Thich Phap Hoa - Dealing with our "hatred" - Jan.28, 2011
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:17 pm
A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
https://www.dharmawheel.net:443/
C'mon... Amitabha may or may not be a skillful means, but the heart of Pure Land practice, buddhanussati/buddhanusmrti is a valid form of practice.LastLegend wrote:I guess you can say Zen or "Thien" (Vietnamese), but he advocates Pure Land as most Vietnamese monks do even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
I don't understand this. 'Skillful means' is a euphemism for something unskillful?LastLegend wrote:...even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
For those who are not compatible with Zen training, Pure Land then is a skillful means for liberation in this life time.lojong1 wrote:I don't understand this. 'Skillful means' is a euphemism for something unskillful?LastLegend wrote:...even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
Yes, you can say Pure Land might be skillful or not skillful because Zen or Pure Land is not for everyone. For those who wish to be liberated via Pure Land method but not compatible with Zen training, it is skillful. For those who do not wish to be liberated or those who are still ignorant of Dharma, then any means is not skillful. But a practitioner with an average capacities, Pure Land is skillful means for liberation in this life time because he might not make it with Zen training in this life time. A butcher can be liberated through Pure Land in this life time; he might not make it with Zen training. Anyone can be liberated with Pure Land given that they want to be liberated in this life time. Can you say the same with Zen training?PorkChop wrote:C'mon... Amitabha may or may not be a skillful means, but the heart of Pure Land practice, buddhanussati/buddhanusmrti is a valid form of practice.LastLegend wrote:I guess you can say Zen or "Thien" (Vietnamese), but he advocates Pure Land as most Vietnamese monks do even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
Thanks for the videos!
Awww... you've mistaken the story for the technique... how cute!LastLegend wrote:Yes, you can say Pure Land might be skillful or not skillful because Zen or Pure Land is not for everyone. For those who wish to be liberated via Pure Land method but not compatible with Zen training, it is skillful. For those who do not wish to be liberated or those who are still ignorant of Dharma, then any means is not skillful. But a practitioner with an average capacities, Pure Land is skillful means for liberation in this life time because he might not make it with Zen training in this life time. A butcher can be liberated through Pure Land in this life time; he might not make it with Zen training. Anyone can be liberated with Pure Land given that they want to be liberated in this life time. Can you say the same with Zen training?PorkChop wrote:C'mon... Amitabha may or may not be a skillful means, but the heart of Pure Land practice, buddhanussati/buddhanusmrti is a valid form of practice.LastLegend wrote:I guess you can say Zen or "Thien" (Vietnamese), but he advocates Pure Land as most Vietnamese monks do even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
Thanks for the videos!
I don't understand. Want to explain further? I hope you are not telling me Pure Land is not real or existing. If you do, please study interdependence some more. And look into things such as marks and essence.PorkChop wrote:
Awww... you've mistaken the story for the technique... how cute!
Uh no. I don't think that or imply that.No wonder you don't think any Zen monks practice Pure Land or that you think it's only a practice for Zen failures...
Taking rebirth in Pure Land is not the same as dying.As someone once said "if you don't find the Pure Land in this life, you're not going to find it after you die."
LastLegend wrote:I don't understand. Want to explain further?PorkChop wrote: Awww... you've mistaken the story for the technique... how cute!Uh no. I don't think that or imply that.No wonder you don't think any Zen monks practice Pure Land or that you think it's only a practice for Zen failures...Taking rebirth in Pure Land is not the same as dying.As someone once said "if you don't find the Pure Land in this life, you're not going to find it after you die."
The last couple of sentences are very prevalent in both Chan and TianTai circles throughout history.http://www.urbandharma.org/ibmc/ibmc1/pure.html wrote:Since Zen is more a methodology than a system of thought, although it certainly does have a system of thought, the self-power of Zen, contains the other power of Pure Land. Once you have self power, you must have other power. After all, the Recitation of the Buddha's name is used as a concentration exercise. This is where Chinese/ Vietnamese Pure Land differs from Japanese forms. The Vietnamese Pure Land adherents also meditate whenever they have the time to, whereas Jodosinshu says that meditation is a mere psychological trick, where you think you are capable of saving yourself. They say we must drop meditation and all thoughts of saving ourselves, and rely only upon Buddha Amitabha to save us. Their practice is to realize exactly who and what they are, without any rosy constructs placed upon their realization.
If your practice is to devoid everything in your mind, does it matter is you use a koan, shikentaza or recreating the Buddha in your mind? All of these techniques work if they are done with great diligence and bring the meditator to the same point, to the satori experience (that is to insight, which Theravadans praise so much.)
When you begin Pure Land practice, you think of the Buddha and his Pure Land as being apart from you. But as you practice it, slowly you come to realize that you and Amitabha are one and the same. You can experience the Pure Land right here and now.
For instance, the great Japanese Zen man, D. T. Suzuki was fascinated by Pure Land. He studied it and translated their writings in to English. He came to the conclusion that Zen and Pure Land Buddhism are the same. And Dr. Thien-An certainly believed it.
Before I go on, I would like you to answer this question: Is Pure Land real or existing?PorkChop wrote:LastLegend wrote:I don't understand. Want to explain further?PorkChop wrote: Awww... you've mistaken the story for the technique... how cute!Uh no. I don't think that or imply that.No wonder you don't think any Zen monks practice Pure Land or that you think it's only a practice for Zen failures...Taking rebirth in Pure Land is not the same as dying.As someone once said "if you don't find the Pure Land in this life, you're not going to find it after you die."The last couple of sentences are very prevalent in both Chan and TianTai circles throughout history.http://www.urbandharma.org/ibmc/ibmc1/pure.html wrote:Since Zen is more a methodology than a system of thought, although it certainly does have a system of thought, the self-power of Zen, contains the other power of Pure Land. Once you have self power, you must have other power. After all, the Recitation of the Buddha's name is used as a concentration exercise. This is where Chinese/ Vietnamese Pure Land differs from Japanese forms. The Vietnamese Pure Land adherents also meditate whenever they have the time to, whereas Jodosinshu says that meditation is a mere psychological trick, where you think you are capable of saving yourself. They say we must drop meditation and all thoughts of saving ourselves, and rely only upon Buddha Amitabha to save us. Their practice is to realize exactly who and what they are, without any rosy constructs placed upon their realization.
If your practice is to devoid everything in your mind, does it matter is you use a koan, shikentaza or recreating the Buddha in your mind? All of these techniques work if they are done with great diligence and bring the meditator to the same point, to the satori experience (that is to insight, which Theravadans praise so much.)
When you begin Pure Land practice, you think of the Buddha and his Pure Land as being apart from you. But as you practice it, slowly you come to realize that you and Amitabha are one and the same. You can experience the Pure Land right here and now.
For instance, the great Japanese Zen man, D. T. Suzuki was fascinated by Pure Land. He studied it and translated their writings in to English. He came to the conclusion that Zen and Pure Land Buddhism are the same. And Dr. Thien-An certainly believed it.
Is anything inherently real or existing?LastLegend wrote:Before I go on, I would like you to answer this question: Is Pure Land real or existing?
Then why does Pure Land of Amitabha bother you? Do you see anything wrong with taking rebirth in Pure Land?PorkChop wrote:Is anything inherently real or existing?LastLegend wrote:Before I go on, I would like you to answer this question: Is Pure Land real or existing?
Are there any experiences that are outside of the mind?
Pure Land of Amitabha doesn't bother me at all.LastLegend wrote:Then why does Pure Land of Amitabha bother you? Do you see anything wrong with taking rebirth in Pure Land?PorkChop wrote:Is anything inherently real or existing?LastLegend wrote:Before I go on, I would like you to answer this question: Is Pure Land real or existing?
Are there any experiences that are outside of the mind?
If everything is not inherently real or existing, then why do you care about Buddhadharma since it's not real or existing also?
On that basis koans are a skillful means, zazen is a skillful means, Buddhadharma is a skillful means, as none of it is Awakening.but he advocates Pure Land as most Vietnamese monks do even though they don't practice Pure Land because they know Pure Land is a skillful mean.
There is some misunderstanding there. I do not mean Pure Land for the stupid at all. But that is not to deny that most Vietnamese monks (whether they practice both Pure Land and Zen or not) advocate Pure Land. Even the ones who don't incorporate Pure Land as their main practice, or ones who don't incorporate Pure Land at all advocate Pure Land. The point is they all advocate Pure Land.PorkChop wrote:
Pure Land of Amitabha doesn't bother me at all.
you're the one who said:
On that basis koans are a skillful means, zazen is a skillful means, Buddhadharma is a skillful means, as none of it is Awakening.
Whether you intended to or not, you came off very dismissive - as if only stupid people practice Pure Land, when in fact many monks (even Vietnamese ones) have practiced it and continue to practice it and it's not so different from the Zen/Thien you reify so much.
Ah, I see where you're coming from now.LastLegend wrote:There is some misunderstanding there. I do not mean Pure Land for the stupid at all. But that is not to deny that most Vietnamese monks (whether they practice both Pure Land and Zen or not) advocate Pure Land. Even the ones who don't incorporate Pure Land as their main practice, or ones who don't incorporate Pure Land at all advocate Pure Land. The point is they all advocate Pure Land.PorkChop wrote:
Pure Land of Amitabha doesn't bother me at all.
you're the one who said:
On that basis koans are a skillful means, zazen is a skillful means, Buddhadharma is a skillful means, as none of it is Awakening.
Whether you intended to or not, you came off very dismissive - as if only stupid people practice Pure Land, when in fact many monks (even Vietnamese ones) have practiced it and continue to practice it and it's not so different from the Zen/Thien you reify so much.