Upāya (continued from another thread)

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.
Post Reply
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:39 am Even the particular text of the Lotus as we know it is upaya. I have no problem with that.
Then it is not definitive and requires interpretation.
The Buddha actually asserts this in the Sutra. Its why Nichiren could collapse the Lotus, and the entire corpus of all teachings of the Buddhas, anytime, anywhere, into the title.
The practice of collapsing the meaning of texts into their titles is a pan-Indian hermeneutical device. It is not unique to Nichiren, nor even to Buddhism.
Its the name given to the Buddha's most sacred teaching at this time and place.
Such statements are statements of sentiment and not fact.
There is a definitive teaching. It finds expression in innumerable ways.
Those expressions cannot be definitive if they are innumerable. Since they are not definitive, the teaching they purport to express cannot be definitive either.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by DGA »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:01 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:39 am Even the particular text of the Lotus as we know it is upaya. I have no problem with that.
Then it is not definitive and requires interpretation.
The Buddha actually asserts this in the Sutra. Its why Nichiren could collapse the Lotus, and the entire corpus of all teachings of the Buddhas, anytime, anywhere, into the title.
The practice of collapsing the meaning of texts into their titles is a pan-Indian hermeneutical device. It is not unique to Nichiren, nor even to Buddhism.
Its the name given to the Buddha's most sacred teaching at this time and place.
Such statements are statements of sentiment and not fact.
There is a definitive teaching. It finds expression in innumerable ways.
Those expressions cannot be definitive if they are innumerable. Since they are not definitive, the teaching they purport to express cannot be definitive either.
What, then, is a definitive teaching?
Fortyeightvows
Posts: 2948
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:37 am

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by Fortyeightvows »

The practice of collapsing the meaning of texts into their titles is a pan-Indian hermeneutical device. It is not unique to Nichiren, nor even to Buddhism.
Interesting, do any other examples of this come easily to your mind?

Is this similar to the mantra in the heart sutra?
User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 2034
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Helena, MT
Contact:

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by Thomas Amundsen »

DGA wrote: Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:16 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:01 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:39 am Even the particular text of the Lotus as we know it is upaya. I have no problem with that.
Then it is not definitive and requires interpretation.
The Buddha actually asserts this in the Sutra. Its why Nichiren could collapse the Lotus, and the entire corpus of all teachings of the Buddhas, anytime, anywhere, into the title.
The practice of collapsing the meaning of texts into their titles is a pan-Indian hermeneutical device. It is not unique to Nichiren, nor even to Buddhism.
Its the name given to the Buddha's most sacred teaching at this time and place.
Such statements are statements of sentiment and not fact.
There is a definitive teaching. It finds expression in innumerable ways.
Those expressions cannot be definitive if they are innumerable. Since they are not definitive, the teaching they purport to express cannot be definitive either.
What, then, is a definitive teaching?
That's a really good question. I noticed this in Loppon's signature:
The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by DGA »

Thomas Amundsen wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:49 pm
DGA wrote: Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:16 pm
What, then, is a definitive teaching?
That's a really good question. I noticed this in Loppon's signature:
The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra
It seems to me that if someone claims that something is upaya, then that person must have a certain idea about what counts as a definitive teaching. It also seems that there are a variety of claims on what is most definitive, ultimate answer to the question "what is the definitive Dharma teaching?".

If the purpose of this split thread is to discuss upaya, then I don't think we can do without some discussion of the definitive too.

And if I understand the quotation that you refer to, the answer isn't that a particular text or canon of texts is to be regarded as definitive. It must instead be a particular view.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by Malcolm »

DGA wrote: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:55 am
And if I understand the quotation that you refer to, the answer isn't that a particular text or canon of texts is to be regarded as definitive. It must instead be a particular view.
Yes. I have always maintained this to be the case.

BTW, Candrakīrti's true brilliance is not just that he honed certain points of Madhyamaka, though that is what he most famous for. His true brilliance and best contribution is that he explains how to correctly understand Yogacāra doctrines from a precise and uncompromising Madhyamaka perspective, taking into account the Maitreyan synthesis. Candrakīrti represents the pinnacle of late Indian Buddhist Mahāyāna thought.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Upāya (continued from another thread)

Post by DGA »

A question for any takers:

If it is true that there is such a thing as upaya, that any upaya presumes a definitive teaching, that and any definitive teaching must be a particular view, then what is a definitive view?

and in the context of that definitive view, what does it mean for something to be upaya?
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”