The role of truth in Buddhism?

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
tkp67
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 »

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.
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.
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.
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.

If you think the three vs two truth model deserves debate I feel it would be best in a new thread.
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.
How do we exists as beings on a planet IN a solar system that resides IN galaxy that exists IN a universe.

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.

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.
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.
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.
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".
You certainly have not described how. You have not even mapped out the three truths you propose.
I assumed since you contested it you where intimate with it from contemplation. Am I wrong to do so?
Sorry, but this is incoherent.
I like how you assume there is no fault in your comprehension. I gladly prostrate myself as an inferior on all levels.
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.
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.
User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín »

tkp67 wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:17 pm
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.
Are you intimate enough with Nichiren buddhism to understand how those schools are incorporated into Nichiren's teachings?
Well, are they though? I'm not saying yes or no, but Ven Nichiren also states that the practice of the six perfections is incorporated into the chanting of the "myō" syllable in myōhō. Is it?

Venerable Zhiyi (I believe this comes from Ven Zhiyi, not Ven Nichiren) mistook the sad in saddharmapuṇḍarīkaḥ for the ṣaḍ in ṣaḍpāramitāḥ (i.e. wondrous/mystical vs six). We can't blame Ven Zhiyi for bad Sanskrit though, because he couldn't read Sanskrit at all AFAIK. Does this impact, in any way, whether or not the six perfections are incorporated into the chanting of the "myō" syllable in myōhō?

Open questions for all. Nothing forthcoming from me.
savi saghara aṇica di, savi saghara dukha di, savi dhama aṇatva di:
yada paśadi cakhkṣuma tada nivinadi dukha eṣo mago viśodhia.

"All formations are inconstant," he said.
"All formations are stressful," he said.
"All phenomena are selfless," he said.
When one sees this, one becomes adverse to stress, and this is the path of purity.

(Gāndhārī Dharmapada fragments)
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

tkp67 wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:17 pm
How do we exists as beings on a planet IN a solar system that resides IN galaxy that exists IN a universe.
Universes are not absolute spaces.



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?
This is the root of your problem. You think there is an absolute that exists.

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.
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.
The only constants in Buddhadharma are impermanence, suffering, and nonself.

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.
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".
Yes, you don't understand that text. That single basis or single ground is the all-basis: a conditioned, impure consciousness, the nature of which is ignorance.

You certainly have not described how. You have not even mapped out the three truths you propose.
I assumed since you contested it you where intimate with it from contemplation. Am I wrong to do so?
I am familiar with Zhiyi's writings on the subject. Just because I know what Zhiyi writes, does not mean that you have comprehended it. Hence, my request for you to explicate them.


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.
That statement by Nicherin has a canonical basis in Mahāyāna sūtras, so I don't see anyting wrong with it, per se. But the question here is not what Nichiren understands, it is what you understand.
User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:07 pm Universes are not absolute spaces.
But is space absolute? :spy: :jawdrop: :sage:

Forgive the frivolity, I couldn't resist.
savi saghara aṇica di, savi saghara dukha di, savi dhama aṇatva di:
yada paśadi cakhkṣuma tada nivinadi dukha eṣo mago viśodhia.

"All formations are inconstant," he said.
"All formations are stressful," he said.
"All phenomena are selfless," he said.
When one sees this, one becomes adverse to stress, and this is the path of purity.

(Gāndhārī Dharmapada fragments)
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

Caoimhghín wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:12 pm
Malcolm wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:07 pm Universes are not absolute spaces.
But is space absolute? :spy: :jawdrop: :sage:

Forgive the frivolity, I couldn't resist.
No, space is just uncompounded, but it is not an ultimate truth since there is extension, and thus space has parts. See Āryadeva.
User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 11028
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg »

Caoimhghín wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 8:26 pm Venerable Zhiyi (I believe this comes from Ven Zhiyi, not Ven Nichiren) mistook the sad in saddharmapuṇḍarīkaḥ for the ṣaḍ in ṣaḍpāramitāḥ (i.e. wondrous/mystical vs six).
Where do you get this stuff?
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
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín »

I believe that was from Clear Serenity, Quiet Insight, but it actually might have been one of Ven Nichiren's goshos and I'm incorrectly attributing it back to Ven Zhiyi.

EDIT: why did I ever think it was in Clear Serenity, Quiet Insight? I have no clue.

Either way, the idea that myō has the six perfections in it is predicated on the similarity of the words "sad" and "ṣaḍ," or at least that is how it explained on a surface level, but you'll have to forgive me while I try to remember where/when more precisely this explanation comes into vogue and where I first read it.
Last edited by Caoimhghín on Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
savi saghara aṇica di, savi saghara dukha di, savi dhama aṇatva di:
yada paśadi cakhkṣuma tada nivinadi dukha eṣo mago viśodhia.

"All formations are inconstant," he said.
"All formations are stressful," he said.
"All phenomena are selfless," he said.
When one sees this, one becomes adverse to stress, and this is the path of purity.

(Gāndhārī Dharmapada fragments)
User avatar
rory
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by rory »

This is removed from practice, but read Brook Ziporyn's H-net book review of Paul Swanson's translation of Zhiyi's great work Maka Shikan,Mohe Zhiguan Clear Serenity; Quiet Insight Below is an extract:
This way of reading the section shows us all the more how right Zhanran was to think that this is what is truly distinctive to the Tiantai exposition, particularly when viewed in light of the manner in which it is subsequently and separately joined to the demonstration in the following Emptiness section—where the same results are derived from the other direction, from Emptiness to Conventionality: Emptiness itself, considered alone, renders the full panoply of Conventionally definite entities (via the four siddhāntas)—and then how this relation between the Conventional and Emptiness is subsequently and separately what is invoked in the Middle section, in the form of a re-evocation and expansion of both sides and the second-order relation of undecidable reversibility between these two, which is what is meant by their mutual identity: annulling the separation only on the basis of having first posited it, and also preserving it in the indecidability of the result. It is in the Middle section that Zhiyi gives us, as Swanson correctly points out, the application of the usual third step to the exposition: in this case, showing that the two opposite Inconceivabilities of the prior two sections (i.e., from Conventionality to Emptiness and from Emptiness to Conventionality) are themselves reversible, are identical-as-different, another Mobius strip, introducing a new level of Inconceivability.
https://networks.h-net.org/node/6060/re ... %80%99s-mo
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/
User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín »

It looks like it was Ven Nichiren after all:
The passage indicates that they requested to hear a doctrine such as they had not heard in the previous more than forty years, one that differed from the four flavors and the three teachings. With regard to the part “[they] wish to hear the teaching of perfect endowment,” it may be noted that the Nirvana Sutra states, “Sad indicates perfect endowment.” The Profound Meaning of the Four Mahayana Treatises states, “Sad connotes six. In India the number six implies perfect endowment.” In his commentary Chi-tsang writes, “Sad is translated as perfect endowment.” In the eighth volume of his Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra T’ien-t’ai remarks, “Sad is a Sanskrit word, which is translated as myō, or wonderful.” Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna, in the heart of his thousand-volume Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom, comments, “Sad signifies six.” Nāgārjuna was thirteenth in the lineage of the Buddha’s successors, the founder of the True Word, Flower Garland, and the other schools, a great sage of the first stage of development, and the person whose true identity was the Thus Come One Dharma Clouds Freedom King.
(WND I: 30)

This pops up again:
Question: You have not yet fully answered my question about the Ten Worlds, Buddhahood in particular, being inherent in the human world.

Answer: The Immeasurable Meanings Sutra states, “Although they have not yet been able to practice the six pāramitās, the six pāramitās will of themselves appear before them.” The Lotus Sutra says, “All wish to hear the teaching of perfect endowment.” The Nirvana Sutra states, “Sad indicates perfect endowment.” Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna comments, “Sad signifies six.” The Profound Meaning of the Four Mahayana Treatises states, “Sad connotes six. In India the number six implies perfect endowment.” In his commentary Chi-tsang writes, “Sad is translated as perfect endowment.” The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai remarks, “Sad is a Sanskrit word, which is translated as myō, or wonderful.” If I add my own interpretation, it will be as if I had profaned these passages, but in essence they mean that Shakyamuni’s practices and the virtues he consequently attained are all contained within the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo. If we believe in these five characters, we will naturally be granted the same benefits as he was.
(WND I: 39)

To be fair, if anyone can be said to be someone he might have inherited this misunderstanding from, it would likely be Venerable Hui-chün, who wrote the śāstra Ven Nichiren identifies as 大乗四論玄義, the "Profound Meaning of the Four Mahayana Treatises," which seems to be quite an obscure text in English.

This is all somewhat secondary to whether or not the practice of the six perfections can be found within or not be found within the Daimoku.
Last edited by Caoimhghín on Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:53 pm, edited 4 times in total.
savi saghara aṇica di, savi saghara dukha di, savi dhama aṇatva di:
yada paśadi cakhkṣuma tada nivinadi dukha eṣo mago viśodhia.

"All formations are inconstant," he said.
"All formations are stressful," he said.
"All phenomena are selfless," he said.
When one sees this, one becomes adverse to stress, and this is the path of purity.

(Gāndhārī Dharmapada fragments)
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

rory wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:38 pm This is removed from practice, but read Brook Ziporyn's H-net book review of Paul Swanson's translation of Zhiyi's great work Maka Shikan,Mohe Zhiguan Clear Serenity; Quiet Insight Below is an extract:
This way of reading the section shows us all the more how right Zhanran was to think that this is what is truly distinctive to the Tiantai exposition, particularly when viewed in light of the manner in which it is subsequently and separately joined to the demonstration in the following Emptiness section—where the same results are derived from the other direction, from Emptiness to Conventionality: Emptiness itself, considered alone, renders the full panoply of Conventionally definite entities (via the four siddhāntas)—and then how this relation between the Conventional and Emptiness is subsequently and separately what is invoked in the Middle section, in the form of a re-evocation and expansion of both sides and the second-order relation of undecidable reversibility between these two, which is what is meant by their mutual identity: annulling the separation only on the basis of having first posited it, and also preserving it in the indecidability of the result. It is in the Middle section that Zhiyi gives us, as Swanson correctly points out, the application of the usual third step to the exposition: in this case, showing that the two opposite Inconceivabilities of the prior two sections (i.e., from Conventionality to Emptiness and from Emptiness to Conventionality) are themselves reversible, are identical-as-different, another Mobius strip, introducing a new level of Inconceivability.
https://networks.h-net.org/node/6060/re ... %80%99s-mo
gassho
Rory
That is an awfully complicated way to say that the two truths are inseparable.
User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 11028
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg »

Caoimhghín wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:46 pm This is all somewhat secondary to whether or not the practice of the six perfections can be found within or not be found within the Daimoku.
My point was, you were making it up as you went along, which is fine when you just get facts wrong, but inserting opinions based on wrong facts is another story.
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
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín »

No, I wasn't. I cited what I remembered. Before I found the citation, I gave you a preamble of where I thought I remembered first reading it.
savi saghara aṇica di, savi saghara dukha di, savi dhama aṇatva di:
yada paśadi cakhkṣuma tada nivinadi dukha eṣo mago viśodhia.

"All formations are inconstant," he said.
"All formations are stressful," he said.
"All phenomena are selfless," he said.
When one sees this, one becomes adverse to stress, and this is the path of purity.

(Gāndhārī Dharmapada fragments)
User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 11028
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg »

Caoimhghín wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:57 pm No, I wasn't. I cited what I remembered. Before I found the citation, I gave you a preamble of where I thought I remembered first reading it.
OK.
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
tkp67
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:07 pm
Universes are not absolute spaces.
It is in regards to matter within it, something that is inherent in this existence. The precious birth in which suffering and liberation can be experienced.

We create or deny relevance based on our desires.

This is the root of your problem. You think there is an absolute that exists.
Or you play a game of semantics as if the derivative in your mind is derivative of all minds. Symantec is a provision. A provisional understanding of absolute is not absolute is it? Provisional teachings teach according to the minds of ordinary people. The lotus sutra teaches from the mind of buddha. They have both led to liberation. The assembly serves the purpose of enlightening seemingly conflicting teachings to the same end. Is there a reason those teachings have to be in conflict with each other here?

The only constants in Buddhadharma are impermanence, suffering, and nonself.
Deviating from direct contextual dialog isn't a adequate or reasonable retort.

Yes, you don't understand that text. That single basis or single ground is the all-basis: a conditioned, impure consciousness, the nature of which is ignorance.
Ok TY for the correction. Does it change the dynamic other than syntactically?
I am familiar with Zhiyi's writings on the subject. Just because I know what Zhiyi writes, does not mean that you have comprehended it. Hence, my request for you to explicate them.
As suggested if so desired it should be the topic of a new thread. I don't see them worthy of contention but I don't see they nullify one another as they have both served capacity, cause and condition over time. Rather they have predicates on those very factors.
That statement by Nicherin has a canonical basis in Mahāyāna sūtras, so I don't see anyting wrong with it, per se. But the question here is not what Nichiren understands, it is what you understand.
Yes but according to the interpreted meaning of words I used there seems to be a thick overlay of Tibetan derived meaning that skews things sharply. Not that there is anything wrong with those designations but they are as foreign to me as mine are to you.

Once again I am not even arguing against the logic/reasoning/teaching but the insistence that one specificity of the buddha's teachings is the only right way.

As far as I understand it, the only superiority in any aspect of these teachings is how effectively they liberate people here and now. As I understand it Shakyamuni's complete and perfect enlightenment sees the buddha nature revealed by all these methods and a lack of acknowledgement of that same understanding makes liberation ephemeral.
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

tkp67 wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 10:36 pm
Malcolm wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:07 pm
Universes are not absolute spaces.
It is in regards to matter within it, something that is inherent in this existence. The precious birth in which suffering and liberation can be experienced.
What is the antecedent for the first it and the second it in the above sentence?

This is the root of your problem. You think there is an absolute that exists.
Or you play a game of semantics as if the derivative in your mind is derivative of all minds. Symantec is a provision. A provisional understanding of absolute is not absolute is it? Provisional teachings teach according to the minds of ordinary people. The lotus sutra teaches from the mind of buddha. They have both led to liberation. The assembly serves the purpose of enlightening seemingly conflicting teachings to the same end. Is there a reason those teachings have to be in conflict with each other here?
The thread is entitled "the role of truth in Buddhism." We are discussing the definitive view, not provisional views here.

The only constants in Buddhadharma are impermanence, suffering, and nonself.
Deviating from direct contextual dialog isn't a adequate or reasonable retort.
I see, like the GOP defending Trump, you are making a process argument since you have no facts.


Yes, you don't understand that text. That single basis or single ground is the all-basis: a conditioned, impure consciousness, the nature of which is ignorance.
Ok TY for the correction. Does it change the dynamic other than syntactically?
Completely.



I am familiar with Zhiyi's writings on the subject. Just because I know what Zhiyi writes, does not mean that you have comprehended it. Hence, my request for you to explicate them.
As suggested if so desired it should be the topic of a new thread. I don't see them worthy of contention but I don't see they nullify one another as they have both served capacity, cause and condition over time. Rather they have predicates on those very factors.
Yiou really do need train yourself not to use so many indefinite pronouns or passive constructions in your writing. It is lazy and it makes it impossible to understanding whatever is it that is being discussed because one has no idea to what "it" is referring to.
That statement by Nicherin has a canonical basis in Mahāyāna sūtras, so I don't see anyting wrong with it, per se. But the question here is not what Nichiren understands, it is what you understand.
Yes but according to the interpreted meaning of words I used there seems to be a thick overlay of Tibetan derived meaning that skews things sharply. Not that there is anything wrong with those designations but they are as foreign to me as mine are to you.
I am not relying on any Tibetan scholars or schools in our discussion. I suggest you spend a few years studying the Indian masters, you know, like me. I first read Nāgārjuna in 1985. He is what caused me to embrace the Dharma. There is no presentation of the view, or truth, of Mahāyāna that is more authoritative than the presentation of Nāgārjuna. Nāgārjuna is the gold standard which all must meet, or be relegated to the dustbin of Buddhist history.
Once again I am not even arguing against the logic/reasoning/teaching but the insistence that one specificity of the buddha's teachings is the only right way.
When you show me a sūtra that teaches three truths, rather than two, that will be a different story. But such a sūtra does not exist. Thus the Buddha only taught two truths.

Now, with respect to the so-called "three truths," Nāgarjuna said:

Whatever arises in dependence
that is empty,
that is dependently designated,
that is the middle way.
Why? There exist no phenomena
which do not originate dependently.
Therefore, there are no phenomena
which are not empty.


Now, I understand that Zhiyi took these three terms, and he decided that the middle way reconciled the first two terms. However, in reality, all three terms are merely synonyms for dependent origination. Whatever is dependently originated is empty and dependently designated, and that is the middle way. There is no need to call these "three truths." Buddhapalita (not a Tibetan) explains:

I explain that whatever arises dependently to be empty. That is dependently designated. That is the middle way. Therein, if there is some entity which exists, that is dependently originated and dependently designated. Why? Because there are no phenomena which are not dependently originated, therefore, there are no phenomena which are not empty.

"Emptiness," "dependent designation," and "middle way" are absolute synonyms for dependent origination. But this passage is not actually about the two truths at all, let alone three truths. This passage concerns the meaning of the profound truth that the Buddha taught, dependent origination, the madhyama-pratipad, i.e. the middle way, and nothing else.
User avatar
rory
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by rory »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:47 pm
rory wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 9:38 pm This is removed from practice, but read Brook Ziporyn's H-net book review of Paul Swanson's translation of Zhiyi's great work Maka Shikan,Mohe Zhiguan Clear Serenity; Quiet Insight Below is an extract:
This way of reading the section shows us all the more how right Zhanran was to think that this is what is truly distinctive to the Tiantai exposition, particularly when viewed in light of the manner in which it is subsequently and separately joined to the demonstration in the following Emptiness section—where the same results are derived from the other direction, from Emptiness to Conventionality: Emptiness itself, considered alone, renders the full panoply of Conventionally definite entities (via the four siddhāntas)—and then how this relation between the Conventional and Emptiness is subsequently and separately what is invoked in the Middle section, in the form of a re-evocation and expansion of both sides and the second-order relation of undecidable reversibility between these two, which is what is meant by their mutual identity: annulling the separation only on the basis of having first posited it, and also preserving it in the indecidability of the result. It is in the Middle section that Zhiyi gives us, as Swanson correctly points out, the application of the usual third step to the exposition: in this case, showing that the two opposite Inconceivabilities of the prior two sections (i.e., from Conventionality to Emptiness and from Emptiness to Conventionality) are themselves reversible, are identical-as-different, another Mobius strip, introducing a new level of Inconceivability.
https://networks.h-net.org/node/6060/re ... %80%99s-mo
gassho
Rory
That is an awfully complicated way to say that the two truths are inseparable.
They are simultaneous, but Malcolm, don't start criticizing Zhiyi if you cannot read Chinese, haven't studied Maka Shikan or early intellectual currents in Chinese Buddhism it is foolish...
gassho
Rory
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/
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

rory wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 11:58 pm
They are simultaneous, but Malcolm, don't start criticizing Zhiyi if you cannot read Chinese, haven't studied Maka Shikan or early intellectual currents in Chinese Buddhism it is foolish...
gassho
Rory
Hi Rory,

Fine, then don't defend Zhiyi unless you can read Chinese, etc.

You know what they say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
tkp67
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 »

The most important aspect of mayahana practice is faith not linguistics. What good are they when it comes to that which is beyond description.

At some point all the various thoughts expressed here represent the totality of perspectives that can arise and can be reconciled to the middle way for the purpose of emancipation.

That is why Nichiren's Daimoku is beyond the ability for anyone to describe.

I will answer your last post in depth later Malcom.

:anjali:
Malcolm
Posts: 32641
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm »

tkp67 wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2020 12:36 am The most important aspect of mayahana practice is faith not linguistics. What good are they when it comes to that which is beyond description.

At some point all the various thoughts expressed here represent the totality of perspectives that can arise and can be reconciled to the middle way for the purpose of emancipation.

That is why Nichiren's Daimoku is beyond the ability for anyone to describe.

I will answer your last post in depth later Malcom.

:anjali:
Don’t bother. There is no point.
User avatar
rory
Posts: 1574
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by rory »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2020 12:06 am
rory wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2020 11:58 pm
They are simultaneous, but Malcolm, don't start criticizing Zhiyi if you cannot read Chinese, haven't studied Maka Shikan or early intellectual currents in Chinese Buddhism it is foolish...
gassho
Rory
Hi Rory,

Fine, then don't defend Zhiyi unless you can read Chinese, etc.

You know what they say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
My Sensei does Malcolm. She reads Chinese, Japanese and English. It was pointed out to me that even the Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy doesn't translate the meaning of Tiantai correctly. It doesn't mean "platform of the sky."

You haven't studied Maka Shikan, you don't read Chinese and Japanese, you simply don't know. It really is that simple.
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/
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”