Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
White Lotus
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by White Lotus »

things are no longer seen nor heard, one says ''seen'', ''heard'' for convenience sake, but actually there is no seeing nor hearing. this is after the five senses have been torn down. it is then that emptiness is seen in its not seeing.

''knowledge'' of extinction is knowledge of emptiness. when all is extinct the 'a' (as in 'a'nt or 'a'lpha, or ph'a't) is heard. seeing extinction is seeing emptiness... there is no seer nor anything seen. seeing emptiness is not seeing emptiness, but this is not an ordinary seeing, since nothing at all is seen anymore.

this is not it. mind is not it. it is not it. consciousness gone. for convenience we say these things are seen, but really there is no seer nor anything seen nor heard and so we say this is 'not' it. the house is torn down. the flame blown out.

having experienced these things one may still value ones life, it doesn't become a meaningless husk of bread. living goes on. its just that one sees that life and mind depend upon nothing at all whatsoever. that really there is no life or mind, no being, no consciousness. so we say ''something'' remains, however that is only for convenience say. actually once the flame is blown out: there was never anything at all. yet, living goes on.

hope this is helpful.

best wishes, Tom.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
Pringle
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:48 pm
Location: Birmingham, UK

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by Pringle »

White Lotus wrote:things are no longer seen nor heard, one says ''seen'', ''heard'' for convenience sake, but actually there is no seeing nor hearing. this is after the five senses have been torn down. it is then that emptiness is seen in its not seeing.

''knowledge'' of extinction is knowledge of emptiness. when all is extinct the 'a' (as in 'a'nt or 'a'lpha, or ph'a't) is heard. seeing extinction is seeing emptiness... there is no seer nor anything seen. seeing emptiness is not seeing emptiness, but this is not an ordinary seeing, since nothing at all is seen anymore.

this is not it. mind is not it. it is not it. consciousness gone. for convenience we say these things are seen, but really there is no seer nor anything seen nor heard and so we say this is 'not' it. the house is torn down. the flame blown out.

having experienced these things one may still value ones life, it doesn't become a meaningless husk of bread. living goes on. its just that one sees that life and mind depend upon nothing at all whatsoever. that really there is no life or mind, no being, no consciousness. so we say ''something'' remains, however that is only for convenience say. actually once the flame is blown out: there was never anything at all. yet, living goes on.

hope this is helpful.

best wishes, Tom.
Am confused about the wording of ' After 5 senses have been torn down' , surely an enlightened being doesn't 'tear down' there senses, merely sees them for what they are, and as such is no longer attached to them. If the Buddha had 'torn down his senses' then I don't understand how he would been able to communicate with his follows as would have no senses to be communicated with
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by LastLegend »

White Lotus wrote:things are no longer seen nor heard, one says ''seen'', ''heard'' for convenience sake, but actually there is no seeing nor hearing. this is after the five senses have been torn down. it is then that emptiness is seen in its not seeing.

''knowledge'' of extinction is knowledge of emptiness. when all is extinct the 'a' (as in 'a'nt or 'a'lpha, or ph'a't) is heard. seeing extinction is seeing emptiness... there is no seer nor anything seen. seeing emptiness is not seeing emptiness, but this is not an ordinary seeing, since nothing at all is seen anymore.

this is not it. mind is not it. it is not it. consciousness gone. for convenience we say these things are seen, but really there is no seer nor anything seen nor heard and so we say this is 'not' it. the house is torn down. the flame blown out.

having experienced these things one may still value ones life, it doesn't become a meaningless husk of bread. living goes on. its just that one sees that life and mind depend upon nothing at all whatsoever. that really there is no life or mind, no being, no consciousness. so we say ''something'' remains, however that is only for convenience say. actually once the flame is blown out: there was never anything at all. yet, living goes on.

hope this is helpful.

best wishes, Tom.
Not really.
It’s eye blinking.
White Lotus
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by White Lotus »

after the five senses are dissolved it is seen that there never were five senses, only the appearance of five senses. it is then that sounds and things seen are neither heard nor seen. when mindful in this no-state one sees only emptiness. when going about ones daily tasks then the world is seen and experienced. mindfulness has become the diect experience of emptiness.

is this ''necessary'': ''not really'' (!) its just an aspect of the gradualist path.

best wishes, Tom.
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by Malcolm »

White Lotus wrote:after the five senses are dissolved it is seen that there never were five senses,
Ummmm....can't dissolve what never was....
White Lotus
Posts: 1333
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by White Lotus »

its called No dissolving. And some would say its completely unnecessary!
in any matters of importance. dont rely on me. i may not know what i am talking about. take what i say as mere speculation. i am not ordained. nor do i have a formal training. i do believe though that if i am wrong on any point. there are those on this site who i hope will quickly point out my mistakes.
usnisha
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 3:17 am

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by usnisha »

maybe the following quotes from Mahayana Mahanirvana sutra helps:

"Noble son. There is 'Nirvana', but that is not Maha-nirvana [Great Nirvana]. Why is Nirvana not Maha-nirvana? The elimination of the afflictions [kleshas] without having seen the Buddha-dhatu [Buddha Nature] is called 'Nirvana', and not Maha-nirvana. Thus, because one has not seen the Buddha-dhatu, there is no permanence nor Self, though there is bliss and utter purity. Hence, even though the afflictions have been eliminated, this should not be called 'Maha-nirvana'. When one has seen the Buddha-dhatu and eliminated the afflictions, that is called 'Maha-parinirvana'. Because of having seen the Buddha-dhatu, it is stated to be permaennt, Self, blissful, and utterly pure, and therefore that elimination of the afflictions is stated to be Maha-parinirvana.'

(Mahayana Mahanirvana Sutra chapter 31)
usnisha
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 3:17 am

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by usnisha »

another quote, also from same sutra:

"O good man! The same is the case with the body of Nirvana. There is no place where it is. When all Buddhas do away with defilement, we call this Nirvana. Nirvana is at once the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure. We say that Nirvana is Bliss. But it is no feeling of Bliss. This is the all-wonderful, unsurpassed silence and extinction. The All-Buddha-Tathagata has two kinds of Bliss. One is that of silence and extinction; the second is the "Bliss that is sensed by the sense-organs". There are three Blisses in the body of the Real State, which are: 1) the feeling of Bliss, 2) the Bliss of silence and extinction, and 3) the Bliss of sensing. The Buddha-Nature is a single Bliss, as it is what is to be seen. When one gains unsurpassed Bodhi, we call this the Bliss of Bodhi."
User avatar
Challenge23
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:36 pm

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by Challenge23 »

usnisha wrote:another quote, also from same sutra:

"O good man! The same is the case with the body of Nirvana. There is no place where it is. When all Buddhas do away with defilement, we call this Nirvana. Nirvana is at once the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure. We say that Nirvana is Bliss. But it is no feeling of Bliss. This is the all-wonderful, unsurpassed silence and extinction. The All-Buddha-Tathagata has two kinds of Bliss. One is that of silence and extinction; the second is the "Bliss that is sensed by the sense-organs". There are three Blisses in the body of the Real State, which are: 1) the feeling of Bliss, 2) the Bliss of silence and extinction, and 3) the Bliss of sensing. The Buddha-Nature is a single Bliss, as it is what is to be seen. When one gains unsurpassed Bodhi, we call this the Bliss of Bodhi."

I'm a little confused. How can there be a bliss of silence and extinction? Silence and extinction would mean that there wouldn't be anything. No bliss, no lack of bliss, no anything.
IN THIS BOOK IT IS SPOKEN OF THE SEPHIROTH & THE PATHS, OF SPIRITS & CONJURATIONS, OF GODS, SPHERES, PLANES & MANY OTHER THINGS WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST. IT IS IMMATERIAL WHETHER THEY EXIST OR NOT. BY DOING CERTAIN THINGS CERTAIN RESULTS FOLLOW; STUDENTS ARE MOST EARNESTLY WARNED AGAINST ATTRIBUTING OBJECTIVE REALITY OR PHILOSOPHICAL VALIDITY TO ANY OF THEM.

Wagner, Eric; Wilson, Robert Anton (2004-12-01). An Insider's Guide to Robert Anton Wilson (Kindle Locations 1626-1629). New Falcon Publications. Kindle Edition., quoting from Alister Crowley
usnisha
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 3:17 am

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by usnisha »

Challenge23 wrote:
usnisha wrote:another quote, also from same sutra:

"O good man! The same is the case with the body of Nirvana. There is no place where it is. When all Buddhas do away with defilement, we call this Nirvana. Nirvana is at once the Eternal, Bliss, the Self, and the Pure. We say that Nirvana is Bliss. But it is no feeling of Bliss. This is the all-wonderful, unsurpassed silence and extinction. The All-Buddha-Tathagata has two kinds of Bliss. One is that of silence and extinction; the second is the "Bliss that is sensed by the sense-organs". There are three Blisses in the body of the Real State, which are: 1) the feeling of Bliss, 2) the Bliss of silence and extinction, and 3) the Bliss of sensing. The Buddha-Nature is a single Bliss, as it is what is to be seen. When one gains unsurpassed Bodhi, we call this the Bliss of Bodhi."

I'm a little confused. How can there be a bliss of silence and extinction? Silence and extinction would mean that there wouldn't be anything. No bliss, no lack of bliss, no anything.
in Mahayana there is a consciousness called alaya vijnana, which is beyond self. silence and extinction refers to manas vijnana (conception about self).

the following Quote from Lankavatara Sutra clarifies:

Further, Mahāmati, those who, afraid of sufferings arising from the discrimination of birth-and-death, seek for Nirvana, do not know that birth-and-death and Nirvana are not to be separated the one from the other; and, seeing that all things subject to discrimination have no reality, imagine that Nirvana consists in the future annihilation of the senses and their fields. (62) They are not aware, Mahāmati, of the fact that Nirvana is the Ālayavijñāna where a revulsion takes place by self-realisation. Therefore, Mahāmati, those who are stupid talk of the trinity of vehicles and not of the state of Mind-only where there are no images. Therefore, Mahāmati, those who do not understand the teachings of the Tathagatas of the past, present, and future, concerning the external world, which is of Mind itself, cling to the notion that there is a world outside what is seen of the Mind and, Mahāmati, go on rolling themselves along the wheel of birth-and-death.
User avatar
garudha
Posts: 718
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:33 am
Location: UK

Re: Contradiction in Mahayana philosophy

Post by garudha »

Vajrasvapna wrote:I noticed a contradiction in Buddhist Mahayana philosophy. Some Buddhist texts say that Bodhisattvas are beings who reject nirvana condition to help others to attain liberation; other Buddhist texts say that Bodhisattvas are beings who seek to attain perfect enlightenment, while the state of nirvana would still be a state of ignorance. This appear to be a great contradiction. What is the opinion of the members of this forum?
As I understand the situation; the higher-order dynamic in play is that a bodhisattva cannot find true peace until ALL sentient beings have also attained liberation.

From the enlighted perspective, this situation is non-subjective, that is to say, to be liberated takes "ones self" out of cyclic-existence and enrolls "ones self" automatically into this inescapable higher-order dynamic.

As an analogy; consider a lake of water. It keeps raining onto the surface of the water and because of this "the lake" cannot find a timeless stillness. There would not be any true timeless stillness until all the drops of water in the rest of existence have fallen into the lake.
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”