Do you have any recommendations for a Hosso primer? I'm working my way through Living Yogacara by Tagawa Shun'ei. Pretty accessible read, but not sure how its received generally. Any comments?
Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Read Asanga:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=475
Hsüan Tsang and Vasubandhu:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=456
These are the roots.
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Tip o'the hat, M.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:12 pmRead Asanga:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=475
Hsüan Tsang and Vasubandhu:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=456
These are the roots.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
The latter text is the basic text of the Hosso (Fa Hsiang) school. Enjoy reading it. I did.Queequeg wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:44 pmTip o'the hat, M.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:12 pmRead Asanga:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=475
Hsüan Tsang and Vasubandhu:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=456
These are the roots.
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:48 pmThe latter text is the basic text of the Hosso (Fa Hsiang) school. Enjoy reading it. I did.Queequeg wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:44 pmTip o'the hat, M.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:12 pm
Read Asanga:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=475
Hsüan Tsang and Vasubandhu:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=456
These are the roots.
If you want to understand the Indian antecendents, there are a number of basic Yogacāra texts in translation these days.
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Out of curiosity, how do the Fa Hsiang Chinese writings compare with the Indian antecedents? Did you identify any differences?
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Well, I have not really read anything other than the book recommended above. But it is pure, Indian Yogacāra from the middle period. A bit earlier than the true aspectarian-false aspectarian debates that came to dominate later Yogacāra discourse. As such, having read it, you will have no trouble with Bodhisattvabhumi, Mahayānasaṃgraha, Madhyantavibhagabhasyaṃ and so forth.
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Hi Rev. Jikai,jikai wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:46 am Hi all,
I have uploaded the next lot of study notes. I am sorry for the quite lengthy delay. As some of you are aware, I help out with English teaching, and the English curriculum at the Tendai High School here in Tokyo. Given that it has been the end of the School year here, I have been rather busy with exams, grading, and designing and preparing the curriculum for the coming year. This has taken a great deal of my time over the last few weeks, but It appears that the worst is behind me now. So I will be getting around to all of the comments left here, and hope now I can get back into the discussion. My apologies for the inconvenience, and I hope the new notes are of some help in placing the discussion:
http://tendaiaustralia.org.au/documents/Guandingpt2.pdf
Gassho,
Jikai
You referred to the criticism of Zhiyi that he misunderstood Madhyamika, and pointed out that the Three-Fold Truth is addressed to the standing controversy about the relation between the Relative and Ultimate truths. As a comparison, you refer to the Three Natures in Yogacara as another remedy for the controversy.
It seems that any innovation in Buddha dharma is met with questions of orthodoxy, but it seems that Tiantai has a doctrinal basis to accommodate a diverse, and often conflicting, array of teachings and practices under its umbrella, really, truly, seamlessly.
Did Zhiyi ever address the criticism regarding his apparent innovations? Or did he simply present the Three-Fold Truth and leave it for later Tiantai/Tendai leaders to address the criticism? I have vague recollection of passages in which Zhiyi seems to acknowledge, implicitly, that he is innovating, but always nominally, at least, dresses it in the language of orthodoxy. Swanson remarks on this, and has a paper with a somewhat amusing title, "Hey Chih-i, what's going on here?" or something like that. He also addresses this in the MHCK intro.
After I became aware of the criticism and started reading Tiantai sources more closely, it occurred to me that if this criticism was presented to Zhiyi, he might simply shrug, saying its merely a matter of numerical distinction, as he suggests in several works - the Six Sublime Dharma Gates comes to mind. That as a matter of upaya, the Dharma is taught in innumerable ways addressed to the particular afflictions of the beings. I also think of the successive meditations that cure the afflictions of the 25 realms, each meditation curing the excess of a particular ailment, but then that cure becoming the basis of excess and requiring further cure. Further, this "excess-cure-excess-cure-excess..." dynamic that Zhiyi sees as exemplified in the Buddha's lifetime teachings, seems to be perfectly addressed by the remarkable stability of the Three-fold Truth. Its this dynamic function of Zhiyi's teachings that have really captivated me.
Perhaps that rambles a little bit and its not a complete and cohesive thought or point I'm making, but, can you offer any comment on these ideas?
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Thank you. That presently has little meaning for me, but I will keep that in mind as I get familiar with it.Malcolm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:36 pmWell, I have not really read anything other than the book recommended above. But it is pure, Indian Yogacāra from the middle period. A bit earlier than the true aspectarian-false aspectarian debates that came to dominate later Yogacāra discourse. As such, having read it, you will have no trouble with Bodhisattvabhumi, Mahayānasaṃgraha, Madhyantavibhagabhasyaṃ and so forth.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
The true aspect/false aspect debate within Yogacāra was whether or not mental experience corresponded with an external reality. The false aspectarians, generally considered the more profound system, argued there was no correspondence.Queequeg wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:03 pmThank you. That presently has little meaning for me, but I will keep that in mind as I get familiar with it.Malcolm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:36 pmWell, I have not really read anything other than the book recommended above. But it is pure, Indian Yogacāra from the middle period. A bit earlier than the true aspectarian-false aspectarian debates that came to dominate later Yogacāra discourse. As such, having read it, you will have no trouble with Bodhisattvabhumi, Mahayānasaṃgraha, Madhyantavibhagabhasyaṃ and so forth.
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
I don't know if you looked at it, but in Jikai's latest outline, he briefly discusses the Three Natures - Tri-Svabhava. Is that related to the debate?Malcolm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:14 pmThe true aspect/false aspect debate within Yogacāra was whether or not mental experience corresponded with an external reality. The false aspectarians, generally considered the more profound system, argued there was no correspondence.Queequeg wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:03 pmThank you. That presently has little meaning for me, but I will keep that in mind as I get familiar with it.Malcolm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:36 pm
Well, I have not really read anything other than the book recommended above. But it is pure, Indian Yogacāra from the middle period. A bit earlier than the true aspectarian-false aspectarian debates that came to dominate later Yogacāra discourse. As such, having read it, you will have no trouble with Bodhisattvabhumi, Mahayānasaṃgraha, Madhyantavibhagabhasyaṃ and so forth.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
The three natures is central to the debate. The question is whether the imputed nature's appearance has an external correlate.Queequeg wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:34 pmI don't know if you looked at it, but in Jikai's latest outline, he briefly discusses the Three Natures - Tri-Svabhava. Is that related to the debate?
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Dear Rev. Jikai; thank you for all the work! you have put into the outlines. Please do not take my long silence for disinterest rather the material is complex and difficult...
This passage at the end is causing me some confusion:
As
Swanson talks about this and says:" As an ultimate reality that synthesizes and utterly transcends the two provisionally devised truths, Chih-i describes the middle as an unalloyed and singular truth" p.11 Vol.1
Swanson seems (to me) to be positing the Middle at the top of a hierarchy which subsumes both of the 'lower' truths, he talks of a 'singular transcendent middle' p. 11
gassho
Rory
This passage at the end is causing me some confusion:
p.18The Middle is the perfect integration of the three principles, such that all is equally empty, all is conventionally existent, all is the middle."
As
Swanson talks about this and says:" As an ultimate reality that synthesizes and utterly transcends the two provisionally devised truths, Chih-i describes the middle as an unalloyed and singular truth" p.11 Vol.1
Swanson seems (to me) to be positing the Middle at the top of a hierarchy which subsumes both of the 'lower' truths, he talks of a 'singular transcendent middle' p. 11
gassho
Rory
Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
That's a great book, Rev. Tagawa is the head of the Hosso sect in Japan.
here is a link to a 2009 uni of chicago course reading list for Yogacara, hope it is helpful
Yogacara texts make my brain hurt!
gassho
Rory
Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Sorry forgot the link, here it is:
http://home.uchicago.edu/~daarnold/Yogacara.html
Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58
https://www.tendai-usa.org/
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Hi all, Just a heads up that the new section of notes is up on the website. Enjoy!
http://tendaiaustralia.org.au/Mohe-Zhig ... l-摩訶止觀.php
I will now try to get around to all the posts!
Gassho,
Jikai
http://tendaiaustralia.org.au/Mohe-Zhig ... l-摩訶止觀.php
I will now try to get around to all the posts!
Gassho,
Jikai
"止觀明靜前代未聞"
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
I second Loppon in his suggestions. As far as East Asian Yogacara is concerned the Chengweishi Lun is the key text. It is an amalgamation of Indian commentaries which Xuanzang compiled and commented on, at the request of his disciple Kuiji.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:48 pmThe latter text is the basic text of the Hosso (Fa Hsiang) school. Enjoy reading it. I did.Queequeg wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:44 pmTip o'the hat, M.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:12 pm
Read Asanga:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=475
Hsüan Tsang and Vasubandhu:
http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/files/ ... ode&id=456
These are the roots.
Having said that, if you aren't familiar with Yogacara concepts and language it can be difficult to make genuine sense of the system. Generally speaking the traditional method for learning Yogacara is to start with a grounding in the Abhidharma materials. There is a traditional Japanese saying which reflects this: "Eight years on the Abhidharma, three years on the Yogacara. You don't have to go that far perhaps, or read the whole of the Abhidharma Kosa Bhasyam or anything like that (although I encourage anyone who hasn't to do so!and eight years on the Abhidharma would make you more knowledgeable than most). But it is wise to go through one of the later Abhidharma manuals at the least. These later manuals were written to be fairly concise and contain the majority of the basic Abhidharma concepts and terms. If you aren't well acquainted with these terms, then when you get to Yogacara works, you are really making it difficult for yourself. They expect you to know them, and then build on or modify them as they see fit. Of these later manuals two have been translated into English, and either will serve as a nice primer. These are the Abhidharma Hrdaya Sastra and the Abhidharmavatara. Both are good, but I recommend you go with the Abhidharmavatara if you have to pick one. It has been translated with annotation by Bhikku Dhammajoti as Entrance into the Supreme Doctrine: Skandhila's Abhidharmavatara. It divides the basic categories of Abhidharma thought into a framework of eight padartha: the five skandha, and the three asamskrta (unconditioned dharmas). Once you have a degree of comfort with these materials, Yogacara should be simply a case of adapting and adding.
Gassho,
Jikai
"止觀明靜前代未聞"
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
If you want to go directly to Yogacara, Living Yogacara by Tagawa Shunei is a nice start. I recommend it to those who want to understand the general thrust and orientation of Yogacara texts and ideas. But it wont realistically get you far enough to go through texts like the Chengweishi Lun and expect to get much from it. As I mentioned, having some knowledge of the Abhidharma is helpful, but failing that, once you've finished Living Yogacara the best 'proper' Yogacara Primer in my opinion is Dan Lusthaus' Buddhist Phenomenology' A Philosophical investigation of Yogacara Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun. At about six hundred pages, you should have a reasonable grasp of the ideas once you've completed it. A lot of practitioners and scholars misunderstand the fundamental premise of Vijnaptimatrata, so there is a lot out there that seems more confusion than clarity.
Gassho,
Jikai
"止觀明靜前代未聞"
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
Re: Mohe Zhiguan Study Thread 摩訶止觀 Part 1
Zhiyi does respond to criticism in many many places. The general thrust of his defence is that the idea is right there in the texts. As you rightly say however, Zhiyi is not especially concerned with the criticism, because concepts like the Three Truths are only upayic. Zhiyi can happily abandon his position as incidental if he needs to (although I don't think he needs to). There is only one reality after all. The Three Truths are quite genius in that way.Queequeg wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:01 pmHi Rev. Jikai,jikai wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:46 am Hi all,
I have uploaded the next lot of study notes. I am sorry for the quite lengthy delay. As some of you are aware, I help out with English teaching, and the English curriculum at the Tendai High School here in Tokyo. Given that it has been the end of the School year here, I have been rather busy with exams, grading, and designing and preparing the curriculum for the coming year. This has taken a great deal of my time over the last few weeks, but It appears that the worst is behind me now. So I will be getting around to all of the comments left here, and hope now I can get back into the discussion. My apologies for the inconvenience, and I hope the new notes are of some help in placing the discussion:
http://tendaiaustralia.org.au/documents/Guandingpt2.pdf
Gassho,
Jikai
You referred to the criticism of Zhiyi that he misunderstood Madhyamika, and pointed out that the Three-Fold Truth is addressed to the standing controversy about the relation between the Relative and Ultimate truths. As a comparison, you refer to the Three Natures in Yogacara as another remedy for the controversy.
It seems that any innovation in Buddha dharma is met with questions of orthodoxy, but it seems that Tiantai has a doctrinal basis to accommodate a diverse, and often conflicting, array of teachings and practices under its umbrella, really, truly, seamlessly.
Did Zhiyi ever address the criticism regarding his apparent innovations? Or did he simply present the Three-Fold Truth and leave it for later Tiantai/Tendai leaders to address the criticism? I have vague recollection of passages in which Zhiyi seems to acknowledge, implicitly, that he is innovating, but always nominally, at least, dresses it in the language of orthodoxy. Swanson remarks on this, and has a paper with a somewhat amusing title, "Hey Chih-i, what's going on here?" or something like that. He also addresses this in the MHCK intro.
After I became aware of the criticism and started reading Tiantai sources more closely, it occurred to me that if this criticism was presented to Zhiyi, he might simply shrug, saying its merely a matter of numerical distinction, as he suggests in several works - the Six Sublime Dharma Gates comes to mind. That as a matter of upaya, the Dharma is taught in innumerable ways addressed to the particular afflictions of the beings. I also think of the successive meditations that cure the afflictions of the 25 realms, each meditation curing the excess of a particular ailment, but then that cure becoming the basis of excess and requiring further cure. Further, this "excess-cure-excess-cure-excess..." dynamic that Zhiyi sees as exemplified in the Buddha's lifetime teachings, seems to be perfectly addressed by the remarkable stability of the Three-fold Truth. Its this dynamic function of Zhiyi's teachings that have really captivated me.
Perhaps that rambles a little bit and its not a complete and cohesive thought or point I'm making, but, can you offer any comment on these ideas?
"止觀明靜前代未聞"
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)
(摩訶止觀)
"此妙法蓮花經者本地甚深之奧藏也"
( 法華玄義)
"觀心者空觀是般若假觀是解脫中觀是法身"
(法華文句)