Do Buddhas have to die? 1 or 3 or 4 Vehicles?

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.
User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 2034
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Helena, MT
Contact:

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Thomas Amundsen »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:28 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:55 pm According to your tradition it does, since there is only one vehicle and not three. In fact, Candrakīrti cites the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka in support of this verse.
Bro... I don't even
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Are you saying that the Lotus Sutra contradicts, say, Chapter Thirteen of the Guhyagarbha tantra? I had always thought they were compatible if interpreted in some kind of subtle way (i.e. the sravakayana and pratyekabuddhayanas necessarily funneling into the bodhisattvayana).
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14473
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:28 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:55 pm According to your tradition it does, since there is only one vehicle and not three. In fact, Candrakīrti cites the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka in support of this verse.
Bro... I don't even
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Sorry, can't play along with the choices you present.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

Thomas Amundsen wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:55 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:28 pm

Bro... I don't even
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Are you saying that the Lotus Sutra contradicts, say, Chapter Thirteen of the Guhyagarbha tantra? I had always thought they were compatible if interpreted in some kind of subtle way (i.e. the sravakayana and pratyekabuddhayanas necessarily funneling into the bodhisattvayana).
As you know, the Guhygarbha's statment, "Incorrect realization, partial realization, and not realizing perfectly," refers respectively to nonbuddhists, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and those who practice the common Mahāyāna.

However, in the Indian treatises, "ekayāna" means different things. For example, in the Lankāvatāra, ekayāna does not include all the other vehicles. "The One Vehicle" refers to Mahāyāna only because it has not been obtained in the past by others. It is stated that it is because of the karmic traces and knowledge obscuration śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have that the Buddha teaches three vehicles, and that the teaching of one vehicle is actually only for Mahāyānis. Given that the Lanka was set down quite some time later than the Saddharmapundarika, we can understand this as a response to it. Likewise, the Nirvana responds to the prediction of all sentient beings as capable of attaining Buddhahood in Saddharmapundarika with the notion of the icchantika, while at the same time promoting tathāgatagarbha, as contradictory as that may seem.
ItsRaining
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by ItsRaining »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:55 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:49 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:48 pm

Apparently Nāgārjuna disagrees, in MMK:18, final verse:


If the perfect buddha does not arise and the śrāvakas vanish,
even so, the wisdom of the pratyekabuddhas will arise without support.
Pratyekabuddahood ≠ Buddhahood.
According to your tradition it does, since there is only one vehicle and not three. In fact, Candrakīrti cites the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka in support of this verse.
Lmao, do you know what the "One Vehicle" refereed to in his tradition actually means?
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

ItsRaining wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 3:27 am
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:55 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:49 pm

Pratyekabuddahood ≠ Buddhahood.
According to your tradition it does, since there is only one vehicle and not three. In fact, Candrakīrti cites the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka in support of this verse.
Lmao, do you know what the "One Vehicle" refereed to in his tradition actually means?
Sure.
marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by marting »

(Still enjoying the Lotus Sutra debate...)

:popcorn:
User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 2034
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Helena, MT
Contact:

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Thomas Amundsen »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:10 am
Thomas Amundsen wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:55 pm
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm

Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Are you saying that the Lotus Sutra contradicts, say, Chapter Thirteen of the Guhyagarbha tantra? I had always thought they were compatible if interpreted in some kind of subtle way (i.e. the sravakayana and pratyekabuddhayanas necessarily funneling into the bodhisattvayana).
As you know, the Guhygarbha's statment, "Incorrect realization, partial realization, and not realizing perfectly," refers respectively to nonbuddhists, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and those who practice the common Mahāyāna.

However, in the Indian treatises, "ekayāna" means different things. For example, in the Lankāvatāra, ekayāna does not include all the other vehicles. "The One Vehicle" refers to Mahāyāna only because it has not been obtained in the past by others. It is stated that it is because of the karmic traces and knowledge obscuration śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have that the Buddha teaches three vehicles, and that the teaching of one vehicle is actually only for Mahāyānis. Given that the Lanka was set down quite some time later than the Saddharmapundarika, we can understand this as a response to it. Likewise, the Nirvana responds to the prediction of all sentient beings as capable of attaining Buddhahood in Saddharmapundarika with the notion of the icchantika, while at the same time promoting tathāgatagarbha, as contradictory as that may seem.
Very interesting! Thanks, Loppon!
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

Thomas Amundsen wrote: Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:49 am
Malcolm wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:10 am
Thomas Amundsen wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:55 pm
Are you saying that the Lotus Sutra contradicts, say, Chapter Thirteen of the Guhyagarbha tantra? I had always thought they were compatible if interpreted in some kind of subtle way (i.e. the sravakayana and pratyekabuddhayanas necessarily funneling into the bodhisattvayana).
As you know, the Guhygarbha's statment, "Incorrect realization, partial realization, and not realizing perfectly," refers respectively to nonbuddhists, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and those who practice the common Mahāyāna.

However, in the Indian treatises, "ekayāna" means different things. For example, in the Lankāvatāra, ekayāna does not include all the other vehicles. "The One Vehicle" refers to Mahāyāna only because it has not been obtained in the past by others. It is stated that it is because of the karmic traces and knowledge obscuration śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have that the Buddha teaches three vehicles, and that the teaching of one vehicle is actually only for Mahāyānis. Given that the Lanka was set down quite some time later than the Saddharmapundarika, we can understand this as a response to it. Likewise, the Nirvana responds to the prediction of all sentient beings as capable of attaining Buddhahood in Saddharmapundarika with the notion of the icchantika, while at the same time promoting tathāgatagarbha, as contradictory as that may seem.
Very interesting! Thanks, Loppon!

I should add, that in Pali scriptures, ekayāna refers to the direct path.
florin
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by florin »

Queequeg wrote: Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:45 pm Can the Dharmakaya preach to an assembly of sentient beings? That's a serious question.
Not directly.
But will always do, at all times, through appropriate manifestations.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by DGA »

rory wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:57 am Of course this is what Malcolm et al. is about: the Lotus Sutra undermines suppositions of TB, ideas about everybody becoming a buddha, karmic transfer by Buddhas and Bodhisattvas :bow: , Jizo preaching in Hell to all beings, animals, insects all sentient beings being equal to humans goes against their school and I daresay their egos.
Returning to this ^^

How does the Lotus Sutra undermine any supposition of any school of Tibetan Buddhism? What aspect of the Lotus Sutra are you referring to? What supposition are you referring to? And how is any of this warranted to the topic at hand?

If anyone cares to follow me down this rabbit hole, consider the posts below as a starting point:

viewtopic.php?f=102&t=27263&start=20#p422334
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

DGA wrote: Mon Feb 05, 2018 3:13 pm
rory wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:57 am Of course this is what Malcolm et al. is about: the Lotus Sutra undermines suppositions of TB, ideas about everybody becoming a buddha, karmic transfer by Buddhas and Bodhisattvas :bow: , Jizo preaching in Hell to all beings, animals, insects all sentient beings being equal to humans goes against their school and I daresay their egos.
Returning to this ^^

How does the Lotus Sutra undermine any supposition of any school of Tibetan Buddhism? What aspect of the Lotus Sutra are you referring to? What supposition are you referring to? And how is any of this warranted to the topic at hand?

If anyone cares to follow me down this rabbit hole, consider the posts below as a starting point:

viewtopic.php?f=102&t=27263&start=20#p422334

Her statements is a misconception piled upon misconception.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by DGA »

Queequeg wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:28 am
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:28 pm

Bro... I don't even
Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Sorry, can't play along with the choices you present.
It seems to me that the Lotus Sutra and Chandrakirti are correct on this one. I think Zhiyi would take the same position; it would not be difficult for Tendai Daishi to answer this question.

Do you disagree with the premise that someone who enters the sravakayana is not able to (or will not inevitably) enter Mahayana and attain Buddhahood?
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14473
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Queequeg »

DGA wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:41 am
Queequeg wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:28 am
Malcolm wrote: Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:38 pm

Well, you cannot have it both ways. Either there is one vehicle, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is the same (Candrakīriti's point of view) or three, in which case the emptiness realized by śrāvaka arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and buddhas is not the same.

Which one is it?
Sorry, can't play along with the choices you present.
It seems to me that the Lotus Sutra and Chandrakirti are correct on this one. I think Zhiyi would take the same position; it would not be difficult for Tendai Daishi to answer this question.
Nope. Once again, Malcolm dictates the course of discussion instead of being interested in an actual discussion.

See p. 159
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=496

That diagram shows the relative levels of enlightenment of the Buddhas in the various teachings from the Tiantai perspective.

Ekayana in the Lotus means that even when the Buddha teaches the the three vehicles he is actually teaching the one Buddhayana. Those on the sravakayana are taught arhatship and are aiming for arhatship; pratyekabuddhayana are aiming for pratyekabuddhahood; bodhisattvayana are taught a particular ideal of Buddhahood culminating after 3 eons of practice and they aim for that particular conception of Buddhahood. The actual goal of the Ekayana is not known within these paths. The Buddha is preparing them all to receive the Buddhayana. The Buddhayana is inconceivable to anyone within the three vehicles, even the bodhisattvayana.
Do you disagree with the premise that someone who enters the sravakayana is not able to (or will not inevitably) enter Mahayana and attain Buddhahood?
Yes, I disagree. Even the Arhat, who rests in a phantom city for the time being, treads the Buddhayana, unbeknownst to her.
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,
marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by marting »

Queequeg wrote: Yes, I disagree. Even the Arhat, who rests in a phantom city for the time being, treads the Buddhayana, unbeknownst to her.
With that said, why did you answer:
Queequeg wrote:Pratyekabuddahood ≠ Buddhahood.
to the Nagarjuna quote?

Relatedly how does a pratyekabuddha arise without a Buddha given what you described above?
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14473
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Queequeg »

marting wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 4:58 am
Queequeg wrote: Yes, I disagree. Even the Arhat, who rests in a phantom city for the time being, treads the Buddhayana, unbeknownst to her.
With that said, why did you answer:
Queequeg wrote:Pratyekabuddahood ≠ Buddhahood.
to the Nagarjuna quote?

Relatedly how does a pratyekabuddha arise without a Buddha given what you described above?
You seem to misunderstand something I wrote but can't figure it out from your post.
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,
marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by marting »

I think I follow: that the three would not be treading the path of Buddhayana without the Buddha? Just wanted to double check.

With the ekayana perspective can the three paths arise without the Buddha?

(Maybe the hang-up is that I'm just trying to understand the subject better. I'm not arguing.)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14473
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Queequeg »

marting wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 5:30 am I think I follow: that the three would not be treading the path of Buddhayana without the Buddha? Just wanted to double check.

With the ekayana perspective can the three paths arise without the Buddha?

(Maybe the hang-up is that I'm just trying to understand the subject better. I'm not arguing.)
Right, the message of the Lotus seems to be that the Buddha teaches three paths to prepare beings for the Buddhayana. Without Buddha, there are no paths at all. Buddha is considered eternal, so the paths are eternal.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:21 am

Ekayana in the Lotus means that even when the Buddha teaches the the three vehicles he is actually teaching the one Buddhayana. Those on the sravakayana are taught arhatship and are aiming for arhatship; pratyekabuddhayana are aiming for pratyekabuddhahood; bodhisattvayana are taught a particular ideal of Buddhahood culminating after 3 eons of practice and they aim for that particular conception of Buddhahood. The actual goal of the Ekayana is not known within these paths. The Buddha is preparing them all to receive the Buddhayana. The Buddhayana is inconceivable to anyone within the three vehicles, even the bodhisattvayana.
That is a novel interpretation.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:12 pm
marting wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 5:30 am I think I follow: that the three would not be treading the path of Buddhayana without the Buddha? Just wanted to double check.

With the ekayana perspective can the three paths arise without the Buddha?

(Maybe the hang-up is that I'm just trying to understand the subject better. I'm not arguing.)
Right, the message of the Lotus seems to be that the Buddha teaches three paths to prepare beings for the Buddhayana.
I see, now you have retreated from your previous statement of certitude to "seems to be."
The Buddha is considered eternal, so the paths are eternal.
You are referring to the rūpakāya? If so, this is just not so. With respect to this assertion, the Buddha states in the PP in 100,000 lines:

If matter…is a phenomena that is permanent, stable, eternal and unchanging, this Mahāyāna Dharma would not be able to overwhelm the world with its devas, humans, asuras and gandharvas. Because matter…is a phenomena that is impermanent, unstable, transient and changing, this Mahāyāna Dharma is able to overwhelm the world with its devas, humans, asuras and gandharvas.


BTW, some Buddhas, like Sikhin, never ordain a monastic Sangha. So, just how are all paths eternal?
marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Monastic Tibetan Buddhists Fear Death More

Post by marting »

Queequeg wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:12 pm
marting wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2018 5:30 am I think I follow: that the three would not be treading the path of Buddhayana without the Buddha? Just wanted to double check.

With the ekayana perspective can the three paths arise without the Buddha?

(Maybe the hang-up is that I'm just trying to understand the subject better. I'm not arguing.)
Right, the message of the Lotus seems to be that the Buddha teaches three paths to prepare beings for the Buddhayana. Without Buddha, there are no paths at all. Buddha is considered eternal, so the paths are eternal.
Ah, thanks. What is your take on Nagarjuna and his quote from earlier:

"If the perfect buddha does not arise and the śrāvakas vanish,
even so, the wisdom of the pratyekabuddhas will arise without support"
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”