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.
tkp67
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:26 pm

My view is both 2 truth and 3 truth models existed before and exist today. My view is trying to remove them from experiential and historical perspectives isn't necessary nor does it change reality as it stands today. Putting them use within that perspective honors all those who brought the teachings tohis very place and time as well as the person(s) benefiting from them.

Once we make it about what pleases and functions for OUR INDIVIDUAL MINDS ONLY we are not practicing in terms of shakyamuni's enlightenment (imagine he was a narcissist) as taught in the lotus sutra. So I personally don't abide to such perspectives.

I am no admonishing other perspectives just stating there are not definitive perspectives, If they where the newer patriarchs would be patriarchs.

Malcolm
Posts: 31196
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:27 pm

LastLegend wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:27 am

Two truths usually the case of attachment to duality.
As Nagarjuna pointed out, those who do not understand the two truths do not understand the doctrine of the Buddha. Adding a third truth does not make things more clear. If it did, the Buddha would have taught three truths, but he didn’t.

Malcolm
Posts: 31196
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:34 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:26 pm
My view is both 2 truth and 3 truth models existed before and exist today. My view is trying to remove them from experiential and historical perspectives isn't necessary nor does it change reality as it stands today. Putting them use within that perspective honors all those who brought the teachings tohis very place and time as well as the person(s) benefiting from them.

Once we make it about what pleases and functions for OUR INDIVIDUAL MINDS ONLY we are not practicing in terms of shakyamuni's enlightenment (imagine he was a narcissist) as taught in the lotus sutra. So I personally don't abide to such perspectives.

I am no admonishing other perspectives just stating there are not definitive perspectives, If they where the newer patriarchs would be patriarchs.
You do realize that all you are doing is expressing your own bias, rather than making common ground? Also, if you are claiming that nothing is definitive, you just ruin all your exclusivist claims about the Lotus Sutra, Zhiyi, and Nichiren.

It is for this reason I recommend you get out if your silo and study some normative Mahayana Buddhism. But if you are not interested, well, that’s your problem, not mine.

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 4138
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 4:37 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:27 pm
LastLegend wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:27 am

Two truths usually the case of attachment to duality.
As Nagarjuna pointed out, those who do not understand the two truths do not understand the doctrine of the Buddha. Adding a third truth does not make things more clear. If it did, the Buddha would have taught three truths, but he didn’t.
Although ‘mind is Buddha,’ personally this takes me a long time to have a better understanding now (I think) because I find it’s the same emptiness but ‘layers’ covering it. I personally had hard times with views of two truths or three truths. To me, they are just skillful means. I am aiming towards being able to give rise to right views. I don’t know.
Make personal vows.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10125
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:33 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 7:49 am
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.
The original character means "lookout", so the meaning was "Heavenly Lookout" or "Observatory of Heaven". The simplified term loses the emphasis on the activity that takes place and instead puts emphasis on the physical characteristic, so you end up with a sense, "Heavenly Platform".

Simplification here also has a different etymology with a few characters with different meanings being simplified to 台.

The character for Buddha follows a different logic. Its a foreign word that was rendered based phonetic rules. That said, people have a way of reading meaning into characters. I am sure meaning has been read into the character and into other characters that share radicals over time, and the choice of radicals in its simplifications has contributed to changing nuance.

Chinese characters don't follow the same sort of etymological conventions you find in other languages.
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: 2510
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 5:57 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:33 pm
Chinese characters don't follow the same sort of etymological conventions you find in other languages.
I noticed it was a bizarre simplification. It's odd, because 台 is used all over the Taishō reactions of the texts, predating this simplification. I wonder if the Taishō editors were already using 台 for some reason, and if using these two interchangeably predates communist simplification.

Well, I have some stuff to look up. :reading:
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

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10125
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Queequeg » Sat Mar 07, 2020 6:03 pm

Caoimhghín wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:57 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:33 pm
Chinese characters don't follow the same sort of etymological conventions you find in other languages.
I noticed it was a bizarre simplification. It's odd, because 台 is used all over the Taishō reactions of the texts, predating this simplification. I wonder if the Taishō editors were already using 台 for some reason, and if using these two interchangeably predates communist simplification.

Well, I have some stuff to look up. :reading:
I think its a phonetic rule simplification.

I know that 台 was in use in the Kamakura period, and probably predates Saicho. This goes back to China probably at least 1200 years ago. I was looking around my house to see if we have any old Chinese character dictionaries.
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: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:06 pm

Of difference and of purpose .....

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3fc/8 ... b32936.pdf
the Tiantai view of the relation between the two truths cannot be interpreted as identity. The relation between the two truths is explained in Tiantai by the relation among three truths (三諦). These are sometimes called ultimate truth (眞諦),conventional truth (俗諦), and the middle truth (中諦)’ , but also sometimes emptiness (空), the provisional (假), and the middle (􀮤).

The founder of the Tiantai tradition, Zhiyi(智顗), characterized the relation as round fusionamong three truths (三諦圓融). 圓三諦者. 非但中道具足佛法. 眞俗亦然. 三諦圓融一三三一. 法華玄義 (Fa Hua Xyan Yi), Taisho, vol.33, p.705.

The round doctrine of the three truths is that not only the middle, but also the ultimate and conventional truths constitute Buddha dharma. The three truths roundly fuse with one other. One is three, and three is one.
Just what this round fusion (圓融) consists in, is a difficult question. Zhiyi himself admitted that it is very difficult, even impossible, to grasp it
conceptually. 此三諦理不可思議無決定性實不可説. 摩訶止観 (Mohe Zhiguan), Taisho, vol.46, p.26.



The characteristics of these three truths are unthinkable. Since they don’t have any determinate nature, they are inexplicable indeed.6 But he did his best to explicate it anyway. Here is an example.非三而三三而不三. 非合非散而合而散. 非非合非非散不可一異而一
異. 譬如明鏡. 明喩即空. 像喩即假. 鏡喩即中. 不合不散合散宛然. 不一二三二三無妨. 摩訶止観 (Mohe Zhiguan), Taisho, vol.46, p.8-9

[The three truths are] not three but three, three but not three;
neither integrated nor disintegrated, but both integrated and
disintegrated; neither non-integrated nor non-disintegrated;
neither one nor different, but both one and different. Let me use
the metaphor of clear mirror. Clear light is a metaphor of
emptiness. Vision is a metaphor of the provisional. The mirror is
a metaphor of the middle. They are neither integrated nor
disintegrated, and both integrated and disintegrated. There is no
difference between integration and disintegration. They are
neither one, two, nor three. And there is no obstruction between
two and three.
Even with this metaphor, we must acknowledge that it is difficult to
understand the relation among the three truths. But one thing is clear: it is
not identity. As Zhiyi explicitly states, it is “neither one nor different” and
“both one and different.”
Now, it might be tempting to read this last claim that the truths are
both identical and different as one more dialethia: the relation is identity,
and something else as well. But here we must proceed with caution. The
context makes it clear that Zhiyi is stating that the relation among the
truths is like identity in some respects, and like difference in others. Most
7 crucially, as we shall see, the relation does not support the mutual
substitutivity of identicals, and so is not literal identity.
http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.co ... odern_Time

The “Round” Doctrine of Tian Tai and Its Significance for Modern Time

practice in Mohe Zhiguan is also called the Round and Abrupt contemplation, where Zhiyi includes all methods of practice such as ritual practice and repentance. Any object can be practiced if one understands that the higher truth is not beyond the conventional. One should see the phenomena as empty, conventional and middle in one single thought. Conclusion
The advantage of Tian Tai in modern time is that it balances theory and practice. Not only does it systematically present all Buddhist thoughts but also contains its own systematical practice. In this 21th century, it seems that the modern people are more self-isolated and perplexed; thus it is necessary to further develop some spirit of Tian Tai and re-examine it. Round, inclusive are significant to modern society. We need to accept others; we cannot force others to give up their traditions. Any tradition and culture should be truly accepted. In Tian Tai, any level of practice is acceptable under the expedient means; anyone can receive benefits from the Buddha’s teaching. Even the immoral person still has the possibility to survive. Also, “one mind with three thousand realms” includes the hell realm in the Buddha realm. This is the unique doctrine of Tian Tai— Anyone has hope and possibility to become a Buddha.

Malcolm
Posts: 31196
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Sun Mar 08, 2020 2:59 pm

The advantage of Tian Tai in modern time is that it...systematically present all Buddhist thoughts but also contains its own systematical practice.
Correction, it presents an interpretation of all Buddhist thought known to Zhiyi, but that necessarily excludes 6 centuries of Buddhist thought in India and elsewhere (such as Khotan and Central Asia, etc.), and does not mean he was necessarily party to contemporary developments in Buddhist thought in India. Of course, everyone knows that the dominant strains of Buddhist thought and writing in China were Hua Yen and Tien Tai.

tkp67
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Sun Mar 08, 2020 6:49 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Mar 08, 2020 2:59 pm
The advantage of Tian Tai in modern time is that it...systematically present all Buddhist thoughts but also contains its own systematical practice.
Correction, it presents an interpretation of all Buddhist thought known to Zhiyi, but that necessarily excludes 6 centuries of Buddhist thought in India and elsewhere (such as Khotan and Central Asia, etc.), and does not mean he was necessarily party to contemporary developments in Buddhist thought in India. Of course, everyone knows that the dominant strains of Buddhist thought and writing in China were Hua Yen and Tien Tai.
That is a straw man argument but in order to make this clear you have to understand round in references to those teachings.

There are two aspects, one is the concept of the mind seeing itself and requiring three divisions to do so succinctly, not two. Munil posted the two truths being explained this way as right and wrong conventional view from a Tibetan teacher.

However what the concept "round" means in regards to the world honored one's enlightenment is after he achieved perfect enlightenment he dedicated his life to liberating various minds through various methods. The round aspect of these teachings is that Shakyamuni's liberation is to accommodate all minds, all capacities, all conditions all causes is a necessary part of enlightenment. One that need not be sequentially introduced but seeded in the same moment the practice is engage on any level. The ultimate economy of thought in regards to Shakyamuni's existence without loss of the cause and effect FROM ANY POTENTIAL PERSPECTIVE. Mayahana practice isn't about one's own enlightenment only and the round aspect ensures mayahana practice at all times even if one does not realize it.

Once we transverse the realms upon internal reflection of the mind we need to observe the same in others we cannot serve them. These teachings posses all of these teachings in one. A very shallow introduction to a much deeper practice.

:anjali:

User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Supramundane » Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:59 am

how does the concept of Three Truths account for the concept of Pervasion, meaning that something cannot be singular and plural at the same time.

The DL uses this principle to discuss the nature of the self; if the self is singular, then how can the aggregates be plural? either the self is all of the aggregates, which would mean we have multiple selves, or the self is beyond the aggregates, which would mean it would be eternal and thus not reflective of the aggregates. therefore, the conclusion he draws is that the aggregates cannot be considered a Self.

It seems to me that the quotes you have chosen about the Three Truths make reference to the Truths being independent but also being multiple at the same time...

how is this logically possible? how do you reconcile these notions?
tx

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 4138
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by LastLegend » Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:23 am

Supramundane wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:59 am
how does the concept of Three Truths account for the concept of Pervasion, meaning that something cannot be singular and plural at the same time.

The DL uses this principle to discuss the nature of the self; if the self is singular, then how can the aggregates be plural? either the self is all of the aggregates, which would mean we have multiple selves, or the self is beyond the aggregates, which would mean it would be eternal and thus not reflective of the aggregates. therefore, the conclusion he draws is that the aggregates cannot be considered a Self.

It seems to me that the quotes you have chosen about the Three Truths make reference to the Truths being independent but also being multiple at the same time...

how is this logically possible? how do you reconcile these notions?
tx
Oh boy what happens to direct experience these days?
Make personal vows.

User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 2510
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Caoimhghín » Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:43 am

Supramundane wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:59 am
how does the concept of Three Truths account for the concept of Pervasion, meaning that something cannot be singular and plural at the same time.

The DL uses this principle to discuss the nature of the self; if the self is singular, then how can the aggregates be plural? either the self is all of the aggregates, which would mean we have multiple selves, or the self is beyond the aggregates, which would mean it would be eternal and thus not reflective of the aggregates. therefore, the conclusion he draws is that the aggregates cannot be considered a Self.

It seems to me that the quotes you have chosen about the Three Truths make reference to the Truths being independent but also being multiple at the same time...

how is this logically possible? how do you reconcile these notions?
tx
All three truths are empty, all are the tathāgatagarbha, all are the true aspect. Not three, they are three; being three, they are not three. Neither combined nor separated, neither uncombined nor unseparated. Neither same nor different, yet same and different.

(Venerable Zhìyǐ, 摩訶止観 Mahāśamathavipaśyanā, T1911.8c29)


Riddle me that! These are tricky matters. I don't think Ven Zhìyǐ is talking about something that can be just casually discussed to any degree of real progress. It's like two scholarly pedant Mādhyamikas having an argument where they both merely use wordplay to make it seem like they've negated more thoroughly than their opponent.
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: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:26 pm

Supramundane wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:59 am
how does the concept of Three Truths account for the concept of Pervasion, meaning that something cannot be singular and plural at the same time.

The DL uses this principle to discuss the nature of the self; if the self is singular, then how can the aggregates be plural? either the self is all of the aggregates, which would mean we have multiple selves, or the self is beyond the aggregates, which would mean it would be eternal and thus not reflective of the aggregates. therefore, the conclusion he draws is that the aggregates cannot be considered a Self.

It seems to me that the quotes you have chosen about the Three Truths make reference to the Truths being independent but also being multiple at the same time...

how is this logically possible? how do you reconcile these notions?
tx
The simplest resolve is to contemplate the answer against the sutra they where born from (the lotus sutra)

IMHO the key here is to understand the nature of the methods not the part one understands versus the part one does not.

The difference is these methods accommodate various capacities, causes and conditions opposed to requiring a specific set of capacity, cause and conditions to understand at all.

The answers are both in the sutra and the teachings.

Remember the teachers in question here all understood that sutra. They took the requests at the assembly and contemporized to the zeigest of the people during the period their own existence. That is the epiphany of turning around. The mind understands the realms and how varying minds accord there of. It has had this capacity the whole time. It needs to be potentiated and realized.

tkp67
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:13 pm

One thing to keep in mind is the absolute becomes provisional over the term and the lotus sutra reveals this and allows for synchronization.

This happens on a sublime level genetically and expresses itself in our nature as well.

This can make an absolute teaching provisional over time, but contextually that teaching is still absolute and provisional from the perspective of the lotus sutra. In reality is both and neither, etc and so forth.

Why?

Because all of this occurs in the living moment, not outside of it so it the ultimate basis of perspective needs to be reconciled to the living moment from the point of cause which is the world honored one's enlightenment.

This is why verbiage such as eagle's peak or vulture's peak is used. It is denoting a hierarchy of conscious perspective whi.ch becomes natural over the term.

If we don't attempt to hold this all in the living moment we aren't fathoming the honored one's complete and perfect enlightenment because it included us and others if we can only muster the faith in such a prospect.

Simon E.
Posts: 7453
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Simon E. » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:20 pm

You frequently use the word verbiage.
I suspect that you do not know what that word means, and that it is frequently pejorative.

But please continue to ventilate your own subjective interpretation of a Sutra which means nothing to the vast majority of Buddhists in a subforum for the general mainstream Mahayana. It clearly has a function for you.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.

Malcolm
Posts: 31196
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:28 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:13 pm
One thing to keep in mind is the absolute becomes provisional over the term and the lotus sutra reveals this and allows for synchronization.

This happens on a sublime level genetically and expresses itself in our nature as well.

This can make an absolute teaching provisional over time, but contextually that teaching is still absolute and provisional from the perspective of the lotus sutra. In reality is both and neither, etc and so forth.

Why?

Because all of this occurs in the living moment, not outside of it so it the ultimate basis of perspective needs to be reconciled to the living moment from the point of cause which is the world honored one's enlightenment.

This is why verbiage such as eagle's peak or vulture's peak is used. It is denoting a hierarchy of conscious perspective whi.ch becomes natural over the term.

If we don't attempt to hold this all in the living moment we aren't fathoming the honored one's complete and perfect enlightenment because it included us and others if we can only muster the faith in such a prospect.
Intellectual smoothy: take a bunch of concepts, put them in a blender.

tkp67
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:38 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:20 pm
You frequently use the word verbiage.
I suspect that you do not know what that word means, and that it is frequently pejorative.

But please continue to ventilate your own subjective interpretation of a Sutra which means nothing to the vast majority of Buddhists in a subforum for the general mainstream Mahayana. It clearly has a function for you.
You frequently declare you don't understand me but critique me none the less

look to the statement that caused contention in this thread. Since there are plenty of those with a PHd education unravel this for me.

Some people have thinner frontal cortex which is a trait of several disorders (including attention/impulse disorders)

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e ... ness&btnG=

Buddhist practices such a meditation thicken frontal cortex.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e ... ning&btnG=

So does it stand to reason that some minds experience delusion (the relative) as a default aspect of existence which can be changed significant enough to reveal a state that does not have that same delusional influence?

How do you think this experience unfolds for someone like that? Would you be able to understand that from a personal perspective.

It seems you like to impose your mind on others as it posses an authority in regards to difference and compassion but your critiques don't seem to engage those aspects. Yet the world honored one did not show the same disdain to diversity did he?

:anjali:

tkp67
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by tkp67 » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:40 pm

Now does this invalidate previous teachings or does it simply make them provisional in a new day and age (without taking away their influence or causative merit) ?

Simon E.
Posts: 7453
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: The role of truth in Buddhism?

Post by Simon E. » Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:07 pm

The World Honoured One called out bullshit every time he encountered it. BECAUSE he was moved by compassion.
I suggest that you start simply by googling the word “verbiage”. Then read back on your posts. And cringe.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Astus, jeui and 55 guests