"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.
thecowisflying
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:35 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by thecowisflying » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:10 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:38 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:28 pm
I'm kind of feeling the need to justify my alienation from 'ordinary' life, so I thought I might leap into the discussion with the entry from "The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism" on this topic:

The problem with this entry is that the term "ekacitta" is not attested in the Lanka, existing nowhere in the Sanskrit text or its Tibetan translation. It appears that the term ekacitta is used by Suzuki on page 269 of his study of the Lanka, but it is not listed as term appearing in his Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan glossary.

The quasi-Vedanta use of the term in Chinese Buddhism causes a lot of problems for westerners.
Hmmm... yeah it only sounds Vedantic in English? In Chinese it suggests more like an individual mind and doesn’t sound like an universal one.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27499
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:48 pm

thecowisflying wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:10 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:38 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:28 pm
I'm kind of feeling the need to justify my alienation from 'ordinary' life, so I thought I might leap into the discussion with the entry from "The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism" on this topic:

The problem with this entry is that the term "ekacitta" is not attested in the Lanka, existing nowhere in the Sanskrit text or its Tibetan translation. It appears that the term ekacitta is used by Suzuki on page 269 of his study of the Lanka, but it is not listed as term appearing in his Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan glossary.

The quasi-Vedanta use of the term in Chinese Buddhism causes a lot of problems for westerners.
Hmmm... yeah it only sounds Vedantic in English? In Chinese it suggests more like an individual mind and doesn’t sound like an universal one.
You would have to review Suzuki to see what I am talking about.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

ItsRaining
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by ItsRaining » Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:17 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:48 pm
thecowisflying wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:10 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:38 pm



The problem with this entry is that the term "ekacitta" is not attested in the Lanka, existing nowhere in the Sanskrit text or its Tibetan translation. It appears that the term ekacitta is used by Suzuki on page 269 of his study of the Lanka, but it is not listed as term appearing in his Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan glossary.

The quasi-Vedanta use of the term in Chinese Buddhism causes a lot of problems for westerners.
Hmmm... yeah it only sounds Vedantic in English? In Chinese it suggests more like an individual mind and doesn’t sound like an universal one.
You would have to review Suzuki to see what I am talking about.
I mean you said Quasi-Vedanta use in Chinese Buddhism which I will disagree with. I don't see the point of reading Suzuki to understand Chinese Buddhism. Do you read Chinese?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27499
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Malcolm » Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:13 pm

ItsRaining wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:17 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:48 pm
thecowisflying wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:10 pm


Hmmm... yeah it only sounds Vedantic in English? In Chinese it suggests more like an individual mind and doesn’t sound like an universal one.
You would have to review Suzuki to see what I am talking about.
I mean you said Quasi-Vedanta use in Chinese Buddhism which I will disagree with. I don't see the point of reading Suzuki to understand Chinese Buddhism. Do you read Chinese?

No. But I have seen over time a lot of westerners following Zen in particular who seize terms like one mind with vedantic spins. The source of this problem is a) Suzuki b) Paul Reps.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9253
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by DGA » Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:53 pm

Returning to the OP, it seems to me that this quotation rory offered from J Stone's book on Japanese Buddhist doctrine...
Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind
...looks a lot like the semi-Vedantic thinking that some in this thread such as Malcolm have shown to be problematic. Is Stone's description of Hua Yen accurate? Am I misreading it?

this is consequential for discussions here at DW that extend well beyond Hua Yen.


ItsRaining wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:17 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:48 pm
thecowisflying wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:10 pm


Hmmm... yeah it only sounds Vedantic in English? In Chinese it suggests more like an individual mind and doesn’t sound like an universal one.
You would have to review Suzuki to see what I am talking about.
I mean you said Quasi-Vedanta use in Chinese Buddhism which I will disagree with. I don't see the point of reading Suzuki to understand Chinese Buddhism. Do you read Chinese?

User avatar
Matt J
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:29 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Matt J » Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:43 pm

I've always wondered about that. Having absorbed quite a bit of Zen instruction and literature, I could never really find support the idea of a universal cosmic mind. However, it did appear that the one mind is one's own mind, the only mind that one ever really encounters. I know in Hua Yen they talk about mind as mirrors and say that the teacher always appears in the mirror of the student. It also falls in line with the Zen focus on finding the Buddha within. It is not clear to me that the term "one mind" in ancient China would have the same theistic ramifications it has in the West.

Francis Cook in his Hua Yen Buddhism seems to use one mind and mind only as synonyms, which backs up Malcolm's quote.
The Great Way is not difficult
If only there is no picking or choosing
--- Xin Xin Ming

Simon E.
Posts: 5296
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Simon E. » Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:55 pm

There was at one time a now defunct Zen forum. I dipped into it a couple of times and a large proportion of its western members seemed to have swallowed the 'vedantic one mind' interpretation hook, line and sinker.
I suspect that was why a number of them failed to see that well known traditional Vedanta teachers, as well as current purveyors of their own syncretic systems like Adyashanti, were not teaching Buddhadharma at all.
And the actual teachers of Buddhadharma who tried to correct this were considered too rigid.
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

jake
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 3:13 pm

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by jake » Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:26 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:53 pm
Returning to the OP, it seems to me that this quotation rory offered from J Stone's book on Japanese Buddhist doctrine...
Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind
...looks a lot like the semi-Vedantic thinking that some in this thread such as Malcolm have shown to be problematic. Is Stone's description of Hua Yen accurate? Am I misreading it?

this is consequential for discussions here at DW that extend well beyond Hua Yen.
I seem to recall there was some discussion in Hakeda's Awakening of Faith text that explored what was meant by the work's use of Mind. I wonder if this distinction is overlooked in Stone's work? (I've not made it past the introduction of the text quoted earlier)

Unfortunately, all my stuff is boxed up for a move so I can't access my copy. Perhaps if it rings a bell someone could chime in?

jake
“The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only. There is no stopping in the red zone."

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9253
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by DGA » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:54 pm

jake wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:26 pm
DGA wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:53 pm
Returning to the OP, it seems to me that this quotation rory offered from J Stone's book on Japanese Buddhist doctrine...
Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind
...looks a lot like the semi-Vedantic thinking that some in this thread such as Malcolm have shown to be problematic. Is Stone's description of Hua Yen accurate? Am I misreading it?

this is consequential for discussions here at DW that extend well beyond Hua Yen.
I seem to recall there was some discussion in Hakeda's Awakening of Faith text that explored what was meant by the work's use of Mind. I wonder if this distinction is overlooked in Stone's work? (I've not made it past the introduction of the text quoted earlier)

Unfortunately, all my stuff is boxed up for a move so I can't access my copy. Perhaps if it rings a bell someone could chime in?

jake
Stone is trying to trace the intellectual history of "original enlightenment" in Japanese thought back to some Chinese substrates. One of these is Hua Yen. Hua Yen isn't the topic of her book, although early on she summarizes some of the scholarship on it. The quotation rory gave is part of that summary. Here's more of the relevant passage (top of page 7)
Hua-yen thinkers developed new theories of dependent origination [...] to clarify how the one mind manifests as the phenomenal world.
These are the theories Stone cites as examples: "dharma-realm origination (fa chieh yuan ch'i)" "tathagathagarbha origination (ju lai tsang yuan-ch'i)" and "nature origination (hsing-ch'i)"

Do these theories correspond to the summary Stone gives of them?

User avatar
Meido
Posts: 427
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:50 am
Contact:

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Meido » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:17 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:55 pm
There was at one time a now defunct Zen forum. I dipped into it a couple of times and a large proportion of its western members seemed to have swallowed the 'vedantic one mind' interpretation hook, line and sinker.
I suspect that was why a number of them failed to see that well known traditional Vedanta teachers, as well as current purveyors of their own syncretic systems like Adyashanti, were not teaching Buddhadharma at all.
And the actual teachers of Buddhadharma who tried to correct this were considered too rigid.
A Japanese Zen teacher I know remarked RE this tendency, attributing the confusion to deep Abrahamic underpinnings carried by many westerners, unawares and despite their conscious rejection of those faith traditions. I didn't completely buy what he was saying then.

Upon further reflection, though, it is clear to me he was right. Many Buddhist types who reject "God" really just reject that which is easily rejected: the crudely anthropomorphized tribal deity. But they continue to hold tightly to a less-defined spiritual "oneness" or "source" of reality, and to view the goal of practice through the lens of atonement, "returning to" something, or "becoming one with" something. Even the choice often made to capitalize "One Mind" and "True Self" perhaps speaks to this. It's a factor worth acknowledging when discussing dharma in these parts.

Am interested to hear what others think RE this, and to what extent they have seen noticed such conditioning in themselves (perhaps a different topic).

Vis a vis confusion in some corners of the Zen world, it is also important to recognize the classic model of the path in which sutra and other textual study is largely taken up later - primarily as a means to confirm and identify lacks within one's experiential understanding - rather than as a foundation. I do not disagree with this approach. But a complete lack of any conceptual framework, coupled with the lack of guidance from a qualified teacher, is obviously a recipe for disaster. Oddly, it is also the approach from which folks more and more seem to need disabusing.

~ Meido
Last edited by Meido on Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It is relatively easy to accomplish the important matter of insight into one’s true nature, but uncommonly difficult to function freely and clearly [according to this understanding], in motion and in rest, in good and in adverse circumstances. Please make strenuous and vigorous efforts towards this end, otherwise all the teachings of Buddhas and patriarchs become mere empty words. - Torei

The Rinzai Zen Way: A Guide to Practice

Korinji Rinzai Zen Monastery [臨済宗 • 祖的山光林禅寺] - http://www.korinji.org

thecowisflying
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 12:35 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by thecowisflying » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:44 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:53 pm
Returning to the OP, it seems to me that this quotation rory offered from J Stone's book on Japanese Buddhist doctrine...
Hua-yen thought sees all phenomena as expressions of an originally pure and undifferentiated one mind
...looks a lot like the semi-Vedantic thinking that some in this thread such as Malcolm have shown to be problematic. Is Stone's description of Hua Yen accurate? Am I misreading it?

this is consequential for discussions here at DW that extend well beyond Hua Yen.


ItsRaining wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:17 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:48 pm


You would have to review Suzuki to see what I am talking about.
I mean you said Quasi-Vedanta use in Chinese Buddhism which I will disagree with. I don't see the point of reading Suzuki to understand Chinese Buddhism. Do you read Chinese?
What do you mean by semi-vedantic? One Mind doesn’t mean a universal mind like in Vedanta. Originally pure mind is pretty common doctrine and so is being undifferentiated which just means the mind is empty of distinctions/conceptualisations. Are you reading it to mean all minds are one undifferentiated universal mind?

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9253
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by DGA » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:49 pm

thecowisflying wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:44 pm
What do you mean by semi-vedantic? One Mind doesn’t mean a universal mind like in Vedanta. Originally pure mind is pretty common doctrine and so is being undifferentiated which just means the mind is empty of distinctions/conceptualisations. Are you reading it to mean all minds are one undifferentiated universal mind?
Yes, that is how I understand the term "one mind" too. However, there are others who do regard it as meaning that not only all minds but all phenomena emerge from an undifferentiated universal mind. The language Stone uses suggests that is her understanding of what Hua Yen teaches. I started this thread to clarify that point, since Stone's book has a way of coming up over and over again in a variety of discussions you wouldn't expect to see it in at DW.

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 14, 2018 8:53 pm

Meido wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:17 pm


Am interested to hear what others think RE this, and to what extent they have seen noticed such conditioning in themselves (perhaps a different topic).
What you describe I've noticed plenty of times but it is also seen as what it is, a construct of mind, or a sky flower if you will. The conditioning comes from thinking, feeling, living from an imagined phenomenal center. Again a construct of mind.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/

User avatar
Wayfarer
Posts: 3817
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Wayfarer » Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:29 pm

It might be worth considering the sense in which ‘the One’ is sometimes understood in religious and spiritual thought. In this context, ‘one’ doesn’t necessarily denote a numerical unity, but something which is the same in everything. If you say that ‘there is one’ of something, then this very cognitive act makes an object of what is being spoken about - this one, as distinct from some other one. But that is an intrinsically dualistic concept. Whereas it might be understood better, by analogy, as ‘the one cloth from which varying forms are cut’. So - not a numerical one, but a unity. Subtle difference in the concepts.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki-roshi

User avatar
Wayfarer
Posts: 3817
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by Wayfarer » Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:48 pm

Meido wrote:A Japanese Zen teacher I know remarked RE this tendency, attributing the confusion to deep Abrahamic underpinnings carried by many westerners, unawares and despite their conscious rejection of those faith traditions.
Alan Watts wrote:the Westerner who is attracted by Zen and who would understand it deeply must have one indispensable qualification: he must understand his own culture so thoroughly that he is no longer swayed by its premises unconsciously. He must really have come to terms with the Lord God Jehovah and with his Hebrew-Christian conscience so that he can take it or leave it without fear or rebellion.
Beat Zen, Square Zen, and Zen
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki-roshi

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 14, 2018 10:54 pm

Wayfarer wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:29 pm
It might be worth considering the sense in which ‘the One’ is sometimes understood in religious and spiritual thought. In this context, ‘one’ doesn’t necessarily denote a numerical unity, but something which is the same in everything. If you say that ‘there is one’ of something, then this very cognitive act makes an object of what is being spoken about - this one, as distinct from some other one. But that is an intrinsically dualistic concept. Whereas it might be understood better, by analogy, as ‘the one cloth from which varying forms are cut’. So - not a numerical one, but a unity. Subtle difference in the concepts.
We could have a constructive talk about this if this forum wouldn't have an "seek out the advaita errors/there is no liberation outside of buddhadharma" agenda which is projected unto members because they're already locked up in a mental picture no matter what they say. Unfortunately this is a distraction from having a civil open minded discussion and mutual interest instead of playing the endless praise and blame game, "right and wrong view" loophole narrative. Group politics/behaviour as usual, a ghost chasing its tail, alas.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/

ItsRaining
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by ItsRaining » Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:30 pm

DGA wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:54 pm
jake wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:26 pm
DGA wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:53 pm
Returning to the OP, it seems to me that this quotation rory offered from J Stone's book on Japanese Buddhist doctrine...



...looks a lot like the semi-Vedantic thinking that some in this thread such as Malcolm have shown to be problematic. Is Stone's description of Hua Yen accurate? Am I misreading it?

this is consequential for discussions here at DW that extend well beyond Hua Yen.
I seem to recall there was some discussion in Hakeda's Awakening of Faith text that explored what was meant by the work's use of Mind. I wonder if this distinction is overlooked in Stone's work? (I've not made it past the introduction of the text quoted earlier)

Unfortunately, all my stuff is boxed up for a move so I can't access my copy. Perhaps if it rings a bell someone could chime in?

jake
Stone is trying to trace the intellectual history of "original enlightenment" in Japanese thought back to some Chinese substrates. One of these is Hua Yen. Hua Yen isn't the topic of her book, although early on she summarizes some of the scholarship on it. The quotation rory gave is part of that summary. Here's more of the relevant passage (top of page 7)
Hua-yen thinkers developed new theories of dependent origination [...] to clarify how the one mind manifests as the phenomenal world.
These are the theories Stone cites as examples: "dharma-realm origination (fa chieh yuan ch'i)" "tathagathagarbha origination (ju lai tsang yuan-ch'i)" and "nature origination (hsing-ch'i)"

Do these theories correspond to the summary Stone gives of them?
I don't know what Stone says but the four types of dependent origin are definitely Huayan though I don't know if all of them relate to the One Mind. The first two is just the interpretations of the Sravakayana and then the Yogacara Eight Consciousnesses. The third is dependent origination based on Suchness in other words the Tathagatabarbha. Here the Alaya is taught to be dependent upon the Tathagatabarbha and that every being inherently has the pure Buddha Nature and that it is based on the Tathagatagarbha that appearance of arising and ceasing come forth. So the phenomena that appears are like waves on the ocean which is Suchness or the Tathagatagarbha, I think here is when the One Mind becomes relevant.

The fourth Dharma Realm Origination is the highest view of the Huayan school, it's generally described to be like Indra's Net. I'm not that great at explaining, Yongming Yanshou has a passage on it. I'll pull it up and translate it a bit later.

ItsRaining
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: "One Mind" in Hua Yen thought

Post by ItsRaining » Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:31 pm

fuki wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:54 pm
Wayfarer wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:29 pm
It might be worth considering the sense in which ‘the One’ is sometimes understood in religious and spiritual thought. In this context, ‘one’ doesn’t necessarily denote a numerical unity, but something which is the same in everything. If you say that ‘there is one’ of something, then this very cognitive act makes an object of what is being spoken about - this one, as distinct from some other one. But that is an intrinsically dualistic concept. Whereas it might be understood better, by analogy, as ‘the one cloth from which varying forms are cut’. So - not a numerical one, but a unity. Subtle difference in the concepts.
We could have a constructive talk about this if this forum wouldn't have an "seek out the advaita errors/there is no liberation outside of buddhadharma" agenda which is projected unto members because they're already locked up in a mental picture no matter what they say. Unfortunately this is a distraction from having a civil open minded discussion and mutual interest instead of playing the endless praise and blame game, "right and wrong view" loophole narrative. Group politics/behaviour as usual, a ghost chasing its tail, alas.
'There is no liberation outside of buddhadharma" is a pretty standard stance of Buddhism. Liberation hinges on the Eightfold path has Right View as it's first step.

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 14, 2018 11:45 pm

ItsRaining wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:31 pm

'There is no liberation outside of buddhadharma" is a pretty standard stance of Buddhism. Liberation hinges on the Eightfold path has Right View as it's first step.
That is not my point (whether it is so or not)
I dont end up marrying every woman I meet, but do I go out and say to every woman I meet "I would never marry you" What's the motive of doing that? It would be considered very antisocial behaviour.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/

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 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:42 am

Meido wrote:
Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:17 pm
Upon further reflection, though, it is clear to me he was right. Many Buddhist types who reject "God" really just reject that which is easily rejected: the crudely anthropomorphized tribal deity. But they continue to hold tightly to a less-defined spiritual "oneness" or "source" of reality, and to view the goal of practice through the lens of atonement, "returning to" something, or "becoming one with" something. Even the choice often made to capitalize "One Mind" and "True Self" perhaps speaks to this. It's a factor worth acknowledging when discussing dharma in these parts.
Rejecting "God" or "Self" only creates a framework and thus asserts the "thing" in the very rejection. Its pretty silly as far as I can see. Merging with the absolute or "becoming one" is the sound of one hand clapping, its a joke, then the bell echos in primordial space and we forget about it all again, which too is part of the joke, the source of the smile on Buddha's face and its unfanthomable gifts are not a product of practise or correct buddhadharma, let alone dreamcharacters pratteling on about who are the "true buddhists" or not.
meldpunt seksueel misbruik in boeddhistische gemeenschappen nederland.
https://meldpuntbg.nl/

Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests