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.
Misty
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:29 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Misty » Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:16 pm

Thank you :)

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10103
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg » Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:43 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:31 pm
In very simple terms, yes. When we do not recognize an affliction is in play, this causes us to engage in an action, and that action ripens as suffering. When we recognize an affliction is in play, we can refrain from carrying out the action it would otherwise cause, and thus, that suffering will not arise for use as a result in the future.
I try to remember this when my daughter employs the 7th strategy of the night to avoid going to bed, an hour past bedtime.
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: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 1:52 am

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:09 pm
It’s easy to frame statements in the TOS that identify aggressive and intolerant speech. And I know that I have been guilty on occasion of crossing that line.
It’s much harder to take a line against constant whining passive aggression and expressions of victimhood. And yet it’s just as toxic to the flow of a forum.
I am not victim here because I am not suffering because I suffered, I state it because suffering is the cause that brought me to buddhism.

I don't suffer when people state they speak for the buddha then engage in self or emotionally charged behaviors. They do.

I am a lay person who claims a connection through his own studies. There is no one to shame but myself in a misrepresentation of buddhism. I don't have the privilege or the liability of representing lineages of living masters.

Still I treat my commitment to the buddha of the ten directions and three periods to the best of my ability at all times.

Suffering was a great catalyst for me in regards to compassion, loving kindness and selflessness which where great prerequisites for this practice.

If the suffering of others puts a bad taste in your mouth I can't fathom how you process your own.

:anjali:

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 1:56 am

Queequeg wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:56 pm
tkp67 wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:53 pm
So you invalidate the three truths because wanting to know the roots is ancillary but your study of Indian buddhism is reasonable desire to know dharma.

Seems you are trying hard to justify teachings that accord to your mind and discard those that don't accord to your mind but accord to the minds of others.

I will patiently wait for a citation that speaks to teachings according to the mind of one teacher and one teacher only.
Now you're just being argumentative.
Really ..





Queequeg wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:43 pm
Coëmgenu wrote:Are the three truths meant to be read as a syllogism, or as three truths, that is to say, in the "three truths" is the "third" the conclusion of the other two (effectively superseding the first two)?

My own suspicions are that such is not the case, but I am open to whatever.
Zhiyi discusses 5 types of Three Truths in Fahua Hsuan-i (Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra). Swanson translates part of it in Tientai Philosophy, including the section where he describes 5 types of Three Truths.

Some of the inferior understandings of the Three Truths fit the Middle as syllogism. The Inclusive Threefold Truth of the Perfect and Spontaneous Teaching does not.
[First] With respect to those who enter the Distinct from the Shared [Teaching], the meaning of the threefold truth is fulfilled by combining "neither with outflow [of passions]" and 'nor without outflow [of passions]." "With outflows" refers to the mundane and "without outflows" refers to the real. "Neither with with outflows nor without outflows" refers to the Middle. In these teachings the Middle is discussed merely as different from emptiness and stops there. The Middle has no active function and does not include all dharmas.

[Second] The threefold truth of those who enter the Perfect from the Shared is not different in [its interpretation of] the two truths from the previous one. It is different from the previous [understanding of] the Middle, in the sense that "neither with outflows" and "nor without outflows" are combined and include all dharmas.

[Third] The threefold truth of the Distinct [Teaching] exposes the mundane as both truths and posits the Middle in opposition to the real. However,
it stops with the reality of the Middle.

[Fourth] The threefold truth of those who enter the Perfect from the Distinct is not different from the previous one in its interpretation of the two truths. It combines the real and the Middle as being included in Buddha Dharma.

[Fifth] The perfect threefold truth is that it is not only the Middle Path which completely includes the Buddha Dharma, but also the real and the mundane [truths]. This threefold truth is perfectly integrated; one-in-three and three-in-one.
Out of time now, but will add more later.

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am

How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?


More on the 3 truths.

Concerning the Three Truths
Lectures on Basic Study Materials (13)
from Dai-Byakuho [Nichiren Shoshu priest]

What are the Three Truths? It is impossible to perceive the true nature of any given phenomenon from only a single aspect. It is likewise impossible to perfectly gain a complete grasp of a phenomenon from just two opposing aspects of it. Accordingly, to clarify any given phenomenon, it is necessary to have a third aspect, which, rather than being biased toward either of the other two opposing aspects, acts to fuse them. As a means of clarifying the true entity of all phenomena, the Great Master T'ien-t'ai explains these three aspects as the "Three Truths of Ku, Ke and Chu" (non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground). He further explains that by practicing these Three Truths, one can sever oneself from the three categories of illusion ‹ illusions of thought and desire (kenji-waku), illusions as numerous as particles of dust and sand (jinga-waku) and illusions about the true nature of life (mumyo-waku). These three categories of illusion are explained to be the collective root of suffering. The word "truth" is also called "ascertaining truth," which is "to fully know" or "to be apparent," and signifies "truth that is not in vain," This also means "truth that derives from the Buddha's enlightenment." The nomenclature "three truths" appears in the Nitai Chapter of the Ninno Sutra, while non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground are mentioned by name in the Seigakkan (Shogakkan) Chapter of the Bosatsu Yoraku Hongo Sutra and the Shitai Chapter of the Chukan Ron.

In relation to this, it is said that the Chinese priest Hokusai (also known as Emon Zenji) attained enlightenment to the Mystic Essence by reading the following passage from the Chukan Ron: "Causal relationship is the law through which all things come into being. The self is non-substantial, but it exists temporarily. But then again, the self signifies the middle path." It is said that Hokusai passed this enlightenment on to his disciple Nan-yueh, who in turn transmitted it to the Great Master T'ien-t'ai.

Distinctiveness of the Three Truths

The Truth of Non-substantiality (Kutai)

The Chinese character used for "non-substantiality" (ku) is usually understood in the Japanese language to mean "void," "non-existent" or "devoid of." For this reason Japanese are apt to think that "ku" means "void" (non existing). However, Buddhism explains that both phenomena that possess minds, as well as phenomena that are devoid of minds ‹ all existence ‹ come into being through causal relationship. Buddhism further explains that the entities of all things that manifest through causal relationship are non-substantial. This explanation is called the concept of "ku" (non-substantiality). In short, the truth that no phenomenon is permanent is known as the "Truth of Non-substantiality."

The Great Master T'ien-t'ai explains that the concept of non- substantiality expounded in Hinayana Buddhism is a "fragmented concept of non-substantiality" because it uses analysis to observe that existence is non-substantial. He also explains that the Mahayana concept of non-substantiality is the "true concept of non- substantiality" because it observes with direct immediacy that existence itself is non-substantial. Further, because Hinayana Buddhism sees only the non-substantial aspect of existence, not recognizing its substantial side, the Hinayana concept is also called "Conditional Non-substantiality." On the other hand, while Mahayana Buddhism sees all phenomena as non-substantial, it also acknowledges the substantial facet of existence, and is therefore known as "Unconditional Non-substantiality."

The Truth of Temporary Existence (Ketai)

Although nothing maintains an absolute existential form, in reality, the distinct emergence of form is known as the "Truth of Temporary Existence." Temporary existence is explained as a temporally hypothetical entity, which does not possess an absolute existence, but which, figuratively speaking, does exist. For that reason, the term "Temporary Existence" is used to mean the temporal existence of a phenomenon that is not substantive by nature. The Daihon Hannya Sutra explains three aspects of temporary existence, whereby all entities exist as temporary phenomena:

1. Objects are composed of a collection of many factors. (Receptive Temporary Existence)

2. Phenomena themselves are derivations from causal relationships. (Phenomenal Temporary Existence)

3. All things exists in name only. (Nominal Temporary Existence)

These three aspects indicate that nothing possesses a true "self nature" (an object's substantive character), which frees us from bondage to our common mortality.

The Truth of the Middle Way (Chutai)

The reasoning behind a correct middle ground that remains unbiased toward either of the two extremes of non-substantiality and temporary existence is known as the "Truth of the Middle Way." More precisely, all phenomena are non-substantial because they exist through causal relationship, but only within the confines of limited time frames. Then again, because non-substantiality is not a fixed reality, non-substantiality itself can be said to be non-substantial. Therefore, that unopposing area, where one finds true reason that rejects both non-substantiality and temporary existence, is known as the Middle Way, or the Middle Path. The Middle Path is not a self-compromising concept, as if caught between a rock and hard place. Rather, it is a truth that is able to incorporate within itself the truths of both non-substantiality and temporary existence. When the Middle Path is viewed with the overlay of the Four Teachings, the following nomenclatures result: "Negation of the Middle Path," "Inclusion of the Middle Path," "Conditional Middle Path," and "Unconditional Middle Path."

The doctrine of the middle path is not to be found within Hinayana Buddhism (Zokyo/Tripitaka teachings), and hence, the name "Negation of the Middle Path" is appended. The connecting teaching (Tsugyo), or the introductory Mahayana teaching, incorporates the doctrine of the middle path. That is the reason for the term "Inclusion of the Middle Path." The specific teaching (Bekkyo), a more profound level of Mahayana Buddhism, only expounds the middle path as a doctrine unrelated to non-substantiality and temporary existence, which is why the nomenclature "Conditional Middle Path" is used. The perfect teaching (Engyo), or true Mahayana teaching, expounds the perfectly endowed middle pathcontained in the Three Truths. Thus, it is called the "Unconditional Middle Path."

The Three Distinct and Successive Truths, and Perfect Endowment

There are two ways of looking at the Three Truths. One way is to think of each of the Three Truths as an individual and independent truth. These are known as the Three Distinct and Successive Truths. The second way is to discard the concept of the isolated character of the Three Truths to form the concept that each single truth is mutually endowed with the Three Truths, with each truth embodying both non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground. This doctrine is the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths. The Three Distinct and Successive Truths are also referred to as the Three Ordered Truths, meaning that each of the Three Truths is distinct. That is, the truth of non-substantiality is only non-substantiality, including neither temporary existence nor the middle way. In the same way, the truth of temporary existence is solely temporary existence, but is neither non-substantiality nor the middle way. Again, the middle way is only the middle way, inclusive of neither non-substantiality nor temporary existence. This doctrine is expounded in higher Mahayana Buddhism (Bekkyo).

In contrast to this, in the Three Perfectly Endowed Teachings, the three truths of non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle way are mutually infused, with each truth inclusive of the other two. That is, it is explained that the truth of non-substantiality is naturally the truth of both temporary existence and the middle way. The truth of temporary existence is naturally the truth of both nonsubstantialty and the truth of the middle way. Further, the truth of the middle way is naturally the truths of both non-substantiality and temporary existence. The principle of the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths is called the Perfect Teaching (Engyo). The Great Master T'ien-t'ai established the practice of the Three Observations in a Single Mind.

Observing the Three Truths is known as the Three Observations. The principle of clear perception derived from the Three Perceptions in a Single Mind, which perceives that the moment to moment mind of the common man is itself the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths, is the principle of ichinen sanzen (three thousand realms in a single mind). The Ongi Kuden states: The three truths of perfect endowment are none other than Namu-Myoho-Renge-Kyo. These five characters are the true reason for Nichiren's advent in the world. (Shinpen, p. 1729)

Illarraza

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2483
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?
Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, the dharmadhātu (法界), and we can say there is only one dharma too generally, the 一念, the "one (thought-)moment," if we can speak via euphemism, because enumerating it is pointless, it seems to be at least.
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:32 am

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?
Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, dharmadhātu, because enumerating it is pointless.
Anthropologically?

Zhiyi's taught the ten realms and accompanied it with three truths. I don't believe Nagarjuna taught ten realms.

fwiw as a Nichiren Buddhist being posed to venerate teachings of Nagarjuna and ignore Zhiyi denies my teacher in a request to observe them both and the causative differences. If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.

He did not.

Malcolm
Posts: 31143
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:59 am

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:32 am
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?
Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, dharmadhātu, because enumerating it is pointless.
Anthropologically?

Zhiyi's taught the ten realms and accompanied it with three truths. I don't believe Nagarjuna taught ten realms.

fwiw as a Nichiren Buddhist being posed to venerate teachings of Nagarjuna and ignore Zhiyi denies my teacher in a request to observe them both and the causative differences. If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.

He did not.
That’s not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting you learn normative Mahayana Buddhism. That will require you to set aside your Nicherin lense and consider other perspectives. Your attachment to enumeration is, well, trivial. There are infinite realms, not just ten.

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 4125
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by LastLegend » Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:27 am

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?


More on the 3 truths.

Concerning the Three Truths
Lectures on Basic Study Materials (13)
from Dai-Byakuho [Nichiren Shoshu priest]

What are the Three Truths? It is impossible to perceive the true nature of any given phenomenon from only a single aspect. It is likewise impossible to perfectly gain a complete grasp of a phenomenon from just two opposing aspects of it. Accordingly, to clarify any given phenomenon, it is necessary to have a third aspect, which, rather than being biased toward either of the other two opposing aspects, acts to fuse them. As a means of clarifying the true entity of all phenomena, the Great Master T'ien-t'ai explains these three aspects as the "Three Truths of Ku, Ke and Chu" (non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground). He further explains that by practicing these Three Truths, one can sever oneself from the three categories of illusion ‹ illusions of thought and desire (kenji-waku), illusions as numerous as particles of dust and sand (jinga-waku) and illusions about the true nature of life (mumyo-waku). These three categories of illusion are explained to be the collective root of suffering. The word "truth" is also called "ascertaining truth," which is "to fully know" or "to be apparent," and signifies "truth that is not in vain," This also means "truth that derives from the Buddha's enlightenment." The nomenclature "three truths" appears in the Nitai Chapter of the Ninno Sutra, while non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground are mentioned by name in the Seigakkan (Shogakkan) Chapter of the Bosatsu Yoraku Hongo Sutra and the Shitai Chapter of the Chukan Ron.

In relation to this, it is said that the Chinese priest Hokusai (also known as Emon Zenji) attained enlightenment to the Mystic Essence by reading the following passage from the Chukan Ron: "Causal relationship is the law through which all things come into being. The self is non-substantial, but it exists temporarily. But then again, the self signifies the middle path." It is said that Hokusai passed this enlightenment on to his disciple Nan-yueh, who in turn transmitted it to the Great Master T'ien-t'ai.

Distinctiveness of the Three Truths

The Truth of Non-substantiality (Kutai)

The Chinese character used for "non-substantiality" (ku) is usually understood in the Japanese language to mean "void," "non-existent" or "devoid of." For this reason Japanese are apt to think that "ku" means "void" (non existing). However, Buddhism explains that both phenomena that possess minds, as well as phenomena that are devoid of minds ‹ all existence ‹ come into being through causal relationship. Buddhism further explains that the entities of all things that manifest through causal relationship are non-substantial. This explanation is called the concept of "ku" (non-substantiality). In short, the truth that no phenomenon is permanent is known as the "Truth of Non-substantiality."

The Great Master T'ien-t'ai explains that the concept of non- substantiality expounded in Hinayana Buddhism is a "fragmented concept of non-substantiality" because it uses analysis to observe that existence is non-substantial. He also explains that the Mahayana concept of non-substantiality is the "true concept of non- substantiality" because it observes with direct immediacy that existence itself is non-substantial. Further, because Hinayana Buddhism sees only the non-substantial aspect of existence, not recognizing its substantial side, the Hinayana concept is also called "Conditional Non-substantiality." On the other hand, while Mahayana Buddhism sees all phenomena as non-substantial, it also acknowledges the substantial facet of existence, and is therefore known as "Unconditional Non-substantiality."

The Truth of Temporary Existence (Ketai)

Although nothing maintains an absolute existential form, in reality, the distinct emergence of form is known as the "Truth of Temporary Existence." Temporary existence is explained as a temporally hypothetical entity, which does not possess an absolute existence, but which, figuratively speaking, does exist. For that reason, the term "Temporary Existence" is used to mean the temporal existence of a phenomenon that is not substantive by nature. The Daihon Hannya Sutra explains three aspects of temporary existence, whereby all entities exist as temporary phenomena:

1. Objects are composed of a collection of many factors. (Receptive Temporary Existence)

2. Phenomena themselves are derivations from causal relationships. (Phenomenal Temporary Existence)

3. All things exists in name only. (Nominal Temporary Existence)

These three aspects indicate that nothing possesses a true "self nature" (an object's substantive character), which frees us from bondage to our common mortality.

The Truth of the Middle Way (Chutai)

The reasoning behind a correct middle ground that remains unbiased toward either of the two extremes of non-substantiality and temporary existence is known as the "Truth of the Middle Way." More precisely, all phenomena are non-substantial because they exist through causal relationship, but only within the confines of limited time frames. Then again, because non-substantiality is not a fixed reality, non-substantiality itself can be said to be non-substantial. Therefore, that unopposing area, where one finds true reason that rejects both non-substantiality and temporary existence, is known as the Middle Way, or the Middle Path. The Middle Path is not a self-compromising concept, as if caught between a rock and hard place. Rather, it is a truth that is able to incorporate within itself the truths of both non-substantiality and temporary existence. When the Middle Path is viewed with the overlay of the Four Teachings, the following nomenclatures result: "Negation of the Middle Path," "Inclusion of the Middle Path," "Conditional Middle Path," and "Unconditional Middle Path."

The doctrine of the middle path is not to be found within Hinayana Buddhism (Zokyo/Tripitaka teachings), and hence, the name "Negation of the Middle Path" is appended. The connecting teaching (Tsugyo), or the introductory Mahayana teaching, incorporates the doctrine of the middle path. That is the reason for the term "Inclusion of the Middle Path." The specific teaching (Bekkyo), a more profound level of Mahayana Buddhism, only expounds the middle path as a doctrine unrelated to non-substantiality and temporary existence, which is why the nomenclature "Conditional Middle Path" is used. The perfect teaching (Engyo), or true Mahayana teaching, expounds the perfectly endowed middle pathcontained in the Three Truths. Thus, it is called the "Unconditional Middle Path."

The Three Distinct and Successive Truths, and Perfect Endowment

There are two ways of looking at the Three Truths. One way is to think of each of the Three Truths as an individual and independent truth. These are known as the Three Distinct and Successive Truths. The second way is to discard the concept of the isolated character of the Three Truths to form the concept that each single truth is mutually endowed with the Three Truths, with each truth embodying both non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle ground. This doctrine is the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths. The Three Distinct and Successive Truths are also referred to as the Three Ordered Truths, meaning that each of the Three Truths is distinct. That is, the truth of non-substantiality is only non-substantiality, including neither temporary existence nor the middle way. In the same way, the truth of temporary existence is solely temporary existence, but is neither non-substantiality nor the middle way. Again, the middle way is only the middle way, inclusive of neither non-substantiality nor temporary existence. This doctrine is expounded in higher Mahayana Buddhism (Bekkyo).

In contrast to this, in the Three Perfectly Endowed Teachings, the three truths of non-substantiality, temporary existence and the middle way are mutually infused, with each truth inclusive of the other two. That is, it is explained that the truth of non-substantiality is naturally the truth of both temporary existence and the middle way. The truth of temporary existence is naturally the truth of both nonsubstantialty and the truth of the middle way. Further, the truth of the middle way is naturally the truths of both non-substantiality and temporary existence. The principle of the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths is called the Perfect Teaching (Engyo). The Great Master T'ien-t'ai established the practice of the Three Observations in a Single Mind.

Observing the Three Truths is known as the Three Observations. The principle of clear perception derived from the Three Perceptions in a Single Mind, which perceives that the moment to moment mind of the common man is itself the Three Perfectly Endowed Truths, is the principle of ichinen sanzen (three thousand realms in a single mind). The Ongi Kuden states: The three truths of perfect endowment are none other than Namu-Myoho-Renge-Kyo. These five characters are the true reason for Nichiren's advent in the world. (Shinpen, p. 1729)

Illarraza
Two truths usually the case of attachment to duality.

Three truth is the middle way. Lotus Sutra discussed Upaya (which means Buddhas use skill means or put Mahaprajnaparamita to use (skillful means which are Dharma) while skillful means are great emptiness of Mahaprajnaparamita, for the benefits of sentient beings. Likewise we are trying to penetrate empty Buddha nature in order to use Dharma for benefits of sentiment beings, without being grasped by what we use. Language is skillful means?

I believe Sharangama Sutra talked about using nature (in this context I prefer unborn wisdom) instead of consciousness through six faculties (ear, eye, etc).
Make personal vows.

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:24 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:59 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:32 am
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am

Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, dharmadhātu, because enumerating it is pointless.
Anthropologically?

Zhiyi's taught the ten realms and accompanied it with three truths. I don't believe Nagarjuna taught ten realms.

fwiw as a Nichiren Buddhist being posed to venerate teachings of Nagarjuna and ignore Zhiyi denies my teacher in a request to observe them both and the causative differences. If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.

He did not.
That’s not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting you learn normative Mahayana Buddhism. That will require you to set aside your Nicherin lense and consider other perspectives. Your attachment to enumeration is, well, trivial. There are infinite realms, not just ten.
Diluting Zhiyi's teaching doesn't honor him as a patriarch. I am not dishonoring any teachings by honoring his teachings as rendered. This has NEVER been established.

Odd that you won't retract the tibetan lens but expect I should when I haven't denied Nagarjuna's teachings or any other for that matter.

Even more interesting is that a number of people here feel qualified to deny the works of a buddhist patriarch because "they seem to mean the same thing".

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2483
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:49 am

Queequeg wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 2:09 pm
Caoimhghín wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 1:48 am
天台
Its a simplified version. The nuance is different.

天臺

It has an active, experiential sense, rather than being a place. The focus is not the location or nature of the place, but rather the activity that takes place there.
Where do you get the "active, experiential sense" reading from? I just looked these up, and they seem to be synonyms. Are they indeed just the simplified and the traditional? If that's the case, then how can there be a different sense between the two? That would be like a different sense of meaning between 佛 and 仏 (two characters for "Buddha"), no? I'm not asking a question to prove a point, it's a legitimate question.
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:32 am
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?
Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, dharmadhātu, because enumerating it is pointless.
Anthropologically?
What do you mean here?
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
Zhiyi's taught the ten realms and accompanied it with three truths. I don't believe Nagarjuna taught ten realms.
Well, I suppose, in a way, we can say he did not, since some say that the animal realm, human realm, and preta realm are the same "area," so to speak, experienced differently according to karma, if one wants to talk about "areas" when talking about "realms." But he certainly taught of hell-dwellers, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, gods, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas. The Buddha spoke of these things in his teachings in addition to venerables Zhìyǐ, Nāgārjuna, and Nichiren.

"Realms" is a tricky term in English translation. 界 (dhātu), as Ven Nichiren would have known it, unless I'm terribly mistaken. This 界 is a sphere, a continuum, an environment, a world, a space, an element, a basis, a faculty, an object, a function, an essence, a substance, a nature, a kernel, a germ, a materializing force, a discrimination, a boundary, a domain, a category, a scope, an extent, a division, a root, a field, a constituent -- and that's just listing out definitions I thought were contextually relevant from the Digital Dictionary of Buddhism, NTI Reader, etc.

We can also speak of 界 as being a sight, a sound, a smell, a taste, a texture, a dharma, an eye, an ear, a nose, a tongue, a body, a mind, a consciousness associated with an eye (base), a consciousness associated with an ear (base), a consciousness associated with a nose (base), a consciousness associated with a tongue (base), a consciousness associated with an body (base), and a consciousness associated with a mind (base). These are also called 界: in this case a usage from the Abhidharmikas, 18 context-specific 界s. In English, we also speak of these "ten realms" as the "ten destinies," which I always assumed would be a Sinitic turn of phrase but doesn't appear to be. Either way, "destinies" is not usually what is meant by "界." I guess that speaks of the versatility of 界, like the word "dharma."

Venerable Nāgārjuna knew all these destinies, these realms so-to-speak, but does he necessarily need to list them tenfold? I am reminded of the preface to 六妙法門 (Six Subtle Dharma Gates), when Venerable Zhìyǐ goes to introduce the eponymous six gates. And then he says, "As for the 'six,' it is simply a dharma of enumeration."
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
fwiw as a Nichiren Buddhist being posed to venerate teachings of Nagarjuna and ignore Zhiyi denies my teacher in a request to observe them both and the causative differences.
I don't think anyone is saying "ignore Zhìyǐ, prefer Nāgārjuna." It's just that Ven Zhìyǐ is a little bit more distant to the English speaker, and is always a little bit less contextualized. I'm not saying this to be edgelordy, to steal a phrase from Johnny Dangerous, it's just an honest appraisal of the extent of Tiāntāi/Tendai in English/translated as opposed to other traditions. For instance, a lot of disagreement here is to do with 中 (the middle) in the context of the three truths.

Let me go wild here, I'll give myself permission, if you don't mind.

I thought the following up while considering a passage that has always captivated me from Venerable Jízàng. I'll make the vainglorious foolish mistake of posting it here in the interest of opening it up to what will no doubt be rightful critique, because I think it is ultimately somewhat relevant to certain ways the thread is developing vis-a-vis "provisional vs true," and 開權顯實 (opening the provisional to reveal the true), like the blossom and the fruit of the lotus in 妙法玄義 (T1716 "Profound meaning the Dharma Flower Sūtra," readable in Swanson's Clear Serenity, Quiet Insight, Supplementary Texts p. 1815), and like these "two" and "not two" differentiations between two stances, two "missed" or "misunderstood" truths. It is important here that these two truths are initially presented as "misunderstood/missed." This represents a specific East Asian Madhyamaka sticking point that is not as prominent in other Madhayamakas, because the misunderstanding it addresses was not as prevalent in other places.
It is time to speak of two truths, two truths fashioned from the difference between two views. These two truths equally are missed. How? To those who grasp at existence, to those sentient beings, one speaks the absolute truth. To those who grasp at emptiness, to those sentient beings, one speaks the relative truth. In this way, through 'is' and 'is not' equally, sentient beings are grasping. Consequently, all misconceive. It is time to speak of two comprehensions which are not two. These two truths equally attained. How? Because these two comprehensions are not two. Two is the principle's teaching. Not two is the teaching's principle. Two is the middle's designation. Not two is the designation's middle. Two is the essence's function. Not two is the function's essence.
(Venerable Jízàng, 二諦義, "Exegesis on the Two Truths," T1854.81c28)

Here is my nonsense.

Two is the principle's teaching -- a disparity between the two truths gives rise to the 84,000 dharma gates, the three Buddha vehicles, the manifold needs of sentient beings, the varied and many diverse teachings of the Buddha.

Not two is the teaching's principle -- a indistinguishability between the two truths is the underlying principle that supports the one Buddha vehicle, the principle behind the the varied and many diverse teachings of the Buddha.

Two is the middle's designation -- a disparity between the two truths is the designation, or the naming, of myriad empty dharmas, and is the relative.

Not two is the designation's middle -- a indistinguishability between the two truths is the emptiness of those dharmas itself, and is the ultimate.

Two is the essence's function -- a disparity between the two truths is the functioning, the instantiation, the particularity, the mere appearance, and the conceived fruit of the unarisen empty existence.

Not two is the function's essence -- a indistinguishability between the two truths is the essence, the basis, and the root of the unarisen empty existence.


Maybe this is the silliest thing on this thread, we'll see. It's certainly off the deep end, but hopefully at least grounded in a citation of a text, if not grounded in anything else. The operative phrase in the above being "Two is the middle's designation. Not two is the designation's middle."
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.
What did you mean here?
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:18 am

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:22 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
How many Dharma realms accompany the 2 truth teachings and how many dharma realms in the 3 truth teachings?
Three thousand for both, if you believe in the ten suchnesses, the ten destinies, the ten destinies further within each of the ten destinies, and the three realms. 10x10x10x3.

But why does it matter how many "dharma realms" there are "in" each presentation? There is technically only one dharma realm, the dharmadhātu (法界), and we can say there is only one dharma too generally, the 一念, the "one (thought-)moment," if we can speak via euphemism, because enumerating it is pointless, it seems to be at least.
realms is used interchagably confusing this dialog. I take ownership of this and understand this is why some people dont like english translation.
The ten realms, sometimes referred to as the ten worlds,[1] are part of the belief of some forms of Buddhism that there are ten conditions of life which sentient beings are subject to, and which they experience from moment to moment
While this mode of viewing the realms might seem unnecessary to a practice with a living master, to create a karmic bond with shakyamuni it is essential which is why it is a cornerstone of these practices.

it represents the cause and effect of his enlightenment and acknowledges shakyamuni's desire of enlightenment for all sentient beings.

bodhisattva of shakyamuni's enlightenment, not one's own.

The implications are meaningful, there are schools in practice today.

Many teachings, many minds.

I find previous teachings TOO empty personally so I enjoy the East Asian derivatives. I understand that does not deny that the previous teachings still resonate with others.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2483
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:22 am

"Realms" is perfectly fine if it's understood with a wider range of meaning. As for "worlds," I don't know if I would call them that in English, but I'm the opposite of omniscient. Preferences, preferences...
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:26 am

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:49 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.
What did you mean here?
If the two truth teaching was the most appropriate according to nichiren he would have simply employed it.

he did not.

one simple set of reasoning (same as 6 vs 10 realm) is the ten realm teaching contains 6 realm teaching.

3 truth teaching accounts for 2 truth teaching.

There are deeper implications however which are included in later and more verbose teachings.

This is why they havent been reformed accordingly.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2483
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:17 am

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:26 am
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:49 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.
What did you mean here?
If the two truth teaching was the most appropriate according to nichiren he would have simply employed it.

he did not.
But he did, one can say. Ven Nichiren makes use of two-truth language in addition to three-truth language, just like Ven Zhiyi. They say 開權顯實 (opening the provisional, revealing the real). The "real" here is a well-established synonym for "the ultimate." Ven Zhiyi talks about the blossom and the fruit, the blossom which falls away as the trace and the fruit as the essence, the blossom as the provisional and the fruit as the ultimate. These metaphors don't say, "opening the provisional to open the ultimate to reveal the middle." It's two-truth language. The enumerations, three-truth/two-truth, aren't necessarily as strict as they might seem, that's what the earlier quote from "The Dharma Flower Sūtra's Profound Meaning" was meant to imply. There's also four truths, if we're willing to get even more wide-ranging with our associations.
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:26 am
one simple set of reasoning (same as 6 vs 10 realm) is the ten realm teaching contains 6 realm teaching.

3 truth teaching accounts for 2 truth teaching.

There are deeper implications however which are included in later and more verbose teachings.
Well, it's up to you if you want to believe according to faith that a particular school's insights are deeper than another's. Everyone does this to various degrees. I will say though, the verbiage of a Dharma presentation isn't directly correlated with worth. Exhibit A, myself.
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:26 am
This is why they havent been reformed accordingly.
Reformed according to your interpretations? Are you that sure?
歸命本覺心法身常住妙法心蓮臺本來莊嚴三身徳三十七尊住心
城遠離因果法然具普門塵數諸三昧無邊徳海本圓滿還我頂禮心諸佛

In reverence for the root gnosis of the heart, the dharmakāya,
for the ever present good law of the heart, the lotus terrace,
for the inborn adornment of the trikāya, the thirty-seven sages dwelling in the heart,
for that which is removed from seed and fruit, the upright key to the universal gate,
for all boundless concentrations, the sea of virtue, the root perfection,
I prostrate, bowing to the hearts of all Buddhas.

胎藏金剛菩提心義略問答鈔, Treatise on the teaching of the gnostic heart of the womb and the diamond, T2397.1.470c5-8

tkp67
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:39 am

The evolution of teachings accords with the capacity, causes and conditions of the people over the course of time. The past influences the future but does not supercede it. Everything flowing in accord to how it occurred. Cause and effect is an essential theme, not just internal but from beginning to end.

Keeping this context is what nichiren does in his teachings. This is what he did with all other teachings. In this regard the lotus is the spine of the book to all other teachings since the evaluations are made against it.

There was a reason for the assembly in the lotus sutra. This is why it is not a subjective matter for lotus practioners. This is why other distilations are not subjective either. The teaching contains ten realms. It was developed from prior teachings that taught less. Same as the truths.

Why cant they both remain golden without contest? Nichiren only looked at how they suited sentient beings as a metric for comparison.

Simon E.
Posts: 7434
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Simon E. » Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:58 am

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 1:52 am
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:09 pm
It’s easy to frame statements in the TOS that identify aggressive and intolerant speech. And I know that I have been guilty on occasion of crossing that line.
It’s much harder to take a line against constant whining passive aggression and expressions of victimhood. And yet it’s just as toxic to the flow of a forum.
I am not victim here because I am not suffering because I suffered, I state it because suffering is the cause that brought me to buddhism.

I don't suffer when people state they speak for the buddha then engage in self or emotionally charged behaviors. They do.

I am a lay person who claims a connection through his own studies. There is no one to shame but myself in a misrepresentation of buddhism. I don't have the privilege or the liability of representing lineages of living masters.

Still I treat my commitment to the buddha of the ten directions and three periods to the best of my ability at all times.

Suffering was a great catalyst for me in regards to compassion, loving kindness and selflessness which where great prerequisites for this practice.

If the suffering of others puts a bad taste in your mouth I can't fathom how you process your own.

:anjali:
I beg your pardon? Oh well, as the saying goes, if the cap fits.
“The difference between us and Tara is that she knows she doesn’t exist”.

Malcolm
Posts: 31143
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:47 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:39 am
The evolution of teachings accords with the capacity, causes and conditions of the people over the course of time. The past influences the future but does not supercede it. Everything flowing in accord to how it occurred. Cause and effect is an essential theme, not just internal but from beginning to end.

Keeping this context is what nichiren does in his teachings. This is what he did with all other teachings. In this regard the lotus is the spine of the book to all other teachings since the evaluations are made against it.

There was a reason for the assembly in the lotus sutra. This is why it is not a subjective matter for lotus practioners. This is why other distilations are not subjective either. The teaching contains ten realms. It was developed from prior teachings that taught less. Same as the truths.

Why cant they both remain golden without contest? Nichiren only looked at how they suited sentient beings as a metric for comparison.
Most of us are not Nichiren Buddhists, and so don’t really regard Nichiren’s opinions as terribly relevant. All of us are Mahayana Buddhists, and for all of us Nagarjuna is relevant. This is why, in threads like these, I don’t introduce Tibetan Buddhist perspectives—they are not universal enough. It it seems you prefer to just engage in sectarian polemics. Yawn. However, I will compliment you on taking the effort to compose better sentences.

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 4125
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by LastLegend » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:05 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:26 am
Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:49 am
tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 2:01 am
If the two truths could be stripped from the ten realms Nichiren would have done so for the same of making liberation more efficient.
What did you mean here?
If the two truth teaching was the most appropriate according to nichiren he would have simply employed it.

he did not.

one simple set of reasoning (same as 6 vs 10 realm) is the ten realm teaching contains 6 realm teaching.

3 truth teaching accounts for 2 truth teaching.

There are deeper implications however which are included in later and more verbose teachings.

This is why they havent been reformed accordingly.
You get caught up with views. Don’t be offended because I’ve been there. It’s a big blockage to the fluidity of wisdom. Nature is brisk and dynamic not static.
Make personal vows.

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 4125
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by LastLegend » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:19 pm

Emptiness is really absolutely directly empty but clearly through functioning. I personally find it harder to describe without falling into construction and attachment of duality; this is what blocking wisdom.
Make personal vows.

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Astus, Grigoris, Shaku Kenshin, Wayfarer and 29 guests