Malcolm wrote:Oh, what Dzogchen teachings says concerning this is that in every eon from beginningless time, Dzogchen teachings appear first and disappear last.
I think that's the biggest claim I have heard yet in Buddhism. But just to turn it on its head, it could be said, again from a modern historical point of view, that such a claim makes it likely the latest on the list of sets of teachings to appear.
So, we have our cake and can eat it too...
1Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek? 2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing. 3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata. 4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Good question. I think it matters in case of interschool debates when historicity is brought into the argument. But not when measuring the value of certain views and methods.
1Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek? 2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing. 3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata. 4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Why would that be? History is not a purely Western field of study. The Japanese are at the top level in Buddhist studies, and most Asian Buddhist countries are catching up. The historical perspective gained currency among Asian Buddhists in the 19th century, and has been found a valid method in researching past events. The Taisho Tripitaka compiled in 1924 is an obvious example. So it might be that only Tibetans have not yet caught up with the rest of the world.
1Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek? 2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing. 3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata. 4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Why would that be? History is not a purely Western field of study. The Japanese are at the top level in Buddhist studies, and most Asian Buddhist countries are catching up. The historical perspective gained currency among Asian Buddhists in the 19th century, and has been found a valid method in researching past events. The Taisho Tripitaka compiled in 1924 is an obvious example. So it might be that only Tibetans have not yet caught up with the rest of the world.
Or that the rest of the world haven't caught up with how it really is.
/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
Why would that be? History is not a purely Western field of study. The Japanese are at the top level in Buddhist studies, and most Asian Buddhist countries are catching up.
For all intents and purposes, they are a modern, western industrialized nation.
The historical perspective gained currency among Asian Buddhists in the 19th century, and has been found a valid method in researching past events. The Taisho Tripitaka compiled in 1924 is an obvious example. So it might be that only Tibetans have not yet caught up with the rest of the world.
Only the Tibetans have understood that narratives beings written by Buddhologists have nothing to do with the narratives they find meaningful because they don't really give a shit about Buddhologists, and neither do I.
Why would that be? History is not a purely Western field of study. The Japanese are at the top level in Buddhist studies, and most Asian Buddhist countries are catching up. The historical perspective gained currency among Asian Buddhists in the 19th century, and has been found a valid method in researching past events. The Taisho Tripitaka compiled in 1924 is an obvious example. So it might be that only Tibetans have not yet caught up with the rest of the world.
Or that the rest of the world haven't caught up with how it really is.
