Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:55 pm

Malcolm wrote:[but I don't buy it — there are too many contradictions inherent in the term, which is why we cannot take these buddhist sutras that discuss and use the term "self" literally. They are provisional and requite interpretation.
You were saying.


Nirvana Sutra
Chapter Six: On the Virtue of the Name

V199. “Then the Tathagata spoke again to Kasyapa: “O good man! You should now uphold all the words, chapters, clauses and all the virtues thereof of this sutra. Any good man or woman who hears the name of this sutra will never get born into the four realms [of hell, hungry ghost, animal, and asura]. Why not? I shall now expound to you all the virtues of this sutra and all that is practised by innumerable boundless Buddhas.”

V200. Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “O World-Honoured One! What is this sutra to be called? How should Bodhisattva-mahasattvas uphold this sutra?” The Buddha said to Kasyapa: “The name of this sutra is to be “Mahaparinirvana”. The foremost word betokens “good”, the middle also “good”, and the final “good” too. The signification [of this sutra] is extremely deep, and what is written [in it] is good. The pureness of its arrangement is perfect, its action is pure, and its adamantine treasure-house is all-satisfying. Listen well, listen well! I shall now speak. O good man! The word “maha” betokens “eternal”. This is like all the great rivers draining into the great ocean. The same with this sutra. It crushes out all the bonds of illusion and all the qualities of Mara, and then body and life drain into “Mahaparinirvana”. Hence we say “Mahaparinirvana.” O good man! This is like a doctor who has a secret treatment embracing all medical treatments for disease. O good man! It is the same with the Tathagata. V201. All the various wonderful doctrines taught and all the secret(esoteric) depths of meaning find their way into this Mahaparinirvana. That is why we say Mahaparinirvana. O good man! It is like a farmer who sows seed in spring. He entertains a rare wish. When he has finished the harvesting, all his longing is at an end. O good man! The same is the case with all beings. If we study other sutras, we always long for beautiful tastes. When one once hears this Mahaparinirvana, [however], one long ceases to covet the beautiful tastes mentioned in other sutras. This great Nirvana well enables all beings to cross the sea of all existences. O good man! Of all footprints, that of the elephant is the best. The same with this sutra. Of all the samadhis of the sutras, that of this sutra is the best. O good man! Of all the tillings of the field, that done in autumn is best.
V202. The same with this sutra. It is the best of all sutras. It is like sarpirmanda, which is the best of all medicines. It thoroughly cures the feverish worries and madding minds of beings. This Great Nirvana is the foremost of all. O good man! It is like sweet butter which contains the eight tastes. The same also applies to this sutra. It contains the eight tastes. What are the eight? These are: 1) it is eternal, 2) it always is, 3) it is peaceful, 4) it is pure and cool, 5) it does not grow old, 6) it does not die, 7) it is taintless, and 8) it is pleasing and happy. These are the eight tastes. It possesses these eight tastes. This is why we say “Mahaparinirvana”. Now, all Bodhisattva-mahasattvas peacefully abide in this and manifest Nirvana in all places. That is why we say “Mahaparinirvna”. O Kasyapa! All good men and women who desire to enter Nirvana by this Mahaparinirvana must study well the fact that the Tathagata is eternal and that the Dharma and Sangha are eternal.”

V203. Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “All is wonderful, O World-Honoured One! We cannot conceive of the Tathagata’s depths of virtue. The same is the case with the virtues of Dharma and Sangha. This Mahaparinirvana is also inconceivable. One who studies this sutra will gain the right eye of Dharma and become a good doctor. Anybody who has not studied this sutra, we should know, is [like] a blind person, not possessing the eye of Wisdom and overshadowed by ignorance.”

Malcolm
Posts: 31174
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:55 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:
Malcolm wrote:[
No, the illusion of a snake has never been the rope. If you really think that the illusion of snake is the rope you have just betrayed the basic flaw in your thinking.
Yes the rope and the illusion of the snake are the same. Cause whether a person see a rope or a misperception of a snake it doesn't change the fact he is looking at the same one object.
Just as there is no snake apart from the rope that we see, there also no snake in the rope that we see. So too it is with a self — there is no self apart from the persons and phenomena that we see, there is also no self in the persons and phenomena we perceive.

If the snake and the rope are the same thing, we should also see a snake when we see a rope.

Since we do not see a snake when we see a rope, and we do not see rope when we see a snake, we can understand that in fact the former perception is accompanied by knowledge and the latter perception is accompanied by ignorance.

We can understand that rope and the snake are just not the same thing. If they were the same thing, when one was seen, the other must always be seen. For example, when we fire, it is always accompanied by heat.

Likewise, If the self and the suchness are the same thing, we should also see a self when we see suchness.

Since we do not see a self when we see suchness, and we do not see suchness when we see a self, we can understand that in fact the former perception is accompanied by knowledge and the latter perception is accompanied by ignorance.

You make a big deal about purity, permanence and so on. There is no self without the selfless; there is purity without the impure, and so on. Taking these teachings in the Nirvana Sūtra and so on literally just traps one in dualistic categories. This why they cannot be taken literally.

Malcolm
Posts: 31174
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:56 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:
Malcolm wrote:[but I don't buy it — there are too many contradictions inherent in the term, which is why we cannot take these buddhist sutras that discuss and use the term "self" literally. They are provisional and requite interpretation.
You were saying.


Nirvana Sutra
Chapter Six: On the Virtue of the Name

V199. “Then the Tathagata spoke again to Kasyapa: “O good man! You should now uphold all the words, chapters, clauses and all the virtues thereof of this sutra. Any good man or woman who hears the name of this sutra will never get born into the four realms [of hell, hungry ghost, animal, and asura]. Why not? I shall now expound to you all the virtues of this sutra and all that is practised by innumerable boundless Buddhas.”

V200. Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “O World-Honoured One! What is this sutra to be called? How should Bodhisattva-mahasattvas uphold this sutra?” The Buddha said to Kasyapa: “The name of this sutra is to be “Mahaparinirvana”. The foremost word betokens “good”, the middle also “good”, and the final “good” too. The signification [of this sutra] is extremely deep, and what is written [in it] is good. The pureness of its arrangement is perfect, its action is pure, and its adamantine treasure-house is all-satisfying. Listen well, listen well! I shall now speak. O good man! The word “maha” betokens “eternal”. This is like all the great rivers draining into the great ocean. The same with this sutra. It crushes out all the bonds of illusion and all the qualities of Mara, and then body and life drain into “Mahaparinirvana”. Hence we say “Mahaparinirvana.” O good man! This is like a doctor who has a secret treatment embracing all medical treatments for disease. O good man! It is the same with the Tathagata. V201. All the various wonderful doctrines taught and all the secret(esoteric) depths of meaning find their way into this Mahaparinirvana. That is why we say Mahaparinirvana. O good man! It is like a farmer who sows seed in spring. He entertains a rare wish. When he has finished the harvesting, all his longing is at an end. O good man! The same is the case with all beings. If we study other sutras, we always long for beautiful tastes. When one once hears this Mahaparinirvana, [however], one long ceases to covet the beautiful tastes mentioned in other sutras. This great Nirvana well enables all beings to cross the sea of all existences. O good man! Of all footprints, that of the elephant is the best. The same with this sutra. Of all the samadhis of the sutras, that of this sutra is the best. O good man! Of all the tillings of the field, that done in autumn is best.
V202. The same with this sutra. It is the best of all sutras. It is like sarpirmanda, which is the best of all medicines. It thoroughly cures the feverish worries and madding minds of beings. This Great Nirvana is the foremost of all. O good man! It is like sweet butter which contains the eight tastes. The same also applies to this sutra. It contains the eight tastes. What are the eight? These are: 1) it is eternal, 2) it always is, 3) it is peaceful, 4) it is pure and cool, 5) it does not grow old, 6) it does not die, 7) it is taintless, and 8) it is pleasing and happy. These are the eight tastes. It possesses these eight tastes. This is why we say “Mahaparinirvana”. Now, all Bodhisattva-mahasattvas peacefully abide in this and manifest Nirvana in all places. That is why we say “Mahaparinirvna”. O Kasyapa! All good men and women who desire to enter Nirvana by this Mahaparinirvana must study well the fact that the Tathagata is eternal and that the Dharma and Sangha are eternal.”

V203. Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: “All is wonderful, O World-Honoured One! We cannot conceive of the Tathagata’s depths of virtue. The same is the case with the virtues of Dharma and Sangha. This Mahaparinirvana is also inconceivable. One who studies this sutra will gain the right eye of Dharma and become a good doctor. Anybody who has not studied this sutra, we should know, is [like] a blind person, not possessing the eye of Wisdom and overshadowed by ignorance.”
Oh yawn....

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by DGA » Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:41 pm

and here we are...
William Blake wrote:unable to do other than repeat the same dull round over again
http://www.bartleby.com/235/339.html

how many times have those chunks of that translation of chapter 6 of the Nirvana Sutra been posted to this board now?

Malcolm
Posts: 31174
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:42 pm

DGA wrote:and here we are...
William Blake wrote:unable to do other than repeat the same dull round over again
http://www.bartleby.com/235/339.html

how many times have those chunks of that translation of chapter 6 of the Nirvana Sutra been posted to this board now?
Until we all do this to SOB....
:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:46 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Just as there is no snake apart from the rope that we see, there also no snake in the rope that we see. So too it is with a self — there is no self apart from the persons and phenomena that we see, there is also no self in the persons and phenomena we perceive.
Sure there us a self apart from persons and phenomena.

Here is Ju Mipham’s gloss on 9:23, from the new Dharmachakra version of Sutralamkara: In the absence of the twofold self of persons and phenomena, this is the actual nature of things, the supreme nature of the abiding reality, the intrinsic nature or essence itself. In achieving this, the buddhas have achieved a nature that is of complete purity. Thus, [to actualize] the suchness that is the unmistaken way things are is to be “the self of great beings.” This self is not the same as the conceived object that is involved when apprehending the twofold self because such a self has no bearing on things as they are.

The Self of great beings(suchness) is apart from the self of persons and phenomena

And


Dolpopa)
From the start
without the entities of the two selves-the ultimate, emptiness, natural clear
light, endowed with all aspects, the natural innate pristine wisdom transcending
the momentary, abides as the self that is thusness, pure self, forever
without interruption.


(Left out all of Maitreyas and Asangas and the Nirvana Sutra quotes no need to beat a dead horse)

If the snake and the rope are the same thing, we should also see a snake when we see a rope.
The snake is an illusion that's very existence is predicated upon the rope which is its source, which again the fact remains when you see the illusion of the snake what you are actually seeing is the rope ........either way the illusion of the snake and the rope are the SAME object.

Since we do not see a snake when we see a rope, and we do not see rope when we see a snake, we can understand that in fact the former perception is accompanied by knowledge and the latter perception is accompanied by ignorance.
Yep I agree, still doesn't change the fact that whether you see an snake or a rope you are looking at the same object(misperception doesn't change that)
We can understand that rope and the snake are just not the same thing. If they were the same thing, when one was seen, the other must always be seen. For example, when we fire, it is always accompanied by heat.
What????....... If we look at the SAME OBJECT and you see a baseball and I see an softball it still doesn't change the fact we are looking at the SAME OBJECT.

Likewise, If the self and the suchness are the same thing, we should also see a self when we see suchness.
The numerous Tathagatagarbha Sutras state that Suchness is the True Self,(different words used to describe the same thing)

You make a big deal about purity, permanence and so on. There is no self without the selfless; there is purity without the impure, and so on. Taking these teachings in the Nirvana Sūtra and so on literally just traps one in dualistic categories. This why they cannot be taken literally
[/quote]

You claim they cannot be taken literally, the Buddha in those Sutras say the opposite.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by DGA » Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:51 pm

phpBB [video]

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:51 pm

DGA wrote:and here we are...
William Blake wrote:unable to do other than repeat the same dull round over again
http://www.bartleby.com/235/339.html

how many times have those chunks of that translation of chapter 6 of the Nirvana Sutra been posted to this board now?

Once.........

Malcolm
Posts: 31174
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:01 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Just as there is no snake apart from the rope that we see, there also no snake in the rope that we see. So too it is with a self — there is no self apart from the persons and phenomena that we see, there is also no self in the persons and phenomena we perceive.
Sure there us a self apart from persons and phenomena.

Here is Ju Mipham’s gloss on 9:23, from the new Dharmachakra version of Sutralamkara: In the absence of the twofold self of persons and phenomena, this is the actual nature of things, the supreme nature of the abiding reality, the intrinsic nature or essence itself. In achieving this, the buddhas have achieved a nature that is of complete purity. Thus, [to actualize] the suchness that is the unmistaken way things are is to be “the self of great beings.” This self is not the same as the conceived object that is involved when apprehending the twofold self because such a self has no bearing on things as they are.

The Self of great beings(suchness) is apart from the self of persons and phenomena
This is just a manner of speaking.



If the snake and the rope are the same thing, we should also see a snake when we see a rope.
The snake is an illusion that's very existence is predicated upon the rope which is its source, which again the fact remains when you see the illusion of the snake what you are actually seeing is the rope ........either way the illusion of the snake and the rope are the SAME object.
No, if they were the same object, we would always see a snake when we see a rope.

Since we do not see a snake when we see a rope, and we do not see rope when we see a snake, we can understand that in fact the former perception is accompanied by knowledge and the latter perception is accompanied by ignorance.
Yep I agree, still doesn't change the fact that whether you see an snake or a rope you are looking at the same object(misperception doesn't change that)
Yes, misperception does change that. Ignorance does not have an object of valid perception, that is why it is ignorance.


We can understand that rope and the snake are just not the same thing. If they were the same thing, when one was seen, the other must always be seen. For example, when we fire, it is always accompanied by heat.
What????....... If we look at the SAME OBJECT and you see a baseball and I see an softball it still doesn't change the fact we are looking at the SAME OBJECT.
In order to maintain this position, you would have to maintain that the water that you see and the pus and blood that a pretas sees are the same thing, something which objectively exists apart from your perception of it. In other words, you are maintaining that the round object we are seeing exists objectively. If you maintain such a thing, you are also maintaining that external phenomena have a self.


Likewise, If the self and the suchness are the same thing, we should also see a self when we see suchness.
The numerous Tathagatagarbha Sutras state that Suchness is the True Self,(different words used to describe the same thing)
As I said and will always maintain, they cannot be taken literally on this point.
You make a big deal about purity, permanence and so on. There is no self without the selfless; there is purity without the impure, and so on. Taking these teachings in the Nirvana Sūtra and so on literally just traps one in dualistic categories. This why they cannot be taken literally
You claim they cannot be taken literally, the Buddha in those Sutras say the opposite.[/quote][/quote]

Buddha taught such sūtras for the timid, those who are afraid of the Lion's Roar of emptiness.

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:02 pm

DGA wrote:
phpBB [video]

Then change the channel nobody forcing you to watch this programming.

All the OP wanted was a list of Buddhist teachers who taught True Self teaching's (not hard to provide there are many), but you guys wanted to go off topic to argue and harass the poor fellow because he has different view's than you.........so you guys got what you were looking for.

But please don't complain when you guys make statements and someone else is willing to reply to those statements in disagreement while providing Sutras and commentary to support their position. :twothumbsup:

Malcolm
Posts: 31174
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:04 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:
DGA wrote:
phpBB [video]

Then change the channel nobody forcing you to watch this programming.

All the OP wanted was a list of Buddhist teachers who taught True Self teaching's (not hard to provide there are many), but you guys wanted to go off topic to argue and harass the poor fellow because he has different view's than you.........so you guys got what you were looking for.

But please don't complain when you guys make statements and someone else is willing to reply to those statements in disagreement while providing Sutras and commentary to support their position. :twothumbsup:
Yes the problem is that you are using provisional sūtras and commentaries from Yogacara, which is a realist system lower than Madhyamaka.

amanitamusc
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by amanitamusc » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:20 pm

This seems to lean to the extreme of eternalism.

This is a Tibetan Buddhism thread.

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:19 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Yes the problem is that you are using provisional sūtras and commentaries from Yogacara, which is a realist system lower than Madhyamaka.
Yes the problem is that you are using provisional sūtras and commentaries from Madhyamaka which is a system that constantly requires interpretation due to it teetering very close to Nhilism/Annhilationism , such a system is lower than the definite Tathagatagarbha teachings..... :tongue:


Also the OP asked for a list of Buddhist teachers that taught True Self teachings, he didn't ask for a list of names for people on DW that want to complain because he is using Sutras and commentaries of the Yogacara tradition....... Also the fact that you think its okay to harass people just because they follow a different tenent system than your's SMACKS of Sectarianism.


Since when did it become a PROBLEM to follow Sutras and commentaries of Yogacara.

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:24 pm

amanitamusc wrote:This seems to lean to the extreme of eternalism.
Nah, nobody's trying to claim that an impermanent personality/ego is eternal and unchanging, which the actual definition the Buddha gave on what eternalism was.
This is a Tibetan Buddhism thread.
And plenty of Tibetan Buddhist masters have been quoted here.

krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by krodha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:24 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:Also the OP asked for a list of Buddhist teachers that taught True Self teachings, he didn't ask for a list of names for people on DW that want to complain because he is using Sutras and commentaries of the Yogacara tradition....... Also the fact that you think its okay to harass people just because they follow a different tenent system than your's SMACKS of Sectarianism.
For this charge of "sectarianism" to be valid you would first have to be accurately representing the system you claim to be representing. However since you are not, and all you are doing is parading around your own meager and unrefined misunderstanding of these teachings, it is again, not the teachings themselves that are being addressed, but your own misinterpretations.

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:34 pm

asunthatneversets wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote:Also the OP asked for a list of Buddhist teachers that taught True Self teachings, he didn't ask for a list of names for people on DW that want to complain because he is using Sutras and commentaries of the Yogacara tradition....... Also the fact that you think its okay to harass people just because they follow a different tenent system than your's SMACKS of Sectarianism.
For this charge of "sectarianism" to be valid you would first have to be accurately representing the system you claim to be representing. However since you are not, and all you are doing is parading around your own meager and unrefined misunderstanding of these teachings, it is again, not the teachings themselves that are being addressed, but your own misinterpretations.




Oh obviously he is talking about my interpretation of the yogacara teaching's, he obviously wasn't saying that the Yogacara Sutra's and commentaries were provisional or that Yogacara as a system was realist and lowly, beneath the Madhyamaka system


Obviously he was talking about me and not the Yogacara tenet system itself.

:rolling:
Yes the problem is that you are using provisional sūtras and commentaries from Yogacara, which is a realist system lower than Madhyamaka.

krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by krodha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:42 pm

Son of Buddha wrote:Oh obviously he is talking about my interpretation of the yogacara teaching's, he obviously wasn't saying that the Yogacara Sutra's and commentaries were provisional or that Yogacara as a system was realist and lowly, beneath the Madhyamaka system
Which I do agree with, Madhyamaka is far more refined than Yogācāra, since Yogācāra ends up a realist view.

Either way, this doesn't change the fact that many criticisms that are leveled against you are addressing your own interpretations.

Son of Buddha
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by Son of Buddha » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:48 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Just as there is no snake apart from the rope that we see, there also no snake in the rope that we see. So too it is with a self — there is no self apart from the persons and phenomena that we see, there is also no self in the persons and phenomena we perceive.
Sure there us a self apart from persons and phenomena.

Here is Ju Mipham’s gloss on 9:23, from the new Dharmachakra version of Sutralamkara: In the absence of the twofold self of persons and phenomena, this is the actual nature of things, the supreme nature of the abiding reality, the intrinsic nature or essence itself. In achieving this, the buddhas have achieved a nature that is of complete purity. Thus, [to actualize] the suchness that is the unmistaken way things are is to be “the self of great beings.” This self is not the same as the conceived object that is involved when apprehending the twofold self because such a self has no bearing on things as they are.

The Self of great beings(suchness) is apart from the self of persons and phenomena
This is just a manner of speaking.
Sure it is. ;)

I,m starting to think only Malcolm's quotes are literal and everyone else's quotes are metaphorical until Malcolm allows them to be literal.

Buddha taught such sūtras for the timid, those who are afraid of the Lion's Roar of emptiness.
I agree the Prajnaparamita Sutras were taught for the timid who are afraid of the Lion's Road of Emptiness.


Queen Srimala Sutra

Chapter 9: The true understanding of the meaning of emptiness V97. O’ Bhagavan, the wisdom of the Buddha Nature is the World Honored One’s wisdom of Sunyata[Emptiness]. The Buddha Nature is not something that has been seen or realized by any Arhat, or Pratyekabuddha. There are two types of Emptiness wisdom concerning the Buddha Nature which are as follows. (1) The Buddha nature is empty from, separate from, independent from and different from all the stores of defilement. (2) The Buddha nature is not-empty from, is not separate from, not independent from and not different from the inconceivable Buddha Attributes which are more numerous than the sands of the river Ganges. V98. O Bhagavan, The great Sravaka’s can have faith and entrust themselves to the Buddha through the two types of emptiness wisdom of the Buddha Nature. All the disciples and Pratyekabuddhas are stuck in the domain of the four inverse views because of their incorrect knowledge of emptiness. This is why none of the Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas have ever seen or attained the Buddha Nature. Only the Buddha’s have experienced the extinction of all suffering and destroyed all the stores of defilement. They alone have practiced all the paths which lead to the extinction of suffering.


Further commentary

Awakening of Faith in Mahayana
Suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty (sunya), for this aspect can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty (a-sunya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities.

1. Truly Empty
Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence; it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind. It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously. In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness; hence, the definition “empty”; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.

2. Truly Nonempty
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, i.e., devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called “nonempty”. And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.

krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by krodha » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:04 am

Son of Buddha wrote:I agree the Prajnaparamita Sutras were taught for the timid who are afraid of the Lion's Road of Emptiness.
Image

krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Buddhist teachers that teach a true self?

Post by krodha » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:10 am

Son of Buddha wrote:Queen Srimala Sutra

Chapter 9: The true understanding of the meaning of emptiness V97. O’ Bhagavan, the wisdom of the Buddha Nature is the World Honored One’s wisdom of Sunyata[Emptiness]. The Buddha Nature is not something that has been seen or realized by any Arhat, or Pratyekabuddha. There are two types of Emptiness wisdom concerning the Buddha Nature which are as follows. (1) The Buddha nature is empty from, separate from, independent from and different from all the stores of defilement. (2) The Buddha nature is not-empty from, is not separate from, not independent from and not different from the inconceivable Buddha Attributes which are more numerous than the sands of the river Ganges. V98. O Bhagavan, The great Sravaka’s can have faith and entrust themselves to the Buddha through the two types of emptiness wisdom of the Buddha Nature. All the disciples and Pratyekabuddhas are stuck in the domain of the four inverse views because of their incorrect knowledge of emptiness. This is why none of the Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas have ever seen or attained the Buddha Nature. Only the Buddha’s have experienced the extinction of all suffering and destroyed all the stores of defilement. They alone have practiced all the paths which lead to the extinction of suffering.

Further commentary

Awakening of Faith in Mahayana
Suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty (sunya), for this aspect can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty (a-sunya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities.

1. Truly Empty
Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence; it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind. It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously. In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness; hence, the definition “empty”; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.

2. Truly Nonempty
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, i.e., devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called “nonempty”. And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.
You do realize this is agreeing with the general Mahāyāna presentation of emptiness found in the prajñāpāramitā and Madhyamaka, yes?

"Non-empty" is simply a play on words to convey that one's nature is not deprived of Buddha qualities, which all Mahāyāna systems agree with... so this is a non-controversial view.

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: heart and 60 guests