Are you intimate enough with Nichiren buddhism to understand how those schools are incorporated into Nichiren's teachings? They do not exists in ignorance of that division.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 05, 2020 3:46 pm One should make a distinction between practice traditions, like Sakya, Nyingma, Gelug, Kagyu, Nichiren Buddhism, Chan, Soto Zen, Tendai, Shingon, Pure Land, and Hua Yen on the one hand; and the two main philosophical traditions in Mahāyāna, yogacāra and madhyamaka.
The buddha of that sutra, recorded in that time and place, according to the capacities, causes and conditions. Golden? yes! Contradiction to Nichiren? Open to interpretation (I can unpack this but would rather let it remain subjective). Denial of the Teachings of Nichiren? No! They where written outside of that knowledge.The Buddha categorically denies there are three truths in the Meeeting of the Father and Sun Sūtra, which I have already presented above, and that takes care of the citation portion of my argument.
Now, the reasoning portion: the idea that there are three truths, rather than two, also does not stand up to reasoning. Why? Truths are objects of cognitions. Cognitions are either veridical or nonveridical. Thus a relative truth is the object of a false cognition and an ultimate truth is an object of a veridical cognition. Since there are no objects of cognitions that are simultaneously false and veridical at one and the same time, a third truth does not exist.
If you think the three vs two truth model deserves debate I feel it would be best in a new thread.
How do we exists as beings on a planet IN a solar system that resides IN galaxy that exists IN a universe.How does this "absolute" space exist, and how can relative things exist within it? Is this absolute space compounded or uncompounded. If it is compounded, it is not absolute; and if it is uncompounded, compounded entities, relative phenomena, cannot exist within it.
Better yet, How did the absolute exist for the world honored one before he sought enlightenment? Was the Brahma realm the "ultimate" truth" or was it better boundless empty compassionate equanimity discovered thereafter?
Not to argue you the instructions you follow are wrong, they just don't invalidate these. Hard to grasp? sure.
Yet the compounding of phenomenon and impermanence do not deny the rising and setting of the sun. Birth and death. Suffering and Nirvana. Or the nature of consciousness in regards to sentient beings. Seems there are some constants within which buddhism is practiced and liberation experienced. If you look hard enough one can see the very influence of them since the potential buddha nature is one of them.If this greater reality has parts, which you imply through your statement, it cannot be anything other than a compounded phenomena. But your assertion is baseless, it is similar to theistic arguments for the existence of god. If this constant is compounded, then it cannot sustain all phenomena, since it must rely on a cause. If this constant is uncompounded, it cannot be a cause, since it should produce all its effects at one and the same time, since an uncompounded entity that produces effects over time is impossible, being compounded.
The absolute conscious is our conscious sans self marked by purity, boundlessness, equanimity and compassion. The state that, if I understand it correctly, the prayer of Kuntuzangpo mentions. The single "ground".Where are you getting this "absolute consciousness" from? There is no such thing as an absolute consciousness in the teachings of the Buddha. There is such a thing as an absolute consciousness in the Vedanta teachings of the Hindus, but we are not Hindus.
I assumed since you contested it you where intimate with it from contemplation. Am I wrong to do so?You certainly have not described how. You have not even mapped out the three truths you propose.
I like how you assume there is no fault in your comprehension. I gladly prostrate myself as an inferior on all levels.Sorry, but this is incoherent.
It seems you draw the line in whose teachings you choose to honor as Buddhist or not. As Nichiren says, earthly desires are enlightenment so it would seem it proves to be.Well, I draw the line in the sand where the Buddha states unequivocally there is no third truth. That is not at all hard to understand. I follow what the Buddha teaches, first and foremost. YMMV.