I've been so wrong/pure lands

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:02 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:06 pm
Pero wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:03 pm
I was thinking of this: "ussuyapandaka - A voyeur, a man who gains sexual satisfaction from watching a man and a woman having sex, and only becomes sexually aroused after that." Doesn't watching porn come pretty close to that?
If you can only be aroused by watching porn, then yes. If you do not need porn to become aroused, then no.

If I recall correctly, someone who can only be aroused by watching porn is traditionally classified as a porndaka.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1592
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Coëmgenu » Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:24 pm

According to this French Nichiren website, which cites the Mahāvyutpatti, people who ejaculate prematurely are also pandaka (asaktapradurbhavipandaka).
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः
उत्पन्नाजातुविद्यन्तेभावाःक्वचनकेचन

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Dec 22, 2017 10:20 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:24 pm
According to this French Nichiren website, which cites the Mahavyutpatti, people who ejaculate prematurely are also pandaka (asaktapradurbhavipandaka).

There is some discussion of this term in footnote 16 of the paper One Plus One Makes Three: Buddhist Gender, Monasticism, and the Law of the Non-excluded Middle by Janet Gyatso. It's not clear from what's written there that it does in fact refer to premature ejaculators.

In Kim's "Tao-sheng's Commentary On the Lotus Sutra : A Study and Translation" it is explained in the following way:
"They can become potent only after others touch their bodies first."
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:47 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 3:21 pm
illarraza wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:46 am
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:22 pm


No. https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... 82367.html:

Here are the eighteen special attributes (aṣṭādaśāveṇikadharma):

1. The Tathāgata has no bodily defect (nāsti tathāgatasya skhalitam).

2. He has no vocal defect (nāsti ravitam).

3. He has no failure of memory (nāsti muṣitasmṛtitā).

4. He has no notion of variety (nāsti nāmātvasaṃjñā).

5. He does not have an unconcentrated mind (nāsty asamāhitaṃ cittam).

6. He does not have thoughtless indifference (nāsty apratisaṃkhyāyopekṣā).

7. He has no loss of zealousness (nāsti chandaparihāṇiḥ).

8. He has no loss of exertion (nāsti vīryaparihāṇiḥ.

9. He has no loss of mindfulness (nāsti smṛtiparihāṇiḥ).

10. He has no loss of wisdom (nāsti prajñāparihāṇiḥ).

11. He has no loss of liberation (nāsti vimuktiparihāṇiḥ).

12. He has no loss of the knowledge and vision of deliverance (nāsti vimuktijñmanadarśanapariāṇiḥ).

13. Every bodily action of the Tathāgata is preceded by knowledge and accompanies knowledge (sarvaṃ tathātagatasya kāyakarma jñānapūrvaṃgamaṃ jñānānuparivarti).

14. Every vocal action is preceded by knowledge and accompanies knowledge (sarvaṃ vākkarma jñānapūrvaṃgamaṃ jñānānuparivarti).

15. Every mental action is preceded by knowledge and accompanies knowledge (sarvaṃ manaskarma jñānapūrvaṃgamaṃ jñānānuparivarti).

16. He has non-attached and unobstructed knowledge about past time (atīte ’dhvany asaṅgam apratihataṃ jñmanaṃ darśanam).

17. He has non-attached and unobstructed knowledge about future time (anāgate ’dhvany asaṅgam apratihataṃ jñānaṃ darśanam). [Page 511]

18. He has non-attached and unobstructed knowledge about the present time (pratyutpanne ’dhvany asaṅgam apratihataṃ jñānaṃ darśanam).
The Buddha also taught that he attained Enlightenment for the first time under the tree. The Lotus Sutra has also demolished that earlier teaching, not to say that of your pie in the sky perfect (Christian-like) God-Buddha.
Mark, the 18 above listed special qualities are found in the Lotus Sūtra.
Yes Malcolm, in the Theoretical Section of the Lotus Sutra. All that was taught previously by the Buddha was overturned by the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren teaches that the difference between the Essential Section and the Theoretical Section is hundreds of thousand times more than the difference between the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings and the Theoretical Teachings. Were what you say true, then there is NO Buddhahood in this very body because in this very body there are afflictions. In the Body of the Buddha, afflictions are attenuated and latent at best but they are not eradicated. This is Ichinen Sanzen or 3000 Realms in a moment of existence. Predominant life tendency of Buddha, is the life of the Buddha. Only the Eternal Buddha has been free of defilements since the beginningless past but the moment he manifests as Nirmanakaya, eats defecates, and gets ill, he demonstrates that he Buddha too possesses afflictions.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:02 am

CedarTree wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:04 pm
I always wondered what happened to Malcolm in the middle Lol.

Thanks for pointing that out Q :)

Queequeg wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:01 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:25 pm
Unless, of course, they are paṇḍakas, in which case they apparently should be shunned.
On a serious note, the full context of Malcolm's reference is as follows:

In the Peaceful Practices chapter, the Buddha gives instruction on how a mahasatvva-bodhisattva should uphold the teaching. He instructs:

The prose section:
“As for the associations proper for them, bodhisattvas mahasattva should not associate closely with rulers, princes, high ministers, or heads of offices. They should not associate closely with non-Buddhists, Brahmans, or Jains, or with those who compose works of secular literature or books extolling the non-Buddhists, nor should they be closely associated with Lokayatas or Anti-Lokayatas. They should not be closely associated with hazardous amusements, boxing, or wrestling, or with actors or others engaged in various kinds of illusionary entertainments, or with chandalas, persons engaged in raising pigs, sheep, chickens, or dogs, or those who engage in hunting or fishing or other evil activities. If such persons at times come to them, then they may preach the Law for them, but they should expect nothing from it. Again they should not associate with monks, nuns, laymen, or laywomen who seek to become voice-hearers, nor should they question or visit them. They should not stay with them in the same room, or in the place of exercise, or in the lecture hall. If at times they come to them, they may preach the Law in accordance with what is appropriate, but should expect nothing from it.

“Manjushri, the bodhisattva mahasattva should not, when preaching the Law to women, do so in a manner that could arouse thoughts of desire in them, nor should he delight in seeing them. If he enters the house of another person, he should not engage in talk with the young girls, unmarried women, or widows. Nor should he go near the five types of unmanly men or have any close dealings with them. He should not enter another person’s house alone. If for some reason it is imperative to enter alone, he should concentrate his whole mind on thoughts of the Buddha. If he should preach the Law for a woman, he should not bare his teeth in laughter or let his chest become exposed. He should not have any intimate dealings with her even for the sake of the Law, much less for any other purpose.

“He should not delight in nurturing underage disciples, shramaneras, or children, and should not delight in sharing the same teacher with them. He should constantly take pleasure in sitting in meditation, and being in quiet surroundings learn to still his mind. Manjushri, these are what I call the things he should first of all associate himself with.
The verse section:
If there are bodhisattvas
who in the evil age hereafter
wish with fearless hearts
to preach this sutra,
these are the places they should enter
and the people they should closely associate with.
At all times shun rulers
and the princes of kingdoms,
high ministers, heads of offices,
those engaged in hazardous amusements
as well as chandalas,
non-Buddhists, and Brahmans.
They should not associate with
people of overbearing arrogance
or those who stubbornly adhere to the lesser vehicle
and are learned in its three storehouses.
Monks who violate the precepts,
arhats who are so in name only,
nuns who are fond
of jesting and laughter,
or women lay believers
who are profoundly attached to the five desires
or who seek immediate entry into extinction—
all these they should not associate with.
If there are people
who come with good hearts
to the place of the bodhisattva
in order to hear the buddha way,
then the bodhisattva
with a fearless heart
but without harboring expectations
should preach the Law for them.
But widows and unmarried women
and the different kinds of unmanly men—
all these he should not associate with
or treat with intimacy.
Also he must not associate with
slaughterers or flesh-carvers,
those who hunt animals or catch fish,
or kill or do harm for profit.
Those who peddle meat for a living
or display women and sell their favors—
all people such as this
he should never associate with.
Those engaged in hazardous sports, wrestling,
or other kinds of amusements,
women of lascivious nature—
never associate with any of these.
Never go alone into an enclosed place
to preach the Law to a woman.
When he preaches the Law,
let there be no jesting or laughter.
When he enters a village to beg for food,
he should take another monk with him;
if there is no other monk around,
with a single mind he should concentrate on the Buddha.
These are what I call
proper practices and associations.
By being careful about these two,
they can preach in a peaceful manner.
The instruction is for the mahasattva-bodhisattva to avoid pretty much anyone who might distract them from the path. What Malcolm is doing here is called trolling.
Let us also not confuse the shallow teachings of the first Fourteen Chapters, save for Chapter 2, and the profound teachings of the Essential Section, the latter 14 Chapters. I don't think there is an admonishment to avoid any common worldling in these latter 14 Chapters, save for the slanderers of the Lotus Sutra. Those who even disbelieve may be called slanderers. Those like Malcolm who claim there are teachings as profound as the Lotus Sutra or even teachings more profound, are certainly slanderers. He doesn't even acknowledge Bodhi in this very body (because there are afflictions in this very body) but claims his teachings are equal or superior to the Lotus Sutra.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:05 am

Malcolm wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:19 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:01 pm
The instruction is for the mahasattva-bodhisattva to avoid pretty much anyone who might distract them from the path. What Malcolm is doing here is called trolling.
It is a bit strange that bodhisattva mahāsattvas should be enjoined from associating with anyone, since presumably they are bodhisattvas on the pure stages who have realized patience towards the non-arising of phenomena and can without a second thought offer their eyes or even their heads to those in need. How could such a highly realized being be distracted by anything?
That is why we need Nichiren...to teach us about the relative profundity of the first 14 chapters and the latter 14 chapters.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:08 am

DGA wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:08 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:01 pm

The instruction is for the mahasattva-bodhisattva to avoid pretty much anyone who might distract them from the path. What Malcolm is doing here is called trolling.
I"m not so sure that Malcolm is distracting anyone from the path as such. He's enthusiastically endorsed the Ekayana teachings. However, he's definitely made some objections to some of the claims of DW members regarding the path. Is that trolling, or discussion?
Have you known Malcolm since the E-Sangha days? He has been trolling the votaries of the Lotus Sutra since, at least, then.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:18 am

DGA wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:39 pm
OK, I found the passage that illarraza was referring to in Chapter 15. It's early on in the chapter in The Threefold Lotus Sutra (Bunno Kato, trans.), on page 239.

This is the chapter that starts with a great earthquake, and the emergence of a multitude of bodhisattva-mahasattvas. Shakyamuni Buddha is greeted as follows:
Thereupon the four great bodhisattvas spoke thus in verse:

"Is the World-Honored One at ease,
With few ailments and few troubles?
In instructing all the living beings,
Is he free from weariness?
And are all the living
Readily accepting his teaching?
Do they cause the World-honored One
Not to get tired?"

Then the World-honored One, in the great assembly of the bodhisattvas, spoke thus: "Sot it is, so it is, my good sons! The Tathagata is at ease, with few ailments and few troubles. These beings are easy to transform and I am free from weariness. Wherefore? Because all these beings for generations of constantly received my instruction and worshiped and honored the former buddhas, cultivating roots of goodness..."
I have some other thoughts about this passage that may be appropriate for a different thread. For now, I have two thoughts.

This looks like a conventional exchange of niceties rather than a doctrinal discussion.

I'm not in a position to evaluate the translation of this passage. Does the English correspond to Kumarajiva's Chinese? to the Sanskrit?
According to Nichiren, the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra, Kumarajiva's translation is definitive. None of the English translations state, "no ailments", "no" troubles". Nearly everything in Chapters 15, 16, and 17 are doctrinal because these, again according to Nichiren, are the most important chapters of the Lotus Sutra.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:23 am

Queequeg wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:40 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:35 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:31 pm


What conclusion ought be drawn?
My bad —— a bodhisattva mahāsattva is any bodhisattva on the stages -- but still my point stands, if one is able to offer one's eyes or limbs sentient beings, how could one possibly be distracted on the path since one has now realized emptiness?

The only conclusion I can draw is that these sentiments are reflective of the bias of the person who wrote the text down.
I watched a youtube movie about a yogi... not sure where. Maybe Ladakh? Anyway, he remarked, hundreds of thousands of prostrations are easy compared to maintaining single pointed focus. Medals of Honor were given out posthumously on a regular basis in WWI and WWII to men who jumped on grenades to save their fellows. I seriously doubt there were many practicing Buddhists, let alone bodhisattvas among those recipients. I think you have it backwards about the difficulty of maintaining concentration.
It sounds to me that these men were Bodhisattvas by definition. Reminds me of the poor woman in the Nirvana Sutra who attains the Way by giving up her life for her infant child. Her caring for the child was akin to a Buddhist one pointed concentration.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:34 am

DGA wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:54 pm
DGA wrote:
Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:39 pm
OK, I found the passage that illarraza was referring to in Chapter 15. It's early on in the chapter in The Threefold Lotus Sutra (Bunno Kato, trans.), on page 239.

This is the chapter that starts with a great earthquake, and the emergence of a multitude of bodhisattva-mahasattvas. Shakyamuni Buddha is greeted as follows:
Thereupon the four great bodhisattvas spoke thus in verse:

"Is the World-Honored One at ease,
With few ailments and few troubles?
In instructing all the living beings,
Is he free from weariness?
And are all the living
Readily accepting his teaching?
Do they cause the World-honored One
Not to get tired?"

Then the World-honored One, in the great assembly of the bodhisattvas, spoke thus: "Sot it is, so it is, my good sons! The Tathagata is at ease, with few ailments and few troubles. These beings are easy to transform and I am free from weariness. Wherefore? Because all these beings for generations of constantly received my instruction and worshiped and honored the former buddhas, cultivating roots of goodness..."
I have some other thoughts about this passage that may be appropriate for a different thread. For now, I have two thoughts.

This looks like a conventional exchange of niceties rather than a doctrinal discussion.

I'm not in a position to evaluate the translation of this passage. Does the English correspond to Kumarajiva's Chinese? to the Sanskrit?
I poked around a bit further on this question. I checked two other translations from Kumarajiva's Chinese (Burton Watson and Gene Reeves), and they say more or less the same as the Bunno Kato version does: few ailments and few worries.

However, I then checked the Leon Hurvitz translation. Here, the meaning differs significantly (page 227):
"Verily, verily, good men, the Thus Come One is comfortable, in good health and free of pain."
Hurvitz also follows Kumarajiva's Chinese. Does Hurvitz follow a different commentarial tradition from Watson, Reeves, and Kato? I'm trying to understand how Watson and the others arrived at their reading of the text.
Good look.

illarraza
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by illarraza » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:41 am

DGA wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 7:07 pm
Ricky wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 7:00 pm
DGA wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:32 pm


These are inconvenient.

:coffee:
How so?
The Lotus Sutra is interesting in part because confounds many of the popular narratives that have been built up around it. The two posts I quoted give two examples of that.

There are others.

So when I say "these are inconvenient," I mean they are inconvenient from the perspective of someone who wishes to promote a particular narrative regarding this sutra that is contradicted by the text of the sutra itself. This is why the transformation of the naga princess's female body into a male body as described in the Sutra, for example, is a sore subject for many. That passage contradicts a commentarial tradition that claims (rightly in my opinion!) that it doesn't matter what gender your body corresponds to, Buddhahood is possible for you in this lifetime. The tradition (Zhiyi in this case) gets the Dharma right but the text wrong in that instance, in my opinion.

We all have to take responsibility for our understanding of the Dharma.
Again, that is why we look to the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra to place the teachings in the proper perspective. For example, The Dragon King's daughter states,

That, having heard [the Truth], I ATTAINED BODHI
Only the Buddha may bear witness.
I will reveal the teaching of the Great-vehicle
Which delivers creatures from suffering."

BEFORE she transformed into a male in order to dispel Shariputra's disbelief. She did attain Bodhi in the body of the Dragon Girl.

Mark

Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests