on a raft, thinking that upon crossing the ocean one should discard the raft. The zazen of our buddha ancestors is not like this, but is simply Buddha’s practice. We could say that the situation of Buddha’s house is the oneness in which the essence, practice, and expounding are one and the same. The essence is verification of enlightenment; expounding is the teaching; and practice is cultivation. Even up to now, these have been studied together.
We should know that practice is the practice of essence and expounding; expounding is to expound the essence and practice; and the essence is the verification of expounding and practice. If practice is not the practice of expounding and is not the practice of verification of enlightenment, how can we say it is the practice of Buddha Dharma? If expounding is not the expounding of practice and is not the expounding of verification, it is difficult to call it the expounding of Buddha Dharma. If verification is not the verification of practice and is not the verification of expounding, how can we name it the verification of the Buddha Dharma? Just know that Buddha Dharma is one in the beginning, middle, and end. It is good in the beginning, middle, and end; it is nothing in the beginning, middle, and end; and it is empty in the beginning, middle, and end. This single matter never comes from the forceful activity of people, but from the beginning is the expression and activity of Dharma.'
(p 521)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Clearly, Dogen perceives stages in zazen, for exmple, on page 859 of Tanahashi translation.

Astus wrote:
Could you specify the chapter title?

Malcolm said:
On 440 he talks of "The understanding at the moment of thorough realization should be authentic..." etc. He speaks of how this practice accumulates over months and years, and over lifetimes.

Astus wrote:
The topic of that chapter is 'expressing the truth' ( https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/key_terms/pdf/key_terms15.pdf ), and it does not really describe a gradual improvement, but rather continuously expressing the truth with one's practice.

'It is simply that where there is the Buddhist patriarchs’ pursuit of the ultimate there is the Buddhist patriarchs’ expression of the truth. In the past they have trained inside that very state of expressing the truth and have experienced it to the end, and now they are still making effort, and pursuing the truth, inside that state. When Buddhist patriarchs, through making effort to be Buddhist patriarchs, intuit and affirm a Buddhist patriarch’s expression of the truth, this expression of the truth naturally becomes three years, eight years, thirty years, or forty years of effort, in which it expresses the truth with all its energy.'
(Dotoku, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 2, p 333)

'Having accumulated long months and long years of holding onto this effort, we then get free of the past years and months of effort. While we are endeavoring to get free, the skin, flesh, bones, and marrow are all equally intuiting and affirming freedom. National lands, mountains, and rivers are all intuiting and affirming freedom together. At this time, while we continue aiming to arrive at freedom, as the ultimate treasure-object, this intention to arrive is itself real manifestation—and so, right in the moment of getting free there is expression of the truth, which is realized without expectation.'
(p 334)

'So when we are “ten years or five years in a monastery,” passing through the frosts and flowers again and again, and when we consider the effort in pursuit of the truth that is “a lifetime not leaving the monastery”; the “sitting in stillness,” which has cut [all interference] by sitting, has been innumerable instances of expressing the truth.'
(p 335)

'Sitting in stillness without speaking for ten years or for five years is expression of the truth for ten years or for five years; it is a lifetime without leaving nonexpression of the truth; and it is being unable to say anything for ten years or for five years. It is sitting away hundred thousands of buddhas, and it is hundred thousands of buddhas sitting away “you.” In summary, the Buddhist patriarchs’ state of expressing the truth is a lifetime without leaving the monastery.'
(p 335)

'When there is learning in practice of knowing the self, there is the reality of expressing the truth.'
(p 337)

Malcolm said:
Dogen clearly embraces gradualism too.

Astus wrote:
'In the Buddha-Dharma practice and experience are completely the same. [Practice] now is also practice in the state of experience; therefore, a beginner’s pursuit of the truth is just the whole body of the original state of experience. This is why [the Buddhist patriarchs] teach, in the practical cautions they have handed down to us, not to expect any experience outside of practice. And the reason may be that [practice itself] is the directly accessible original state of experience. Because practice is just experience, the experience is endless; and because experience is practice, the practice has no beginning.'
(Bendowa, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 1, p 12)

In Tanahashi's version:

'Because practice within realization occurs at the moment of practice, the practice of beginner’s mind is itself the entire original realization. When giving instruction for zazen practice, we say that you should not have any expectation for realization outside of practice, since this is the immediate original realization. Because this is the realization of practice, there is no boundary in realization. Because this is the practice of realization, there is no beginning in practice.'


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Even marmots know how to sit. I've got your marmot Buddha right here:

Astus wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sengai has this nice http://idemitsu-museum.or.jp/collection/sengai/sengai/02.php. The text reads: if by zazen one becomes a buddha...


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 2nd, 2021 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Otherwise, are we expected to believe the magical theory that merely  sitting in a Soto Zendo somehow is sitting in the state of Buddhahood? Or that merely sitting in a posture is Buddhahood? Clearly you can see the ridiculous consequences emerging from such a stance. Obviously Dogen didn’t believe this.

Astus wrote:
I have not seen Dogen, or later teachers, turn away from the Zen rhetoric and follow gradual Mahayana teachings. On the other hand, sitting in any state is not the idea. Furthermore, Dogen has been quite adamant about never stopping to practise.

'There are also those who are not concerned with what their teacher thinks or whether the shuso or other fellow practitioners are watching or not. They always bear in mind that practicing the Buddha-Way is not for the sake of others but only for themselves; such people desire to become buddhas or patriarchs with both body and mind. So they truly practice diligently. They really seem to be people of the Way compared with the people mentioned above. However, since they still practice trying to improve themselves, they have not become free from their ego. They want to be admired by  buddhas and bodhisattvas, and desire to attain buddhahood, and complete awareness. This is because they still cannot throw away their selfish desire for fame and profit.
...
Just cast body and mind into the buddha-dharma, and practice without desire either to realize the Way or to attain the dharma. Then you can be called an undefiled practitioner. This is what is meant by not staying where buddha exists; and running quickly from where no-buddha exists.'
(Shobogenzo Zuimonki, 5.20)

'The most vital concern in learning the Way is to practice zazen. In China, many people attained the Way entirely through the power of zazen. If one concentrates on practicing zazen continuously, even an ignorant person, who does not understand a single question, can be superior to an intelligent person who has been studying for a long time. Therefore, practitioners must practice shikantaza wholeheartedly without bothering to concern themselves with other things. The Way of the buddhas and patriarchs is nothing but zazen. Do not pursue anything else.
At the time, Ejo asked, “In learning both sitting and reading, when I read the collections of the old masters’ sayings or koans, I can understand one thing out of a hundred or a thousand words, though I have never had such an experience in zazen. Should we still prefer to practice zazen?”
Dogen replied, “Even if you may seem to have some understanding while reading koans, such studies will lead you astray from the Way of the buddhas and patriarchs. To spend your time sitting upright with nothing to be gained and nothing to be realized is the Way of the patriarchs. Although the ancient masters encouraged both reading and shikan zazen, they promoted sitting wholeheartedly. Although there are some who have gained enlightenment hearing stories (of the masters), the attainment of enlightenment is due to the merit of sitting. True merit depends on sitting.”'
(Shobogenzo Zuimonki, 5.23)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 2nd, 2021 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
You didn’t really read Cousins article, did you?

Astus wrote:
I actually did. That's why I asked where you found the samatha part to be followed by vipasyana, because that is the one version of the four that is named samathayana.

Malcolm said:
BTW “ease and joy” are two mental factors accompanying the first dhyana.

Astus wrote:
Translated as 'ease and joy' is the term anraku 安樂, a translation for sukha and often used as a short for Sukhavati, and here (see note 13 on page 116 of Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation) a reference to chapter 14 (Anrakugyo 安樂行) of the Lotus Sutra, where it is written (BDK ed, p 194; T0262_.09.0037b10) that ' He should always take pleasure in meditation [zazen 坐禪] and, in a quiet place, practice to control his mind. '.

Malcolm said:
Practice and verification implies having a view and applying it in equipoise.

Astus wrote:
Practice and verification is the translation here of shusho 修證, the first half of the term https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/key_terms/pdf/key_terms07.pdf, the unity of practice and realisation/awakening.

Malcolm said:
Rhetoric is one thing, reality is another.

Astus wrote:
There are teachers who first instruct people to count breath, to focus on the posture, etc., so there it would be valid to say they begin with calming the mind. But when it comes to practising zazen according to the teachings of Dogen, it is to go directly to suchness.

Malcolm said:
As we know, shikantaza is just “shamatha/vipashyana” in Japanese.

Astus wrote:
Shikan as samatha-vipasyana is 止観, while shikan as 'just/simply/intently/etc.' is 只管, so shikantaza 只管打坐 is 'just sitting'.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 2nd, 2021 at 7:06 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
You should read article by Lance cousins. But in a short, shamathayana is the quick path.

Astus wrote:
But where do you see samatha taught in Zen to be succeeded by insight? It's been quite a central point almost from the beginning that samadhi and prajna are not separated (hence the Platform Sutra quote), and then in the teachings of Dogen and his heirs the unity of practice and realisation is affirmed regularly. Also, as Dogen put it in his first work after returning from China: 'Zazen is not the practice of dhyana it is just the dharma gate of ease and joy. It is the practice and verification of ultimate bodhi.' ( https://web.stanford.edu/~funn/zazen_instructions/Fukanzazengi.pdf; T2580_.82.0001b01-3)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 2nd, 2021 at 6:02 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matt J said:
The question is, without kensho, if everyone is already a Buddha and all practice is an expression of Buddhanature, then what's the point?

Astus wrote:
Practice being awakening means that one practises awakening, and without practice there is no awakening to talk about.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, February 2nd, 2021 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Still śamathayāna.

Astus wrote:
Why do you call it such?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 1st, 2021 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
This basically consists only of teaching the śamathayāna. So, we can understand that zazen is śamatha. In śamatha, insight can occur naturally.

Astus wrote:
'Good friends, our teaching takes meditation and wisdom as its fundamental. Everyone, do not say in your delusion that meditation and wisdom are different.
Meditation and wisdom are of one essence, not different. Meditation is the essence of wisdom, and wisdom is the function of meditation. At times
of wisdom, meditation exists in that wisdom; at times of meditation, wisdom exists in that meditation. If you understand this doctrine, this is the equivalent study of meditation and wisdom. All you who study the Way, do not say that they are different, with meditation prior to and generating wisdom or with wisdom prior to and generating meditation. If your view of them is like this, then the Dharma would have two characteristics. This would be to say something good with your mouth but to have that which is not good in your minds. It is to make meditation and wisdom falsely existent to consider them as not equivalent.'
(Platform Sutra, ch 4, BDK ed, p 41-42)

'Discipline is usually understood as ceasing wrong action and eliminating evil. In zazen the whole thing is known to be non-dual. Cast off the numberless concerns and rest free from entangling yourself in the “Buddhist way” or the “worldly way.” Leave behind feelings about the path as well as your usual sentiments. When you leave behind all opposites, what can obstruct you? This is the formless discipline of the ground of mind.
Practice usually means unbroken concentration. Zazen is dropping the bodymind, leaving behind confusion and understanding. Unshakeable, without activity, it is not deluded but still like an idiot, a fool. Like a mountain, like the ocean. Without any trace of motion or stillness. This practice is no-practice because it has no object to practice and so is called great practice.
Wisdom is usually understood to be clear discernment. In zazen, all knowledge vanishes of itself. Mind and discrimination are forgotten forever. The wisdom-eye of this body has no discrimination but is clear seeing of the essence of awakening. From the beginning it is free of confusion, cuts off concept, and open and clear luminosity pervades everywhere. This wisdom is no-wisdom; because it is traceless wisdom, it is called great wisdom.
The teaching that the buddhas have presented all throughout their lifetimes are just this discipline, practice, and wisdom. In zazen there is no discipline that is not maintained, no practice that is uncultivated, no wisdom that is unrealized. Conquering the demons of confusion, attaining the way, turning the wheel of the Dharma and returning to tracelessness all arise from the power of this. Supernormal powers and inconceivable activities, emanating light and expounding the teaching- all of these are present in this zazen. Penetrating Zen is zazen.'
( http://antaiji.org/en/classics/english-zazen-yojinki/ )

'It is said in the Mahaprajnyaparamita-sutra that even though you practice the five paramitas (i.e. generosity, observing the precepts, patience, diligence, and meditation), all your practices remain within the realm of the defiled causation of human or heavenly being unless you practice prajnya-paramita. Such a practice is not that of annuttara-sammyak-sambodhi (ultimate awakening).
To practice prajnya-paramita means that the light of the wisdom of jijuyu-zanmai illuminates and dispels the darkness of the ignorance of delusory thoughts. If the light of the Self is clear, even a small good deed is the practice of incomparable awakening, since the deed is performed prior to the arising of illusory mind. Therefore, you should not be concerned with anything but leaving behind illusory mind, cutting the root of delusions, emitting the light of jijuyu--zanmai, and opening the eye of prajnya. This is the Buddha’s wisdom and also the true path of practicing the buddha-way.'
...
'The true taste properly transmitted through the buddhas and ancestors is Buddha’s wisdom; this is also called shinjin-datsuraku (dropping off body and mind), that is, understanding thoroughly that body, mind, and world (time and space) cannot be grasped with the discriminating mind, that reality is outside of illusory mind, and then releasing the light of the Self.'
(Jijuyu Zanmai, in Heart of Zen, p 47, 48)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 1st, 2021 at 5:49 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
clyde said:
So which Soto teachers say that satori isn’t important? This shouldn’t be a secret if these teachers have taught that to their students.

Astus wrote:
Where awakening is equated with practice (see https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=567151#p567151 and https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=566984#p566984 post), as in the teachings of Dogen, Keizan, Menzan, and Kodo Sawaki, Kosho Uchiyama, and Shohaku Okumura.

'The idea of transforming delusion to attain enlightenment is easy to understand in terms of our ordinary way of thinking, yet it is not in accord with the buddha-dharma. In Buddhism, the dichotomy of delusion and enlightenment is transcended from the very beginning. We have to practice and actualize right now, right here the buddha-dharma (reality of life) that transcends both delusion and enlightenment. This is Great Enlightenment (daigo).
Therefore, from the first, we are neither deluded nor enlightened. Reality itself exists before we divide and name delusion and enlightenment. We are practicing this reality right here and right now. This is called attaining or actualizing enlightenment (kaigo). We practice with enlightenment as our base. Practice and enlightenment are simply one (shucho ichinyo).
Consequently, a confused attitude such as that I am deluded, or enlightened, or I was deluded and now I am enlightened, is not jijuyu zanmai. Since we are the self that is only the self, surpassing the dichotomy of delusion and enlightenment, we sit in the self that is only the self. This is jijuyu zanmai. This is the true meaning of "actualizing enlightenment."'
(The Wholehearted Way by Kosho Uchiyama, p 81-82)

'A student preparing for an entrance examination wants to pass; no one wants to fail. Yet the world in which there is no success or failure is the best. We cannot expect such a world in Japan today. It is possible only in the world of zazen. However, there is a group of people who try to put pass and fail into the world of zazen through satori. If you attain satori you succeed, if not you fail. This attitude has nothing to do with the buddha-dharma; it is samsara.
We only have to sit with the self that is only the self, without comparing it to others. It is not necessary at all to visit a Zen master to ask if one is enlightened or not. That is really a stupid question. First of all, to practice the buddha-dharma is to live out the self that is only the self. The truth is that one always has to live out the self that is only the self in any situation, so it is impossible to bring up the question of whether one succeeds or fails.'
(p 118)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, February 1st, 2021 at 5:19 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
clyde said:
I agree that “practice as enlightenment” is open to misunderstandings and it is the duty of teachers to help their students by pointing to a correct understanding. But it also incumbent on the student to do the work of seeing through their delusions to a realization.

jimmi said:
If, as per Matylda’s critique, Soto teachers are for the most part lacking in the correct understanding of “practice as enlightenment” well, it’s clear where that will go. How can students be expected to do the work and arrive at authentic Shikantaza if those tasked with transmitting the necessary understanding have themselves fallen short? It makes the adage that Zen cannot be practiced without a teacher somewhat problematic.

Malcolm said:
Cue Astus.

Astus wrote:
That's the difficult consequence of the dharma-transmission lineage concept: either every lineage member is a buddha, or the whole concept falls apart. But such an idealist view of the lineage can function only on paper.

'This [practice] relies on the mystical and authentic transmission of the subtle method from master to disciple, and the [disciple’s] reception and maintenance of the true essence of the teachings.'
(Bendowa, in SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 1, p 5; T2582_.82.0015c24-26)

And that subtle method (妙術) transmitted correctly (正傳) is zazen (坐禪):

'Great Master Śākyamuni exactly transmitted, as the authentic tradition, this subtle method of grasping the state of truth, and the tathāgatas of the three times all attained the truth through zazen. Thus the fact that [zazen] is the authentic gate has been transmitted and received. Furthermore,
the patriarchs of the Western Heavens and the Eastern Lands all attained the truth through zazen. Therefore I am now preaching [zazen] to human beings and gods as the authentic gate.'
(p 7-8; T2582_.82.0016c11-17)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
I think what she is saying is the picture of Soto zen you paint is abstracted from books by western scholars, rather than a deep knowledge of the tradition based on fluency in Japanese, etc.

Astus wrote:
It seems to me more like criticism of Soto both in Japan and in Western countries. Of course, if it turns out to be otherwise, and all she meant so far was a problem with the academic representation of Soto while at the same time what actually happens in temples and centres are fine with her, then I have misread things.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 8:57 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
Where is it said that koan dokusan satori etc. belongs only to rinzai??? it is not true.

Astus wrote:
I meant commonly found in and associated with Rinzai, not that it was their property or that others were excluded. If you say it's not the consequence of reformations that Sotoshu is what it is today, then what do you say is the reason behind it? Also, do you find current Rinzai more according to your standards of Zen, and would that be because they practise with koans?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 7:30 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
I see.. well official soto is the very problem.. those people deny everything when they hear satori etc. and start talking, that everything is satori etc. and that practice with aim of satori is almost a sin.. and of course they have miriad excuses and nice theories.

Astus wrote:
Why expect Soto to follow ideas that are prevalent in Rinzai (koan practice, dokusan, emphasis on kensho, etc.)? Even if once the two branches were quite similar, after the 18th century reforms in both, they have intentionally distanced themselves from each other, unlike in China where lineage association has practically no bearing on one's views and methods.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 4:55 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
this is only philosophical work for philosophers and academics, has nothing to do with actual zen practice.. just typical modern soto view, devoided of zazen and experience.

Astus wrote:
I put the link there as a reference for one possible interpretation as provided by the official Soto website. But the question is if you could give your view to show why you call the majority of Japanese and Western teachers wrong, and what you consider correct.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 4:09 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
So,  shikantaza is kind of like nembutsu or nam myoho renge kyo.

Astus wrote:
There are similarities.

'Dogen taught his religion through the language and lore of Chinese Ch'an; yet in many ways the structure of his religion reflects familiar patterns in the soteriological strategies of Japanese writers like Shinran and Nichiren. This is hardly surprising, since many of the same issues that determined the rules of Ch'an discourse in China - the theory of the supreme, Buddha vehicle and the perfect, sudden practice appropriate to it - had long been at work in the dominant Tendai system in Japan, the system that initially educated Dogen, Shinran, Nichiren, and other leaders of the reformation. Despite their obvious differences, in very broad terms, the ideologies of all three of these famous religious thinkers can be seen as an attempt to define the true practice of the Tendai Buddha vehicle - a sudden practice to be based solely on the absolute truth of Buddhahood itself, not on the upaya of the relative teachings and gradual practices.'
(Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation, p 165)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 3:58 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
the real problem with unity of practice/enlightenment is that it is widely intrepreted by people without realization, then many are simply mislead by the wrong views.

Astus wrote:
What do you take to be the right view about https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/key_terms/pdf/key_terms07.pdf?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
Looks like stages to me, in direct contradiction to your claim.

Astus wrote:
Yes, seems so, but not. The first stage mentioned is of faith, the second is acting upon that faith, and it's the second what comprises shikantaza.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
Of course that there is denial, very great dednial when it comes to any serious talk about it. If there was no denial, then what happened to dokusan in soto? what happened　to　koans　in　soto?

Astus wrote:
It seems the concept of the unity of practice and realisation is what makes a difference here, as such elements of method are not required when zazen is both the means and the goal.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 26th, 2021 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
Well it is not only Gasans case but all generations of soto masters untill the begining of the 20th cxentury, when it was decided that satori is wrong. one should not strive and should not attain it, otherwise it is against Dogen. Such nonsense is easily repeated in the West and largly in Japan but in different context, it is why satori - indispensable characteristic of zen became a serious problem in soto.

Astus wrote:
There is no denial of the need for realisation, for awakening, but rather that it is not found outside the very practice of zazen (and even the meaning of zazen is not restricted to the seated posture).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 26th, 2021 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
Whatever modern days soto zen claims abnout Dogen and satori he has never denied it.

Astus wrote:
It is not denying satori, but rather stating that it is not something that happens after practice. Here are some quotes from long deceased teachers:

Dogen:

'Just sit and get the state that is free of body and mind. If a human being, even for a single moment, manifests the Buddha’s posture in the three forms of conduct, while [that person] sits up straight in samādhi, the entire world of Dharma assumes the Buddha’s posture and the whole of space becomes the state of realization. [The practice] thus increases the Dharma joy that is the original state of the buddha-tathāgatas, and renews the splendor of their realization of the truth.'
...
'The practice is not confined to the sitting itself; it strikes space and resonates, [like] ringing that continues before and after a bell. How could [the practice] be limited to this place?'
...
'The thought that practice and experience are not one thing is just the idea of non-Buddhists. In the Buddha-Dharma practice and experience are completely the same. [Practice] now is also practice in the state of experience; therefore, a beginner’s pursuit of the truth is just the whole body of the original state of experience. This is why [the Buddhist patriarchs] teach, in the practical cautions they have handed down to us, not to expect any experience outside of practice. And the reason may be that [practice itself] is the directly accessible original state of experience. Because practice is just experience, the experience is endless; and because experience is practice, the practice has no beginning.'
(Bendowa, in Shobogenzo, BDK ed, vol 1)

Keizan:

'Although we speak of realization, this realization does not hold to itself as being “realization”. This is practice of the supreme samadhi which is the knowing of unborn, unobstructed, and spontaneously arising awareness. It is the door of luminosity which opens out onto the realization of the Buddha, born through the practice of the great ease. This goes beyond the patterns of holy and profane, goes beyond confusion and wisdom. This is the realization of unsurpassed enlightenment as our own nature.'
( http://antaiji.org/en/classics/english-zazen-yojinki/ )

Menzan:

'Those teachers in medieval times (Song dynasty China) thought that we are all deluded and that if we practice zazen, we could gain enlightenment as a result of the power accumulated by zazen practice. They also thought that, after gaining enlightenment, there would be no further need to practice zazen. They compared it to a boat which is no longer necessary once the other shore is reached.
People in the present day often practice zazen in this manner. This is the attitude of ordinary people, Hinayana practitioners, and bodhisattvas within the provisional Mahayana practice of zazen. They aspire to rid themselves of delusions and to gain enlightenment; to eliminate illusory thoughts and to obtain the truth. This is nothing but creating the karma of acceptance and rejection. Such an attitude is just another form of dualism, in that one escapes from one thing and chases after another. If we think this kind of practice is the same as that transmitted by the buddhas and ancestors, as the Tathagata’s zanmai-o-zanmai, or as Bodhidharma’s sitting facing the wall for nine years, these also become mere methods to rid oneself of delusions and to obtain enlightenment. What a pitiful view!
In the last several hundred years, a great many have adhered to this attitude, both in China and Japan. All mistake a broken piece of tile for gold, or a fish eye for a jewel, because they do not yet clearly understand the essence of the great Dharma.
The true zazen which has been transmitted by the buddhas and ancestors is the Tathagata’s jijuyu-zanmai. It is the state in which the body and mind of perfect nirvana always abide peacefully. In the Lotus Sutra, the Tathagata’s zazen is called muryo-gisho-zanmai (‘the samadhi of infinite meaning’). In the Mahaprajnya-sutra it is called toji-o-zanmai (‘the king of samadhis’). It is referred to as zanmai-o--zanmai in the Daihon-Hannya-kyo, and Zen master Tozan Ryokai named it hokyo-zanmai (the samadhi of the precious mirror). Obviously, zazen is not a practice for getting rid of delusions and gaining enlightenment.'
(Jijuyu Zanmai, in https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/leaflet/heartofzen/pdf/Heart_of_Zen.pdf, p 42-43)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 26th, 2021 at 4:07 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
This all very much depends on what one means by “enlightenment.”

Astus wrote:
'Students of the Way should desire to be obstructed by the Way. To be obstructed by the Way means to forget any trace of enlightenment. Practitioners of the Way must first of all have faith in the Way. Those who have faith in the buddha-way must believe that one (the self) is within the Way from the beginning; that you are free from delusive desires, upside-down ways of seeing things, excesses or deficiencies, and mistakes. Arousing this kind of faith, clarifying the Way and practicing the Way comprise the foundation of learning the Way. We do this by sitting and cutting off the root of the discriminating mind; by turning away from the path of intellectual understanding. This is a skillful way to lead beginners. Next, drop off body and mind, and throw away both delusion and enlightenment. This is the second stage. Truly it is most difficult to find a person who believes that his self is within the buddha-way. Only if you believe that you are really inside the Way, will you naturally clarify the scenery of the Great Way and understand the origin of delusion and enlightenment. Try to sit cutting off the root of discriminating mind. Eight or nine out of ten will be able to immediately see the Way.'
(Gakudo Yojinshu by Dogen, in https://www.sotozen.com/eng/library/leaflet/heartofzen/pdf/Heart_of_Zen.pdf, p 32-33)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 25th, 2021 at 4:51 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Malcolm said:
The consequence of this is that one is only realized during shikantaza. How does this escape the equipoise/post-equipoise division? And if there is a division between equipoise/post-equipoise, this means that there are stages.

Astus wrote:
The main point is that if shikantaza is practice-realisation, then there is no point of working towards a realisation apart from it, there is no satori later. A comparison of the two approaches from Shohaku Okumura:

'Uchiyama Roshi emphasizes that the zazen practice transmitted from Dogen Zenji to Sawaki Roshi differs from D. T. Suzuki’s Zen. For example, Dogen Zenji described the oneness of a practitioner and other people and objects, using the example of a cook and his work with colleagues, ingredients, firewood, and water, as well as those who eat the food. In “Tenzokyokun,” or “Instructions for the Cook,” in Dogen’s Pure Standards for the Zen Community, he wrote, “All day and all night, things come to mind and the mind attends to them; at one with them all, diligently carry on the Way.” Here there’s no mysterious satori, or becoming conscious of the Unconscious. There’s only sincere, wholehearted practice in ordinary activities.'
(Zazen Is the Stability of One’s Whole Life, in Homeless Kodo)

And from Kodo Sawaki:

'Nine hundred years ago there was a Zen system in which there were gradations of satori—three hundred and some tens of cases. Finally completing them all you would perfect a great satori. That system was contrasted with what was referred to as mokusho Zen [silent illumination]. It was also labeled eko and hensho. The other teaching [which uses koans] was called kanna Zen.
Dogen Zenji’s is a religion of practice. Dogen goes so far as to say there is no benefit in recitation with the mouth. In the Bendowa, Dogen wrote: “Continuously uttering sounds is like a frog crying in the night in a spring rice paddy and is ultimately worthless.” 
In the Butsuyuikyogyo, too, [the Buddha] warns against useless talk... Satori is not something that is uncovered by the mind. Practice is enlightenment.
Again in the Bendowa, “A beginner’s wholehearted practice of the Way is the totality of the original enlightenment.” And in Zanmai O Zanmai [The King of Samadhi], “The posture for shikantaza is the most important meaning in Buddhist teaching.”'
(From a talk titled “Dogen’s Zen,” delivered in August 1952 in Kumamoto, in Discovering the True Self)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 24th, 2021 at 5:43 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
ask a teacher not me, you know some, isnt it? like sogenji roshi and others, they are right addressee to put this question.

Astus wrote:
Still, you propose such a set of contradicting views, hence asking you how can that be so.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, January 24th, 2021 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
Indeed, shikan taza has no stages, but the final result of koan practice or shikan taza is exactly or must be exactly the same - complete enlightenment and liberation.

Astus wrote:
How can there be a final result of shikantaza if it has no stages?


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, January 23rd, 2021 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
The whole topic which I picked up concerns exclusivly Japanese zen.

Astus wrote:
The main point still stands: Practising with koans is in order to gain realisation, shikantaza is practice-realisation, so there is a difference. If there were stages to be reached in shikantaza, then realisation were apart from practice.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 22nd, 2021 at 7:38 PM
Title: Re: What is cittavijanana?
Content:
bhadanta1 said:
can someone explain what cittavijnana in buddhist belief means? It is a concept specific to the yogacara school?

Astus wrote:
Where have you seen such a term? In Yogacara there is talk of citta, manas, and vijnana as three distinct aspects/functions:

'When the Buddha speaks of citta, manas and vijñāna (cf. Dīgha, I, p. 21; Saṃyutta, II, p. 95), it is not a question of three synonyms as the Visuddhimagga has it, p. 452 (viññāṇaṃ cittaṃ mano ti atthato ekaṃ) and the Kośa, II, p. 176 (cittaṃ mano 'tha vijñānam ekārtham), but rather of three distinct things (cf. H: citta, manas and vijñāna are three). Citta is the store-consciousness; manas is the twofold manas; vijñāna is the six active consciousnesses (pravṛttivijñāna).'
(Mahayanasamgraha I.6 commentary by Lamotte, tr Migme Chodron)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 22nd, 2021 at 4:51 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
Matylda said:
The problem itself is not in shikan taza or koan practice. The problem is in complete denial of kensho/satori realization. The fact that one is practicing shikan taza does not mean by itself that kind of denial. In fact wether shikan taza or koan the experience should be exactly the same.

Astus wrote:
Practising with koans is in order to gain realisation, shikantaza is practice-realisation, so there is a difference. If there were stages to be reached in shikantaza, then realisation were apart from practice.
This is the difference between directly practising no-thought or using huatou to reach no-thought, as Hanshan Deqing wrote:

'If you can thus engage in contemplation, then whenever a thought arises, you should find its source. Never haphazardly allow it to pass you by [without seeing through it]. Do not be deceived by it! If this is how you work, then you will be doing some genuine practice. Do not try to gather up some abstract and intellectual view on it or try to fabricate some cleaver understanding about it. Still, to even speak about practice is really like the last alternative. For example, in the use of weapons, they are really not auspicious objects! But they are used as the last alternative [in battles]. The ancient ones spoke about investigating Chan and bringing forth the huatou. These, too are last alternatives. Even though there are innumerable gong ans, only by using the huatou, “Who is reciting the Buddhaís name?” can you derive power from it easily enough amidst vexing situations. Even though you can easily derive power from it, [this huatou] is merely a [broken] tile for knocking down doors. Eventually you will have to throw it away. Still, you must use it for now.'
( https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/HanshanDeqing.html#c )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 15th, 2021 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Mahayana Sutras Lack Oral Transmission?
Content:
Bodhiquest said:
There's nothing much that would allow us to conclusively say that certain ideas and teachings were never given by the Buddha and were simply developed later by "philosophers" and the like.

Astus wrote:
That's not necessarily so. For instance, the concept of alayavijnana is a later development as we can see in the Mahayanasamgraha how Asanga has to explain himself for proposing its existence, and what scriptural sources he can present (abhidharma works and the Samdhinirmocana Sutra), while 5 centuries later Jinamitra quotes from several Mahayana sutras (see 'The Ālaya-Consciousness in Yogācāra Treatises' in the Introduction of 'A Compendium of the Mahayana' by Brunnholzl, vol 1). Similarly, where one finds the mention of ideas that are not found in the Agamas but only in abhidharma texts, unless we attribute such abhidharma treatises to the Buddha, the sutras using such concepts are necessarily later than the Agamas.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 15th, 2021 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Is the Mahayana or vajrayana canon closed?
Content:
Dgj said:
Are these individual canons closed?

Astus wrote:
Basically, yes. Their titles often designate the imperial era of publication (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongle_Emperor, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qianlong_Emperor, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taish%C5%8D ), so to modify them would mean a new version published at a different time.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 14th, 2021 at 3:42 PM
Title: Re: Is the Mahayana or vajrayana canon closed?
Content:
Varis said:
As for Mahayana sutras, we know there will be new ones because Maitreya Buddha will arrive in the future and teach the dharma and therefore we can assume there will be new sutras.

Astus wrote:
There are also old sutras and other texts discovered, as in the case of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunhuang_manuscripts, for which https://icabs.repo.nii.ac.jp/index.php?action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_view_main_item_snippet&index_id=85&pn=1&count=20&order=17&lang=english&page_id=15&block_id=18 with the Taisho Canon.

Also about the Taisho Canon, one of its editors noted (The Essentials of Buddhist Philosophy by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takakusu_Junjiro, 1st Indian Edition, 1956, p 2):
'In Japan, the Tripitaka Literature has been published at least four times, each edition adding new volumes. Recently it became my responsibility to complete its latest publication, which contains the Chinese and Korean compilations as well as texts newly discovered in Central Asia and Japan—a work of thirteen years—comprising 13,520 chüans or parts in 100 bound volumes of about 1,000 pages each.'


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 14th, 2021 at 6:39 AM
Title: Re: Is the Mahayana or vajrayana canon closed?
Content:
Dgj said:
For example the Chinese Tripitiaka; is it a closed canon?

Astus wrote:
There are several https://lic.dila.edu.tw/en/node/13121, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taish%C5%8D_Tripi%E1%B9%ADaka and the supplement Xuzangjing (Zokuzokyo) 卍續藏 that are modern, 20th century editions, and older ones, like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhaocheng_Jin_Tripitaka (12th century), https://culture.teldap.tw/culture/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1550:catalogue-of-the-qianlong-tripitaka-qianlong-zang-&catid=148:a-slice-of-wonder&Itemid=209 (18th century), https://culture.teldap.tw/culture/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1549:catalogue-of-the-yongle-north-tripitaka-yongle-bei-zang-&catid=148&Itemid=209 and Southern Yongle 永樂 (15th century), the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripitaka_Koreana, and so on.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 13th, 2021 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: History: Why does Southern Buddhism seem to disappear from history at certain periods?
Content:
Padmist said:
Do you know why the history of Buddhism in Southern Asia seem to be spotty at different periods? Active at times, disappearing or blank on others? http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/thera_timeline.htm
or is it a failure of history records/lost records?

Astus wrote:
Isn't it like that everywhere else with destructive wars and invasions? E.g. the demise of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anuradhapura_period#Demise and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Polonnaruwa#Demise, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burmese%E2%80%93Siamese_War_%281765%E2%80%931767%29#Sack_of_the_city. But you can find similar blank spots, and ups and downs in the histories of China, Korea, and Japan.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 12th, 2021 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: is Buddha"just a man" in any tradition?
Content:
megaman chiquito said:
is there any accepted tradition of buddha being just a normal human

Astus wrote:
'Followers of the Way, if you say that the Buddha is the ultimate, how is it that after eighty years of life the Buddha lay down on his side between the twin śāla trees at Kuśinagara and died? Where is the Buddha now? We clearly know that his birth and death were not different from ours.'
(Record of Linji, p 19, tr Sasaki)

'The Buddha was a living human being. Just like the rest of us,  he  had  parents, a family, and he lived a life. It was through this human life that he showed his great loving-kindness and compassion, his moral character, and his wisdom.'
( https://www.fgsitc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/A1-The-Fundamentals-of-Humanistic-2019.pdf?, p 2)

megaman chiquito said:
who achieved nirvana trough his own diligent efforts?

Astus wrote:
There are several suttas where the Buddha talks of his own efforts, e.g.: https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html, https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html, https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036.than.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 8th, 2021 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Soto zen and problem of satori
Content:
ryunin said:
What was Kodo Sawaki's opinion of satori?

Astus wrote:
From Homeless Kodo:

'A Zen tenma, or heavenly demon, is an ordinary person practicing to gain satori, to become great.
Buddhadharma is not something for making an ordinary person great.'
(Halfway Zazen chapter)

'Zazen is the way we tune in to the whole universe. Samadhi is practicing each and every thing with the entire universe moment by moment.
Satori is not going to a special place that is difficult to reach, but simply being natural.'
(No Other chapter)

'Satori is like a burglar breaking into an empty house. Although he had difficulty getting in, there’s nothing to steal. He doesn’t need to run. Nobody’s after him. The whole thing is a flop.'
Uchiyama commentary: 'Satori is simply settling down here and now, where things are unsatisfactory.'
(A Burglar Breaks into an Empty House chapter)

From https://antaiji.org/archives/eng/kodo-sawaki-to-you.shtml:

'You want to become a buddha? There’s no need to become a buddha! Now is simply now. You are simply you. And tell me, since you want to leave the place where you are,where is it exactly you want to go?
Zazen means just sitting without even thinking of becoming buddha.
We don’t achieve satori through practice: practice is satori. Each and every step is the goal.'
(To you who do everything you can to get satori)

'No illusion is as hard to cure as satori.
Don’t take pride in your practice. It’s clear that any satori you take pride in is a lie.
You’ve got it backwards if you talk about stages of practice. Practice is satori.
Satori is like a thief breaking into an empty house. He breaks in but there’s nothing to steal. No reason to flee. No one who chases him. So there’s nothing which could satisfy him either.'
(To you who is showing off your satori)

'You suffer because you don’t want to accept what has to be accepted.
Quietly accepting what has to be is what’s meant by satori. Great satori means seeing necessity as necessity, for necessity is an integral part of the universe.
You’re worried about death? Don’t worry – you’ll die for sure.'
(To you who are tumbling down the career ladder)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, January 8th, 2021 at 3:49 PM
Title: Re: Can someone explain Yogacara to me?
Content:
Manjushri said:
where would I find those translations of the works by Vasubandhu?

Astus wrote:
There are the translations by Kochumuttom in A Buddhist Doctrine of Experience and by Thomas E. Wood in Mind Only. Online the Vimsatika and Trimsika are included in the BDK volume https://bdkamerica.org/product/three-texts-on-consciousness-only/, and the Trisvabhavanirdesa translated by Garfield is available https://info-buddhism.com/Vasubandhu-Three_Natures-Garfield.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, January 7th, 2021 at 7:48 PM
Title: Re: Can someone explain Yogacara to me?
Content:
Manjushri said:
what would be the essential texts pertaining to Yogachara, available in English translation today?

Astus wrote:
Mahayanasamgraha, Mahayanasutralamkara, Madhyantavibhaga, Vimsatika, Trimsika, Trisvabhavanirdesa, Cheng Weishi Lun.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, January 6th, 2021 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Definition: “Outflows” ?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
In various texts, the term “outflows”  is used, such as the Buddha or his disciples being free from outflows.

Astus wrote:
Āsrava is a wonderful word, signifying how one mentally/emotionally is moved toward various objects, and how such things (in particular: sensuality/kāma, becoming/bhava, ignorance/avidyā, and views/dṛṣṭi) in-fluence one's mind (see e.g. AKB 5.35-36).


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, January 5th, 2021 at 5:34 AM
Title: Re: Can someone explain Yogacara to me?
Content:
Dharmalight889 said:
Where do East Asian schools stand on this issue? Do some schools follow Yogacara philosophy, or are they like the Tibetans and consider themselves mostly to be Madhyamaka?

Astus wrote:
There are eight or ten schools distinguished traditionally in Chinese Buddhism (Satyasiddhi 成實宗; Abhidharmakosa 俱舍宗; Vinaya 律宗; Sanlun 三論宗; Faxiang 法相宗; Tiantai 天台宗; Huayan 華嚴宗; Zhenyan 真言宗; Chan 禪宗; Jingtu 淨土宗), and in Japanese Buddhism there are the so called six schools of Nara (Jojitsu 成実宗; Kusha 倶舎宗; Ritsu 律宗; Sanron 三論宗; Hossō 法相宗; Kegon 華嚴宗). Of those Sanlun/Sanron correspond to Madhyamaka and Faxiang/Hossō to Yogacara. In China both disappeared quite early, while in Japan the Hossō school still exists, and one of its priests actually has a book translated to English: https://books.google.hu/books?id=1C4qAwAAQBAJ. Apart from that, there are people who study Yogacara in East Asia, but no school dedicated to it.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, January 4th, 2021 at 5:09 PM
Title: Re: Can someone explain Yogacara to me?
Content:
Dharmalight889 said:
explain Yogacara philosophy to me and how it compares with Madhyamaka philosophy?

Astus wrote:
There is no singular Yogacara philosophy but rather various texts considered by various people to be called Yogacara. Here are two introductory articles/essays:

https://www.lionsroar.com/dharma-dictionary-yogacara/ by Charles Muller
http://www.acmuller.net/yogacara/articles/intro.html by Dan Lusthaus

Wikipedia also gives a general overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogachara.

Dharmalight889 said:
From some of the information I have looked up, Yogacara seems to be a Buddhist psychology school studying consciousness.

Astus wrote:
Better view it as a Mahayana reformation of Abhidharma teachings.

Dharmalight889 said:
I have not found any information about the philosophical beliefs associated with Yogacara.

Astus wrote:
Their most famous ones are the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Consciousnesses and the https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Three_natures.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 28th, 2020 at 4:04 AM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Astus wrote:
A pertinent educational animation by Dharma Drum Mountain TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ_0NhJ6JYI


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 23rd, 2020 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Philosophical differences between Soto and Rinzai?
Content:
narhwal90 said:
A cursory glance at the former shows detailed instruction on how to sit, how to compose the mind, and the latter shows instruction on view.

Astus wrote:
Let's consider Zazengi a bit then, because I would not call this one page writing a 'detailed instruction' on anything really. It has a shorter paragraph as a sort of preliminary considerations, and then a longer one on everything he has to mention on doing zazen. What are his instructions on what to be done with the mind once one has the posture? 'Sitting in balance in the mountain-still state, think the concrete state of not thinking. How can the state of not thinking be thought? It is non-thinking.' (SBGZ, BDK ed, vol 3, p 226) As for what 'non-thinking' means, it is not clarified anywhere, and it is only through some further research (e.g. Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation by Carl Bielefeldt) that one can see how Dogen gradually rewrote Zhanglu Zongze's manual (The Baizhang Zen Monastic Regulations, BDK ed, p 253-255) to be more fitting to his Zen literary style. But likely because Dogen's very short instruction is so cryptic, modern instructions of both https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/practice/zazen/howto/index.html and http://zen.rinnou.net/zazen/sitting.html follow the slightly more explicit form of Zongze.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 22nd, 2020 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Philosophical differences between Soto and Rinzai?
Content:
narhwal90 said:
Instructions on how to lay out the facilties, instructions on bathroom conduct, instructions on how to make the robes and what materials that should be used and why.

Astus wrote:
Maybe it could be put under the category of ethics to argue against the use of toothbrush, as Dogen does in Senmen, but that's not much of a philosophical standpoint, nor an instruction one would follow outside of a very traditional style monastic setting.

narhwal90 said:
Extensive discussion on correct and incorrect views...

Astus wrote:
Could you give an example or two of Dogen's specific views on topics like the four wisdoms, five hindrances, six perfections, etc.? At the same time, even if Dogen did have some specific interpretations of the Dharma, it's another matter whether the past and present Soto school is defined by them.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 22nd, 2020 at 8:19 PM
Title: Re: In Buddhism, what is "form", and how does it come about?
Content:
Astus wrote:
'Matter or material form is (1-5) the five sense-faculties, (6-10) the five object-referents [or object-fields of the five sense-faculties], arid (11) the non-informative.'
(AKB I.9ab, tr Sangpo, p 214)

'What is form?
It is all form whatsoever that is included in the four great elements and that is derived from the four great elements.
What are the four great elements?
The earth constituent, the water constituent, the fire constituent, and the air constituent.
...
What is derivative form?
The eye faculty, the ear faculty, the nose faculty, the tongue faculty, the body faculty, [visible] form, sound, smell, taste, a portion of tangible objects, and noninformative [form].'
(Pancaskandhaprakarana, in Inner Science of Buddhist Practice, p 229-230)

'What is the characteristic (laksana) of matter? Change is the characteristic of matter. It has two forms: change in contact and change in localization. What is change in contact? It is the alteration caused by contact by a hand, a foot, a stone, a weapon, a stick, cold, heat, hunger, thirst, a mosquito, a gadfly, a snake, a scorpion, etc. What is change in localization? It is the imagination of form, through determined or undetermined mental conception, as such and such or some such other form.'
(Abhidharmasamuccaya, tr Boin-Webb, p 3)

'Formation (vivarta) occurs after the void state following destruction by fire, first from the commencement of the formation of the wind manḍ ạ la as the lower basis of the first absorption, up to the existence of one sentient being in the hell of Avīci. Formation of the physical cosmos takes one eon, and the formation of sentient beings takes nineteen eons, making twenty eons.'
(Ornament of Abhidharma, 3.90 commentary)


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 22nd, 2020 at 4:53 PM
Title: Re: Philosophical differences between Soto and Rinzai?
Content:
narhwal90 said:
There are many very specific instructions and views in Shobogenzo, but perhaps I am misunderstanding?

Astus wrote:
Are there? Any examples maybe?


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 22nd, 2020 at 4:52 PM
Title: Re: Philosophical differences between Soto and Rinzai?
Content:
kirtu said:
They both assert that one's very own fathom-long body is the Buddha.

Astus wrote:
The idea of buddha-nature has been well regarded in China even before Bodhidharma, and it has been accepted by influential schools like the Sanlun, the Tiantai, and the Huayan. To say that Soto and Rinzai have their own philosophies about buddha-nature, they should present some definition and explanation, but if you look at for instance Dogen's Bussho, there isn't that much of a philosophical view to take away from it, although it can serve as a starting point to invent one.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 21st, 2020 at 3:25 PM
Title: Re: Philosophical differences between Soto and Rinzai?
Content:
Nicholas2727 said:
The more I have studied Vajrayana Buddhism, I have realized that there are a few philosophical differences between each school and I was wondering if this is the same for Japanese Zen schools?

Astus wrote:
There would have to be a philosophical view in the first place to then allow comparison. Although one can find some unique perspectives in the works of Dogen and Hakuin, but they did not propose anything systematic. It is rather the hallmark of Zen (Japanese or otherwise) that the main bonding factor is lineage, and not doctrine or method.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 15th, 2020 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Teach me Madhyamaka
Content:
karmanyingpo said:
This is crystal clear to me and accords with what I understand hopefully others can confirm (or not!) this explanation thank you for posting

Astus wrote:
It is a fine summary. Thanks Anders!


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 14th, 2020 at 3:16 PM
Title: Re: Abrahamic religions and Buddhism
Content:
coldbeer said:
Can one be a Christian, Muslim or Jew and still practice Buddhism?

Astus wrote:
It depends on what one's practice is.

coldbeer said:
I'm asking this as I'm currently in a relationship with a woman in one of these religions and the only way I can get married to her is to convert to her religion.

Astus wrote:
Starting a family based on lies can and likely will be a source of a series of major and minor problems.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, December 13th, 2020 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Malcolm said:
People inspired by Buddhism, who practice ethics and meditation for this life are not Dharma practitioners, no matter how nice, kind, or good they may be, whether they consider themselves Buddhists or not.

Astus wrote:
How about what is called "the least capacity" or "lesser scope"?

'Know that those who by whatever means
Seek for themselves no more
Than the pleasures of cyclic existence
Are persons of the least capacity.'
(Lamp for the Path, v 3, in Illuminating the Path to Enlightenment, p 69)

'Given the distinction between virtue and nonvirtue as laid down in the teachings, it is important to rely on virtue. The ten virtues tending to happiness will produce happy destinies, while negative action will precipitate a fall into the states of loss. To understand this distinction correctly, according to the karmic law of cause and effect, and to adopt positive rather than negative behavior is the so-called path of beings of lesser scope.'
(Treasury of Precious Qualities, vol 1, p 151)


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 11th, 2020 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: If Nagarjuna had a mirror
Content:
Malcolm said:
Apart from what has been mirrored and not been mirrored, there is no [present] mirroring. A mirroring mirror is redundant, just like moving movers.

Astus wrote:
Indeed, MMK ch 2.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 11th, 2020 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: If Nagarjuna had a mirror
Content:
kirtu said:
The mirror doesn't change on the gross level at all but only on a subtle level, which is irrelevant to the phenomena  of mirroring

Astus wrote:
The very idea that there is such a thing on its own as a mirror is imagining it to be apart from the function of mirroring/reflecting. But what is a mirror without the act of reflecting, and if mirroring is not required for it, how can one tell what is or is not a mirror?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 11th, 2020 at 8:03 PM
Title: Re: If Nagarjuna had a mirror
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
What I mean is, strictly based on the idea that the reflection in the mirror is constantly changing, does that itself mean that the mirror is constantly changing?

Astus wrote:
A mirror is what reflects (mirrors) an image (mirrored). What does not reflect/mirror is not called a mirror, otherwise earth and stones would be mirrors too; so there is no mirror apart from mirroring. If the image could change without the mirroring changing, there should be reflections without anything to reflect them.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 11th, 2020 at 4:49 AM
Title: Re: If Nagarjuna had a mirror
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
If Nagarjuna had a mirror, would he say the mirror is a different mirror each time something different is reflected in it, or is it the same mirror?

Astus wrote:
He knew of mirrors.

'Through the examples of: oral instruction, a lamp, a mirror, a seal, a sun-crystal, a seed, sourness and sound, the wise should understand the non-transmigration as well as the re-emergence of the aggregates.'
(The Heart of Interdependent Origination, v 5, in http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/nagarjuna.pdf, p 58)

'A woman sees her beautified face
On the surface of a mirror or a bowl of oil.
The fool feels passion for it
And runs in search for the desired.
The face was not transferred there.
The face will never be found in the reflection,
And yet fools have desire for it.
Know that all phenomena are like that.'
( https://read.84000.co/translation/toh127.html, 9.17-18)

As for the nature of a mirror, from the perspective of the reflective quality, it can be analysed according to how there can be no reflector nor reflected according to for instance MMK ch 2, exchanging motion for reflection.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, December 10th, 2020 at 4:27 PM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Astus wrote:
'What is mind? The mind is impermanent because it arises from causes and conditions, and because, arising and ceasing, it does not abide; [merely] similar [but discrete moments of mind are] arising [in succession]. Only due to perverted [views] does one think that the [mind] is a single [entity]. What did not exist before now exists, and having existed, it will not exist anymore. Therefore, [the mind] is impermanent. One observes the mind as empty. Why? From causes and conditions the eye and a visible object arise. Eye consciousness arises when [the eye and its object] are combined with mindfulness, the wish to see, and other [conditions]. It is just like a lens. When the sun and a lens exist, together with various conditions such as dry grass and cow dung, fire arises. When one examines each [of the relevant elements], fire is not perceivable. [It is just that] when [these] conditions meet, fire arises. Examining [these conditions] one by one, no fire is perceivable. Eye consciousness is also the same. It abides neither in the eye, nor in visible objects, nor somewhere between them. It has no abode, nor is it nonexistent. Therefore the Buddha says: “[Everything] is like an illusion or emanation.” If [one] observes the present mind and the past mind, they are either painful, pleasant, or neutral. Manifold minds cease in their respective ways. One should observe the internal mind, the external mind, and both the internal and external minds in a similar way. Thus far is [the explanation of] the application of mindfulness to mind.'
(The Sutra on the Concentration of Sitting Meditation, BDK ed, p 50-51)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 at 8:25 PM
Title: Re: Core of Mahayana
Content:
kirtu said:
Kapleau was explain the five types of Zen and was specifically explain the deficiencies of shojo Zen.

Astus wrote:
Better read what Guifeng Zongmi (whom Kapleau calls by his Japanese name: Keiho) actually wrote, it's found in the Treatise on the Origin of Humanity, available in the BDK edition https://bdkamerica.org/product/three-short-treatises-by-vasubandhu-sengzhao-and-zongmi/, p 153-164.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 at 4:39 PM
Title: Re: Core of Mahayana
Content:
kirtu said:
we cannot attain true enlightenment or even just true personal peace of mind without any concern about others.  So because all beings are intimately interdependent, we have to practice not just for our own enlightenment but for the complete enlightenment for all beings.  We also have to concern ourselves not just with the alleviation of our own suffering but the alleviation of suffering of all beings.

Astus wrote:
It is not mandatory at all to have any concern about others, otherwise one denies the possibility of liberation, and affirms the true existence of others. Also, if great compassion were to arise out of the need to liberate oneself, it wouldn't be much of a compassion.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 at 4:25 PM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
How can there be dependent origination if origination is not at all established?what is dependent coarising in your view ?

Astus wrote:
That is the only way there can be dependent origination. If there were anything established about it, it would be contrary to dependent origination itself.

'Those who understand the dependent origination
To be utterly devoid of arising and disintegration,
Those who have such knowledge will cross
The ocean of samsara of dogmatic views.'
(Yuktisastika, v 23, tr Thupten Jinpa)


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
Okay,so do you believe that this new citta is not the same citta/vijnana/alaya as the former?because this type of arising is still arising from other wich actually doesn’t exist and is still exnihilo creation?

Astus wrote:
Causality means that from a cause comes an effect. Madhyamaka, by saying that things do not arise from themselves, from others, from both, or from neither, means that causality is merely a conceptual fabrication. So there are conventional truths (dependent origination) and the ultimate truth (no birth), and these two truths are not opposites but inseparable.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: How exactly is there a momentariness of consciousness ?
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
If one chitta perishes and the next arises,from what does this next chitta arise? in a chain of chittas you would either have to have a chitta perishing and it’s subsequent chitta arising from nothingness

Astus wrote:
Arising out of nothing could occur only if there were a gap between moments. Since no such gap is proposed, there is no place for any sort of nothingness to arise from.

You might also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratnak%C4%ABrti 's arguments, and https://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/the-buddhist-doctrine-of-momentariness_vonrospatt.pdf 's book.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 8th, 2020 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Picking and choosing
Content:
CosmosFF said:
Not neglecting or denying pain or pleasure, not denying that one's mind has thoughts and emotions, but feel no difference when faced with pain. The body can feel pain but with realization of the emptiness it is not seen as "I am hurt" but as "pain is funny". Is this the way? Or am i stupid?

Astus wrote:
'There are two kinds of suffering: i) bodily suffering (kāyika [230a] duḥkha), ii) mental suffering (caitasika duḥkha). By the power of their wisdom (prajñābala), the holy individuals (āryapudgala) have no further mental suffering like sadness (daurmanasya), jealousy (īrṣyā), malice (vyāpāda), etc. On the other hand, because they have received a body composed of the four great elements (mahābhūtamaya) as a result of actions in their previous existences (pūrvajanmakarman), they still have bodily sufferings such as old age (jarā) and sickness (vyādhi), hunger and thirst (kṣutpipāsa), cold and heat (śītoṣṇa), etc., but these bodily sufferings are slight and quite rare.'
( https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/maha-prajnaparamita-sastra/d/doc225706.html )

'No mind means that the eight winds cannot move [mind]. Suppose habit energy is not yet exhausted and a thought of anger happens to arise; at that moment have no mind to strike or abuse the other. If a thought of greed happens to arise, at that moment have no mind that prays for acquiring [the coveted object]. Should one see another prosper and become famous, at that moment, have no mind that envies him or seeks to outdo him. At all times in oneself have no mind that is sorrowful or hungry or cold; have no mind that fears being despised by others, up to and including all these sorts of things. We can even call it "lacking all mind." This is called cultivating the path. If you have obtained [the state wherein] toward agreeable and disagreeable sense objects you have no passion or hatred or desire or dislike at all, this is called obtaining the path. Do a reverse illumination on each of these. If you have a disease, apply an antidote. If you have no disease, there is no [need for] a prescription.'
(Chan Prolegomenon, in Zongmi on Chan, p 174)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, December 7th, 2020 at 5:28 PM
Title: Re: Picking and choosing
Content:
CosmosFF said:
If picking and choosing leads to suffering, where is the limit to what is considered picking and choosing?

Astus wrote:
'The Supreme Way is difficult   
Only for those who pick and choose. 
Simply let go of love and hate;     
The Way will fully reveal itself.'
( http://sunnyvale.ctzen.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/trust-in-mind-v1.7.12-20131216.pdf )

Then the poem continues on explaining that pursuing the https://suttacentral.net/an8.6/en/sujato is the wrong path to take, and in that sense one should be free from discrimination. Then it goes on, addressing the root of discrimination, not recognising suchness.

'Gain and loss, fame and disgrace,
praise and blame, and pleasure and pain.
These qualities among people are impermanent,
transient, and perishable.

A clever and mindful person knows these things,
seeing that they’re perishable.
Desirable things don’t disturb their mind,
nor are they repelled by the undesirable.

Both favoring and opposing
are cleared and ended, they are no more.
Knowing the stainless, sorrowless state,
they understand rightly, going beyond rebirth.'
( https://suttacentral.net/an8.6/en/sujato )

'The subject disappears with its object,
The object vanishes without its subject.
Objects are objects because of subjects,
Subjects are subjects because of objects.

Know that these two
Are essentially of one emptiness.
The one emptiness unites opposites,
Equally pervading all phenomena.

Not differentiating what is fine or coarse,
How can there be any preferences?'
( http://sunnyvale.ctzen.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/trust-in-mind-v1.7.12-20131216.pdf )


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, December 4th, 2020 at 3:51 PM
Title: Re: Zen Mantras
Content:
Astus wrote:
You can find several mantras and dharanis in liturgical texts, like the https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/practice/sutra/scriptures.html. A popular set in Chinese Buddhism is the ten small mantras (十小咒):

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?t=235
https://thebuddhistmantra.blogspot.com/2018/09/ten-small-mantras-se-siau-cou-or-dasa.html

Another useful collection of http://www.sutrasmantras.info/mantra0.html.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, December 2nd, 2020 at 6:21 PM
Title: Re: Vipassanā
Content:
Malcolm said:
Not that different than paramanus, actually.

Astus wrote:
The atomist ideas of Sarvastivada, Sautrantika, and Theravada are analysed by Karunadasa in chapter 15 of https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/The_Theravada_Abhidhamma/a1GBDwAAQBAJ and chapter 8 of https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/The_Buddhist_Analysis_of_Matter/eifADwAAQBAJ. From the former book:

'For the Sarvāstivāda, the atom is the smallest unit of a single unitary material dharma, so small that it has no spatial dimensions. For the Theravāda, the atom is an aggregate of a number of unitary material dhammas. This is why it is described not only as “atom” (paramāṇu) but also as “cluster of material dhammas” (rūpa-kalāpa). It thus corresponds not to the atom of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma but to what it calls the “octuple aggregate.” The Theravāda term that corresponds to the “atom” of the Sarvāstivāda is kalāpaṅga — that is, the constituent of a kalāpa.
...
The Pāli commentators observe that although it is possible, for the sake of defining the individuating characteristics (lakkhaṇa), to speak of color, taste, smell, and so on as separate dhammas, yet positionally they are not separable from one another. Color, taste, and so on, so runs the argument, cannot be dissected and separated like particles of sand. The color of the mango, for instance, cannot be separated from its hardness (earth element) or from its taste. This situation is equally true of the constituents of a rūpa-kalāpa as well. Hence there is no necessity, other than logical, to postulate the constituent (kalāpaṅga) as the smallest of all (sabba-pariyantima).'

But I think a more interesting part is that kalapas are meant to be experienced during vipassana practice.

'You observe this structure that initially appears to be so solid, the entire physical structure at the level of sensation. Observing, observing you will reach the stage when you experience that the entire physical structure is nothing but subatomic particles: throughout the body, nothing but kalapas (subatomic particles). And even these tiniest subatomic particles are not solid. They are mere vibration, just wavelets.'
( https://pariyatti.org/Free-Resources/Articles-and-Excerpts/Buddhas-Path-is-to-Experience-Reality )


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, December 1st, 2020 at 3:47 PM
Title: Re: Vipassanā
Content:
SilenceMonkey said:
From the tibetan point of view, Theravada holds one of the two "lower" tenet systems which believe in material reality as an ultimate truth. ie. The material world can be broken down into atoms, but at some point these "atoms" can no longer be broken down. Therefore, these are seen to be what constitute reality.

Astus wrote:
The shravaka systems in Tibetan Buddhism are what they take to be the views of Vaibhashika and Sautrantika based mainly on the Abhidharmakosha-bhashyam. Theravada is a separate school, not known/considered in Tibetan doxography, that also disagreed with some doctrines of the Sarvastivadins. As for the Theravada view of material dharmas, the smallest unit according to post-canonical teachings are called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalapa_%28atomism%29, they are considered composite, and used in some vipassana meditations: 'To know that our very body is tiny kalapas all in a state of change is to know the true nature of change or decay.' ( https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/khin/wheel231.html ).


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 30th, 2020 at 6:14 PM
Title: Re: The 37 Factors of Enlightenment and Asanga
Content:
Astus wrote:
If it's about a Yogacara explanation of smrtyupasthana, check Mahayanasutralamkara 18/19.43-45 and Madhyantavibhaga 4.1.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 29th, 2020 at 6:38 PM
Title: Re: Zen on sleeping
Content:
Astus wrote:
'While sleeping, lie on your right side, not [on your back] facing straight upward, because this is called the dead man’s sleep. Sleeping [with your face down] is called indulgent sleep because it creates bad dreams.'
(The Baizhang Zen Monastic Regulations, BDK ed, p 280)

'When sleeping, the monk should lie on his right-hand side with his head on his right palm and with his left hand placed on his left hip as though carrying a knife.'
(Chanyuan qinggui, in The Origins of Buddhist Monastic Codes in China by Yifa, p 139)

'Definitely sleep lying on your right side and not on your left side. When you lie down your head should be towards buddha. Now [in the monks' hall] our heads are toward the joen, so our heads are toward Manjushri. Do not sleep lying on your front. Do not raise both knees and lie on your back. Do not sleep on your back with your legs crossed. Do not stretch out your legs together.'
(Dogen's Pure Standards for the Zen Community, p 65)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, November 28th, 2020 at 5:48 PM
Title: Re: Vipassanā
Content:
yeshedronmay said:
Is there a difference between Theravada Vipassana meditation and Kagyu or Tibetan Vipassana meditation practice ?

Astus wrote:
Vipassana is not a single method but a term for any technique that has the aim of gaining insight. In order to be able make a comparison, one would need to be specific about what it is exactly one means. Generally speaking, Theravada and Vajrayana are very far from each other in terms of historical development, so relying simply on terminology used by them can be easily misleading. For instance, there was mention of how 'emptiness of dharmas' is a Mahayana teaching, which is true, but at the same time, it is meant as a rejection of the Vaibhashika interpretation of dharmas, not the Theravada one where dharmas are viewed differently.

Here are two examples you may look into:
https://mahasivipassana.com/docs/practical-insight-meditation-basic-practice/ by Mahasi Sayadaw
https://www.lionsroar.com/directly-experience-the-nature-of-mind/ by Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, November 27th, 2020 at 7:58 PM
Title: Re: Study in Zen
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
Taking Dogen as just one example

Astus wrote:
At the end of each volume of the https://bdkamerica.org/product/shobogenzo-the-true-dharma-eye-treasury-volume-iv/ there is a bibliography of the main Chinese sources quoted by Dogen.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 25th, 2020 at 6:20 AM
Title: Re: What is the source for the story of the sixth patriarch Huineng destroying sutras?
Content:
Tao said:
Who did burn a buddha statue? I vaguely  recall something like this...

Astus wrote:
Danxia Tianran.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 24th, 2020 at 5:29 AM
Title: Re: What is the source for the story of the sixth patriarch Huineng destroying sutras?
Content:
Dgj said:
What are the incidents with non canonical writings you reference?

Astus wrote:
Deshan burned his sutra commentary (Wumenguan case 28), Danxia burned his notes (Original Teachings of Ch'an Buddhism, p 220), Yangshan burned the secret notebook of symbols (Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 186), and as you mentioned, Dahui burned the Blue Cliff Record (Blue Cliff Record, BDK ed, p 6).

'the Three Vehicles’ twelve divisions of teachings, are just so much waste paper to wipe off privy filth'
(Record of Linji, p 19, tr Sasaki)


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 23rd, 2020 at 5:04 PM
Title: Re: What is the source for the story of the sixth patriarch Huineng destroying sutras?
Content:
Dgj said:
So he just made it up for no reason?

Astus wrote:
Not no reason but a great expression of not relying on words. And it is a good choice exactly because there is no such story about Huineng.

Dgj said:
What are some other masters destroying sutras or other religious texts like Dahui Zonggao for example?

Astus wrote:
I can recall only incidents where non-canonical writings were destroyed, mostly one's own works. I guess it'd be too much even for Zen anecdotes to talk of such sacreligious acts as destroying scriptures.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 23rd, 2020 at 4:41 PM
Title: Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine
Content:
Schrödinger’s Yidam said:
But it’s safe to say that what HHK meant—whatever that is—is more authoritative than Brunnhölzl.

Astus wrote:
The more pertinent question is if Shentongpas take the works of Maitreya, Asanga, and Vasubandhu as their primary treatises or something else, because if yes, then they are rightly called Yogacarins.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 23rd, 2020 at 6:40 AM
Title: Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine
Content:
Astus wrote:
'There is no Shentong-Madhyamaka nor any need to make one up. The subdivision of Madhyamaka into “self-empty” and “other-empty” is obsolete. ... what is called Shentong is nothing other than the Yogacara (Yoga Practice) system of Maitreya, Asanga, and Vasubandhu, also called “the lineage of vast activity.”'
(Karl Brunnhölzl, in Center of the Sunlit Sky, p 445)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 22nd, 2020 at 8:12 PM
Title: Re: What is the source for the story of the sixth patriarch Huineng destroying sutras?
Content:
Dgj said:
What is the source for the story of the sixth patriarch Huineng destroying sutras?

Astus wrote:
It seems to be the artistic creativity of Liang Kai.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 22nd, 2020 at 8:00 PM
Title: Re: Samsarically Satisfied?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Is this just a case of, “Dharma ain’t for everybody” ?

Astus wrote:
I think it is rather a matter of presentation. Everyone loves to make a new friend, and nobody loves to lose one (see: https://suttacentral.net/sn42.11/en/sujato. Eradicating desires sounds like turning everything dull, making oneself insensate (cf. https://suttacentral.net/sn35.232/en/sujato ). But if one's told that one can have friends without the pains of craving for them, of fearing for them, then it surely seems like the best possible outcome (see: https://suttacentral.net/mn25/en/sujato ).


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 15th, 2020 at 6:11 PM
Title: Re: Is there a systematized course of study in Zen Buddhism (Soto)?
Content:
ElenaTheo said:
Is there a systematized course of study that one can follow in Zen Buddhism (Soto)?

Astus wrote:
Not to my knowledge, apart from what they teach at Komazawa University. What you might do is to learn about East Asian Buddhism in general, and then about Soto Zen Buddhism.

For a general introduction to East Asian Buddhism:

https://hsingyun.org/books/core-teachings/ by Hsing Yun
https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-sutra-of-queen-srimala-of-the-lions-roar-and-the-vimalakirti-sutra/
http://www.kalavinka.org/kp_book_pages/n6p_book_page.htm
https://bdkamerica.org/product/three-short-treatises-by-vasubandhu-sengzhao-and-zongmi/
https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-awakening-of-faith/ by Aśvaghoṣa
https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-platform-sutra-of-the-sixth-patriarch/

For introduction to Soto Zen:

https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/library/leaflet/sotozen/index.html
https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/library/leaflet/heartofzen/index.html
http://antaiji.org/en/classics/english-zazen-yojinki/
https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/library/leaflet/Zuimonki/index.html
https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/library/denkoroku/index.html

In book:

https://books.google.hu/books?id=vNSRQkSACb4C by Kosho Uchiyama
https://books.google.hu/books?id=dQDm5oNbKdgC by Shohaku Okumura
https://books.google.hu/books?id=dyzRAgAAQBAJ
https://books.google.hu/books?id=tRfrlTX0ojoC by Shohaku Okumura


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 10th, 2020 at 3:21 PM
Title: Re: alaya vs. alaya vijnana
Content:
Malcolm said:
Well, you can read the bodhisattvabhumi for starters, where this distinction is made.

Astus wrote:
Do you have a more specific location of that distinction? A quick search in the translation brought no results to me. Abiding in suchness is what is usually taught in Yogacara.


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, November 8th, 2020 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: "think" as buddha-nature
Content:
Viach said:
To recognize buddha-nature one has to "think" as buddha-nature.

Astus wrote:
How does one do that?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 5th, 2020 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Why would clinging be entailed?

Astus wrote:
Because the nonafflictive ignorance of cognitive obscuration is attachment to dharmas (dharmagraha) that is removed by realising their emptiness.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, November 5th, 2020 at 5:21 AM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Non-afflictive ignorance satisfies that definition.

Astus wrote:
Since that means grasping at concepts like apprehender-apprehended, and agent-action-object, how would it be free from clinging?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 4th, 2020 at 5:28 PM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Yes, there is.
That is why Mogallana had to ask the Buddha where his mother was. That’s an obscuration.

Astus wrote:
That is a story in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulanpen_Sutra, the closest event mentioned in the Pali Canon ( https://suttacentral.net/pv14/en/kiribathgoda ) is where Sariputta successfully helps his mother without the assistance of the Buddha. On the other hand, in the https://suttacentral.net/sn54.9/en/sujato the Buddha asked Ananda about why 'the mendicant Saṅgha seem so diminished'.
In any case, how do you define an obscuration that can be present without grasping at anything?


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, November 4th, 2020 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
This was your assertion, "An arahant in Theravada is free from all attachments. In Mahayana only a buddha has that level of freedom."
This assertion is mistaken.

Astus wrote:
Only buddhas are free from the two obscurations, meaning that even on the 10th bhumi there is some clinging to concepts. Arahants, in Theravada at least, are free from attachment to both physical and mental phenomena, so there is no room for any obscuration.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Difficulty understanding Vijnana/Consciousness
Content:
SleepingTurtle said:
people form fetters by clinging/avoiding things, based on emotional response that arises from contact?

Astus wrote:
The emotional response is what comes from the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_%28Buddhism%29, or they are the fetters themselves.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020 at 5:10 AM
Title: Re: Difficulty understanding Vijnana/Consciousness
Content:
SleepingTurtle said:
When we cognize something, does that cognition/consciousness also serve as trigger for some craving/desire/thirst related to it to arise?

Astus wrote:
Once one is aware of something, one also has a basic feeling (pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral) about it, and then how one acts on that cognition and feeling is where one can form an emotional response, what are categorised as formations in Buddhism, and in that way from consciousness one can arrive at craving towards pleasant things, anger towards unpleasant ones, and carelessness towards things that feel neutral. See this summarised in this speech: https://suttacentral.net/sn36.3/en/sujato; and some explanation in https://www.buddhistinquiry.org/article/the-underlying-tendencies/.

SleepingTurtle said:
Its because I've read that Buddha taught how our thirst/needs/desires/what we crave actually keep us attached to specific things. Our attention is tied to those desires, be them placed in past or future. What Im saying is, if there is nothing to be associated with Vijnana/Consciousness, then there is no craving/desire to be recalled by it either.

Astus wrote:
So it is. When there are no conceptual and emotional complications of an impression/cognition, that is, when something is not turned into a personal issue, then there is nothing to be hung up on, one is free from pain, stress, and dissatisfaction.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
Yes,  the Buddha clearly makes this distinction in various suttas found in the Pali canon. So while Theravadins argue there is no difference in bodhi, they do not claim that arhats are party to the same knowledge as a buddha: example, Mogallana had to ask the Buddha where his mother had taken rebirth. Hence, the distinction is recognized in Theravada as well.

Astus wrote:
There can be many differences even among the arahants, depending on what qualities they possess. In what there is no difference between an arahant and a buddha is complete freedom from all attachments. The various special qualities of a buddha are not the result of liberation, but the accumulated merits/paramis, at least in Theravada.


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
Malcolm said:
False. The obscuration of affliction is abandoned on the seventh bhumi. Bodhisattvas on the pure stages are also free of attachments.
In the shravaka schools, the difference between an arhat and is Buddha is that the former has nonafflictive ignorance and the latter does not.

Astus wrote:
That's a distinction coming from Sarvastivada that was then used by Mahayana. No such difference exists in Theravada.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 2nd, 2020 at 7:05 PM
Title: Re: Which Bhumi is synomous with the Theravad Arahant?
Content:
sapo7 said:
Do we know for sure which Bhumi corresponds to the Theravadin version of Arahanthood?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bh%C5%ABmi_%28Buddhism%29

Astus wrote:
An arahant in Theravada is free from all attachments. In Mahayana only a buddha has that level of freedom.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, November 2nd, 2020 at 6:32 PM
Title: Re: Difficulty understanding Vijnana/Consciousness
Content:
SleepingTurtle said:
What exactly IS Vijnana/Consciousness?

Astus wrote:
In the Nikayas (Pali suttas) there is no strict terminology for consciousness, so it can mean various aspects, depending on the context. But it should be kept in mind that consciousness does not mean a singular experience, it always occurs with various https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_factors_%28Buddhism%29 (e.g. feeling, perception, intention, contact, attention).

SleepingTurtle said:
From what I understand, it is content associated with what is perceived(psychological trigger), which has has unfulfilled desire/complex in its background?

Astus wrote:
How perception happens is described with the 12 sense-bases and the 18 elements (see a nice summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80yatana ). So first there are for instance the eye organ and a visual object, from them emerge a visual consciousness, their contact results in a feeling, and this is where there are two options, either there is a dis/liking of the feeling, or not. So, in this model consciousness is not something triggered by previous conditions, but by the meeting of the organ and the object. Although there is a different approach too, described in the twelve links, that shows how consciousness depends on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%E1%B9%85kh%C4%81ra, and therefore it defines how one eventually reacts to things. It's better not to confuse these two perspectives, even if they are related.

SleepingTurtle said:
If there was nothing in us to be associated with external object,  eye-consciousness wouldn't arise and we would be unaffected by what we are seeing.

Astus wrote:
Consciousness does not necessarily involve complications, at least not at first contact, but through the sequential processing of sensory data. However, consciousness is required in order to be basically aware of something occurring, so all three, the object, the organ, and the consciousness are required for there to be any awareness of something.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 30th, 2020 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan and Mahayana and kshangabhanga of cittas and a self
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
if the Cittas are not permanent how can it accumulate karma,vasanas and samskaras etc The mental impressions  cannot exist without a permanent receptacle or abode.

Astus wrote:
What is permanent cannot change, therefore it cannot serve as a support for any living being (as living necessarily means change), nor as a basis for accumulating karma, because that too involves change. For the Madhyamaka explanation of how karma is an effective force, Nagarjuna states (MMK 17.31-33, tr Padmakara):

'Just as an illusory form, which Our Teacher emanated
Through the perfection of miraculous power,
Gave rise to yet another magical appearance,
And this in turn produced another,

Likewise, agent and the deed performed
Resemble magical appearances.
They’re like illusory forms produced
By what is also an illusion bodied forth.

Defilements, actions, and embodied beings;
Agents and the fruits of action
Are like cities of gandharvas.
They’re like mirages and dreams.'

Mabja Jangchub comments in the Ornament of Reason:

'Indeed, we have refuted that any of this possesses a nature, but we have not proved that it is nonexistent in a conventional sense. Neither is it the case that if something lacks nature, it cannot reasonably function at the level of convention. Let us use an example that is accepted by the treatises. The Teacher, the Buddha, the Transcendent Conqueror, creates emanations. These emanations are created in a perfect miracle where one emanation gives rise to a second, the second creates a third, and so forth. Likewise, although the agent has no nature, it is still able to act in terms of convention. Thus, the agent resembles an emanation. Although the act has no nature, it can still be carried out conventionally, just as when one emanation gives rise to another. The same point can be made by means of an example that is in line with worldly consensus. Afflictions such as desire; the virtuous, nonvirtuous, or immovable actions that are motivated by affliction; their resulting physical support (that is, the body); the ineffable self that is the agent of the karmic act; and the ripened, ruled, and concordant effects that are the results of affliction and action—none of this has any nature, and yet conventionally it originates in dependence. It all appears in the same way as a city of scent-eaters, like an illusion and like a dream.'

To further clarify, Wangchuk Dorje wrote (The Karmapa's Middle Way, p 232):

'Followers of the Middle Way do not posit anything connected to the relative truth after analysis, because they do not accept that any phenomenon can withstand analysis.
When one analyzes, there is no origination of results from either a cause that has disintegrated or a cause that has not disintegrated. If a result were to originate after its cause had disintegrated, any result could arise from any cause. If results were to originate from a cause that had not disintegrated, no results would depend on conditions.
If you assume that a result arises following the postdisintegration state of its cause, that view entails nihilism: the continuity of the subsequent phenomena would be severed. If you assume that a result arises following its cause which had not disintegrated, that view entails eternalism: all things would have to exist simultaneously. Thus postdisintegration is not a suitable cause for phenomena, nor is nondisintegration.
When one analyzes, one cannot posit the connection between causes and results, their support, and so on in any way, including conventionally. Understanding this is the supreme way of this teaching system.'

Artziebetter1 said:
the four great arguments of the middle way are madhyamika arguments and when applied to Citta,posit that a permanent atman exists.

Astus wrote:
If by the four great arguments you mean https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/four-great-logical-arguments, then you can see that especially the fourth, dependent origination, is what shows how no permanent consciousness is possible. As Aryadeva explained (Catuhsataka 9.202-203, tr Ruth Sonam)

'There is not anywhere anything 
That ever exists without depending. 
Thus never is there anywhere  
Anything that is permanent.

There is no functional thing without a cause,
Nor anything permanent which has a cause. 
Thus the one who knows suchness said what has
Come about causelessly does not exist.'


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 29th, 2020 at 6:07 PM
Title: Re: Dogen refutes view that Zen stories are "beyond logic" or "irrational."
Content:
Astus wrote:
Perhaps using the dichotomy of "rational" and "irrational" (in English) is too much and it can lead to unwanted paths. Better go with in/comprehensible for mu/rie 無/理會 (as in https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/pdf/dharma-eye/hogen09/hogen09_07.htm ), as the point is that merely not thinking is not a solution, and that mistake is what is being criticised. As for a modern example of treating Zen teachings, Okumura writes in his commentary to the Mountains and Waters Sutra:

'if we can follow the thread of the teachings from Buddha through Mahāyāna Buddhism and Zen until Dōgen, we can discover the meaning of this wondrous writing for ourselves. We will completely miss the point if we simply read Dōgen and create a fixed philosophy based on our understanding of his writings. If we do that, we create another system of views — another problem. Instead, when we read Dōgen we have to apply his words in our lives, studying the relationship between our self and the myriad things.'


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 29th, 2020 at 4:12 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan and Mahayana and kshangabhanga of cittas and a self
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
This proves that-atleast if you reject theravadan kshanabhangavada

Astus wrote:
Let's not call it a Theravadin doctrine, as their version of momentariness (see e.g. Kathavatthu 22.8, Visuddhimagga XX.24; for more see chapter 17 of The Theravada Abhidharma by Y. Karunadasa, and section I.B of The Buddhist Doctrine of Momentariness by Alexander von Rospatt)  is not exactly like those taught by other Abhidharmikas and in the various Mahayana schools.

Artziebetter1 said:
a permanent Citta exists though.a permanent atman is the logical conclusion of this.

Astus wrote:
A permanent consciousness is a rejected and refuted idea in Buddhism. Look at what the Buddha told Sāti when he presented his idea of an eternal mind:

“Silly man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way? Haven’t I said in many ways that consciousness is dependently originated, since consciousness does not arise without a cause? But still you misrepresent me by your wrong grasp, harm yourself, and make much bad karma. This will be for your lasting harm and suffering.”
( https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato )

Artziebetter1 said:
If Kshanabhanga is not true ultimately,then Cittas do not cease or arise,and then there is one enduring Citta or atman.this is a logical conclusion to make.

Astus wrote:
Momentariness is an extension of the teaching of impermanence. What is refuted in Madhyamaka is that momentariness is more than a relative concept, not that it is completely invalid. Just the teaching of impermanence on its own removes any room for an eternal consciousness, then momentariness and emptiness only further clarifies how there is not even the smallest anything to hang on to as real. From this it is not a logical conclusion at all to posit any permanent mind.

Artziebetter1 said:
but we can say that we experience our minds and that it does exist in a concrete sence.

Astus wrote:
Mind is never experienced on its own, there are only instances of being conscious of something. In the above quoted sutta the Buddha states very clearly: 'Consciousness is reckoned according to the specific conditions dependent upon which it arises.', so there are eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness. No experience stays permanently, this is personally verifiable, so it cannot be claimed that there is an eternal mind.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 28th, 2020 at 3:56 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan and Mahayana and kshangabhanga of cittas and a self
Content:
Artziebetter1 said:
As far as I know in madhyamika there is no arising or cessation besides nirvana so kshanabhangavada is rejected.however Cittas are moments of consciousness with no permanent atman behind it.

Astus wrote:
Arising and cessation are illusory, it does not matter whether we talk of mind or something else. Chapter 7 of the Mulamadhyamakakarika discusses the topic of arising, abiding, and ceasing, concluding it with:

'Arising and abiding and decay are not established.
Thus compounded things do not exist.
And since compounded things are not established,
How could the uncompounded be established?

Like a dream and like a mirage,
Like a city of gandharvas,
So arising and abiding
And cessation have been taught.'
(MMK 7.33-34, tr Padmakara)

And in the Yuktisastika (v 18-23, tr Thupten Jinpa):

'Those who imputes arising and disintegration
With relation to conditioned things,
They do not understand well the movement
Of the wheel of dependent origination.

That which has originated due to “this” and “that,”
That has not done so as its own being;
And that which has not arisen as its own being,
How can it be called “arisen”?

The tranquility derived from extinction of cause,
This is understood to be a cessation;
That which is not extinguished through its intrinsic nature,
How can that be called an “extinguishment”?

Since there is nothing that arises,
There is nothing that disintegrates;
Yet the paths of arising and disintegration
Were taught [by the Buddha] for a purpose.

By understanding arising, disintegration is understood;
By understanding disintegration, impermanence is understood;
By understanding how to engage with impermanence,
The sublime dharma is understood as well.

Those who understand the dependent origination
To be utterly devoid of arising and disintegration,
Those who have such knowledge will cross
The ocean of samsara of dogmatic views.'

As for momentariness specifically, the Bodhicaryavatara says (9.6-8, tr Padmakara):

'Forms and so forth, which we all perceive,
Exist by general acclaim but not by valid reasoning.
They’re false just like, for instance, unclean things
Regarded in the common view as pure.

But that he might instruct the worldly,
Our Protector spoke of “things.”
But these in truth lack even momentariness.
Now if you say it’s wrong to claim the momentary as relative,

There is no fault. For momentariness
Is relative for yogis, but for worldly beings, ultimate.
Were it otherwise, the common view
Could fault the yogic insight into corporal impurity.'


Author: Astus
Date: Tuesday, October 27th, 2020 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
In many instances, students are told by their Masters they have attained what their master attained. It is quite common, actually.

Astus wrote:
Does that result in a lineage traced back through many generations? Does it authorise the student to pass on the lineage?


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 26th, 2020 at 5:40 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
The tulku tradition, and also the notion of "lineage holders" in Tibetan Buddhism.

Astus wrote:
Tulkus are nominated mostly when they're children, and then they receive their education. As for lineage holders, is there actually a process of making that a qualification? Isn't it rather an expression meaning someone who knows the teachings of a lineage? So, neither of them seem to be like what goes on in Zen. For instance, to make it like Zen, Milarepa should have at one point told Gampopa that their attainment were the same, and not advise him to keep practising.


Author: Astus
Date: Monday, October 26th, 2020 at 6:22 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
I understand you to be asserting that there is something unique about Zen's approach to lineage and transmission, but I'm not clear about where you think the uniqueness lies.

Astus wrote:
Do you know other schools where lineage means not the transmission of a method or doctrine, but those confirmed as awakened (it is the nature of this confirmation that can have a variety of meanings)?

'If we did not rely on a teacher’s certification, there would be those who, not having experienced realization, would nevertheless claim they had, and those who, not having this certification, would claim they possessed it. If these people then delude others who seek the Dharma, they end up destroying the Right Law. With this certification former buddhas could foresee future buddhas, former teachers could recognize future enlightened students. People are not certified at random. People who come to inquire about the teaching are thoroughly scrutinized, and only people with understanding that is in agreement with the Right Law receive certification. This is what is called transmission.'
(Mud and Water: A Collection of Talks by the Zen Master Bassui, p 70)

'Only a real master—someone who has received confirmation from a qualified teacher—can determine whether someone has clarified the true Dharma. If we trace the line of qualified teachers back through each generation to the time of Shakyamuni himself, we see that this very continuity can rightly be called “the life of Zen Buddhism.”'
(Zen: The Authentic Gate by Koun Yamada, ch 7)


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 25th, 2020 at 4:24 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
In any event, again, lineage is central to many if not all Buddhist schools, so I'm unclear as to why Zen's insistence on its importance would hang on what Vajrayana schools do one way or the other.

Astus wrote:
The Zen lineages (i.e. the system of Dharma transmission) have apparently nothing to do with Vajrayana. See also the https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=556342#p556342 on how lineage in Zen is something other than what is understood by others.

This article by Bodiford is also recommended: https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/Bodiford-transmission-ZenRitual.pdf


Author: Astus
Date: Sunday, October 25th, 2020 at 4:19 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Nonetheless, it still requires some sort of transport mechanism for the teachings, and it comes through people, not reading of texts, though of course those are utilized.

Astus wrote:
The transport mechanism of the teachings is what the Buddhist community is for in general, keeping alive by upholding and passing on the Dharma and the Vinaya. That's not what Zen is about, it is not the Zen lineage, hence it is called a 'special transmission outside the teachings' (jiao-wai bie-chuan 教外別傳; see Welter's analysis of this slogan https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/Koan-Welter.pdf ). It's mentioned in the ' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_Sermon ', as it appears in Wumen's 無門 collection:

In ancient times, at an assembly on Spirit Mountain, the World Honored One [the Buddha] held up a flower and showed it to those gathered there.
Everyone in the assembly was silent at that moment. Only the Venerable Kasyapa cracked a slight smile.
The World Honored One said, “I have the treasury of the Eye of the Correct Dharma, the wondrous mind of nirvana, the real formless subtle gate to Reality, the special transmission outside the scriptural teachings that does not establish texts [as sacred], I entrust it to Mahakasyapa.”
(Wumen's Gate, case 6, in Three Chan Classics, BDK ed, p 76; https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/en/T48n2005_p0293c12 )

To illustrate further:

For a long time Yaoshan did not enter the hall to speak.
The temple director said to him, “The monks have been waiting for a long time for the master to give them some instruction.”
Yaoshan said, “Ring the bell!”
The monks assembled in the hall.
Yaoshan then got down from the Dharma seat and went back to the abbot’s quarters.
The temple director followed him and said, “Master, since you consented to speak to the monks, why didn’t you say anything?”
Yaoshan said, “Sutras have sutra teachers. Shastras have shastra teachers. Why are you unhappy with me?”
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 124-125)

Because the Master was conducting a memorial feast for Yün-yen, a monk asked, "What teaching did you receive while you were at Yün-yen's place?"
The Master said, "Although I was there, I didn't receive any teaching."
"Since you didn't actually receive any teaching, why are you conducting this memorial?" asked the monk.
"Why should I turn my back on him?" replied the Master.
"If you began by meeting Nan-ch'üan, why do you now conduct a memorial feast for Yün-yen?" asked the monk.
"It is not my former master's virtue or Buddha Dharma that I esteem, only that he did not make exhaustive explanations for me," replied the Master.
(Record of Dongshan, p 28, tr Powell)

Johnny Dangerous said:
so far what you are presenting is not unique, and I don't understand what point you are trying to make.

Astus wrote:
The point is that where the Zen lineage is fictional is not related to the ordinary Sangha activities and the regulations of the Vinaya, but to a concept of transmission going back to Shakyamuni that is claimed to be historically valid by the tradition but shown on many levels by modern scholarship to be written and rewritten by various people in China over many centuries, thus it is one of the conflicts between the religious and the academic perspectives.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 24th, 2020 at 5:22 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
I don't know why we would assume this to be true: the Zhenyan school was extremely influential in China during the Tang dynasty, and was transmitted to Japan as the Shingon school in the early 9th Century, where it also became influential.  Different Ch'an and Zen lineages adopted various esoteric practices as a result, some of which are still practiced.  For example, the https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/practice/sutra/scriptures.html contains several dharani.  Unless by Vajrayana you mean specifically Tibetan traditions.

Astus wrote:
See https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=540377#p540377 based on the collection Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 24th, 2020 at 5:18 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Ok, that’s quite semantic in this context, you can call it a transmission or simply a revealing or pointing out...doesn’t much matter in the context in which we are discussing it - the method of said revealing is part of the living lineage.

Astus wrote:
But it's not a revelation, not a pointing out, but the certification of what is already realised. As you could see from Xuanjue's example, he was already awakened without meeting a single Zen teacher.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 24th, 2020 at 5:15 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
You asserted, “ The Zen lineage represents a series of awakened patriarchs who embody the totality of the Dharma.“
How is the above different from your assertion? The guru also embodies the lineage.

Astus wrote:
Right, in that sense, no difference.


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 24th, 2020 at 4:49 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
the need of a teacher to directly transmit a particular state to one "mind to mind" is.

Astus wrote:
There is nothing actually transmitted, it is rather the confirmation, the certification of what one has already attained. A classic example of this is the story of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongjia_Xuanjue 永嘉玄覺 in chapter 7 of the Platform Sutra, where he is also named "one night Jue" (一宿覺), as he spent only one night at the Sixth Patriarch's place. He was already enlightened after reading the Vimalakirti Sutra, but when he met Xuance 玄策, he was told that he must visit the patriarch in order for his enlightenment to be verified (zheng 證, also the first word of his famous poem Zhengdaoge 證道歌), and so he did and spent there a single night.

Johnny Dangerous said:
It lines with Vajrayana in that (for instance) introduction to the state of Shikantaza isn't something you can just get through concepts and reading alone (much less the academic study of some version of history), but requires some form of direct transmission. Thus, lineage is still a living thing rather than a historical artifact.

Astus wrote:
If there were something passed down, Zen would be like any other school preserving the teachings of the Buddha.

Pei Xiu asked, “If they transmit the mind to each other, then why do you say that the mind is nonexistent?”
The master answered, “Not attaining a single dharma is what is called ‘transmitting the mind.’ If you understand this mind, then there is no mind and no dharma.”
Pei Xiu asked, “If there is no mind and no dharma, then why do you call it ‘transmission’?”
The master replied, “The moment you hear me say, ‘transmit the mind,’ you presume there is something to be attained. This is why a patriarch said,
The moment you recognize the nature of the mind,
you can say only that it is inconceivable.
Perfectly clear, there is nothing to be attained.
Once you get it, you won’t say you have any such understanding.
If I tried to teach you this, how would you ever be able to handle it?”
(Essentials of Transmitting the Mind-Dharma, ch 11, tr Buswell & Kim, in A Bird in Flight Leaves No Trace)

The Sixth Patriarch told the assembly, “I have a single thing that is nameless and unlettered. Do you know it?” Chan master Shenhui came forth and said, “It is the original source of the buddhas and is my Buddha-nature.”60 This is the reason he was regarded as an illegitimate son of the Sixth Patriarch. Chan master Huairang came from Mt. Song, and the Sixth Patriarch asked him, “What thing came like this?” Huairang was at a loss. After eight years had passed he then approved himself, saying, “If I say a thing then I miss the mark.” This is why he is considered the legitimate son of the Sixth Patriarch.
(Seonga gwigam, ch 1, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 3, p 51-52)


Author: Astus
Date: Saturday, October 24th, 2020 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
Your guru represents the totality of the Dharna, as it is said, “the guru is the Buddha...the Dharma...and the Sangha.

Astus wrote:
How does that relate to Dharma transmission in Zen? It's not taught that one should cultivate that sort of devotion as in Vajrayana.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 23rd, 2020 at 10:31 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
These three qualities are inherent in Vajrayana, for example, and also in Vinaya.

Astus wrote:
Since Vajrayana couldn't have been much of a source for Zen, it is the Vinaya part that should be looked into. The Vinaya prescribes novice training, but after the first five years a monk is independent. Dharma transmission is not like that, it is not a training, but a confirmation of enlightenment. The Zen lineage represents a series of awakened patriarchs who embody the totality of the Dharma. From this it should be clear that it is not like Vajrayana either.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 23rd, 2020 at 6:04 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Sure, let me find my Official Vajrayana Lineage chart (tm), authorized and signed by Vajradhara.

Astus wrote:
There are actually such official lineage certificates in Zen. Here's one place you can order the template for it: https://www.tera-mura.co.jp/ketimyaku.htm

You can also watch a grand Dharma transmission ceremony https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpWjRRTwERk where "Venerable Master Hsing Yun transmitted the symbols of Dharma lineage: chanting beads, a Dharma scroll, and a kasaya to 72 disciples of the 49th generation Linji School" ( http://fgsihb.org/dictionary-info.asp?id=7357 ).


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 23rd, 2020 at 5:57 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
As you know, there has been massive destruction of texts in India and China. But the Theravada chronicle of ordinations is illustrative.

Astus wrote:
There are a few examples of a lineage, although in two different senses. The Theravada account is about how the Dharma was faithfully transmitted, while in North India there were the five (or more) Dharmacaryas (Mahākaśyapa, Ānanda, Madhyāntika, Śāṇakavāsin, Upagupta) as preserved for instance in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashokavadana (one of its Chinese translations: https://bdkamerica.org/product/the-biographical-scripture-of-king-asoka/ ), and that list is reflected (with some changes) in the final version of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_lineage_charts#The_Indian_Lineage_From_Shakyamuni_to_Bodhidharma, although, as noted before, it was copied from a different source.

The fictional nature of the lineage already shows in the above, since those teachers revered among Sarvastivadins and others had practically nothing to do with Mahayana, much less Zen. The Indian ancestors in Zen were gradually "zennified" and got transmission verses and Zen-style dialogues attributed to them (e.g. https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/eng/library/denkoroku/pdf/CHAPTER_FOUR.pdf ). Also, the significance of the lineage in Zen is quite specific. What is transmitted in Zen is not something in the scriptures, not anything verbal, but the very buddha-mind itself - in a figurative sense, as a reference to the recognition of enlightenment of the disciple - making every recipient an equal of Shakyamuni himself. In McRae's words (Seeing Through Zen, p 4):

'Chan does not define itself as being one among a number of Buddhist schools based on a particular scripture (such as the Tiantai [Tendai] school with its emphasis on the Lotus Sutra, for example). Instead, Chan texts present the school as Buddhism itself, or as the central teaching of Buddhism, which has been transmitted from the seven Buddhas of the past to the twenty-eight Indian patriarchs, the six Chinese patriarchs, and all the generations of Chinese and Japanese Chan and Zen masters that follow. (Bodhidharma occupies a pivotal position as both the twenty-eighth Indian and first Chinese patriarch.) It took several centuries for this entire schema to be developed; the earliest building blocks appeared at the very end of the seventh century, and the complete system was published perhaps as early as 801 but certainly by the year 952.'

Beyond the Indian ancestors the events surrounding the identity of the sixth (and the seventh) patriarch is something about what there are multiple historical sources, showing the disagreement among factions wanting to claim the ultimate authority to themselves.


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 23rd, 2020 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
Well, If you read Tibetan, you could read Lama Dampa's Sonam Gyaltsen's record of lineages for Vinaya, Abhidharma, Pramana, Bodhisattva vows, etc., and so on, as well as lineages Vajrayāna lineages, you name it,

Astus wrote:
Anything about a thousand years before him, just to see how the concept of Dharma lineages already existed in various Indian schools?


Author: Astus
Date: Friday, October 23rd, 2020 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
The notion of lineage is found in all Buddhist schools in India, and was carried to Tibet, China, etc., from there. Inconsistencies in the record do not indicate that such lineages are fictions, the central point of your contention.

Astus wrote:
If so, could you point to some sources specifying lineages of Dharma?


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 11:23 PM
Title: Re: Saving all beings, ultimate or conventional goal?
Content:
seeker242 said:
If no one can purify another, then how can you even save anyone?

Astus wrote:
"Good friends, now that we have done the repentances, I will express for you the four great vows. You should all listen closely: the sentient beings of our own minds are limitless, and we vow to save them all. ...
Good friends, why don’t we all say [simply] ‘sentient beings are limitless, and we vow to save them all’? How should we say it? Certainly it’s not me who’s doing the saving!
Good friends, the ‘sentient beings of our own minds’ are the mental states of delusion, confusion, immorality, jealousy, and evil. All these are sentient beings, and we must all [undergo] automatic salvation of the selfnature. This is called true salvation.
What is ‘automatic salvation of the self-nature’? It is to use correct views to save the sentient beings of false views, afflictions, and stupidity within our own minds. Having correct views, we may use the wisdom of prajñā to destroy the sentient beings of stupidity and delusion, automatically saving each and every one of them.When the false occurs, it is saved by the correct. When delusion occurs, it is saved by enlightenment. When stupidity occurs, it is saved by wisdom. When evil occurs, it is saved by good. Salvation such as this is called true salvation."
(Platform Sutra, ch 6, BDK ed, p 48-49)


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 5:47 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
You seem to miss the point of what such empiricism erases, how it salts the soil of tradition, out of which nothing will grow.

Astus wrote:
Please elaborate then.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 5:46 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
Monastic lineage lists certainly predate even these, that as my point.

Astus wrote:
There are two early sources that served as the inspiration for the creation of special lineages: Huiyuan's (334–416) preface to the Dharmatrata-dhyana Sutra (Damoduoluo chan jing 達摩多羅禪經, https://web.archive.org/web/20160304103638/http://ibc.ac.th/faqing/files/English_Translation_ofBuddhabhadra_Meditation_Sutra.pdf ) and the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan 付法藏因緣傳 ('“History of the Transmission of the Dharma-Storehouse,” a lineage history of the Indian Buddhist patriarchs, purportedly translated in 472 by Kiṅkara (d.u.) and Tanyao (fl. 450–490) of the Northern Wei dynasty, but now known to be an indigenous Chinese composition, in six rolls.' - The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, p 307), as summarised by Morrison in The Power of Patriarchs, p 23-27.
However, it should be clear that what was created in China as special lineages are qualitatively different from the common understanding that monastics are heirs of the Buddha, and it was meant to set apart a unique group of people who wield more authority than ordinary monks, eventually resulting in the system of public monasteries bound to lineage members and under the direct control of the imperial court (see: How Zen Became Zen, p 39).

Malcolm said:
The Japanese have annihilated their own indigenous Buddhist tradition by falling the notion that there can only be a single set of facts, and those are known through textual analysis.

Astus wrote:
Reforms in Zen based on textual sources happened in the 18th century in Japan, and in the 17th century in China, without any modern influence of historiography.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Genjo Conan said:
Could you rephrase this, please?  I can't tell if you're asserting that Soto Zen does or does not recognize textual materials.

Astus wrote:
What I mean is to see the scriptures and texts as valid and 'sufficient' sources, for instance because that is what actually happened within the Soto tradition that was itself defined based on centuries old written materials.

Genjo Conan said:
Maybe you could set forth what you think the transmission is and what it signifies in Zen, because I'm not sure we're on the same page.

Astus wrote:
Transmission in Zen can mean several things, from pure bureaucratic paperwork to pure transcendental wisdom and anything in between. The main point is, however, that the teachings are transmitted in words, and the Buddha's words are what one can find in the sutras, just as what one can know about the teachings of Dogen are in his writings and the records of his speeches. Realisation, on the other hand, is not something handed over but individually attained.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 4:22 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Zhen Li said:
He too cannot really be hemmed in by history. If we think of everything in positivist terms, then religiosity has no meaning beyond surface levels and we turn our practice into a glorified Stephen Bachelor-esque secular Buddhism. The world that we are perceiving is a result of our karma, and it is illusion. If we take it's material too seriously then we certainly will interfere with our practice and faith.

Astus wrote:
That seems to imply to me that Buddhism can exist only apart from what is seen by most as the real world, that is, the realm of conventional truths. However, I think that it poses no problem if Shakyamuni is viewed as a historical person, and Buddhism as a tradition maintained by actual human beings over the centuries, because it does not diminish the validity of the transmitted and realised Dharma. On the other hand, setting it into an unreachable dimension may hurt the possibility of it being accepted as a truth for humans.


Author: Astus
Date: Thursday, October 22nd, 2020 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Malcolm said:
The notion of lineages was carried from India to Tibet, China, and Central Asia by subcontinental Buddhists, principally by Vajrayana practitioners such as Amoghavajra, but also monastic abbots.

Astus wrote:
Śubhakarasiṃha arrived in Chang'an in 716 (Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, p 340), a couple of years after the first known record of a Chan lineage (epitaph of Faru 法如, 638-689, see Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch'an Buddhism, p 43-44, 85-86). However, the 'first lineage claim in Chinese Buddhism, made at some point between 607 and 632, predates the emergence of the Chan school; it appears in an early seventh-century work by Guanding 灌頂 (561–632), a disciple of the great Zhiyi 智顗 (538–597), revered by the Tiantai tradition as its founder.' (The Power of Patriarchs, p 33)

Malcolm said:
Holding up western historiography as the pinnacle of human intellectual culture is basically racist. Thus kind of historiography erases indigenous traditions and sensibilities because it is predicated on dominance, as I mentioned before. So it is to be resisted because it is harmful to our tradition, since this kind of historiography insists that only one set of facts can be accepted.

Astus wrote:
Japan has been the leader in (East Asian) Buddhist studies throughout the 20th century, so I don't know why call it 'Western', plus it was not called the pinnacle of human intellectual culture. By the 'highest levels' in my https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=555923#p555923 I merely referred to what is currently accepted in general as the source of reliable knowledge, not only in Western countries, but globally. But if you consider academic research a threat, then it might be needed to come up with a viable defence.


Author: Astus
Date: Wednesday, October 21st, 2020 at 4:20 PM
Title: Re: Academic critiques and slandering the dharma
Content:
Zhen Li said:
When need to see, for instance, and come to terms with the fact that much of what is considered Theravāda is extremely late and is full of statements such as how the Buddha is non-human, and the earliest collections of manuscripts that we know of include Mahāyāna texts alongside Śrāvakayāna texts.

Astus wrote:
The various historical layers within the Pali Canon is readily recognised, not to mention post-canonical works. So there is a clear difference between current Theravada (Mahavihara) orthodoxy and what can be known of the so called pre-sectarian literature.

Zhen Li said:
History shouldn't guide our practice, not just because that's not how religiosity works for most people (as Johnny Dangerous put quite well), but because, as with all fields of science, it's always changing and is a matter of interpretation. The Dharma needs to be something we know to be true, whereas history is something we can suppose to be true.

Astus wrote:
Historical concerns are not foreign to the various traditions, as each have stated a version of its past. Simply dismissing research into Buddhist history is an option of course, but that seems to be driven by fear of losing something. Scriptures serve as a guide, but the Dharma is realised in one's own experience. Even if it is accepted that none of the Abhidharma works, and none of the Mahayana sutras can be attributed to Shakyamuni, it does not mean that they are wrong. As Vasubandhu noted (The Universal Vehicle Discourse Literature, p 8), 'even if the universal vehicle was taught by some enlightened being other (than Säkyamuni Buddha), that also proves it to be buddha-word, since a buddha is anyone who becomes perfectly enlightened and then teaches such (a vehicle).'


