Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 6468
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Queequeg » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:32 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:20 pm


The thread drifted off topic and addressed the OP really only on the first page. If you want to inflame passions, as you did in the OP of that post ("You can read the article for a full catalogue to see if Nichiren sent any patriarchs of your tradition to hell..."), that's your prerogative. Its the way you put things that draws your intent into question.
Your post basically claims there is only one correct understanding and one correct practice. You do understand why some of us think this position is risible?
If you're not seeking bodhi, you're doing it wrong. Is that a controversial statement from a Buddhist perspective?
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: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:47 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:42 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:32 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:20 pm


The thread drifted off topic and addressed the OP really only on the first page. If you want to inflame passions, as you did in the OP of that post ("You can read the article for a full catalogue to see if Nichiren sent any patriarchs of your tradition to hell..."), that's your prerogative. Its the way you put things that draws your intent into question.
Your post basically claims there is only one correct understanding and one correct practice. You do understand why some of us think this position is risible?
If you're not seeking bodhi, you're doing it wrong. Is that a controversial statement from a Buddhist perspective?
The point is that your guy claims if you don't seek bodhi his way, you're out. That is the risible part.
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: 6468
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Queequeg » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:59 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:47 pm
The point is that your guy claims if you don't seek bodhi his way, you're out. That is the risible part.
Certainly understand that.

What I try to point out is that behind the rhetoric is a basic point that's not going to be controversial to most Buddhists and what Nichiren taught is actually basic Mahayana through a Tiantai lens. I won't try to argue that his rhetoric was not forceful in his original context, but it also was not really far out of the norms, either. We're talking about a period when Tendai monks from the top of Hiei and the bottom of Hiei would resort to military maneuvers against each other. We're talking about a period when religious ideas could get you punished as a criminal, even executed. Kamakura Japan was a harsh time and place.

Anyways, it seems we never get around to actual doctrines because people get hung up on the rhetoric.
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

ItsRaining
Posts: 238
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by ItsRaining » Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:32 am

Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:20 pm
DGA wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:55 am
I made a specific claim and supported it with some evidence. The claim is: "It certainly seems that Nichiren himself felt that there was exactly one correct doctrine and one correct practice."

The evidence is in that link. If you have the patriarch of your tradition sending representatives of virtually every other known-to-him tradition to Hell for teaching the wrong Dharma, I think you have evidence that said patriarch felt that there was exactly one correct doctrine and one correct practice.

I don't see how anything I've said in this post could be controversial in this sub.
I see where you are coming from.

In that thread you linked, I offered a response, explaining what I understand about what Nichiren taught, stripped of the the specific language - ie. NMRK.

viewtopic.php?f=53&p=374733#p374707
You have to understand Nichiren's teaching to understand why he said these things. And he was vocal and untiring in his assertions.

His teachings are based on the Lotus Sutra and the Tiantai-Tendai teachings.

1. Nichiren asserted that a direct connection to the Buddha's enlightenment is the only real path to Buddhahood. Everything else, all upaya, if taken as a final path, is just a painful austerity.

2. The moment you hear the Buddha's name, ie. you are introduced to the real nature of the Buddha, whether you understand it or not, you are unalterably on the path to enlightenment. As the Avatamsaka Sutra explains, entering the path is fundamentally not different than achieving the goal. In the Tiantai-Tendai-Nichiren view, the Buddha is revealed in full, without expedients, only in the Lotus Sutra. Hence, the Lotus Sutra is the profoundest teaching. Everything else in comparison is upaya and coarse/unrefined/provisional.

3. For Nichiren, the field of endeavor of the Buddhist path is the saha world. Escape from the Saha world for Nichiren is a Phantom City. This is where the endeavor for Buddhahood plays out. This is the swamp from which the Lotus sprouts. Buddhahood is attained now, in this body.

Nichiren's teaching is radically oriented to this moment. At the same time, understood through ichinen sanzen, this moment is the apex of the cosmos - the profoundest moment where enlightenment is achieved. Practice undertaken now in this moment is the awakening of enlightenment. This moment is THE crucial moment.

Any teaching that does not directly teach this immediate path is an upaya that is to be discarded in light of this teaching (its a little more refined than that - the revelation of the immediate path is said to transform expedients into the immediate path - opening the provisional to reveal the real). Teachers who obfuscate the immediacy of enlightenment lead people wrong, and are karmically culpable. Hence, the teachers he asserted fell into hell are in his view, people who who knew this immediate teaching but obfuscated the immediacy of enlightenment and caused people to waste this precious human life on fruitless austerities.
The thread drifted off topic and addressed the OP really only on the first page. If you want to inflame passions, as you did in the OP of that post ("You can read the article for a full catalogue to see if Nichiren sent any patriarchs of your tradition to hell..."), that's your prerogative. Its the way you put things that draws your intent into question.
The Huayan school gives the explanation to the meaning of "entering the path is fundamentally not different than achieving the goal" in greater detail and it's not that they are the same. They said that since Buddhahood can be said to be comprised of the 52 stages, it is not apart from these stages and without said stages there would be nothing to make up the whole system. Like 1 meter is made of 100cm. So without the small stages the whole cannot exist.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by DGA » Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:43 am

marting wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:55 am
marting wrote:
Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:30 pm
rory wrote:
Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:24 pm
If Malcolm and DGA really want to understand Nichiren Buddhism they they should join the Zhiyi study group; Nichiren relied entirely on Zhiyi and Tendai philosophy which would explain the totality of NMRK. Unless they do not want to do the work but merely criticize and undermine people's faith.
gassho
Rory
Hey Rory, I definitely understand your enthusiasm about the Zhiyi study group. However, I don't think the posters you mentioned are attempting to undermine anyone's faith. As a matter of fact, your casting these discussions in light of an attack on faith is starting to become tiring to read. Knock it off, please. :)
While I don't usually like to read discussions where someone plays the victim card when things don't go their way, I'd like to revise what I said. If someone does feel like their faith is attacked, people should change how they express their points to address it.
Feeling like your faith is attacked, and your faith actually being attacked, are two different things. Example: I have a friend who believes in megachurch-style Protestant Christianity. If you point out to him that Ken Ham is a terrible paleontologist, is not taken seriously as a paleontologist, and is the owner of a museum that is laughable as an institute dedicated to paleontology, he will assume you are attacking his belief system, his Christianity... even if you only want to talk about dinosaur science. My point is that an afflicted person's feeling of being attacked is a poor measure of someone else's intention and action in these conversations. Feeling can't be trusted because feeling is conditioned by affliction. You can't see clearly if your vision is covered in your own hang-ups. Or, to use a metaphor Queequeg brought up in a different thread, you can't hear clearly if you won't pull your head out of your echo-chamber.

Your post raises a different point that I attempted to raise with rory earlier. What is meant by "faith" in this discussion, for Buddhist practitioners? Is faith such a brittle, puny, weak, and compounded thing that it can be shattered simply by pointing out that there is no such thing as Guru Yoga or Lamanism in Shingon-shu? (So many feelings on that one.) If you feel your "faith" is threatened by some idiot asking questions in good faith, then what you call faith is probably only a belief in a doctrine. An intellectual experiment you identify with. Not a confidence born out of practice and experience, what Buddhists call sraddha.

Should we attack the practice of other Buddhists? NO. I rejoice in the many and diverse practices of Dharma people globally. Practice isn't the same as identifying with a belief system, and discussion boards are built on the principle that you actually discuss things, such as bodies of doctrine. Is it ridiculous to assume that asking about the characteristics of a body of doctrine or the narratives around the doctrine is the same as attacking an individual's practice? Of course it is ridiculous, even though they may feel otherwise. Go back to that Guru Yoga and Lamanism thread for a case study.

Maybe it would be worthwhile to discuss what faith (sraddha) means for the purpose of the practices promoted in this sub and elsewhere here at DW.

Namo Buddhaya.

marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by marting » Tue Feb 06, 2018 4:11 am

Yes, the key I think is how to get a person to participate in a discussion without feeling ashamed. I'd actually enjoy it if Rory shared more in the discussions rather than stay in a kind of permanent defensive stance.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:42 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:59 pm
Anyways, it seems we never get around to actual doctrines because people get hung up on the rhetoric.
That means the rhetoric is in the way. It is one of the problems Gelugpas have with Pabhongakha, actually. Non-Gelugpas just can't forget that Pabhongkha stated in his letters, that all other Buddhists apart from his school were all going to hell, and so on. Then Gelugpas get mad and claim we are getting hung up on rhetoric. Moreover, there are more than just a few Gelugpas who double down on the rhetoric, and I see the same thing happening among Nichirenistas. This is complicated by the fact that Nichiren Buddhism itself has a complicated history, with factions and differing ideologies, from peaceful drum bangers who build Nirvana Stupas around to the world, to aggressive street preachers (at least there were in the '80's).
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: 6468
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Queequeg » Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:38 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:42 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:59 pm
Anyways, it seems we never get around to actual doctrines because people get hung up on the rhetoric.
That means the rhetoric is in the way. It is one of the problems Gelugpas have with Pabhongakha, actually. Non-Gelugpas just can't forget that Pabhongkha stated in his letters, that all other Buddhists apart from his school were all going to hell, and so on. Then Gelugpas get mad and claim we are getting hung up on rhetoric. Moreover, there are more than just a few Gelugpas who double down on the rhetoric, and I see the same thing happening among Nichirenistas. This is complicated by the fact that Nichiren Buddhism itself has a complicated history, with factions and differing ideologies, from peaceful drum bangers who build Nirvana Stupas around to the world, to aggressive street preachers (at least there were in the '80's).
I'm not going to disavow Nichiren's rhetoric. Statements that have the effect of shock and provoking anger have their place. Sometimes complacency is so ingrained that gentle words have no effect. I believe that Nichiren had in mind certain metaphors and parables - from the Lotus Sutra, the father who shocks his children out of their delirium by sending word that he has died; Bodhisattva Sadaparibhuta who provokes an angry response from some who by that antagonism form a deep connection and later enter the path under Sadaparibhuta's guidance; from the Nirvana Sutra, the physician who advises the king to outlaw milk; the king who takes up arms to forcefully eject slanderers; the metaphor of the poison drum where people are provoked to anger and slander the law but who by doing so form a deep connection to the Dharma - better than the weak or absent connection in those who look on the Dharma with indifference.

That said, I personally don't think the harsh rhetoric is appropriate now. Actually, I do think it is appropriate, but not within the Dharma community. I do think it is appropriate against materialists and nihilists whose influence is posing an existential threat to humanity. The biggest problem we have now is survival of our species, and our entire ecosystem; the differences in the interpretation of dharma are minor and in reality affect so few people in the scheme of things that to engage in shakubuku is like arguing why the ship hit an iceberg with your spouse while the ship is sinking.
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
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Minobu » Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:12 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:47 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:42 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:32 pm


Your post basically claims there is only one correct understanding and one correct practice. You do understand why some of us think this position is risible?
If you're not seeking bodhi, you're doing it wrong. Is that a controversial statement from a Buddhist perspective?
The point is that your guy claims if you don't seek bodhi his way, you're out. That is the risible part.
It's not so much "your out" Malcolm, but more of a trial .

This was all new to his world at the time He dedicated his very life to "IT"..they tried to kill him, the government exiled him with harsh penalties for anyone aiding Him.

So the basic dogma is there before His arrival and He just used the Teachings and his background study to form something new for all to try.

It works...it holds up to any lense you try to discredit it with...



Now a side note ,you once admonished me for using the word guy towards one of your hero Dzogchens..and yet you just used it towards Nichiren Shonin.
And this rhetoric approach and name calling and using words like nichirenistas , lotiusutraistas , calling a position of fath risible all come to what Crowley said .


For , after all, one cannot explain the necessity of the study of Latin either to imbecile children or to stupid educationalists ; for not having learned Latin, they have not developed the brains to learn anything .

When people begin to argue about things instead of doing them , they become absolutely impossible. Their minds begin to work about it and about, and they go out by the same door as they went in. They remain brutish, voluble, and uncomprehending .
again you have not tried the practice or gave it's trial from a daily practice...so you cannot actually discuss even the practice...for it is as concealed to you as the Secret doctrines of Dzogchen are to me.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:31 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:38 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:42 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:59 pm
Anyways, it seems we never get around to actual doctrines because people get hung up on the rhetoric.
That means the rhetoric is in the way. It is one of the problems Gelugpas have with Pabhongakha, actually. Non-Gelugpas just can't forget that Pabhongkha stated in his letters, that all other Buddhists apart from his school were all going to hell, and so on. Then Gelugpas get mad and claim we are getting hung up on rhetoric. Moreover, there are more than just a few Gelugpas who double down on the rhetoric, and I see the same thing happening among Nichirenistas. This is complicated by the fact that Nichiren Buddhism itself has a complicated history, with factions and differing ideologies, from peaceful drum bangers who build Nirvana Stupas around to the world, to aggressive street preachers (at least there were in the '80's).
I'm not going to disavow Nichiren's rhetoric.
You ought to. It's pure, undiluted sectarianism.
I do think it is appropriate against materialists and nihilists whose influence is posing an existential threat to humanity.
I personally think religious people are a much greater existential threat to humanity than materialists.
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: 6468
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Queequeg » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:31 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:38 pm
I'm not going to disavow Nichiren's rhetoric.
You ought to. It's pure, undiluted sectarianism.
I disavow anyone mindlessly aping Nichiren's criticism now. Those critiques were upaya. The conditions of those critiques no longer prevail.

My thinking on this, I would rather not discuss publicly.
I personally think religious people are a much greater existential threat to humanity than materialists.
I can see the argument for that.
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: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Those critiques were upaya.
That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too; I don't buy it personally. There is upāya, there is also grasping to views. I consider Pabhongkha and Nichiren's condemnations of other schools to be examples of the latter. YMMV.

M
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
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Minobu » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:27 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 7:31 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:38 pm
I'm not going to disavow Nichiren's rhetoric.
You ought to. It's pure, undiluted sectarianism.
I disavow anyone mindlessly aping Nichiren's criticism now. Those critiques were upaya. The conditions of those critiques no longer prevail.
thats something i could never understand until now. His fealty to Nippon and His Master Dozenbo . His love for all and then the hardship in order to bring forth a new paradigm out of an older Dogma.

not unlike the burning of the bras to turn the wheel of feminism and now finnaly the me too movement and times up movement.

Radical change and in your face action that later brings great peace.

oh to get that wheel to turn...

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Minobu » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:28 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Those critiques were upaya.
That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
source please.

dude
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:38 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by dude » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:42 pm

DGA wrote:
Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:36 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:26 pm
DGA wrote:
Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:45 am





That was my understanding, too. I was surprised to see that this observation was rejected in another thread, so I thought I'd crowdsource some wisdom on it.

Thanks.

What other practices would be involved viz. NMRK apart from chanting? I recognize this may be a stupid question, but I'm trying to come to a better understanding of your perspective.

Thank you for taking the time.
There are no stupid questions.
The guy I learned from used to say "Buddhism is a practice. You do it 24 hours a day seven days a week."
Everything is cause, so in a sense, everything is practice.
Chanting NMRK, even without knowing what it means, is a very powerful cause which plants the seed of enlightenment in the chanter.
Simple reason, of course would imply that it can't be that simple, and it isn't. Saying NMRK even once plants the seed, but for it to sprout and bear fruit, it must be nurtured and developed.
Nichiren was pretty unequivocal at times, saying in essence "If you chant you get what you want." However, in another letter, he noted "There is a difference for those who, even if they chant the daimoku, act against the intent of the sutra."
The three elements of practice are faith, practice and study, all of which have been touched on above by others.
For now, I'll just talk about the way of practice.
First, we chant the title of the Lotus Sutra [NMRK] and recite part of the sutra. This is reading the sutra with one's mouth.
Second, we study and ponder, meditate on, the meaning of the sutra. This is reading the sutra with one's mind. Reading the sutra with one's body means living out the intent and words of the sutra. The intent of it is to save all living beings from suffering, even the most difficult to save.
Hence, we make a point of teaching the practice to others in the hope that they may accept it and gain benefit from the practice. This point was mentioned earlier in explaining how Nichiren explained why he had been persecuted, defamed and even exiled. The Daishonin said that no one else had ever lived out with his own body the passage that says "We will be met with angry frowns.....we will be banished again and again.
Chanting starts the process. Surmounting obstacles and changing karma is a life long undertaking.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:56 pm

Minobu wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:28 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Those critiques were upaya.
That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
source please.

Source of what? Pabhongkha's sectarian remarks?
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
Minobu
Posts: 2156
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Minobu » Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:06 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:56 pm
Minobu wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:28 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm


That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
source please.

Source of what? Pabhongkha's sectarian remarks?
i was unaware of his sectarianism...i read his liberation in the palm of your hand ..and well i never was clued into the gelugpa nygma wars you discuss.

Anyway back to source the question;
No, that people use upaya as a means to justify his remarks.

you said
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Those critiques were upaya.
That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
it's the first i heard and wonder if this is actual or just something "You Feel"

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28714
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by Malcolm » Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:55 pm

Minobu wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:06 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:56 pm
Minobu wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:28 pm


source please.

Source of what? Pabhongkha's sectarian remarks?
i was unaware of his sectarianism...i read his liberation in the palm of your hand ..and well i never was clued into the gelugpa nygma wars you discuss.

Anyway back to source the question;
No, that people use upaya as a means to justify his remarks.

you said
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:10 pm
Those critiques were upaya.
That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
it's the first i heard and wonder if this is actual or just something "You Feel"
Yes, I have heard Gelugpas explain away his remarks as being related only to the fact that many Gelugpas in eastern Tibet were all becoming interested in Dzogchen, and he did not like that. He also did not like the so called Rime movement. He regarded it as a threat the Gelug intellectual hegemony in Tibet.
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: 238
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by ItsRaining » Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:52 am

Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:55 pm
Minobu wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:06 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:56 pm



Source of what? Pabhongkha's sectarian remarks?
i was unaware of his sectarianism...i read his liberation in the palm of your hand ..and well i never was clued into the gelugpa nygma wars you discuss.

Anyway back to source the question;
No, that people use upaya as a means to justify his remarks.

you said
Malcolm wrote:
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:24 pm


That's what people say about Pabhongkha's criticisms too;
M
it's the first i heard and wonder if this is actual or just something "You Feel"
Yes, I have heard Gelugpas explain away his remarks as being related only to the fact that many Gelugpas in eastern Tibet were all becoming interested in Dzogchen, and he did not like that. He also did not like the so called Rime movement. He regarded it as a threat the Gelug intellectual hegemony in Tibet.
Just wondering, what is it like now? Is Gelug still the predominant philosophical view in Tibet?

marting
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:37 am

Re: Is NMRK the definitive Buddhist path?

Post by marting » Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:36 am

Tibet is not an independent country anymore, so it's no longer like that. Gelug is still popular among the diaspora because of the Dalai Lama, and I think inside Tibet too.

Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Monlam Tharchin, Queequeg and 25 guests