Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I don't agree. As in my sig words are alive for brief periods. Then they die don't they?
Personifying words? That's one way to put it because like all languages words can live and die as well. Many more words are no longer being used. Just look at Shakespearian language. The point is Buddha Nature is a meaningless word people use to project themselves upon. It can be a dangerous word if not understood. Note CAN be.
I mean living and dying in the experience... My teacher says sometimes she knows someone is onto something not by how they describe it (sometimes) but by the alive tone in their voice. The 'wonder'.
I am refering to wonder. Not to changes in language. Like being a kid and seeing the circus for the first time.
Buddhas never actually utter any words since they abide in eternal samādhi or meditative concentration, but beings perceive words to have been uttered.
I mean living and dying in the experience... My teacher says sometimes she knows someone is onto something not by how they describe it (sometimes) but by the alive tone in their voice. The 'wonder'.
That's a better way of putting it, because as I said, the problem is a word has power to create or destroy delusions.
I am refering to wonder. Not to changes in language. Like being a kid and seeing the circus for the first time.
Hmm... I see what you mean here but how does that apply to such a powerful word as "Buddha Nature"? :skeptical:
See my problem is not the word itself, but how people seem to apply labels such as eternalism or annihilationism to it. That's counterintuitive. Once we're talking about Buddha nature, everyone seems to have an opinion about it(in terms of eternalism or nihilism), but how much does it help as opposed to causing projected delusion to become rampant?
Oh I know, I don't take it literal either, but I felt like clearing the air and being honest about what I know about it to reveal that one's expectations of the Buddha are ones of mere speculation. So to make claims about how I would behave or react in the face of a Buddha is ridiculous.
Hmm... I see what you mean here but how does that apply to such a powerful word as "Buddha Nature"? :skeptical:
See my problem is not the word itself, but how people seem to apply labels such as eternalism or annihilationism to it. That's counterintuitive. Once we're talking about Buddha nature, everyone seems to have an opinion about it(in terms of eternalism or nihilism), but how much does it help as opposed to causing projected delusion to become rampant?
Even a less than ideal view can be what keeps someone going. God? Love? Wealth? A fix? These can all be islands on our journey on various rafts. Buddha will call you when it is time to leave your island dearies.
But for what its worth when you realize the mahamudra is different from random dudes on a forum who are cooking up recipes in their laboratories of their minds to find happiness. Or is it hehe?__________________
<big>That the self advances and confirms the ten thousand things</big>
<big> is called delusion;</big>
<big>That the ten thousand things advance and confirm the self</big>
<big> is called enlightenment.</big>
- Zen Master Dogen Zenji, 1200 - 1253
<big>Fishermen</big>
<big> by a rocky shore,</big>
<big> winds blowing wildly,</big>
<big> in a boat unmoored--</big>
<big> such is our condition.</big>
<b> <big> </big></b> - Saigyo, 1118 - 1190
<big>I see a vision of a great rucksack revolution, thousands or even</big>
<big> millions of young Americans wandering around with their rucksacks,</big>
<big> going up the mountains to pray, making children laugh and old men</big>
<big> glad ... Zen lunatics who go about writing poems."</big>
<big>Why are people called Buddhas</big>
<big>After they die?</big>
<big> Because they don't grumble any more,</big>
<big>Because they don't make a nuisance</big>
<big>Of themselves any more.</big>
<b> <big>- </big></b>Ikkyu
<big>The name "Three Teachings" was empty right from the </big>
<big> start--</big>
<big> Miss even one one and all go wrong.</big><b>
<big> Looking inward or outward, </big></b><big>see there is no fixed self.</big><b>
<big> </big></b><big>Break in the front door, if you want to enter your home.</big>
<b><big> </big></b>- Zen Master Dogen Zenji, 1200 - 1253
<big>Why is it? Because:</big>
<big>All phenomna are like a dream, an illusion,</big>
<big> a bubble, a shadow,</big>
<big> like dew and lightning.</big>
<big>Thus should you meditate on them.</big>
<big>Unity attained:
Who dares to equal him
Who falls into neither being nor non-being!
All men want to leave
The current of ordinary life,
But he, after all, comes back
To sit among the coals and ashes.</big> - Tung-Shan (806-869), Verses on the Five Ranks
Even a less than ideal view can be what keeps someone going. God? Love? Wealth? A fix? These can all be islands on our journey on various rafts. Buddha will call you when it is time to leave your island dearies.
But for what its worth when you realize the mahamudra is different from random dudes on a forum who are cooking up recipes in their laboratories of their minds to find happiness. Or is it hehe?__________________
But seriously, island or not, c'mon a raft can't move without the power of the current. There's no current for a projection of the mind. There's only the flowing or changing of the mind.
That the self advances and confirms the ten thousand things is called delusion; That the ten thousand things advance and confirm the self is called enlightenment.
Zen Master Dogen Zenji, 1200 - 1253
This is called perspective, but it is irrelevant to what we're talking about. Perspective changes.
Same, I just hope the whole throwing eggs at people rather than ideas stop. I know what I know, and I have studied hard so that I have come to know a lot, but ultimately I don't know anymore than what other people have learned about it before me. I do however know that I know a lot more than some people and am willing and able to tell what I know and support what I say to help others grow. I only hope that people stop misconstruing certainty with arrogance.
I hope you don't feel that way about me. Certainty is certainty.
Naaah I don't feel that way about you, but claiming I'd spit in the face of the Buddha or proclaim him unawakened or non-experiential and to assume I think I know everything is a rude way of saying. "I'm not going to listen to you because I don't like what you are saying! You are too confident about what you say, and because it is different from what I think it must be wrong!"
<big>That the self advances and confirms the ten thousand things</big>
<big> is called delusion;</big>
<big>That the ten thousand things advance and confirm the self</big>
<big> is called enlightenment.</big>
- Zen Master Dogen Zenji, 1200 - 1253
<big>Fishermen</big>
<big> by a rocky shore,</big>
<big> winds blowing wildly,</big>
<big> in a boat unmoored--</big>
<big> such is our condition.</big>
<b> <big> </big></b> - Saigyo, 1118 - 1190
<big>I see a vision of a great rucksack revolution, thousands or even</big>
<big> millions of young Americans wandering around with their rucksacks,</big>
<big> going up the mountains to pray, making children laugh and old men</big>
<big> glad ... Zen lunatics who go about writing poems."</big>
<big>Why are people called Buddhas</big>
<big>After they die?</big>
<big> Because they don't grumble any more,</big>
<big>Because they don't make a nuisance</big>
<big>Of themselves any more.</big>
<b> <big>- </big></b>Ikkyu
<big>The name "Three Teachings" was empty right from the </big>
<big> start--</big>
<big> Miss even one one and all go wrong.</big><b>
<big> Looking inward or outward, </big></b><big>see there is no fixed self.</big><b>
<big> </big></b><big>Break in the front door, if you want to enter your home.</big>
<b><big> </big></b>- Zen Master Dogen Zenji, 1200 - 1253
<big>Why is it? Because:</big>
<big>All phenomna are like a dream, an illusion,</big>
<big> a bubble, a shadow,</big>
<big> like dew and lightning.</big>
<big>Thus should you meditate on them.</big>
<big>Unity attained:
Who dares to equal him
Who falls into neither being nor non-being!
All men want to leave
The current of ordinary life,
But he, after all, comes back
To sit among the coals and ashes.</big> - Tung-Shan (806-869), Verses on the Five Ranks
I'm Theravadin, therefore I'm saying both of these (rangtong and shentong) are both delusory and that the Buddha described ultimate reality as neither. He said neither eternal nor subject to annihilation.
That's a weird one, I have never heard of it. There's no Buddha within. Where is it? Is it in the head? Is it in the heart? Is it in the electrons, the energy? If I remove the electrons and energy is the Buddha gone? See this is why I don't think the Buddha Nature doctrine is something that can be helpful to practice. It's directly contrary to Anatta.
Aye, and also discussing the refutation of such a term.
Do you have any inkling of the framing of the rangtong-shentong divide? Both are predicated on accepting the chatushkoti of Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka. Have you read any of Dolpopa's works? Tsongkhapa's responses to them? Gorampa? Nobody is saying that there is some sort of entity that exists called tathagathagarbha that would equate to "atma" in the Samkhya sense. Don't be ridiculous.
This is one of those contentious issues that responsible dharma practitioners should just back away from. As a Theravadin, you do not need to accept tathagathagarbha. You are unacquainted with context and the entire philosophical tradition upon which it rests. You have an understanding based on what you personally view as valid scripturally and epistemologically.
I personally profoundly disagree with many of the suppositions of the Theravadin tradition. However, I am not so arrogant as to call its practice "delusory". On the contrary I have respect and gratitude that the Dharma reaches so widely. We each practice what our vasanas lead us to, and I trust that these teachings are effective in reaching very different goals by very different methods.
When we have such different methods and philosophical viewpoints, where we don't accept the same premises and scriptures what is the point of strident polemics? Better to seek out what is shared and to listen to each other respectfully where we differ. You won't convince me that the Second and Third Turnings are not authentic, no matter if you argued from now until the end of the Kaliyuga. Similarly, I am not going to convince you to abandon your position. What a waste of breath to try to do so.
Comments
Personifying words? That's one way to put it because like all languages words can live and die as well. Many more words are no longer being used. Just look at Shakespearian language. The point is Buddha Nature is a meaningless word people use to project themselves upon. It can be a dangerous word if not understood. Note CAN be.
I am refering to wonder. Not to changes in language. Like being a kid and seeing the circus for the first time.
I am positive this isn't a literal meaning.
Well fruit punch doesn't compare to Pietro but she is cool hehe.
When did I say that?:hrm: If that's what you think, I can't change your mind. :rolleyes:
That's a better way of putting it, because as I said, the problem is a word has power to create or destroy delusions.
Hmm... I see what you mean here but how does that apply to such a powerful word as "Buddha Nature"? :skeptical:
See my problem is not the word itself, but how people seem to apply labels such as eternalism or annihilationism to it. That's counterintuitive. Once we're talking about Buddha nature, everyone seems to have an opinion about it(in terms of eternalism or nihilism), but how much does it help as opposed to causing projected delusion to become rampant?
Oh I know, I don't take it literal either, but I felt like clearing the air and being honest about what I know about it to reveal that one's expectations of the Buddha are ones of mere speculation. So to make claims about how I would behave or react in the face of a Buddha is ridiculous.
But for what its worth when you realize the mahamudra is different from random dudes on a forum who are cooking up recipes in their laboratories of their minds to find happiness. Or is it hehe?__________________
traditional Chinese: 僧問：狗子還有佛性也無？
The master said, "Not [Mu]!"
traditional Chinese: 師云：無。
The monk said, "Above to all the Buddhas, below to the crawling bugs, all have Buddha-nature. Why is it that the dog has not?"
traditional Chinese: 僧問：上至諸佛，下至螻蟻皆有佛性，狗子為什麼卻無？
The master said, "Because he has the nature of karmic delusions".
traditional Chinese: 師云：為伊有業識在。
Makes more sense? As to what I'm getting at?
<big> is called delusion;</big>
<big>That the ten thousand things advance and confirm the self</big>
<big> is called enlightenment.</big>
<big>Fishermen</big>
<big> by a rocky shore,</big>
<big> winds blowing wildly,</big>
<big> in a boat unmoored--</big>
<big> such is our condition.</big>
<big>I see a vision of a great rucksack revolution, thousands or even</big>
<big> millions of young Americans wandering around with their rucksacks,</big>
<big> going up the mountains to pray, making children laugh and old men</big>
<big> glad ... Zen lunatics who go about writing poems."</big>
The Dharma Bums, 1958, p.
<big>Why are people called Buddhas</big>
<big>After they die?</big>
<big> Because they don't grumble any more,</big>
<big>Because they don't make a nuisance</big>
<big>Of themselves any more.</big>
<big>The name "Three Teachings" was empty right from the </big>
<big> start--</big>
<big> Miss even one one and all go wrong.</big><b>
<big> Looking inward or outward, </big></b><big>see there is no fixed self.</big><b>
<big> </big></b><big>Break in the front door, if you want to enter your home.</big>
<big>Why is it? Because:</big>
<big>All phenomna are like a dream, an illusion,</big>
<big> a bubble, a shadow,</big>
<big> like dew and lightning.</big>
<big>Thus should you meditate on them.</big>
- The Diamond Sutra
<big>Unity attained:
Who dares to equal him
Who falls into neither being nor non-being!
All men want to leave
The current of ordinary life,
But he, after all, comes back
To sit among the coals and ashes.</big> - Tung-Shan (806-869), Verses on the Five Ranks
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7g9WjcGdxuM?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7g9WjcGdxuM?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
But seriously, island or not, c'mon a raft can't move without the power of the current. There's no current for a projection of the mind. There's only the flowing or changing of the mind.
This is called perspective, but it is irrelevant to what we're talking about. Perspective changes.
Naaah I don't feel that way about you, but claiming I'd spit in the face of the Buddha or proclaim him unawakened or non-experiential and to assume I think I know everything is a rude way of saying. "I'm not going to listen to you because I don't like what you are saying! You are too confident about what you say, and because it is different from what I think it must be wrong!"
Dailyzen?
Do you have any inkling of the framing of the rangtong-shentong divide? Both are predicated on accepting the chatushkoti of Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka. Have you read any of Dolpopa's works? Tsongkhapa's responses to them? Gorampa? Nobody is saying that there is some sort of entity that exists called tathagathagarbha that would equate to "atma" in the Samkhya sense. Don't be ridiculous.
This is one of those contentious issues that responsible dharma practitioners should just back away from. As a Theravadin, you do not need to accept tathagathagarbha. You are unacquainted with context and the entire philosophical tradition upon which it rests. You have an understanding based on what you personally view as valid scripturally and epistemologically.
I personally profoundly disagree with many of the suppositions of the Theravadin tradition. However, I am not so arrogant as to call its practice "delusory". On the contrary I have respect and gratitude that the Dharma reaches so widely. We each practice what our vasanas lead us to, and I trust that these teachings are effective in reaching very different goals by very different methods.
When we have such different methods and philosophical viewpoints, where we don't accept the same premises and scriptures what is the point of strident polemics? Better to seek out what is shared and to listen to each other respectfully where we differ. You won't convince me that the Second and Third Turnings are not authentic, no matter if you argued from now until the end of the Kaliyuga. Similarly, I am not going to convince you to abandon your position. What a waste of breath to try to do so.