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
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:31 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:29 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:02 pm
Further, "everything is true" is valid because the Bhagavan explains the invariable characteristic of the absence of I and mine as knowable in order to abandon the afflictive obscuration.
All in all, it offers an elegant solution, but if I may nitpick this one point:

The commentary says "everything is true" because the Buddha explains the invariable characteristic of absence.

Is this really an example of "everything is true"? Is the invariance of this characteristic of everything the same thing as everything being "true" in and of itself? And if the invariance is the only thing that is true, when why say "everything" is true?
It is true that everything lacks a self. That is the truth of everything.

Incidentally, we can call this a catuṣkoti; but we cannot call it a tetralemma, because one is not forced to pick one of these four alternatives. For example, a dilemma is where one must choose two different choices, one to the exclusion of the other.
Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Coëmgenu » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:36 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:31 pm
Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:29 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:02 pm
Further, "everything is true" is valid because the Bhagavan explains the invariable characteristic of the absence of I and mine as knowable in order to abandon the afflictive obscuration.
All in all, it offers an elegant solution, but if I may nitpick this one point:

The commentary says "everything is true" because the Buddha explains the invariable characteristic of absence.

Is this really an example of "everything is true"? Is the invariance of this characteristic of everything the same thing as everything being "true" in and of itself? And if the invariance is the only thing that is true, when why say "everything" is true?
It is true that everything lacks a self. That is the truth of everything.
It is true that everything is false. That is what I'm seeing that as, essentially.

It's coherent, but it's not really "everything is true". It's "everything is untrue is true".
नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचन
There absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.
सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्
All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.

一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:43 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:36 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:31 pm
Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:29 pm
All in all, it offers an elegant solution, but if I may nitpick this one point:

The commentary says "everything is true" because the Buddha explains the invariable characteristic of absence.

Is this really an example of "everything is true"? Is the invariance of this characteristic of everything the same thing as everything being "true" in and of itself? And if the invariance is the only thing that is true, when why say "everything" is true?
It is true that everything lacks a self. That is the truth of everything.
It is true that everything is false. That is what I'm seeing that as, essentially.

It's coherent, but it's not really "everything is true". It's "everything is untrue is true".

You are missing the broader point here: which is the abandonment of the afflictive obscuration that results from imputing a self onto conventionally valid phenomena.
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
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Coëmgenu » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:44 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:31 pm
Incidentally, we can call this a catuṣkoti; but we cannot call it a tetralemma, because one is not forced to pick one of these four alternatives. For example, a dilemma is where one must choose two different choices, one to the exclusion of the other.
Then why do we call the so-called "negative tetralemma" a tetralemma?

We don't choose one of these options from the list:

nasvato
nāpiparato
nadvābhyāṃ
nāpyahetutaḥ
नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचन
There absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.
सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्
All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.

一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:54 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:44 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:31 pm
Incidentally, we can call this a catuṣkoti; but we cannot call it a tetralemma, because one is not forced to pick one of these four alternatives. For example, a dilemma is where one must choose two different choices, one to the exclusion of the other.
Then why do we call the so-called "negative tetralemma" a tetralemma?

We don't choose one of these options from the list:

nasvato
nāpiparato
nadvābhyāṃ
nāpyahetutaḥ
We do so because long ago a western translator was struggling for a term to describe a four-fold negation, and that is what he or she came up with. :broke:
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
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Coëmgenu » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:01 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:54 pm
:broke:
:crying:

So I googled lemma to make sure I knew what it was back when you told me the "positive tetralemma" was not a tetralemma.

Google said "a subsidiary or intermediate theorem in an argument or proof."

Are you sure that you need to choose one of the presented lemmata in a dilemma, trilemma, or tetralemma?

Because the "negative tetralemma" can be considered to be four subsidiary or intermediate theoremata in an argument or proof that is not contained in the four subsidiary arguments. Namely that these four negative arguments "prove" emptiness.
नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचन
There absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.
सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्
All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.

一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

Sentient Light
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:40 pm
Location: Pacifica, California

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Sentient Light » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:19 pm

This is a very long article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Tiantai Buddhism that is quite thorough and good: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/buddhism-tiantai/

It showed me that the whole concept of the Buddhanature of insentient beings is soemthing more of a rhetorical device or a logical trick to that further illustrates true insight being beyond dualistic discriminations (or descriptive language for that matter). For each argument, there is an inversion that is equally valid yet seemingly diametrically opposed. It is less a radical doctrine, and more an encouragement to remain mindful of the great complexity of conditioned relationships composing the emptiness experienced as realms and beings.
The controversial idea of “the Buddha-nature of insentient beings” is developed by Zhanran in his Jingangpi using a slightly different approach to the Three Truths, focusing on the trope of space as advanced as a metaphor for Buddha-nature in the Mahāyāna Nirvana Sutra, in its character of all-pervasiveness, ineradicability, and indivisibility, and the non-different/non-identical relation of all regions of space to each other and of each region of space to whatever possible object can occupy it. But here too the central argument is the inseparable intersubsumption of the two opposite terms: sentience is always insentience-sentience, insentience is always sentience-insentience.

One way to think about this is to consider a magnet. It has a north and a south “pole” to it. If we wanted to separate the north from the south pole, we might try cutting it in half. But when we do so, we find that each half still has both a north and a south pole. No matter how many times we slice it, the total set of different characteristics pertaining to the whole are also found in that separate part: northness and southness are, in their entirety, found in what was formerly, in the context of the whole magnet, purely the north part, and also in the former south part. This is how it is in the Tiantai universe: the universe is one big magnet, but instead of just a north and a south, it has 3000 different characteristic aspects: meness, youness, trains, oceans, dogs, soups, historical incidents, smiles, tears, delusion, enlightenment. If we try to isolate any of these, however, what we end up with is another entire “magnet”, which also has all 3000 aspects to it: this meness, it turns out, also has its youness part, its train part, its ocean part, its dog part, and so on. When I face you, it is you-and-me facing you-and-me. It is me-and-all-worlds facing all-worlds-and-me. It is the entire universe facing the entire universe. We are always different, because wherever we go, there is a you and a me, two different aspects, never merging into a blank indifferent mush of a single quality. But since me-and-you is contrasted to me-and-you, there is really no contrast at all: the same thing is found on both sides of the contrast. We are neither the same nor different. We are divided from ourselves, impossible to unify into a simple unity, but for that very reason we are impossible to separate from one another. Each of us, at each moment, are, in a word, absolute, the Center as which all appears, and which is appearing in and as all things. All things are our transformation bodies, we are the transformation body of all things.
:buddha1: Nam mô A di đà Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Quan Thế Âm Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Đại Thế Chi Bồ Tát :bow:

:buddha1: Nam mô Bổn sư Thích ca mâu ni Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Di lặc Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Địa tạng vương Bồ tát :bow:

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:53 pm

Sentient Light wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:19 pm
This is a very long article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Tiantai Buddhism that is quite thorough and good: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/buddhism-tiantai/

It showed me that the whole concept of the Buddhanature of insentient beings
If you read the Critical Buddhist folks, they are convinced that doctrines like this are completely outside of pale of Buddhadharma and open the doorway to all kinds of deviations.

With respect to Zhanran's blanket identification of buddhadhātu with suchness, this presents some critical problems as well, not least of which is that BNI categorically denied in the Nirvana Sūtra, despite his attempt to justify it based on the same sūtra.
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
passel
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:30 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by passel » Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:18 pm

CB folks see original enlightenment (hongaku) and b.n. of the insentient as Panglossian justifications for fascism. You can see that tendency in Han Fei Tzu's Legalist "commentary" on the Dao de Jing- Accord w the Dao, just do your job or you'll get beheaded, by someone in accord with the Dao.
"I have made a heap of all that I have met"- Svetonious

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:37 pm

passel wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:18 pm
CB folks see original enlightenment (hongaku) and b.n. of the insentient as Panglossian justifications for fascism.
Yes, their critique has echoes of Adorno.

Another interesting thing they do is try to show is that Dogen had a change of heart and rejected hongaku and BNI late in his life.
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: 236
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by ItsRaining » Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:58 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:53 pm
Sentient Light wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:19 pm
This is a very long article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Tiantai Buddhism that is quite thorough and good: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/buddhism-tiantai/

It showed me that the whole concept of the Buddhanature of insentient beings
If you read the Critical Buddhist folks, they are convinced that doctrines like this are completely outside of pale of Buddhadharma and open the doorway to all kinds of deviations.

With respect to Zhanran's blanket identification of buddhadhātu with suchness, this presents some critical problems as well, not least of which is that BNI categorically denied in the Nirvana Sūtra, despite his attempt to justify it based on the same sūtra.
If you take them too seriously then apperently “Original Awakening” causes the downfall of societies and will drown your puppies. And that anything related to Tathagatagarbha is non definitive Hindu doctrine snuck into Buddhism.

User avatar
passel
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:30 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by passel » Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:13 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:37 pm
passel wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:18 pm
CB folks see original enlightenment (hongaku) and b.n. of the insentient as Panglossian justifications for fascism.
Yes, their critique has echoes of Adorno.

Another interesting thing they do is try to show is that Dogen had a change of heart and rejected hongaku and BNI late in his life.
I’ll keep an eye out for that. Nice of them to attempt to salvage Dogen!
"I have made a heap of all that I have met"- Svetonious

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28285
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:16 pm

Noriaki cites this example, from the Shōbōgenzō shizen bhikkhu, as presented in Pruning the Bodhi Tree, pg. 123:
Some people say that, because the enlightenment of the Buddhas and Tathagatas encompass the whole world, even a speck of dust manifests that enlightenment. Because that enlightenment encompasses both subject and the object, mountains, rivers, earth, sun, moon, stars, and the four illusions and three poisons express it as well. To see mountains and rivers is to see the Tathagathas, and the four illusions and three poisons are the Buddha-dharma. To see a speck of dust is to see the dharma-dhatu and each spontaneous act is a manifestation of supreme enlightenment. They say this is the great understanding and call it a Patriarchal transmission. In latter-day Sung China, those who subscribe to this view are as numerous as rice plants, hemp. bamboo, and reeds. Their [religious] lineage is unknown, but it is clear they do not understand Buddhism.
All and all an interesting book, quite relevant to the present discussion.
...
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
passel
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:30 am

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by passel » Tue Aug 21, 2018 10:43 pm

When you try to use poetry as law, you wind up in an asura world, with a a few nervous gods waiting for the end in gated communities. All enrichment no sustenance. When you try to use law as poetry, you just get a world full of hungry ghosts. All sustenance no nourishment.

It doesn't seem too different form the mu/u endless non-debate, or emptiness v luminosity/ 2nd v 3rd turning. Was it Jamgon Kongtrul who said that Madhyamaka is great for winning debates (and administration I'd add), but Yogacara is better when you go into retreat. Sometimes you have to chose between accuracy of description and evocativeness of description. Better when you get to use both! Just don't ask one to do the job of the other.
"I have made a heap of all that I have met"- Svetonious

User avatar
anjali
Global Moderator
Posts: 1532
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Buddhahood of Insentient Beings Exclusively East-Asian?

Post by anjali » Tue Aug 21, 2018 11:13 pm

Time out...

Update. A number of posts have been removed, and some inflammatory quips have been trimmed from the remaining posts. The thread will stay locked unless requested it be reopened to add something to topic.
Image

Dharma Wheel Terms of Service and Reporting Procedures.
Wherever there is a human being, there is an opportunity for kindness. –-Seneca

Locked

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests