"One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Grigoris » Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:20 am

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:22 pm
Grigoris wrote:
Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:09 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:17 pm
All functional phenomena are conventional.
When reduced to functional phenomena via conceptualisation.
There are no other kinds of functional phenomena.
I am not really disagreeing except to say that one's experience, if non-conceptual, is not relative/conventional until one starts to conceptualise it. Post-meditation, for example.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Malcolm
Posts: 29105
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:12 pm

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:50 am
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 12:28 am
... you have misrepresented everything I said ....
I deny that. I used your own words to demonstrate the incoherence/internal contradiction of your own words. Perhaps, you misrepresented yourself.
No, you didn’t. You don’t seem to comprehend what truths are.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1323
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Sherab » Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:07 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:12 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:50 am
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 12:28 am
... you have misrepresented everything I said ....
I deny that. I used your own words to demonstrate the incoherence/internal contradiction of your own words. Perhaps, you misrepresented yourself.
No, you didn’t. You don’t seem to comprehend what truths are.
Whatever. It is clear to me that you simply can accept the fact that your own statements are contradictory. You can declare yourself victorious for all I care.

User avatar
fuki
Posts: 210
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:51 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by fuki » Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:34 pm

From another forum;
misconception is a conception. what makes it "mis" is that it is usually perceived as opposite to one's own conception. in the end, it's all conceptions.
there's really no need to be tangled up with or try to untangle misconceptions or right conceptions. sometimes right conceptions are unhelpful, if advanced with a certain agenda/intention; sometimes a misconception leads to peace/happiness. most time what is a misconception for one at a certain time in life evolves to another right conception.
the tendency/need to correct others, defend the dharma, etc really comes from self-grasping, lack of humility.
this is not to say that anything goes. but it's important to have love, humility, and dignity for self and other.
my two cents...
be well,
guo gu
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/

Malcolm
Posts: 29105
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:51 pm

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:07 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:12 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 5:50 am

I deny that. I used your own words to demonstrate the incoherence/internal contradiction of your own words. Perhaps, you misrepresented yourself.
No, you didn’t. You don’t seem to comprehend what truths are.
Whatever. It is clear to me that you simply can accept the fact that your own statements are contradictory. You can declare yourself victorious for all I care.
And you seem unable to accept the fact that you are a realist who accepts the ultimate is an inherent existent.

Malcolm
Posts: 29105
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:55 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:20 am
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:22 pm
Grigoris wrote:
Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:09 pm
When reduced to functional phenomena via conceptualisation.
There are no other kinds of functional phenomena.
I am not really disagreeing except to say that one's experience, if non-conceptual, is not relative/conventional until one starts to conceptualise it. Post-meditation, for example.
Sure it is, even nonconceptual minds are conditioned and relative. There isn't anything other than conventional phenomena, even space and nirvana are conventional. Space is how we designated nonobsruction; cessation is how we designated the absence of cause for a series to continue. Emptiness is how we conventionally designate absence of inherent existence, but none of these exist from their own side.

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Grigoris » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:16 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:55 pm
Sure it is, even nonconceptual minds are conditioned and relative.
I disagree. I believe that one can have glimpses of the unconditioned, but they then rely on conditioned means to express this experience (language), or rely on conditioned means to recall it (memory). Doesn't mean that the experience, or what was experienced, was conditioned.

I believe that the notion, or characterisation, of Nirvana is conditioned, but Nirvana itself... If Nirvana is conditioned, then it means it is temporary. But we have had this discussion before, only we were on opposite sides of the discussion last time. ;)
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Malcolm
Posts: 29105
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 28, 2018 8:45 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:16 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:55 pm
Sure it is, even nonconceptual minds are conditioned and relative.
I disagree. I believe that one can have glimpses of the unconditioned but then reverts to conditioned means to express this experience (language), or relies on conditioned means to recall it (memory). Doesn't mean that the experience, or what was experienced, was conditioned.
All experiences are conditioned. A mind by definition cannot have an unconditioned perception since perception requires an object, a subject, and the act of perceiving.
I believe that the notion, or characterisation, of Nirvana is conditioned, but Nirvana itself... If Nirvana is conditioned, then it means it is temporary. But we have had this discussion before, only we were on opposite sides of the discussion last time. ;)
Nirvana is the cessation of afflictions due to the realization of the absence of the true existence of a self in persons and phenomena. That's it. Nirvana isn't conditioned, but it is a convention.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1323
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Sherab » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:26 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:51 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:07 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 2:12 pm


No, you didn’t. You don’t seem to comprehend what truths are.
Whatever. It is clear to me that you simply can accept the fact that your own statements are contradictory. You can declare yourself victorious for all I care.
And you seem unable to accept the fact that you are a realist who accepts the ultimate is an inherent existent.
Now, this is a real example of a misrepresentation.

I don't know what the ultimate is. I am not an enlightened being. I can only tell you what the ultimate is not.

The ultimate cannot be known by mere intellectualisation. It can only be known by direct experience. You know that. Practically everyone on this board also knows that.

And what is the ultimate not? It is not eternalism, understood as something with no possibility of changes. It is not something static. The ultimate is also not nihilism, understood as something that arises and ceases without any possibility of a continuum of arising and ceasing. That has been my position all along. It is what the Buddha himself taught as the avoidance of the two extremes of existence and non-existence. Again, most on this board will know this.

So why the need to misrepresent the position of others? I can offer some reasons. Take your pick. (1) They did understand their opponent's position through lack of comprehension; (2) Their need to win becomes an obstruction to understanding their opponent's position. (You see a lot of this in Christian and Muslim apologists' arguments against atheists.); (3) They hold their status in the eyes of others as of utmost important and therefore cannot afford to be seen to be on the losing end. (4) They have an agenda to promote their own position. (Again, this is the case with apologists of specific religion.) Feel free to add to this list.

The only way your view on what I am is true is if I am ignorant of my own position and were making arguments against my own position without knowing it. So far, you have not demonstrated this. Neither have you demonstrated that my argument against your position is logically invalid.

What was the logical argument that I made? You said "even ultimate truth is merely a conventional truth" Call this statement 1. You also said, "An ultimate truth is the veridical perception of a given entity, a relative truth is the non-veridical perception of a given entity. " Call this statement 2.

Statement 1 can be represented as U -> C, where U = ultimate truth and C = conventional truth
Statement 2 can be represented as U = V, R = not V, where V = veridical perception of a given entity.
Substituting 2 into 1 gives V -> not V, which is incoherent.

Anyone with an understanding of logic will tell you that the argument above is logically correct. Whether the argument is valid or not depends then on whether the premises, statements 1 & 2, are true. If we take your premises as true, than the argument is true and you have an incoherent conclusion. So one of your premises must be false. I would suggest that Statement 1 is false, namely that the ultimate truth is merely a conventional truth. I have already stated before that I thought that saying the ultimate truth is merely a conventional truth is to over negate. It is my view that the incoherence from over-negation implies the undermining of the possibility of knowing what reality is, a consequence that I tried to argue in an earlier post. In other words, when you negate the ultimate to such an extent that it reduces the ultimate to the convention, and since the convention excludes veridical perception, that veridical perception that is necessary for knowing the ultimate is excluded as well.

Refute the above argument if you can. If not, do not make wild allegations of misrepresentation of your position as it only serves to diminish your status.
Last edited by Sherab on Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
coffeebeans
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:27 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by coffeebeans » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:31 pm

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:26 pm
It can only be known by direct experience. You know that. Practically everyone on this board also knows that.
Who is experiencing it, and experiencing what?

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1323
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Sherab » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:41 pm

coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:31 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:26 pm
It can only be known by direct experience. You know that. Practically everyone on this board also knows that.
Who is experiencing it, and experiencing what?
Are you a figment of my imagination?

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Grigoris » Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:54 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 8:45 pm
All experiences are conditioned. A mind by definition cannot have an unconditioned perception since perception requires an object, a subject, and the act of perceiving.
I disagree. I believe one can have an unconditioned experience. An experience/glimpse of gzhi, for example, cannot be conditioned as the conditioned mind cannot experience the unconditioned. Post-experience, the conditioning begins.
Nirvana is the cessation of afflictions due to the realization of the absence of the true existence of a self in persons and phenomena. That's it. Nirvana isn't conditioned, but it is a convention.
How can something be a convention and unconditioned at the same time? It cannot. The description is conditioned, not the object being described. You are confusing the finger for the moon.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
coffeebeans
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:27 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by coffeebeans » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:13 pm

There is no experience without faculties of perception and an object to experience. "Direct experience" of an ultimate or unconditioned are indeed a fantasy

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2398
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by 明安 Myoan » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:23 pm

coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:13 pm
There is no experience without faculties of perception and an object to experience. "Direct experience" of an ultimate or unconditioned are indeed a fantasy
A nirvana which isn't experienced or known doesn't seem like a very useful goal to me.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

The Fundamental Vow [of Amitabha Buddha] is just for such people as woodcutters and grassgatherers, vegetable pickers, drawers of water and the like, illiterate folk who merely recite the Buddha's name wholeheartedly, confident that as a result of saying "Namu Amida Butsu" they will be born into the western land. -- Master Hōnen

User avatar
coffeebeans
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:27 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by coffeebeans » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:24 pm

Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:23 pm
coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:13 pm
There is no experience without faculties of perception and an object to experience. "Direct experience" of an ultimate or unconditioned are indeed a fantasy
A nirvana which isn't experienced or known doesn't seem like a very useful goal to me.
Welcome to the Dharma. :hi:

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2398
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by 明安 Myoan » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:40 pm

coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:24 pm
Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:23 pm
coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:13 pm
There is no experience without faculties of perception and an object to experience. "Direct experience" of an ultimate or unconditioned are indeed a fantasy
A nirvana which isn't experienced or known doesn't seem like a very useful goal to me.
Welcome to the Dharma. :hi:
Great, you and I are already buddhas then since we neither experience or know freedom from samsara :smile:
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

The Fundamental Vow [of Amitabha Buddha] is just for such people as woodcutters and grassgatherers, vegetable pickers, drawers of water and the like, illiterate folk who merely recite the Buddha's name wholeheartedly, confident that as a result of saying "Namu Amida Butsu" they will be born into the western land. -- Master Hōnen

User avatar
coffeebeans
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:27 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by coffeebeans » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:49 pm

Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:40 pm
coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:24 pm
Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:23 pm

A nirvana which isn't experienced or known doesn't seem like a very useful goal to me.
Welcome to the Dharma. :hi:
Great, you and I are already buddhas then since we neither experience or know freedom from samsara :smile:
Is that truly the extent of your understanding of the implications? :coffee:

Malcolm
Posts: 29105
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:58 pm

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:26 pm

Refute the above argument if you can. If not, do not make wild allegations of misrepresentation of your position as it only serves to diminish your status.
Nāgārjuna states:

Without depending on convention, the ultimate cannot be explained;
without realizing the ultimate, nirvana will not be obtained.


Candrakīriti states in the Madhyamakāvatāra:

"Because all entities can be seen correctly and falsely,
entities possess a dual nature;
the correct perception of any object is true;
the false perception is called "realtive."
Also false perception is asserted to be of two kinds,
clear sense organs and faulty sense organs."


The point here is that one must have an entity in question in order to have a correct or incorrect perception. And those entities are themselves established on the basis of worldly convention which we are not supposed to contravene. The two truths are also conventions, as Candrakīrti states in his commentary on the 70:

Relative truth and ultimate truth are conventions used by the noble ones.


And:

Here, these are true through the power of a worldly, undistorted consciousness, and are defined as ultimate truth through the power of this absence of distortion.

And:

"Uimate truth" is expressed on the basis of worldly convention."

The reason we can say that ultimate truth is conventional is that is it is functional. If ultimate truth was not functional, its perception could not lead to liberation.

I suspect that you are conflating "truths," which are subjective perceptions, with emptiness. All objects have an ultimate nature, emptiness, which is a truth for those who can see it and is conventionally expressed as such. Also emptiness can be an object of distorted consciousness, which is why there are warnings about not apprehending it incorrectly.

Moreover, Candra says:

Any fabricated entity which appears as true
is that which the Muni called relative truth."


In other words, the perception that entities that arise from cause and conditions are true is what we call relative truth. The perception that they are not true because they are empty is what we call ultimate truth.

Below the path of seeing that ultimate truth can only be a conventional truth because that perception is merely an approximation of the actual lack of inherent existence or absence of the four extremes for a given thing. Such a mundane perception of the ultimate truth of emptiness may be tinged with delusion because it is relative, but since it is functional in bringing about realization, it is conventional.

Finally, the two truths are in union because they exist as aspects of any given entity. There is no ultimate truth beyond entities that are known to the world.

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2398
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by 明安 Myoan » Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:58 am

coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:49 pm
Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:40 pm
coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:24 pm


Welcome to the Dharma. :hi:
Great, you and I are already buddhas then since we neither experience or know freedom from samsara :smile:
Is that truly the extent of your understanding of the implications? :coffee:
With respect, one can know precious little of someone else's understanding or not on an internet forum, only what they write at a given time.
I'd rather hear your explanation of how there can be release from suffering if there is no knowledge or experience of nirvana.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

The Fundamental Vow [of Amitabha Buddha] is just for such people as woodcutters and grassgatherers, vegetable pickers, drawers of water and the like, illiterate folk who merely recite the Buddha's name wholeheartedly, confident that as a result of saying "Namu Amida Butsu" they will be born into the western land. -- Master Hōnen

User avatar
coffeebeans
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:27 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by coffeebeans » Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:14 am

Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:58 am
coffeebeans wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:49 pm
Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:40 pm

Great, you and I are already buddhas then since we neither experience or know freedom from samsara :smile:
Is that truly the extent of your understanding of the implications? :coffee:
With respect, one can know precious little of someone else's understanding or not on an internet forum, only what they write at a given time.
I'd rather hear your explanation of how there can be release from suffering if there is no knowledge or experience of nirvana.
So you were just being facetious. Let's go back to the discussion... 'nirvana' in my tiny brain's understanding is not an experience to be had. Anything experienced is conditioned. Release from suffering is the cessation of experiencing.

But...everything I've just mentioned is misleading. Not only do I not have an ounce of realization, I can't understand or express anything about it even if I did. All I can hope to do is one day work out a way to dismantle the act of experiencing.

Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests