Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

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.
smcj
Posts: 6677
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by smcj » Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:22 pm

muni wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:19 pm
Buddhahood being able to express itself as anything whatsoever
Here is no atman, no object by subject, still all is inclusive.
Ok, so are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?
https://soundcloud.com/user-730689343/chenrezig-puja
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)

muni
Posts: 4851
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by muni » Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:27 pm

smcj wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:22 pm
muni wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:19 pm
Buddhahood being able to express itself as anything whatsoever
Here is no atman, no object by subject, still all is inclusive.
Ok, so are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?
I agree. In the continuity is neither atman. There is nowhere atman other than in misunderstanding.

In the sentence you wrote is awareness-creativity expressed.
The nature of just what is, in all things, is undifferentiated.
When purified, it is the nature of the tathagata.
Therefore all living beings possess that nucleus.

The fortress of the spacious and timeless expanse has no division into
higher or lower or in between.

smcj
Posts: 6677
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by smcj » Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:34 pm

muni wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:27 pm
smcj wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:22 pm
muni wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:19 pm


Here is no atman, no object by subject, still all is inclusive.
Ok, so are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?
I agree. In the continuity is neither atman. There is nowhere atman other than in misunderstanding.

In the sentence you wrote is awareness-creativity expressed.
:thumbsup:
https://soundcloud.com/user-730689343/chenrezig-puja
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 3646
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by LastLegend » Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:45 pm

muni wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 2:38 pm
smcj wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 2:15 pm
So I don't agree that the tathagatagarbha teachings are 'ātman in disguise'.
The Advaita heresy has two major components, Atman and Brahman.

My current understanding is that there are interpretations of Buddha Nature that mimic Brahman, but without the idea of Atman. The objection to Atman is that Buddhism does not agree that there is anything about the individual that is unchanging in the sense of being both manifest and inert. There is, however, continuity. and in that sense something unchanging. If there was something inert about the individual, ultimately it would be an impediment or limitation to resulting Buddhahood being able to express itself as anything whatsoever.

The Brahman issue is different.

Anyway that’s my current understanding.YMMV.
https://books.google.be/books?id=vJVDCU ... nd&f=false

Nondual awareness = there is no atman. While misunderstanding happens by "atman". There is no advaita object-perception other than by atman.
This is difficult for me. The very recognition of non-dual awareness isn’t it because that’s distinction and duality itself.
Make personal vows.

Simon E.
Posts: 7204
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by Simon E. » Fri Nov 29, 2019 7:49 pm

frak me. It’s like a excerpt from Waiting For Godot... :lol:
“The difference between us and Tara is that she knows she doesn’t exist”.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 10435
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Fri Nov 29, 2019 8:56 pm

To paraphrase: It is empty of creation, cessation or existence, for that matter, multiplicity or unity, but it’s luminosity is unimpeded.
"...if you think about how many hours, months and years of your life you've spent looking at things, being fascinated by things that have now passed away, then how wonderful to spend even five minutes looking into the nature of your own mind."

-James Low

User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 4930
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by Wayfarer » Sat Nov 30, 2019 3:37 am

Here is the publisher's page for Sallie B. King's book, Buddha Nature. The jacket copy reads as follows.
This volume presents the first book-length study in English of the concept of Buddha nature as discussed in the Buddha Nature Treatise (Fo Xing Lun), attributed to Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Paramartha in the sixth century. The author provides a detailed discussion of one of the most important concepts in East Asian Buddhism, a topic little addressed in Western studies of Buddhism until now, and places the Buddha nature concept in the context of Buddhist intellectual history. King then carefully explains the traditional Buddhist language in the text, and embeds Buddha nature in a family of concepts and values which as a group are foundational to the development of the major indigenous schools of Chinese Buddhism. In addition, she refutes the accusations that the idea of Buddha nature introduces a crypto-Atman into Buddhist thought, and that it represents a form of monism akin to the Brahmanism of the Upanisads. In doing this, King defends Buddha nature in terms of purely Buddhist philosophical principles. Finally, the author engages the Buddha nature concept in dialogue with Western philosophy by asking what it teaches us about what a human being, or person, is.
Bolds added. I recommend this book to anyone interested in Buddha Nature teachings, and it's still in print. I have just ordered a copy from Windhorse Books for only $29.95.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi

smcj
Posts: 6677
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by smcj » Sat Nov 30, 2019 4:38 am

In addition, she refutes the accusations that the idea of Buddha nature introduces a crypto-Atman into Buddhist thought, and that it represents a form of monism akin to the Brahmanism of the Upanisads...
...because that would be heretical!
In doing this, King defends Buddha nature in terms of purely Buddhist philosophical principles.
With an emphasis on “pure” I suppose, presumably meaning the emptiness teachings of the Second Turning of the Wheel.
*****
I don’t think the Advaita heresy was much of a boogeyman to people that had never met a Hindu. Just my guess though.
https://soundcloud.com/user-730689343/chenrezig-puja
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)

ItsRaining
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by ItsRaining » Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:19 am

No one seems to understand the meaning of "One Mind" as used by East Asian Buddhist schools, it does not refer to any universal consciousness, it's simply the pure mind or the Buddha Mind. Chandrakirti and the madhyamka's never refuted it since they've never even encountered the doctrine.
Of all dharmas whether true, false, tainted or pure their non-dual nature is termed "one", in this place of not two-ness it is not the same as empty space as the nature of it naturally has spiritual understanding it is known as "mind".

Just like the one/first (same word in Chinese) truth of the middle way is not of the two extremes is termed "middle", it is the true nature of all phenomena, equally spread in both sages and ordinary people, sentient and insentient, hence it is known as one. Also, it can be called unequaled as it is unsurpassed hence it is known as one/first, thus tall dharmas are the sucheness one mind.
-Yongming Yanshou in the Zongjing Lu

It's clear "One" simply refers to the mind's non-dual nature in other words the empty nature or true nature or middleway rather than they way many people are interpreting it here.

ItsRaining
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by ItsRaining » Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:23 am

Dgj wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 7:23 am
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:12 am
Dgj wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:21 am


Thanks.

Well Huangbo literally stated this and so have many other Mahayana teachers.

"All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists."

-Huangbo
I’m not familiar with Huangbo, but I’m guessing that this statement means something different from what you might think it means. As Astus mentions....it’s not a statement about some universal consciousness, etc. likely.
Well this is not Huangbo exactly, but the debating Yogacara adherents in this work argue that mind exists and all is mind, and Chandrakirti argues that this is incorrect. This is nearly the same issue, but without the "One" part. So I don't believe authors that spoke about Mind like that were always using it to mean something else. Sometimes they were meaning what the words mean and imply. For example: all is mind, nothing else exists.

This of course implies mind exists, otherwise the sentence has no meaning. I don't think they were always coded messages which mean completely other than what they literally say, but only to an initiate who knows all the background and how to define the words outside their normal use.

This attitude seems to be the result of synthesis of schools and so is not incorrect per se, but may not always be exactly what the authors actually meant, but rather what later interpreters synthesized from multiple schools of thought and adapted to fit this perspective.

Fenner, Peter G. (1983). "Chandrakīrti's refutation of Buddhist idealism." Philosophy East and West Volume 33, no.3 (July 1983) University of Hawaii Press. P.251.
Huangbo accepts neither Yogacara nor Madhyamaka. Orthodox Yogacarins were primary opponents to the "One Mind" teachings of the Huayan and the Tiantai schools dominant in China as both schools (Huayan, Tiantai) did not accept the ultimate existence of the consciousness (dependent nature) as the Yogacarins did.

User avatar
SonamTashi
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by SonamTashi » Sat Nov 30, 2019 9:30 am

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Nov 29, 2019 7:49 pm
frak me. It’s like a excerpt from Waiting For Godot... :lol:
This is off topic, but the latest episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia is called Waiting For Big Moe, and it is heavily inspired by Waiting For Godot. I recommend watching it (although much of Sunny's humor requires familiarity with the characters); it's hilarious.
:bow: :buddha1: :bow: :anjali: :meditate:

Simon E.
Posts: 7204
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by Simon E. » Sat Nov 30, 2019 10:47 am

Unfortunately I’m not sure that any U.K. channels carry it.. :smile:
“The difference between us and Tara is that she knows she doesn’t exist”.

illarraza
Posts: 743
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Are there any schools of Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism that do not ascribe to the view that all is one mind?

Post by illarraza » Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:06 am

The Nichiren Lotus Sutra school has this to say:

"The essence of the sutras preached before the Lotus Sutra is that all phenomena arise from the mind. To illustrate, they say that the mind is like the great earth, while the grasses and trees are like all phenomena. But it is not so with the Lotus Sutra. It teaches that the mind itself is the great earth, and that the great earth itself is the grasses and trees. The meaning of the earlier sutras is that clarity of mind is like the moon, and that purity of mind is like a flower. But it is not so with the Lotus Sutra. It is the teaching that the moon itself is mind, and the flower itself is mind. You should realize from this that polished rice is not polished rice; it is life itself." -- The Gift of Rice by Nichiren

Mark

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dhammanando and 75 guests