32 marks of the Buddha
32 marks of the Buddha
Hi
Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?
Thomas
Are the 32 marks of the Buddha true and real?
Thomas
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Yes.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
- PuerAzaelis
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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
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
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Thanks. Do the texts state the Buddha says he has 32 marks?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
- PuerAzaelis
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
For posts from this user, see Karma Dondrup Tashi account.
- Thomas Amundsen
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
- Location: Helena, MT
- Contact:
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
The text only states the marks. It does not say the Buddha say he has the marks.Thomas Amundsen wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:36 pmYes 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.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Stanzas one and two of the Uttaratantra (Ken and Katia Holmes' translation):
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.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.
We abide nowhere. We possess nothing.
~Chatral Rinpoche
~Chatral Rinpoche
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
.
I hope its ok to post this here, but there's an article "On the 32 marks" by Bhikkhu Sujato in which he says :
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/04/06 ... -32-marks/
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
~ Tilopa
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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.
He could have been the ugliest sod in the world by conventional standards and it makes no difference in terms of his teaching.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
This.PuerAzaelis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:51 pmThe 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
So we need to define 'real'.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
For the 32 marks it should refer to the actual marks of the physical body.Simon E. wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:37 amThis.PuerAzaelis wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 5:51 pmThe 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
So we need to define 'real'.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Define 'real'...
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Which body? Which kaya are we talking about?
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
- Thomas Amundsen
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
- Location: Helena, MT
- Contact:
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
Conze's translation of the Abhisamayalamkara says this:thomaslaw wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:34 amThe text only states the marks. It does not say the Buddha say he has the marks.Thomas Amundsen wrote: ↑Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:36 pmYes 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 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:
- Thomas Amundsen
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
- Location: Helena, MT
- Contact:
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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.
Re: 32 marks of the Buddha
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.
If that is correct it is a recipe for confusion. The Mahayana has to be understood on its own terms.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.