Four Dharma Seals

[DGA]

Sorry to bore those deeper acquainted to the dharma, my question is seriously posted:

What is it that is uncompoud?

I remember from a teaching, but cannot cite and may be wrong, there are three only:
(1) Nirvana
(2) Entrance into nirvana and
(3) mind

Could you please confirm or correct?

If so, why for example paradoxy is compound?

Thanks

It's hard to discuss "mind" in this context, because so many of us seem to have unique definitions for that term in mind when writing. So...

Would you please explain what you mean by mind?

Also: Is paradoxy a thing in itself, or is it a quality of a thing?

[Simon E.]

Sorry to bore those deeper acquainted to the dharma, my question is seriously posted:

What is it that is uncompoud?

I remember from a teaching, but cannot cite and may be wrong, there are three only:
(1) Nirvana
(2) Entrance into nirvana and
(3) mind

Could you please confirm or correct?

If so, why for example paradoxy is compound?

Thanks

It's hard to discuss "mind" in this context, because so many of us seem to have unique definitions for that term in mind when writing. So...

Would you please explain what you mean by mind?

Also: Is paradoxy a thing in itself, or is it a quality of a thing?

I have never seen a discussion concerning 'mind' on a Buddhist forum yet that did not go one of two ways.
Either it kind of peters out eventually ( see also threads like veggie or not, Aro etc) and is reborn sometime later..
Or the concept of mind is deconstructed along skandha lines...which is of course the most useful.
But it is extraordinary that we still think of 'mind' as a thing, and whats more a thing that is self-explanatory.

[Caoimhghín]

FYI, it would be helpful to include a Sanskrit title, like Saddharmapundarika-- assuming I am correct, this phrase is missing from the Tibetan text.

M

Apologies, I figured the Taishō number was the most straightforward way.

No worries, but it is an unattested reasding, i.e., pretty basless, Can you tell me exactly what chapter this comes from?

M

I can reproduce the relevant parts from the dictionary entry:

[From DDB:] The three marks of the law. Three aspects of the Buddhist teaching that clearly distinguish it from non-Buddhist teachings: all things are impermanent 諸行無常, all things lack inherent existence (no-self) 諸法無我, and that nirvāṇa is perfect quiescence 涅槃寂靜. 〔法華經 T 262.9.15b7〕 Also written 三印 (Skt. tri-dṛṣṭi-namitta-mudrā; Tib. phyag rgya gsum). [Charles Muller; source(s): YBh-Ind]

[If anyone has trouble accessing DDB, you just type 'guest' into the first line of the window that pops up and then hit enter.]

I don't know if 'Yhb-Ind' is a citation of a manuscript or something, or a scholarly work of some sort. The Taishō citation they give just links to the Chinese text. If indeed it was a reconstruction, I think it would have been nice for the dictionary compilers to try to mark it with at least an *asterisk.

[Simon E.]

'quiescence' ? Does anyone want to unpack it's usage here?

[Caoimhghín]

'quiescence' ? Does anyone want to unpack it's usage here?

寂靜

It can also be peaceful it seems.

Basic Meaning: quiescence

Senses:

• Tranquility, stillness. A synonym for enlightenment, or nirvāṇa (Skt. śānti, śama; nirābhāsa, nirodha, nirvāṇa, nirvâṇamupalabhate, nirvṛta, nirvṛti; Pāli santi, sama). The Sanskrit śama is transliterated as 舍摩. [Charles Muller; source(s): Nakamura, JEBD, Yokoi, Stephen Hodge, YBh-Ind, Hirakawa, Iwanami]

• Mental equipoise; stabilizing meditation, or calm abiding. The Sanskrit śamatha is translated as 止 and 定 and is transliterated as 奢摩他. [Charles Muller; source(s): YBh-Ind, Hirakawa]

• The Yogâcārabhūmi discusses four kinds of tranquilization 四種寂靜. [Charles Muller]

• Solitary existence, living apart from society, without social interaction. (vivikta, viveka) [Charles Muller; source(s): Nakamura]

• (Skt. saumyatā, śānta,praśama, alam, asaṃsarga, āraṇyaka, āśvāsa, uparati, upaśamana, upaśānta, upaśānti, nairvānī, naiḥsvâbhāvya, parinirvṛta, *praviveka, praśānta, praśānta-vihārin, praśānti, prasrabdha, prasrabdhi, brahman, muni, mauna, yoga-kṣema, vāntī-bhūta, vijana, viprasanna, viśuddha, vyavakṛṣṭa, vyavadāna-satya-dvaya, vyupaśama, vyupaśānta, vyupasama, śama-buddhi, śamayati, śāntatva, śānta-dharmatā, śānti-karī, śāstṛ, śiva, samāhita, samāhitatva, sānta, suviśuddha; Tib. zhi ba; zhi bar byed pa) [Charles Muller; source(s): Hirakawa, YBh-Ind]

It seems this dictionary has a lot of citation of one source?

[Simon E.]

Processing... ............................

[Malcolm]

Apologies, I figured the Taishō number was the most straightforward way.

No worries, but it is an unattested reasding, i.e., pretty basless, Can you tell me exactly what chapter this comes from?

M

I can reproduce the relevant parts from the dictionary entry:

[From DDB:] The three marks of the law. Three aspects of the Buddhist teaching that clearly distinguish it from non-Buddhist teachings: all things are impermanent 諸行無常, all things lack inherent existence (no-self) 諸法無我, and that nirvāṇa is perfect quiescence 涅槃寂靜. 〔法華經 T 262.9.15b7〕 Also written 三印 (Skt. tri-dṛṣṭi-namitta-mudrā; Tib. phyag rgya gsum). [Charles Muller; source(s): YBh-Ind]

[If anyone has trouble accessing DDB, you just type 'guest' into the first line of the window that pops up and then hit enter.]

I don't know if 'Yhb-Ind' is a citation of a manuscript or something, or a scholarly work of some sort. The Taishō citation they give just links to the Chinese text. If indeed it was a reconstruction, I think it would have been nice for the dictionary compilers to try to mark it with at least an *asterisk.

The term phyag rgya gsum does indeed appear in Tibetan dictionaries, but in the bstan 'gyur it is a very rare term, showing up in only four texts, one of those the Korean commentary mentioned already (apart from Tantric texts where the term means something else). The term shows up in the bka' 'gyur, but again, here it does not refer to the formula "all formations," etc.

[O_156]

Apologies, I figured the Taishō number was the most straightforward way.

No worries, but it is an unattested reasding, i.e., pretty basless, Can you tell me exactly what chapter this comes from?

M

I can reproduce the relevant parts from the dictionary entry:

[From DDB:] The three marks of the law. Three aspects of the Buddhist teaching that clearly distinguish it from non-Buddhist teachings: all things are impermanent 諸行無常, all things lack inherent existence (no-self) 諸法無我, and that nirvāṇa is perfect quiescence 涅槃寂靜. 〔法華經 T 262.9.15b7〕 Also written 三印 (Skt. tri-dṛṣṭi-namitta-mudrā; Tib. phyag rgya gsum). [Charles Muller; source(s): YBh-Ind]

[If anyone has trouble accessing DDB, you just type 'guest' into the first line of the window that pops up and then hit enter.]

I don't know if 'Yhb-Ind' is a citation of a manuscript or something, or a scholarly work of some sort. The Taishō citation they give just links to the Chinese text. If indeed it was a reconstruction, I think it would have been nice for the dictionary compilers to try to mark it with at least an *asterisk.

I might be looking at a totally wrong place, but is 法華經 T 262.9.15b7 the correct place where 三印 (Three Seals) is mentioned? Because I’m not seeing it.
I do see the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom getting cited often though.

Question. - What are the seals of the Buddha's Dharma?

Answer. - There are three kinds of seals of the Buddha's Dharma: i) All conditioned dharmas (samskrtadharma) arising and perishing from moment to moment are impermanent (anitya); ii) All dharmas are without (anātman); [222b] iii) Peaceful is nirvana (santam nirvanam).

Lamotte, Étienne. The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra)
Chapter XXXVI: The Eight Recollections, II. Recollection of the Dharma, 6. Dharma of Unhindered Penetration, P. 1120
(https://ia801709.us.archive.org/26/item ... arjuna.pdf)

As to where the term ‘Three Seals’ comes from, I don’t know anything about the subject, and I can’t read Sanskrit either, but I found a paper by a Japanese researcher Yoshihito Muroji, and according to him the ‘Three Seals’ (Dharmamudrā Trilakṣaṇā – is this different from tri-dṛṣṭi-namitta-mudrā?) was coined by Mātṛceṭa in Varṇārhaṇastotra (Jens-Uwe Hartmann ed. Göttingen 1987) Verse 1, Chapter 6.

(sarva)[dh](a)rmā anātmānaḥ kṣaṇikaṃ sarvasaṃskṛta(m) /
śāntaṃ nirvā[ṇa]m i[ty] eṣā [dha]rmamudrā trilakṣaṇā //
(https://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/ ... 88_442.pdf)

The paper is in Japanese but the abstract is available in English.

In the cultural sphere of the Pāli canons the three sutta-phrases that have been transmitted are "all compounded things are impermanent" (Pāli: sabbe sankhārā aniccā), "all compounded things are suffering" (sabbe sankhārā dukhā), and "all dhammas are without a self" (sabbe dhammā anattā), which originate from the words of the Buddha (see the Dhammapada, vv. 277-279 in the Chap. XX 'magga'). As is known from the appearance of these three phrases among the sayings of Aññā-Kondañña (see the Theragāthā, vv. 676-678), who would become the Buddha's first disciples at the time of his first sermon, the Pāli transmission of the three phrases has been believed to the present to possess the three marks (tilakkhana) of the Buddha's teaching for those following his path. On the contrary, in the Chinese linguistic cultural sphere the three phrases "all conditioned things are impermanent" (Skt.: sarvasam skārā anityā), "all dharmas are without a self" (sarvadharmā anātmānah), and "nirvāna is peace" (śāntamnirvānam) have their source in the Buddha's words and are sūtra-phrases used by the Buddha's disciples led by Ānanda soon after his parinirvāna as part of a new trend of thought from "all is suffering" to "nirvāna is peace" (see the Samyuktāgama, No. 262). These three phrases were fixed during the first period of translation in China of the Āgamas and the Sarvāstivādin Ābhidharmic literature from around the end of the 3rd century to the first half of the 4th century. Concerning the term 三法印, the original Sanskrit is, as far as we know, a newly coined word, dharmamudrā trilaksanā, used by the Buddhist poet Mātrceta to poetically evoke non-self, momentariness, and peace in the first verse of the sixth chapter Avivādastava of the Varmārhanastotra in about the 2nd century.

Muroji, Yoshihito. ʻThree Dharma sealsʼ (dharmamudrā trilakṣaṇā): The Origin and Aspects of Developments of three Phrases in Classical India
(TheTōhō Gakuhō Journal of Oriental Studies (Kyoto) No. 88 (2013) 442–423)
(https://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/ ... 433/180561)

[Caoimhghín]

I might be looking at a totally wrong place, but is 法華經 T 262.9.15b7 the correct place where 三印 (Three Seals) is mentioned? Because I’m not seeing it.

I was having a difficult time following the citation as well, otherwise I would have responded with the section in question as well as the dictionary quotes. I made a thread about the sort of thing here.

The CBETA edition of T262 I'm referencing only has 7 scrolls. This is citing a 9th scroll. This means that the scroll numbers and volume numbers are not always the same, and there seems to be no way to know if someone is citing a scroll or a volume.

So the Saṃgaṇikīkṛtaṃ Taiśotripiṭakaṃ Database (SAT DB) has it by volume number, and the citation there is T0262_.09.0015b07, which corresponds to T262.9.15b7 from the dictionary.

The Taishō Canon I consult lists it by scroll number, not volume number. So the citation for me is T262.2.15b7. Maybe you can find it that way. Try looking for scroll 2 instead of volume 9.

This is the text: 故現於世 汝舍利弗 我此法印

This seems an odd citation to give for 三印, as the text actually has 法印.

[Malcolm]

I might be looking at a totally wrong place, but is 法華經 T 262.9.15b7 the correct place where 三印 (Three Seals) is mentioned? Because I’m not seeing it.

I was having a difficult time following the citation as well, otherwise I would have responded with the section in question as well as the dictionary quotes. I made a thread about the sort of thing here.

The CBETA edition of T262 I'm referencing only has 7 scrolls. This is citing a 9th scroll. This means that the scroll numbers and volume numbers are not always the same, and there seems to be no way to know if someone is citing a scroll or a volume.

So the Saṃgaṇikīkṛtaṃ Taiśotripiṭakaṃ Database (SAT DB) has it by volume number, and the citation there is T0262_.09.0015b07, which corresponds to T262.9.15b7 from the dictionary.

The Taishō Canon I consult lists it by scroll number, not volume number. So the citation for me is T262.2.15b7. Maybe you can find it that way. Try looking for scroll 2 instead of volume 9.

This is the text: 故現於世 汝舍利弗 我此法印

This seems an odd citation to give for 三印, as the text actually has 法印.

For those who do not read Chinese, this is useless, especially in the Nyingma Forum.

[Caoimhghín]

I might be looking at a totally wrong place, but is 法華經 T 262.9.15b7 the correct place where 三印 (Three Seals) is mentioned? Because I’m not seeing it.

I was having a difficult time following the citation as well, otherwise I would have responded with the section in question as well as the dictionary quotes. I made a thread about the sort of thing here.

The CBETA edition of T262 I'm referencing only has 7 scrolls. This is citing a 9th scroll. This means that the scroll numbers and volume numbers are not always the same, and there seems to be no way to know if someone is citing a scroll or a volume.

So the Saṃgaṇikīkṛtaṃ Taiśotripiṭakaṃ Database (SAT DB) has it by volume number, and the citation there is T0262_.09.0015b07, which corresponds to T262.9.15b7 from the dictionary.

The Taishō Canon I consult lists it by scroll number, not volume number. So the citation for me is T262.2.15b7. Maybe you can find it that way. Try looking for scroll 2 instead of volume 9.

This is the text: 故現於世 汝舍利弗 我此法印

This seems an odd citation to give for 三印, as the text actually has 法印.

For those who do not read Chinese, this is useless, especially in the Nyingma Forum.

You can have the moderators delete it then. I was clarifying to O_156 why it was a strange citation.

[O_156]

You can have the moderators delete it then. I was clarifying to O_156 why it was a strange citation.

Thank you for the clarification, I found it. I think its a translation of the word dharma-mudrā, as far as I can tell.
But yes, moderators please feel free to delete my posts as well, if they distract the thread/topic.

[Dorje Shedrub]

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."

Ven. Thubten Chodron presents the second constraint (she uses the term "seal") this way saying: "All polluted phenomena are dukkha—unsatisfactory or in the nature of suffering."

I'm curious how one uses "emotions" and another "polluted phenomena" Is this a Gelug thing?

http://thubtenchodron.org/2011/08/core- ... rinciples/

[Malcolm]

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."

Ven. Thubten Chodron presents the second constraint (she uses the term "seal") this way saying: "All polluted phenomena are dukkha—unsatisfactory or in the nature of suffering."

I'm curious how one uses "emotions" and another "polluted phenomena" Is this a Gelug thing?

http://thubtenchodron.org/2011/08/core- ... rinciples/

The term in Sanskrit is sāsrava, literally "with outflows," often translated from Pali as "cankers." It is actually fairly rare in the sources texts, but Tibetans seem to have picked up on it and standardized it because it distinguishes formations from āsrava, outflows, cankers, etc.

M

[Malcolm]

I was having a difficult time following the citation as well, otherwise I would have responded with the section in question as well as the dictionary quotes. I made a thread about the sort of thing here.

The CBETA edition of T262 I'm referencing only has 7 scrolls. This is citing a 9th scroll. This means that the scroll numbers and volume numbers are not always the same, and there seems to be no way to know if someone is citing a scroll or a volume.

So the Saṃgaṇikīkṛtaṃ Taiśotripiṭakaṃ Database (SAT DB) has it by volume number, and the citation there is T0262_.09.0015b07, which corresponds to T262.9.15b7 from the dictionary.

The Taishō Canon I consult lists it by scroll number, not volume number. So the citation for me is T262.2.15b7. Maybe you can find it that way. Try looking for scroll 2 instead of volume 9.

This is the text: 故現於世 汝舍利弗 我此法印

This seems an odd citation to give for 三印, as the text actually has 法印.

For those who do not read Chinese, this is useless, especially in the Nyingma Forum.

You can have the moderators delete it then. I was clarifying to O_156 why it was a strange citation.

It's TOS, when using foreign terms, you must provide a translation for them.

[Caoimhghín]

You can have the moderators delete it then. I was clarifying to O_156 why it was a strange citation.

Thank you for the clarification, I found it. I think its a translation of the word dharma-mudrā, as far as I can tell.
But yes, moderators please feel free to delete my posts as well, if they distract the thread/topic.

Its ambiguous. 印 (seal; trace; mark; sign; imprint) has two radicals, 爪 (a hand) & 卩(a kneeling man). This could potentially point to dharmamudrā at least in as much as folk linguistics has a tendency to point to much.

But 法印 (dharma seal) can also have come from dharmoddāna still. The DDB (is this a working link for everyone?) has 印 as a semantic variant of 優檀那 (ʔɨu dɑn nɑ), which in turn is a phonetic transcription of the Sanskrit uddāna. Mind you, this reading seems only attested in a traditional Chinese-Sanskrit dictionary preserved at the end of the Taishō collection (T2131).

Apologies for the aside into speculations as to the origin of various terms for "dharma seal".

[weitsicht]

What is it that is uncompoud?

I remember from a teaching, but cannot cite and may be wrong, there are three only:
(1) Nirvana
(2) Entrance into nirvana and
(3) mind

Could you please confirm or correct?

If so, why for example paradoxy is compound?

Still looking for a response.
And no, don't want to discuss "mind" here.

[Malcolm]

You can have the moderators delete it then. I was clarifying to O_156 why it was a strange citation.

Thank you for the clarification, I found it. I think its a translation of the word dharma-mudrā, as far as I can tell.
But yes, moderators please feel free to delete my posts as well, if they distract the thread/topic.

Its ambiguous. 印 (seal; trace; mark; sign; imprint) has two radicals, 爪 (a hand) & 卩(a kneeling man). This could potentially point to dharmamudrā at least in as much as folk linguistics has a tendency to point to much.

But 法印 (dharma seal) can also have come from dharmoddāna still. The DDB (is this a working link for everyone?) has 印 as a semantic variant of 優檀那 (ʔɨu dɑn nɑ), which in turn is a phonetic transcription of the Sanskrit uddāna. Mind you, this reading seems only attested in a traditional Chinese-Sanskrit dictionary preserved at the end of the Taishō collection (T2131).

Apologies for the aside into speculations as to the origin of various terms for "dharma seal".

That is not a problem, the only problem is when you use Chinese terms with no explanation of what they mean.

[Malcolm]

What is it that is uncompoud?

I remember from a teaching, but cannot cite and may be wrong, there are three only:
(1) Nirvana
(2) Entrance into nirvana and
(3) mind

Could you please confirm or correct?

If so, why for example paradoxy is compound?

Still looking for a response.
And no, don't want to discuss "mind" here.

The three unconditioned phenomena are space, analytical cessation (nirvana), and non-analytical cessation (simple absence of causation).

[weitsicht]

What is it that is uncompoud?

I remember from a teaching, but cannot cite and may be wrong, there are three only:
(1) Nirvana
(2) Entrance into nirvana and
(3) mind

Could you please confirm or correct?

If so, why for example paradoxy is compound?

Still looking for a response.
And no, don't want to discuss "mind" here.

The three unconditioned phenomena are space, analytical cessation (nirvana), and non-analytical cessation (simple absence of causation).

Thanks Malcolm.
Meaning (3) mind was wrong. And (2) Entrance into nirvana is little differently interpreted

What makes phenomena like paradoxy compound?