32 marks of the Buddha

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.
thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:20 am

Hi

Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?

Thomas

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 4873
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Queequeg » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:09 pm

Yes.
“Once you have given up the ghost, everything follows with dead certainty, even in the midst of chaos.”
-Henry Miller

"Language is the liquid that we're all dissolved in.
Great for solving problems, after it creates the problems."
-Modest Mouse

"Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world!"
-The Grateful Dead

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:39 am

Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:09 pm
Yes.
The 32 marks are Mahayana teachings or not?

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:47 am

:jumping:
Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:09 pm
Yes.
But the Mahayana texts do not record the Buddha says he has 32 marks.

Thomas

User avatar
PuerAzaelis
Posts: 958
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by PuerAzaelis » Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:11 pm

In the Theravada tradition, the list of 32 excellent signs appears in The Sutta of the Excellent Signs (Pali: Lakkhana Sutta) in the Long Discourses (Pali: Digha Nikaya). Mahayana has two traditions of their explanation. One derives from The Prajnaparamita Sutras (Pha-rol-tu phyin-pa’i mdo, Sutras of Far-reaching Discrimination, Perfection of Wisdom Sutras). Maitreya follows this tradition in his Filigree of Realizations (mNgon-rtogs rgyan, Skt. Abhisamaya-alamkara), as does Nagarjuna in his Precious Garland (Rin-chen ‘phreng-ba, Skt. Ratnavali). These two renditions have only slight differences. The second Mahayana tradition of explanation of the 32 excellent signs derives from The Sutra Requested by the Girl Ratna (Bu-mo’i rin-chen-gyis zhus-pa’i mdo). Maitreya follows this tradition in his Furthest Everlasting Stream (rGyud bla-ma, Skt. Uttaratantra).

https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-s ... sical-body
Generally, enjoyment of speech is the gateway to poor [results]. So it becomes the foundation for generating all negative emotional states. Jampel Pawo, The Certainty of the Diamond Mind

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:34 pm

PuerAzaelis wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:11 pm
In the Theravada tradition, the list of 32 excellent signs appears in The Sutta of the Excellent Signs (Pali: Lakkhana Sutta) in the Long Discourses (Pali: Digha Nikaya). Mahayana has two traditions of their explanation. One derives from The Prajnaparamita Sutras (Pha-rol-tu phyin-pa’i mdo, Sutras of Far-reaching Discrimination, Perfection of Wisdom Sutras). Maitreya follows this tradition in his Filigree of Realizations (mNgon-rtogs rgyan, Skt. Abhisamaya-alamkara), as does Nagarjuna in his Precious Garland (Rin-chen ‘phreng-ba, Skt. Ratnavali). These two renditions have only slight differences. The second Mahayana tradition of explanation of the 32 excellent signs derives from The Sutra Requested by the Girl Ratna (Bu-mo’i rin-chen-gyis zhus-pa’i mdo). Maitreya follows this tradition in his Furthest Everlasting Stream (rGyud bla-ma, Skt. Uttaratantra).

https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-s ... sical-body
Thanks. Do the texts state the Buddha says he has 32 marks?

User avatar
PuerAzaelis
Posts: 958
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by PuerAzaelis » Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:51 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:34 pm
Thanks. Do the texts state the Buddha says he has 32 marks?
The Diamond Sutra talks about the marks to say they're not physical, I think. I.e. they should be understood as features of the enjoyment body. The large Prajnaparamita talks about the 32 marks, I don't remember if it actually lists them. The other Mahayana texts, I don't know.

PS:

The Diamond Sutra appears to deconstruct the whole idea:

“Subhūti, what do you think, can the Tathāgata be seen by his physical marks?”

“No, World Honored One, the Tathāgata cannot be seen by his physical marks. And why? It is because the physical marks are spoken of by the Tathāgata as no physical marks.”

The Buddha said to Subhūti, “All with marks is deceptive. If you can see all marks as no marks then you see the Tathāgata.”


Diamond Sutra, 5

PPS:

If you want to slog through the large Prajnaparamita, knock yourself out ...

http://lirs.ru/lib/conze/The_Large_Sutr ... e,1975.pdf
Generally, enjoyment of speech is the gateway to poor [results]. So it becomes the foundation for generating all negative emotional states. Jampel Pawo, The Certainty of the Diamond Mind

User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 1774
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Thomas Amundsen » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:36 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:47 am
:jumping:
Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:09 pm
Yes.
But the Mahayana texts do not record the Buddha says he has 32 marks.

Thomas
Yes they do. The Abhisamayalamkara (more or less a summary of the Prajnaparamita sutras, from Maitreya/Asanga) lists the 32 major and 80 minor marks and says they pertain to the Sambhogakaya.

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:34 am

Thomas Amundsen wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:36 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:47 am
:jumping:
Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:09 pm
Yes.
But the Mahayana texts do not record the Buddha says he has 32 marks.

Thomas
Yes they do. The Abhisamayalamkara (more or less a summary of the Prajnaparamita sutras, from Maitreya/Asanga) lists the 32 major and 80 minor marks and says they pertain to the Sambhogakaya.
The text only states the marks. It does not say the Buddha say he has the marks.

Punya
Posts: 1184
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:50 pm

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Punya » Fri Dec 01, 2017 7:42 am

Stanzas one and two of the Uttaratantra (Ken and Katia Holmes' translation):
The entire body of history of treatise can be condensed into the following seven vajra points: Buddha, dharma, sangha, Buddha nature, enlightenment, qualities and activity.

These are in a natural order and one should know the first three as deriving from the introductory and the latter four from the "Wise and Victor's Qualities" chapters of the Dharanishvararajasutra.
As you may know, the 32 major marks are included in the qualities vajra point and as Asanga (Maitreya) is referring back to a Sutra then the Buddha did say that enlightened beings have these qualities.
May the stupid meditators be awakened from the sleep of ignorance;
May the attacks of the logicians with their sophistries be vanquished.

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche

User avatar
Berry
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:19 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Berry » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:48 am

.
I hope its ok to post this here, but there's an article "On the 32 marks" by Bhikkhu Sujato in which he says :
There is plenty of incidental detail in the Suttas and Vinaya that show that the Buddha was normal in appearance, so any freakish or supernatural interpretation of the marks must be wrong. Leaving a few of the bizarre elements aside, most of the marks are straightforward signs of physical beauty: black hair, white teeth, gold skin, and the like.

https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/04/06 ... -32-marks/
Leave the polluted water of conceptual thoughts in its natural clarity. Without affirming or denying appearances, leave them as they are. When there is neither acceptance nor rejection, mind is liberated into mahāmudra.

~ Tilopa

Simon E.
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Simon E. » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:35 am

And even that description stems from an understandable need to see outward signs of inner attainment.

He could have been the ugliest sod in the world by conventional standards and it makes no difference in terms of his teaching.
A belated New Years Resolution 2018.

No posts or responses to posts outside of the Vajrayana forums. Its just a waste of time.

Simon E.
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Simon E. » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:37 am

PuerAzaelis wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:51 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:34 pm
Thanks. Do the texts state the Buddha says he has 32 marks?
The Diamond Sutra talks about the marks to say they're not physical, I think. I.e. they should be understood as features of the enjoyment body. The large Prajnaparamita talks about the 32 marks, I don't remember if it actually lists them. The other Mahayana texts, I don't know.

PS:

The Diamond Sutra appears to deconstruct the whole idea:

“Subhūti, what do you think, can the Tathāgata be seen by his physical marks?”



“No, World Honored One, the Tathāgata cannot be seen by his physical marks. And why? It is because the physical marks are spoken of by the Tathāgata as no physical marks.”

The Buddha said to Subhūti, “All with marks is deceptive. If you can see all marks as no marks then you see the Tathāgata.”


Diamond Sutra, 5

PPS:

If you want to slog through the large Prajnaparamita, knock yourself out ...

http://lirs.ru/lib/conze/The_Large_Sutr ... e,1975.pdf
This.
So we need to define 'real'.
A belated New Years Resolution 2018.

No posts or responses to posts outside of the Vajrayana forums. Its just a waste of time.

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:08 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:37 am
PuerAzaelis wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:51 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:34 pm
Thanks. Do the texts state the Buddha says he has 32 marks?
The Diamond Sutra talks about the marks to say they're not physical, I think. I.e. they should be understood as features of the enjoyment body. The large Prajnaparamita talks about the 32 marks, I don't remember if it actually lists them. The other Mahayana texts, I don't know.

PS:

The Diamond Sutra appears to deconstruct the whole idea:

“Subhūti, what do you think, can the Tathāgata be seen by his physical marks?”



“No, World Honored One, the Tathāgata cannot be seen by his physical marks. And why? It is because the physical marks are spoken of by the Tathāgata as no physical marks.”

The Buddha said to Subhūti, “All with marks is deceptive. If you can see all marks as no marks then you see the Tathāgata.”


Diamond Sutra, 5

PPS:

If you want to slog through the large Prajnaparamita, knock yourself out ...

http://lirs.ru/lib/conze/The_Large_Sutr ... e,1975.pdf
This.
So we need to define 'real'.
For the 32 marks it should refer to the actual marks of the physical body.

Simon E.
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Simon E. » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:29 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:20 am
Hi

Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?

Thomas

Define 'real'...
A belated New Years Resolution 2018.

No posts or responses to posts outside of the Vajrayana forums. Its just a waste of time.

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by thomaslaw » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:39 pm

:twothumbsup:
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:29 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:20 am
Hi

Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?

Thomas

Define 'real'...
For the idea of the 32 marks, 'real' refers to the actual physical marks of the body.

Simon E.
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Simon E. » Fri Dec 01, 2017 7:10 pm

Which body? Which kaya are we talking about?
A belated New Years Resolution 2018.

No posts or responses to posts outside of the Vajrayana forums. Its just a waste of time.

User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 1774
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Thomas Amundsen » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:03 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:34 am
Thomas Amundsen wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:36 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:47 am
:jumping:

But the Mahayana texts do not record the Buddha says he has 32 marks.

Thomas
Yes they do. The Abhisamayalamkara (more or less a summary of the Prajnaparamita sutras, from Maitreya/Asanga) lists the 32 major and 80 minor marks and says they pertain to the Sambhogakaya.
The text only states the marks. It does not say the Buddha say he has the marks.
Conze's translation of the Abhisamayalamkara says this:
The body of the sage which possesses the 32 marks and the 80 minor characteristics is considered as his Enjoyment-Body, because it enjoys the happiness of (the dharma) of the great vehicle.
The 32 marks (of the Lord Buddha) are as follows:

User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 1774
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Thomas Amundsen » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:05 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:39 pm
:twothumbsup:
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:29 pm
thomaslaw wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:20 am
Hi

Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?

Thomas

Define 'real'...
For the idea of the 32 marks, 'real' refers to the actual physical marks of the body.
The problem is that Nirmanakayas have an indefinite appearance and will be perceived differently by sentient beings due to their karma. For example, in the Pali Canon there is an account of a king who couldn't distinguish the Buddha from any of the other monks in the sangha. Then on the other hand, there are other accounts of the Buddha having a 16-foot golden body, a huge aura, and so on.

Simon E.
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: 32 marks of the Buddha

Post by Simon E. » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:17 pm

I might be way off here thomaslaw, but I think you may be attempting to understand the Mahayana through the lens of the Theravada.
If that is correct it is a recipe for confusion. The Mahayana has to be understood on its own terms.
A belated New Years Resolution 2018.

No posts or responses to posts outside of the Vajrayana forums. Its just a waste of time.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aemilius, ItsRaining and 41 guests