What are the Four Dharma Seals?
How can they be depicted?
Who authenticates them??
What are the Four Dharma Seals?
https://www.lionsroar.com/buddhism-nuts ... ls-dharma/weitsicht wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:12 am Taken from the Aro Authenticity Debate viewtopic.php?f=49&t=27652&p=431249&hil ... ls#p431249
What are the Four Dharma Seals?
How can they be depicted?
Who authenticates them??
If you haven’t read it, DJKR’s book “What makes you not a Buddhist” is about the four dharma seals.
To put it more clearly ( I hope). I would not give a teacher support in any sense if she/he taught that;weitsicht wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:45 pm Thanks for the reference, Greg. Good read.
As for the contradiction you mention, Simon, I don't understand. But maybe I don't need to.
Since Dharma expressed through anything else than a conscious stream needs to make use of language or other dualistic means, I think it leaves immediately room for subjectivity, interpretation or opinion. That makes me now totally understand what this whole fuss in the other thread is about.
Hence Authentification impossible. It is left upon one's own scrunity.
Just for those readers who do not want to click to or read Greg's link above. Here are the Four Dharma Seals
(1) All compounded things are impermanent.
(2) All emotions are painful.
(3) All phenomena are empty; they are without inherent existence.
(4) Nirvana is beyond extremes.
DJKR in the same article: you could have a surfer giving you teachings on how to sit on a beach watching a sunset: if what he says contains all these four seals, it would be Buddhism.
beautiful.
I remember a webcast by Yuttadhammo Bhikku, he was asked about a quote in which the Buddha used the "I" about talking of himself. And the user wondered why the Buddha could talk in this dualistic way. So Bhikku was explaining, pity that I don't find this recording, about applying dualistic means of expression to approach nondualistic meaning.
Blimey, they've not been mentioned for a while.Simon E. wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:58 pmTo put it more clearly ( I hope). I would not give a teacher support in any sense if she/he taught that;weitsicht wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:45 pm Thanks for the reference, Greg. Good read.
As for the contradiction you mention, Simon, I don't understand. But maybe I don't need to.
Since Dharma expressed through anything else than a conscious stream needs to make use of language or other dualistic means, I think it leaves immediately room for subjectivity, interpretation or opinion. That makes me now totally understand what this whole fuss in the other thread is about.
Hence Authentification impossible. It is left upon one's own scrunity.
Just for those readers who do not want to click to or read Greg's link above. Here are the Four Dharma Seals
(1) All compounded things are impermanent.
(2) All emotions are painful.
(3) All phenomena are empty; they are without inherent existence.
(4) Nirvana is beyond extremes.
DJKR in the same article: you could have a surfer giving you teachings on how to sit on a beach watching a sunset: if what he says contains all these four seals, it would be Buddhism.
beautiful.
I remember a webcast by Yuttadhammo Bhikku, he was asked about a quote in which the Buddha used the "I" about talking of himself. And the user wondered why the Buddha could talk in this dualistic way. So Bhikku was explaining, pity that I don't find this recording, about applying dualistic means of expression to approach nondualistic meaning.
Some compounded things are permanent.
Some emotions are free from pain.
Some phenomena have inherent existence
And Nirvana is found in duality.
There are 'Buddhist' groups that teach at least one of the above. 'Dark Zen' being one example of such a group.
I didn't read the Aro thread, but I just want to say I really liked this DKR article. It's so nice to hear the basics unpacked simply and profoundly. Not to mention this little gem within it, about the three turnings:
DKR wrote:The Buddha taught three different approaches on three separate occasions. These are known as The Three Turnings of the Wheel, but they can be summed up in a single phrase: “Mind; there is no mind; mind is luminosity.”
The first, “Mind,” refers to the first set of teachings and shows that the Buddha taught that there is a “mind.” This was to dispel the nihilistic view that there is no heaven, no hell, no cause and effect. Then, when the Buddha said, “There is no mind,” he meant that mind is just a concept and that there is no such thing as a truly existing mind. Finally, when he said, “Mind is luminous,” he was referring to buddhanature, the undeluded or primordially existing wisdom.
The great commentator Nagarjuna said that the purpose of the first turning was to get rid of non-virtue. Where does the non-virtue come from? It comes from being either eternalist or nihilist. So in order to put an end to non-virtuous deeds and thoughts, the Buddha gave his first teaching. The second turning of the Dharma-wheel, when the Buddha spoke about emptiness, was presented in order to dispel clinging to a “truly existent self” and to “truly existent phenomena.” Finally, the teachings of the third turning were given to dispel all views, even the view of no-self. The Buddha’s three sets of teaching do not seek to introduce something new; their purpose is simply to clear away confusion.
Hinayāna scriptures do not talk about the four "seals" at all. They do have a regular list of three itemse which excludes nirvana:weitsicht wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:12 am Taken from the Aro Authenticity Debate viewtopic.php?f=49&t=27652&p=431249&hil ... ls#p431249
What are the Four Dharma Seals?
How can they be depicted?
Who authenticates them??
Neither did I until I looked it up in the bKa' 'gyur and bstan 'gyur last night. There are all kinds of received ideas we do not question.
No kidding! Or as it is put today, #Truth.
wow...holy shit...this is actually incredibly groundbreaking stuff Malcolm...perhaps you should think of writing an article for a major Buddhist journal just on this? Sometimes its a good thing to shake the orthodxy tree and see what falls out eh?Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:12 pmHinayāna scriptures do not talk about the four "seals" at all. They do have a regular list of three itemse which excludes nirvana:weitsicht wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:12 am Taken from the Aro Authenticity Debate viewtopic.php?f=49&t=27652&p=431249&hil ... ls#p431249
What are the Four Dharma Seals?
How can they be depicted?
Who authenticates them??
All formations ('du byed, samskara) are impermanent.
All formations are suffering.
All phenomena lack a self.
In its earliest usage in Mahāyāna Sūtras, the so called "four seals" were termed the four summaries of the Dharma (chos kyi mdo bzhi), and took the following form:
All formations are impermanent.
All formations are suffering.
All phenomena lack a self.
Nirvana is peaceful.
The term the "four seals" comes from the Korean Master Won Chuk's commentary on the Samdhinirmocana Sūtra. He identifies several sources for them, but specifically, the Mahāyānasutrālaṃkāra is the source for the term phyag rgya. However the term "seal" is not a direct translation, and in my opinion has lead to some confusion.
The term dharmoddānacatuṣṭayaṃ was translated into Chinese, from there into Tibetan as chos kyi phyag rgya bzhi in Wong Chuk's treatise. When translated directly from Sanskrit to Tibetan, it is chos kyi sdom ni rnam pa bzhi, i.e. the four constraints of the Dharma.
In reality, we have two terms used in Mahāyāna texts: 1) the four summaries of the Dharma and the four constraints of the Dharma, that latter coming from Mahāyānasutrālaṃkāra.
In my opinion, the term "four constraints" is more useful than "four seals," 1) because it shows us not how this or that teaching should be authenticated as a Dharma teachings with some seal of imprimatur, but rather, within what constraints a Dharma teaching should fall. 2) "Constraint" more accurately reflects the underlying original meaning of the term uddāna because it is derived from Sanskrit-->English, rather than the Sanskrit-->Chinese-->Tibetan-->English. Also, constraint/restraint is a widely accepted usage for translating the term sdom pa in this context.
Going forward, I suggest that we drop the usage "four seals of the Dharma" since it is misleading and not accurate.
Finally, in some presentations the second constraint is listed as "All that is contaminated is suffering," but surprisingly, it is very uncommon in this list which is mentioned through out Mahāyāna sūtras in many places. The reading above is the most common in the Sūtras. In one or two places you see "empty" attached to the third constraint, as in "All phenomena are empty and without a self."
I am unclear what point you are making..Who or what is this addressed to?
The Digital Dictionary of Buddhism lists 三印 ("the three seals") as a translation of tridṛṣṭinamittamudrā (or phyag rgya gsum) specifically in the case of T 262.9.15b7 (妙法蓮華經, Ven Kumārajīva translation). Very interesting.
Sounds like a reconstruction to me.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:34 pmThe Digital Dictionary of Buddhism lists 三印 ("the three seals") as a translation of tridṛṣṭinamittamudrā specifically in the case of T 262.9.15b7 (妙法蓮華經, Ven Kumārajīva translation). Very interesting.