Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

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
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:03 am

Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:14 am
Yeah, those guys don't get it.

What I get from that is, Ziporyn should probably try and work with another word besides "identify". He goes and coins a few odd terms - local coherence, global incoherence, for instance.
No, he should eliminate this statement: "The Absolute, the whole of reality, is one and eternal, always the same and omnipresent."

This is a completely nonbuddhist POV. There is no "absolute," "no whole of reality," no "one," and there is nothing that is eternal.

"...each of these three—sense organ, object, this moment of consciousness—is itself the Absolute."

This statement is also faulty, for obvious reasons that I should not have to explain.

The "Buddhism" of this Ziporyn fellow is totally wrong view, 100%.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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

User avatar
Admin_PC
Site Admin
Posts: 4538
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:17 pm
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Admin_PC » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:22 am

I'm no Chinese translator, but i'm not even sure how they get that translation from 法界對法界起法界
If I were to take a stab at it: the Dharma realm facing the Dharma realm awakens to the Dharma realm.

法界 can be translated as Dharma realm, the experiential realm, or even the universe. I believe it's how the Chinese translated dharmadhātu.

對 can be reply/respond, or to face (Skt. adhisthita, adhimukha)

起 can have a number of translations:
- To awaken, to initiate, to begin, to arouse; arising, to start (Skt. pradur-bhāva; Tib. tshes 'gras). [Charles Muller; source(s): Nakamura, Soothill, Stephen Hodge]
- Appearance, occurrence, emergence, manifestation (Skt. utpāda, nirvrtti, saṃbhava). Pāli paccupaṭṭhāna. Exegetical term used to describe the manifestation of a state such as sati, kasiṇa, jhāna, upekkhā, buddhānussati, etc., T 1648.32.400c1, etc. [Charles Muller, Nyanatusita; source(s): Nakamura, Soothill, Stephen Hodge]
- Arising with...as condition. Dependent origination (Skt. samutpāda). [Charles Muller]

"the Absolute" is such a strange choice...
月影の いたらぬ里は なけれども 眺むる人の 心にぞすむ
法然上人

User avatar
rory
Posts: 1455
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by rory » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:33 am

or J. Stone "Original Enlightenment
Where Hua-yen develops a discourse of origination from the one pure mind (juan-chi lun, engi ron), T'ient-t'ai maintains that all dharmas manifest the true aspect of reality (shih-hsiang lun, jisso ron), or that the mind by nature is endowed with all dharmas
(hsing-chu-shuo, shogi setsu.)
p.9
gassho
Rory
Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/

PeterC
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by PeterC » Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:23 am

Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:22 am
I'm no Chinese translator, but i'm not even sure how they get that translation from 法界對法界起法界
If I were to take a stab at it: the Dharma realm facing the Dharma realm awakens to the Dharma realm.
Agree, it's selective quotation + poetic license = nonsense. But what really annoys me is that he doesn't provide a reference so that I can read the original in context. You would expect better from a Stanford professor.

You can only translate things like that within the context of the text, referring also to the contemporary commentaries and the common usage of the terms at the time. Which perhaps brings us back to the question of why/how to study ancient texts: slowly, from multiple angles, and with an understanding of the technical terms used and the choices made in interpreting them. Otherwise you risk thinking something expresses 'truth' because it sounds nice, when in fact all it expresses is confusion.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:06 am

PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:23 am
Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:22 am
I'm no Chinese translator, but i'm not even sure how they get that translation from 法界對法界起法界
If I were to take a stab at it: the Dharma realm facing the Dharma realm awakens to the Dharma realm.
Agree, it's selective quotation + poetic license = nonsense. But what really annoys me is that he doesn't provide a reference so that I can read the original in context. You would expect better from a Stanford professor.

You can only translate things like that within the context of the text, referring also to the contemporary commentaries and the common usage of the terms at the time. Which perhaps brings us back to the question of why/how to study ancient texts: slowly, from multiple angles, and with an understanding of the technical terms used and the choices made in interpreting them. Otherwise you risk thinking something expresses 'truth' because it sounds nice, when in fact all it expresses is confusion.
Having read the paper to which Garfield, et al, are responding, all I can say is that BZ”s apparent knowledge of Indian Buddhism is at best, superficial.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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

User avatar
Admin_PC
Site Admin
Posts: 4538
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:17 pm
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Admin_PC » Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 am

PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:23 am
But what really annoys me is that he doesn't provide a reference so that I can read the original in context.
Sorry, I'm not so good at CBETA. The SAT Daizokyo says the phrase only occurs in 4 texts:
摩訶止觀:1911 (智顗説) (0006b15-0011a13)
十不二門指要鈔:1928 (知禮述) (0705b01-0708a19)
四明尊者教行録:1937 (宗曉編) (0900b09-0900b21)
樂邦文類:1969A (宗曉編) (0203b24-0203c08)

As the first is the only one actually by Zhiyi, I would assume that's the reference, but that's not the full sentence in that reference. The full thing is actually:
佛法界對法界起法界無非佛法

Here's a hatchet job of some of it:
T1911_.46.0009a19: 一色一香無非中道。此擧中道爲言端。即
T1911_.46.0009a20: 中而邊。即非邊非不邊具足無減。勿守語 画像
T1911_.46.0009a21: 害圓誣罔聖意。若得此解。根塵一念心起。
T1911_.46.0009a22: 根即八萬四千法藏。塵亦爾。一念心起。亦
T1911_.46.0009a23: 八萬四千法藏。佛法界對法界起法界無
T1911_.46.0009a24: 非佛法。生死即涅槃是名苦諦。一塵有三
T1911_.46.0009a25: 塵。一心有三心。一一塵有八萬四千塵勞
T1911_.46.0009a26: 門。一一心亦如是。貪瞋癡亦即是菩提。煩惱
T1911_.46.0009a27: 亦即是菩提。是名集諦。翻一一塵勞門。即
T1911_.46.0009a28: 是八萬四千諸三昧門。亦是八萬四千諸陀
T1911_.46.0009a29: 羅尼門。亦是八萬四千諸對治門。亦成八萬
T1911_.46.0009b01: 四千諸波羅蜜。無明轉即變爲明。如融氷成水。
月影の いたらぬ里は なけれども 眺むる人の 心にぞすむ
法然上人

PeterC
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by PeterC » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:57 am

Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 am
PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:23 am
But what really annoys me is that he doesn't provide a reference so that I can read the original in context.
Sorry, I'm not so good at CBETA. The SAT Daizokyo says the phrase only occurs in 4 texts:
摩訶止觀:1911 (智顗説) (0006b15-0011a13)
十不二門指要鈔:1928 (知禮述) (0705b01-0708a19)
四明尊者教行録:1937 (宗曉編) (0900b09-0900b21)
樂邦文類:1969A (宗曉編) (0203b24-0203c08)

As the first is the only one actually by Zhiyi, I would assume that's the reference, but that's not the full sentence in that reference. The full thing is actually:
佛法界對法界起法界無非佛法

Here's a hatchet job of some of it:
T1911_.46.0009a19: 一色一香無非中道。此擧中道爲言端。即
T1911_.46.0009a20: 中而邊。即非邊非不邊具足無減。勿守語 画像
T1911_.46.0009a21: 害圓誣罔聖意。若得此解。根塵一念心起。
T1911_.46.0009a22: 根即八萬四千法藏。塵亦爾。一念心起。亦
T1911_.46.0009a23: 八萬四千法藏。佛法界對法界起法界無
T1911_.46.0009a24: 非佛法。生死即涅槃是名苦諦。一塵有三
T1911_.46.0009a25: 塵。一心有三心。一一塵有八萬四千塵勞
T1911_.46.0009a26: 門。一一心亦如是。貪瞋癡亦即是菩提。煩惱
T1911_.46.0009a27: 亦即是菩提。是名集諦。翻一一塵勞門。即
T1911_.46.0009a28: 是八萬四千諸三昧門。亦是八萬四千諸陀
T1911_.46.0009a29: 羅尼門。亦是八萬四千諸對治門。亦成八萬
T1911_.46.0009b01: 四千諸波羅蜜。無明轉即變爲明。如融氷成水。
Thank you - very much appreciated. I did a double-take reading that passage - what he's done is worse than selective selective quotation. I'm not too familiar with Zhiyi - should 佛法界 be read as a contraction of 佛法及佛界? But regardless, he's clearly changing the meaning by cutting off the 佛 to turn it into dharmadhatu and then cutting off the "...无非佛法" that ends the line.

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7091
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Astus » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:42 am

PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:57 am
Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 am
The SAT Daizokyo says the phrase only occurs in 4 texts:
what he's done is worse than selective selective quotation.
Quoting only the section 法界對法界起法界 is not Ziporyn's idea, but Zhili's (see: T46n1928p706c11-12). Ziporyn discusses the passage in his review of Swanson's translation on p 20.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With 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"

PeterC
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by PeterC » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:54 am

Astus wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:42 am
PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:57 am
Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 am
The SAT Daizokyo says the phrase only occurs in 4 texts:
what he's done is worse than selective selective quotation.
Quoting only the section 法界對法界起法界 is not Ziporyn's idea, but Zhili's (see: T46n1928p706c11-12). Ziporyn discusses the passage in his review of Swanson's translation on p 20.
Thanks. 常坐 is the chapter title from 摩诃止观?

Would you consider Ziporyn's discussion of that phrase in the review to be a fair representative of conventional reading of it?

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7091
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Astus » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:05 am

PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:54 am
常坐 is the chapter title from 摩诃止观?
Yes, the section about "constant sitting".
Would you consider Ziporyn's discussion of that phrase in the review to be a fair representative of conventional reading of it?
I am not familiar enough with Tiantai to judge.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With 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"

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by DGA » Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:02 pm

Back to the OP for a moment.

1) The Lotus Sutra, the Avatamsaka Sutra, and the Prajnaparamita Sutras share the same worldview: Mahayana Buddhism. They may cover different sub-topics, like different chapters in a very large textbook, but they do not present fundamentally different perspectives.

2) The references made Ziporyn's view of TienTai and one of the early pages of Stone's book on "original enlightenment" are basically irrelevant when coming to grips with those sutras. There's not much use in getting this far out in the weeds here: sutras => philosophical systems => contemporary academic discussion on those philosophical systems.

Prove me wrong.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:58 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:02 pm
Back to the OP for a moment.

1) The Lotus Sutra, the Avatamsaka Sutra, and the Prajnaparamita Sutras share the same worldview: Mahayana Buddhism. They may cover different sub-topics, like different chapters in a very large textbook, but they do not present fundamentally different perspectives.
Indeed, as the Lankāvatara Sūtra states:
The entire Mahāyāna is included in
five characteristics, natures,
eight consciousnesses,
and two kinds of absence of identity.
The "five characteristics" refers to the the way one analyzes the three natures. So, the five characteristics are name, sign, concept, correct knowledge, and suchness. Name in turn refers to the imputed nature; sign and concept refer to the dependent nature; and correct knowledge and suchness refer to the perfected nature.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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: 9423
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by DGA » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:08 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:02 pm
Back to the OP for a moment.

1) The Lotus Sutra, the Avatamsaka Sutra, and the Prajnaparamita Sutras share the same worldview: Mahayana Buddhism. They may cover different sub-topics, like different chapters in a very large textbook, but they do not present fundamentally different perspectives.

2) The references made Ziporyn's view of TienTai and one of the early pages of Stone's book on "original enlightenment" are basically irrelevant when coming to grips with those sutras. There's not much use in getting this far out in the weeds here: sutras => philosophical systems => contemporary academic discussion on those philosophical systems.

Prove me wrong.
Related:

Suppose you are a lay practitioner, and your objective is to understand the Lotus Sutra.

Are you well served by reading the sutra in a high-quality translation, including the footnotes and introduction?

Would your time be better spent if, instead of reading the sutra, you dove headlong into TienTai philosophy?

Would your time be even better spent if, instead of diving headlong into TienTai philosophy before reading the sutra in a high-quality translation, you fart around with the academic casseroles of J. Stone and B. Ziporyn for a while?

I think the answers are yes, no, and oh hell no.

If your objective is to understand TienTai philosophy, then read that.

If your objective is to understand Jacqueline Stone, then read Jacqueline Stone. But don't expect others to accept the premise that reading the first sixty pages or so of Stone's book on Original Enlightenment is the same as reading the sutra or the TienTai treatises.

(Similarly for the Avatamsaka and Prajnaparamita)

:coffee:

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:29 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:08 pm
DGA wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:02 pm
Back to the OP for a moment.

1) The Lotus Sutra, the Avatamsaka Sutra, and the Prajnaparamita Sutras share the same worldview: Mahayana Buddhism. They may cover different sub-topics, like different chapters in a very large textbook, but they do not present fundamentally different perspectives.

2) The references made Ziporyn's view of TienTai and one of the early pages of Stone's book on "original enlightenment" are basically irrelevant when coming to grips with those sutras. There's not much use in getting this far out in the weeds here: sutras => philosophical systems => contemporary academic discussion on those philosophical systems.

Prove me wrong.
Related:

Suppose you are a lay practitioner, and your objective is to understand the Lotus Sutra.

Are you well served by reading the sutra in a high-quality translation, including the footnotes and introduction?

Would your time be better spent if, instead of reading the sutra, you dove headlong into TienTai philosophy?

Would your time be even better spent if, instead of diving headlong into TienTai philosophy before reading the sutra in a high-quality translation, you fart around with the academic casseroles of J. Stone and B. Ziporyn for a while?

I think the answers are yes, no, and oh hell no.

If your objective is to understand TienTai philosophy, then read that.

If your objective is to understand Jacqueline Stone, then read Jacqueline Stone. But don't expect others to accept the premise that reading the first sixty pages or so of Stone's book on Original Enlightenment is the same as reading the sutra or the TienTai treatises.

(Similarly for the Avatamsaka and Prajnaparamita)

:coffee:
:good:
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6459
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Queequeg » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:42 pm

Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:22 am
I'm no Chinese translator, but i'm not even sure how they get that translation from 法界對法界起法界
If I were to take a stab at it: the Dharma realm facing the Dharma realm awakens to the Dharma realm.

法界 can be translated as Dharma realm, the experiential realm, or even the universe. I believe it's how the Chinese translated dharmadhātu.

對 can be reply/respond, or to face (Skt. adhisthita, adhimukha)

起 can have a number of translations:
- To awaken, to initiate, to begin, to arouse; arising, to start (Skt. pradur-bhāva; Tib. tshes 'gras). [Charles Muller; source(s): Nakamura, Soothill, Stephen Hodge]
- Appearance, occurrence, emergence, manifestation (Skt. utpāda, nirvrtti, saṃbhava). Pāli paccupaṭṭhāna. Exegetical term used to describe the manifestation of a state such as sati, kasiṇa, jhāna, upekkhā, buddhānussati, etc., T 1648.32.400c1, etc. [Charles Muller, Nyanatusita; source(s): Nakamura, Soothill, Stephen Hodge]
- Arising with...as condition. Dependent origination (Skt. samutpāda). [Charles Muller]

"the Absolute" is such a strange choice...
Note where that passage is quoted from. Its a Western oriented philosophy reference. What significance would dharmadhatu have to a Western philosopher?

I can see the shortcomings in "absolute". What would be a simple way to translate dharmadhatu for non-Buddhist specialist?
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6459
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Queequeg » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:56 pm

This is how Swanson translates that phrase - bolded below, along with the context of this section:
It is also said [in the introduction to the Mo-ho chih-kuan], “there is not a single color or scent that is not the Middle Way.” This is stated from the perspective of the Middle Way, but [ultimately] there are both the Middle and the extremes, and there are neither extremes nor a lack of extremes—thus [the threefold truth of the perfect integration of emptiness, conventionality, and the Middle] is complete and unrestricted. One should not cling to words and thus tarnish the Perfect [Teaching] and falsify this noble meaning.

If one is able to understand this [meaning], [then one will know that] when a single thought-moment [based on] sense organs and sense objects arises in the mind, the sense organs [each at least potentially contains] a myriad aspects of true reality and it is the same for the sense objects. When a single thought moment arises in the mind, it also [contains] a myriad aspects of true reality. The encounter of the dharma realm of the Buddha [= sense organs] and the dharma realm [= sense objects] gives rise to the dharma realm [of the mind: consciousness]; there is nothing that is not the Buddha Dharma.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6459
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Queequeg » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:58 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:03 am
Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:14 am
Yeah, those guys don't get it.

What I get from that is, Ziporyn should probably try and work with another word besides "identify". He goes and coins a few odd terms - local coherence, global incoherence, for instance.
No, he should eliminate this statement: "The Absolute, the whole of reality, is one and eternal, always the same and omnipresent."

This is a completely nonbuddhist POV. There is no "absolute," "no whole of reality," no "one," and there is nothing that is eternal.

"...each of these three—sense organ, object, this moment of consciousness—is itself the Absolute."

This statement is also faulty, for obvious reasons that I should not have to explain.

The "Buddhism" of this Ziporyn fellow is totally wrong view, 100%.
That statement is qualified immediately after the sentence you selectively quoted.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:01 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:42 pm

Note where that passage is quoted from. Its a Western oriented philosophy reference. What significance would dharmadhatu have to a Western philosopher?

I can see the shortcomings in "absolute". What would be a simple way to translate dharmadhatu for non-Buddhist specialist?
Literally the term means "source of phenomena."
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28709
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Malcolm » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:02 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:58 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:03 am
Queequeg wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:14 am


Yeah, those guys don't get it.

What I get from that is, Ziporyn should probably try and work with another word besides "identify". He goes and coins a few odd terms - local coherence, global incoherence, for instance.
No, he should eliminate this statement: "The Absolute, the whole of reality, is one and eternal, always the same and omnipresent."

This is a completely nonbuddhist POV. There is no "absolute," "no whole of reality," no "one," and there is nothing that is eternal.

"...each of these three—sense organ, object, this moment of consciousness—is itself the Absolute."

This statement is also faulty, for obvious reasons that I should not have to explain.

The "Buddhism" of this Ziporyn fellow is totally wrong view, 100%.
That statement is qualified immediately after the sentence you selectively quoted.
Yeah, his qualification does not hold. His thinking is absolutely sloppy and incoherent. He should really lay off the Taoism.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

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

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6459
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Lotus Vs wisdom Vs flower garland sutra worldview?

Post by Queequeg » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:03 pm

PeterC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:23 am
Admin_PC wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:22 am
I'm no Chinese translator, but i'm not even sure how they get that translation from 法界對法界起法界
If I were to take a stab at it: the Dharma realm facing the Dharma realm awakens to the Dharma realm.
Agree, it's selective quotation + poetic license = nonsense. But what really annoys me is that he doesn't provide a reference so that I can read the original in context. You would expect better from a Stanford professor.
U. Chicago.

It is a quote from on online Philosophy resource. Often those articles are limited by guidelines from the editors. In the spirit of readability and wide appeal, the editors likely proscribed extensive citations. We'd need to see the guidelines to determine who's at fault for not providing a citation.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests