Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Locked
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Coëmgenu » Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:28 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:03 pm
Coëmgenu wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:13 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:59 pm


No, it is not derived from any Indian basis at all.

Also this doctrine was rejected by many Chinese Buddhists as well. It appears to be a special feature of the Tienta'i school, but was rejected by Hua Yen scholars (justifiably, in my opinion).

Arguing that the container world appears as buddhafield when one attains buddhahood does not bear the correlation that rocks are capable of attaining buddhahood on their own.
Interestingly, The Buddhist Teaching of Totality: the Philosophy of Hwa Yen Buddhism by Garma C. C. Chang makes literally the opposite claim, that it is a Huáyán doctrine.

So no one can really make up their mind.
Nope, Chang is mistaken. It is very clear that Hua Yen rejects this idea.

http://buddhism.org/kr/koan/Robert_Sharf-e.htm
Is it? Ven Fǎzàng certainly doesn't like the idea of rocks becoming or being Buddhas, but his contemporary Lǐ Tōngxuán can be found spouting more-or-less the same argumentation as Ven Jízàng & Ven Dōgen.

TBH, insentient buddha-nature seems to be some scholasticism that Tiāntāi philosophy busied itself with after it was already an established school in competition with other schools. Likely all of them trying to get patronage by arguing their particular doctrines.
如無為、如是難見、不動、不屈、不死、無漏、覆蔭、洲渚、濟渡、依止、擁護、不流轉、離熾焰、離燒然、流通、清涼、微妙、安隱、無病、無所有、涅槃。
Like this is the uncreated, like this is that which is difficult to realize, with no moving, no bending, no dying. Utterly lacking secretions and smothered in the dark, it is the island shore. Where there is ferrying, it is the crossing. It is dependency's ceasing, it is the end of circulating transmissions. It is the exhaustion of the flame, it is the ending of the burning. Flowing openly, pure and cool, with secret subtlety, and calm occultation, lacking ailment, lacking owning, nirvāṇa.
Asaṁskṛtadharmasūtra, Sermon on the Uncreated Phenomenon, T99.224b7, Saṁyuktāgama 890

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:37 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:53 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:03 pm
Nope, Chang is mistaken. It is very clear that Hua Yen rejects this idea.

http://buddhism.org/kr/koan/Robert_Sharf-e.htm
Not quite. The article suggests that the Hua-yen view sidesteps the issue in order to remain literally faithful to the Mahaparinirvana.
No, they do not sidestep the issue at all. They make a well known distinction, also made by Indian Buddhists, between the suchness of inanimate things and sentient beings, the suchness is the same, but sentient beings are also permeated with consciousness.
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

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Sherab » Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:26 am

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:37 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:53 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:03 pm
Nope, Chang is mistaken. It is very clear that Hua Yen rejects this idea.

http://buddhism.org/kr/koan/Robert_Sharf-e.htm
Not quite. The article suggests that the Hua-yen view sidesteps the issue in order to remain literally faithful to the Mahaparinirvana.
No, they do not sidestep the issue at all. They make a well known distinction, also made by Indian Buddhists, between the suchness of inanimate things and sentient beings, the suchness is the same, but sentient beings are also permeated with consciousness.
If by suchness, you meant dependent arising, then your statement above implies that both inanimate things and sentient beings are dependently arisen. No problem here.

But when you say that the difference between inanimate things and sentient beings is that sentient beings are permeated with consciousness, are you saying that consciousness is not dependently arisen? If yes, then how does consciousness exist? Beyond suchness?

If you say that consciousness is dependently arisen, then is that dependent arising process distinct from the dependent arising process for inanimate things? If you say they are not distinct, then what is consciousness can become inanimate through the same dependent arising process and what is inanimate can become conscious through the same dependent arising process. Is this your position?

If you say that the dependent arising process is distinct, then the realm of phenomena necessarily is a duality of the inanimate and the conscious. Is this your position?

PeterC
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by PeterC » Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:56 am

The original question was whether the buddhanature of insentient things had an Indian antecedent or was a Chinese innovation. I haven’t seen in this thread a reference to an Indian source making this argument, apart from a peripheral reference in the Nirvana sutra, which itself is a slightly apocryphal text. So is it agreed that it is a Chinese innovation, and we are just arguing about the plausibility of that innovation in the light of preceding tathagatagharba doctrine? Just wanted to make sure I’d correctly understood the discussion.

User avatar
Anders
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Anders » Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:49 am

PeterC wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:56 am
which itself is a slightly apocryphal text.
What does that even mean?
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"

--- Gandavyuha Sutra

PeterC
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by PeterC » Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:27 am

Anders wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 8:49 am
PeterC wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:56 am
which itself is a slightly apocryphal text.
What does that even mean?
The textual history is complex, even by the standards of the Chinese canon. If I remember correctly, the longest version only shares six of forty fascicles with the oldest (and shortest) version. Now the quotation earlier in this thread came from one of those six, but from the context it doesn't clearly support the contention about insentient objects having Buddhanature. Which was my point - a somewhat obvious one - to show that the theory isn't a Chinese innovation, we would need to show an Indian antecedent, which hasn't been offered on this thread. What Chinese writers said on the topic is not relevant to that particular question.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:31 pm

Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:26 am
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:37 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:53 pm


Not quite. The article suggests that the Hua-yen view sidesteps the issue in order to remain literally faithful to the Mahaparinirvana.
No, they do not sidestep the issue at all. They make a well known distinction, also made by Indian Buddhists, between the suchness of inanimate things and sentient beings, the suchness is the same, but sentient beings are also permeated with consciousness.
If by suchness, you meant dependent arising, then your statement above implies that both inanimate things and sentient beings are dependently arisen. No problem here.
By suchness, I mean emptiness, śūnyatā. The rest of your questions are irrelevant.
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

User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1342
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by seeker242 » Fri Aug 17, 2018 3:26 pm

PeterC wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:56 am
So is it agreed that it is a Chinese innovation, and we are just arguing about the plausibility of that innovation in the light of preceding tathagatagharba doctrine? Just wanted to make sure I’d correctly understood the discussion.
It appears so. :offtopic: :lol:
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Fri Aug 17, 2018 3:44 pm

PeterC wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:27 am
What Chinese writers said on the topic is not relevant to that particular question.
It is only relevant in so far as it was not a universally held principle in Sinitic Buddhism, even though it appears to be very widely diffused among Japanese Sects.
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

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6485
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Queequeg » Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:11 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:27 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:34 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:25 pm
Depends on which Indian Buddhist view we are discussing. There is for example, Karana-hetu, the principle that all phenomena are causes of all other phenomena apart from themselves.

This still does not make rocks capable of buddhahood. Nor does it make a mind a function of a rock. Your thesis amounts to saying that since there is a container universe and inhabitants, their mutual dependence means that the awakening of the latter necessitates the awakening of the former, even though it is conventionally insentient. But this also bears the consequence that buddhas can become sentient beings just as sentient beings can become buddhas. This is very terrible consequence.
I'm not familiar with Karana-hetu, but all phenomena are indeed causes of all others, in a way.
Not in a way, directly.
We are emphasizing different things. It is correct to say, "in a way" in the context of Tiantai thought because dependent origination is not the whole story, except, in a way, from a particular vantage point. Like light being particles, absolutely, in a way, but also being waves, absolutely, in a way.

I know its easy to just fall back on what you know, but you're treading on ground that you clearly are not familiar with. Come out a little bit and try to understand, give ear.
The problem is not buddhas in hell realms, the problem is buddhas experiencing the suffering of hell realms, or any other realm, for that matter.
The Buddha was born. Possibly caesarean. But in any event, it wasn't the myth where Maya grasped a branch while Gotama just miraculously emerged from her side. He also didn't take 7 steps and declare he was the greatest being. He was a helpless infant, like all of us at birth. The Buddha died of what sounds like food poisoning. It was miraculous enough that he lived to 80 at that time.

If you chose to believe those myths about his birth and death literally, the fabrics of our realities probably don't match up.

What is suffering? We are told from the perspective of an awakened one, it is unarisen. Its a a mistaken apprehension. That doesn't mean one floats through life as though in a protective halo.

The Buddha appears in the Saha world and toils just like the rest of us. The difference is in how it is experienced. We see the toil as an unmitigated, unending cycle of futility, and the stench sticks to us. The Buddha is in the same exact circumstance and sees the Buddhafield, full of humans and devas. Because the Buddha sees the way it really is, there is no stench, let alone sticking to him.

All those stories about Pure Lands... ways to help people who can't unsee the futility of this world to conceive of purity and bliss without being forced to reconcile the real pain and suffering they've endured. Not now, at least. Maybe when they've gained confidence in the principle of purity and bliss, they can.

The point of Trees and Rocks having Buddhanature is to locate the struggle for enlightenment, here and now, in this moment. Its not some attempt to reify a notion of trees and rocks having some sort of consciousness similar to sentients. What most people think of as mind is not what is meant in advanced teachings, anyway. They mistake the six consciousnesses for Mind. They take their mistaken notion of self and apply it to everything around them, rather than striving up to understand what the sages are actually saying.

But you know all this, don't you?
What this really gets to is the kinds of teachings that appear in the Vimalakirti and Lotus Sutras that I quoted above - This Saha World is a Buddhaland, and the Saha World includes all the beings, along with the environments from which they cannot be separated, including this darn rock that we can't agree has Buddhanature or not.
Actually, this doctrine, that insentient beings possess buddhanature, is not in Zhi Yi's writings. See Swanson, CSQI, vol. 1, pg. 58. He states that Zhi Yi really treads lightly around the tathagātagarbha theory.
Indeed, its Zhanran, Keikei Daishi. His interpretation of Zhiyi, Tendai Daishi is considered definitive.

Despite Zhanran's denial of the ultimacy of the Nirvana Sutra's explicit identification of Buddhanature exclusively with sentient beings, there are other aspects of the Nirvana Sutra that inform this.

The Nirvana Sutra actually includes an assertion of True Self - something that goes against pretty much all of the Buddha's teachings. When we consider what is actually meant by True Self, its not so controversial and we see how its an upaya. I think the point that is drawn from that is that all teachings are upaya. When the Buddha utters teachings, he's always addressing some excess, not directly revealing his wisdom. The only direct teaching is reality itself, in which our thoughts are completely integrated. Like Bertram Russel observed that we only think in metaphors, only in abstractions.

The Nirvana also teaches that all true dharmas, non-Buddhist and Buddhist, are Buddhadharma.

The point is that any dharma when fully contemplated ends in awakening. How is that possible? Because all dharmas have the BuddhaNature. If they didn't, contemplating them would not end in awakening.

Again, the point is not rocks being buddhanature. The point is, this thought-moment is the seat of enlightenment.

If it bothers you, leave it alone.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:42 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:11 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:27 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:34 pm


I'm not familiar with Karana-hetu, but all phenomena are indeed causes of all others, in a way.
Not in a way, directly.
We are emphasizing different things. It is correct to say, "in a way" in the context of Tiantai thought because dependent origination is not the whole story, except, in a way, from a particular vantage point. Like light being particles, absolutely, in a way, but also being waves, absolutely, in a way.
The six causes and four conditions precede dependent origination.

Dependent origination is a separate topic.

This account is Chih I's four fold dependent origination is very lucid:

https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/i ... /8729/2636

Nothing really remarkable out of ordinary for a Mahāyāna author.

The problem is not buddhas in hell realms, the problem is buddhas experiencing the suffering of hell realms, or any other realm, for that matter.
The Buddha was born. Possibly caesarean. But in any event, it wasn't the myth where Maya grasped a branch while Gotama just miraculously emerged from her side. He also didn't take 7 steps and declare he was the greatest being. He was a helpless infant, like all of us at birth. The Buddha died of what sounds like food poisoning. It was miraculous enough that he lived to 80 at that time.

If you chose to believe those myths about his birth and death literally, the fabrics of our realities probably don't match up.
This is a non-sequitar.

The Buddha appears in the Saha world and toils just like the rest of us.
No.

All those stories about Pure Lands... ways to help people who can't unsee the futility of this world to conceive of purity and bliss without being forced to reconcile the real pain and suffering they've endured.
No.

The point of Trees and Rocks having Buddhanature is to locate the struggle for enlightenment, here and now, in this moment.
Chih I's writings never imply this doctrine of insentient buddhanature at all. Since you never define your terms, I have no idea what you mean by "struggle for enlightenment."
Despite Zhanran's denial of the ultimacy of the Nirvana Sutra's explicit identification of Buddhanature exclusively with sentient beings, there are other aspects of the Nirvana Sutra that inform this.
Such as?
The Nirvana Sutra actually includes an assertion of True Self - something that goes against pretty much all of the Buddha's teachings.
It does not contain an assertion that this self is the self of rocks and trees.

When the Buddha utters teachings, he's always addressing some excess, not directly revealing his wisdom.


???
The Nirvana also teaches that all true dharmas, non-Buddhist and Buddhist, are Buddhadharma.
The Nirvana Sūtra teaches there are non-Buddhist true dharmas? How are you using the term, "true dharma"?
The point is that any dharma when fully contemplated ends in awakening. How is that possible? Because all dharmas have the BuddhaNature. If they didn't, contemplating them would not end in awakening.
Again, how are you using the term dharma here? Do you mean an entity which bears characteristics such as form, sound, etc.?
Again, the point is not rocks being buddhanature.
We have already established this is not a doctrine present in Chih I's writings, but it is a later idea added on.
The point is, this thought-moment is the seat of enlightenment.
So you are saying the bodhimaṇḍa is found in a moment of thought itself Or are you saying it is found in the dharmatā of that moment of thought?
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

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6485
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Queequeg » Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:53 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:42 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:11 pm
We are emphasizing different things. It is correct to say, "in a way" in the context of Tiantai thought because dependent origination is not the whole story, except, in a way, from a particular vantage point. Like light being particles, absolutely, in a way, but also being waves, absolutely, in a way.
The six causes and four conditions precede dependent origination.
OK. More succinctly: we're not actually communicating. Yogacara is not really an influence of Tiantai. Its not clear how yogacara would relate.
The Buddha appears in the Saha world and toils just like the rest of us.
No.
If you chose to believe those myths about his birth and death literally, the fabrics of our realities probably don't match up.
I'm pretty sure of this.
Chih I's writings never imply this doctrine of insentient buddhanature at all.
Says you? Is that your actual knowledge? Or are you borrowing the opinion of Robert Sharf without attribution?

Zhanran says differently.

I think for this discussion to be constructive, we need to work with the actual material. There are translations of the Diamond Scalpel in which Zhanran makes his argument. I'll see if I can find one that is publicly available.
The point is, this thought-moment is the seat of enlightenment.
So you are saying the bodhimaṇḍa is found in a moment of thought itself Or are you saying it is found in the dharmatā of that moment of thought?
If I understand your question correctly, both. 一念三千
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Sherab » Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:58 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:31 pm
Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:26 am
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:37 pm


No, they do not sidestep the issue at all. They make a well known distinction, also made by Indian Buddhists, between the suchness of inanimate things and sentient beings, the suchness is the same, but sentient beings are also permeated with consciousness.
If by suchness, you meant dependent arising, then your statement above implies that both inanimate things and sentient beings are dependently arisen. No problem here.
By suchness, I mean emptiness, śūnyatā. The rest of your questions are irrelevant.
My questions are irrelevant because sunyata is not the same as dependent arising?

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:40 am

Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:58 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:31 pm
Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:26 am

If by suchness, you meant dependent arising, then your statement above implies that both inanimate things and sentient beings are dependently arisen. No problem here.
By suchness, I mean emptiness, śūnyatā. The rest of your questions are irrelevant.
My questions are irrelevant because sunyata is not the same as dependent arising?
Here's a pedantic question for you:

is "emptiness" dependent origination or what is dependently originated?
如無為、如是難見、不動、不屈、不死、無漏、覆蔭、洲渚、濟渡、依止、擁護、不流轉、離熾焰、離燒然、流通、清涼、微妙、安隱、無病、無所有、涅槃。
Like this is the uncreated, like this is that which is difficult to realize, with no moving, no bending, no dying. Utterly lacking secretions and smothered in the dark, it is the island shore. Where there is ferrying, it is the crossing. It is dependency's ceasing, it is the end of circulating transmissions. It is the exhaustion of the flame, it is the ending of the burning. Flowing openly, pure and cool, with secret subtlety, and calm occultation, lacking ailment, lacking owning, nirvāṇa.
Asaṁskṛtadharmasūtra, Sermon on the Uncreated Phenomenon, T99.224b7, Saṁyuktāgama 890

Yuren
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 1:39 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Yuren » Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:46 am

I'm wondering whether this doctrine is related to a similar motif in East Asian Buddhism, that of "insentient beings preaching the Dharma".

For instance, there's this case from Caodong school of Ch'an:
Dongshan asked Yunyen, "Who can hear the teachings of the insentient?"
Yunyen said, "It can be heard by the insentient." Dongshan asked, "Do you hear it, Master?" Yunyen said, "If I heard it, then you would not hear my teaching." Dongshan answered, "That being the case, then I do not hear your teaching." Yunyen replied, "You don't even hear my teaching, how could you hear the teachings of the insentient?" Dongshan was enlightened on hearing this and responded in verse:
Wondrous! Marvelous!
The teachings of the insentient are inconceivable.
If you listen with the ears, you won't understand.
When you hear with the eyes, then you will know.

User avatar
passel
Posts: 495
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:30 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by passel » Sat Aug 18, 2018 2:22 am

Yuren wrote:
Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:46 am
I'm wondering whether this doctrine is related to a similar motif in East Asian Buddhism, that of "insentient beings preaching the Dharma".

For instance, there's this case from Caodong school of Ch'an:
Dongshan asked Yunyen, "Who can hear the teachings of the insentient?"
Yunyen said, "It can be heard by the insentient." Dongshan asked, "Do you hear it, Master?" Yunyen said, "If I heard it, then you would not hear my teaching." Dongshan answered, "That being the case, then I do not hear your teaching." Yunyen replied, "You don't even hear my teaching, how could you hear the teachings of the insentient?" Dongshan was enlightened on hearing this and responded in verse:
Wondrous! Marvelous!
The teachings of the insentient are inconceivable.
If you listen with the ears, you won't understand.
When you hear with the eyes, then you will know.
Yes
"I have made a heap of all that I have met"- Svetonious

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:00 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:53 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 6:42 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 5:11 pm
We are emphasizing different things. It is correct to say, "in a way" in the context of Tiantai thought because dependent origination is not the whole story, except, in a way, from a particular vantage point. Like light being particles, absolutely, in a way, but also being waves, absolutely, in a way.
The six causes and four conditions precede dependent origination.
OK. More succinctly: we're not actually communicating. Yogacara is not really an influence of Tiantai. Its not clear how yogacara would relate.

The teaching on the six causes and four conditions is fundamental Buddhism, theories in which Chih I was quite expert.

In fact, the whole of the first chapter of the MMK is explicitly about them and how they are merely conventions.

Chih I's writings never imply this doctrine of insentient buddhanature at all.
Says you? Is that your actual knowledge? Or are you borrowing the opinion of Robert Sharf without attribution?
Actually, I am basing my opinion on the consensus of a number of scholars, Paul Swanson chief among them. And then there is this:
As we recall, Daosheng believes that all icchantikas can become Buddhas and Zhiyi believes that Buddha-nature includes inherent evil. But neither speaks about Buddha-nature and insentient beings.
https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/do ... _10217.pdf
Zhanran says differently.
Yes, he does. That does not mean he is right.

So you are saying the bodhimaṇḍa is found in a moment of thought itself Or are you saying it is found in the dharmatā of that moment of thought?
If I understand your question correctly, both. 一念三千
A thought is a concept. Buddhahood is by definition free of concepts. Nevertheless, even concepts also have suchness. If one realizes the dharmatā of a concept, then one can say the seat of awakening can be found in a concept; but if one does not realize the dharmatā of a concept, one cannot say that the seat of awakening can be found in a concept.

Any given entity can be can be the object of a veridical perception that accords with suchness, or the object of a non-veridical perception that does not accord with suchness. But the same perception cannot be both veridical, in accordance with suchness, and non-veridical, not in accordance with-- it must one or the other.
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

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28739
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:20 pm

Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:58 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:31 pm
Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:26 am

If by suchness, you meant dependent arising, then your statement above implies that both inanimate things and sentient beings are dependently arisen. No problem here.
By suchness, I mean emptiness, śūnyatā. The rest of your questions are irrelevant.
My questions are irrelevant because sunyata is not the same as dependent arising?
Your questions are irrelevant because they do not address the distinction between a sentient being (sattva) and and insensible thing (acetana).
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

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Sherab » Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:35 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:20 pm
Sherab wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:58 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Aug 17, 2018 2:31 pm


By suchness, I mean emptiness, śūnyatā. The rest of your questions are irrelevant.
My questions are irrelevant because sunyata is not the same as dependent arising?
Your questions are irrelevant because they do not address the distinction between a sentient being (sattva) and and insensible thing (acetana).
The questions are relevant if sunyata is the same as dependent arising.

Why? Because dependent arising is the reason why there is the phenomena of sentient beings and inanimate things. If you disagree with this, please explain why you disagree.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6485
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Queequeg » Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:52 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:00 pm
... six causes and four conditions is fundamental Buddhism, ...they are merely conventions.
Like I said... "in a way"
A thought is a concept. [Etc.]
Let me stop you there.

That's not 一念
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

Locked

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests