I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post Reply
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:00 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:05 pm
Queequeg wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 8:00 pm

Sigh. :roll:

Congratulations. You're the winner!
Taken on the face of it, your statement "Buddha includes the afflictions" cannot be taken literally. You're basically making the argument that a buddha defines afflictions through exclusion.
Another sigh. :roll:

Great argument and exposition of your point.

:popcorn:
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:17 pm Great argument and exposition of your point.

:popcorn:
There is no discussion to be had when you take statements out of context. The point you seem to think you make was addressed before you made it.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:30 pm The point you seem to think you make was addressed before you made it.
How so? The discussion here is whether buddhas can possess afflictions in any form at all.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:33 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:30 pm The point you seem to think you make was addressed before you made it.
How so? The discussion here is whether buddhas can possess afflictions in any form at all.
I explained it. You dismissed it. What else is there?
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:48 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:33 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:30 pm The point you seem to think you make was addressed before you made it.
How so? The discussion here is whether buddhas can possess afflictions in any form at all.
I explained it. You dismissed it. What else is there?
You offered an assertion, not a proof. A proof involves a citation, a reasoning, and a conclusion.

Apparently you think (unreasonably) that buddhas can possess affliction. This is an extremely strange point of view and is really outside of normative Buddhist discourse.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:05 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:48 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:33 pm

How so? The discussion here is whether buddhas can possess afflictions in any form at all.
I explained it. You dismissed it. What else is there?
You offered an assertion, not a proof. A proof involves a citation, a reasoning, and a conclusion.

Apparently you think (unreasonably) that buddhas can possess affliction. This is an extremely strange point of view and is really outside of normative Buddhist discourse.
You are right in that I did not offer citations for my comments. But, you're also not comprehending what I wrote. If you did, you wouldn't attribute assertions to me that I did not make. I can't argue on behalf of the Queequeg that you conjured.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:09 pm But, you're also not comprehending what I wrote.
Then it is up to you to explain your point in a form which is comprehensible. In other words, if you are not asserting buddhas possess afflictions, just what are you attempting to explain? If you are trying to explain for example, that liberation and bondage are relative concepts which are mutually dependent, that is quite trivial.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:30 pm Zhiyi was not teaching some masturbatory intellectualism as you suggest.

I never suggested this anywhere.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by DGA »

Hold on.

We're in the Nichiren sub. Therefore, whatever Nichiren may have had to say on the topic of whether or not Buddha Shakyamuni had afflictions should be definitive here.

Do Nichiren's writings comment on this topic? I'm asking out of ignorance. I don't know the answer to this question.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

DGA wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:44 pm Hold on.

We're in the Nichiren sub. Therefore, whatever Nichiren may have had to say on the topic of whether or not Buddha Shakyamuni had afflictions should be definitive here.

Do Nichiren's writings comment on this topic? I'm asking out of ignorance. I don't know the answer to this question.
No. The Buddha is freed of afflictions. Period.

This is why this whole line of inquiry has no point.

There is a teaching in Tiantai that Buddha encompasses afflictions, but it doesn't mean that the Buddha is afflicted. This is a teaching on the function of the Buddha in response to afflicted beings, explaining why the Buddha is able to help beings. It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.

I summarized the nature of this teaching above. Coemgenu cited one of the passages where this teaching is invoked.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 pm It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.
Where did I ever assert such a thing? Why produce a polemic against a point I am not raising?

I said buddhas by definition are free of affliction.

In response, you wrote a few thing lines, became indignant that I did not understand the point of your statements since a) they did not appear to be relevant to the question and b) were not themselves particularly deep.

You topped that off with a nice sprinkle of ad homs, while ignoring the fact that Illarazza flat out stated that buddhas have afflictions.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:10 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 pm It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.
Where did I ever assert such a thing? Why produce a polemic against a point I am not raising?

I said buddhas by definition are free of affliction.

In response, you wrote a few thing lines, became indignant that I did not understand the point of your statements since a) they did not appear to be relevant to the question and b) were not themselves particularly deep.

You topped that off with a nice sprinkle of ad homs, while ignoring the fact that Illarazza flat out stated that buddhas have afflictions.
LOL. Its not always about you.

I was giving background of this teaching - nothing to do directly with anything you have written in this thread.

My interjection earlier was trying to clarify a teaching that was not being treated accurately. I guess you assumed Illaraza and I were tag teaming. That was not the case.

I don't speak for Illaraza, and he does not speak for me, thank you.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:15 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:10 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 pm It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.
Where did I ever assert such a thing? Why produce a polemic against a point I am not raising?

I said buddhas by definition are free of affliction.

In response, you wrote a few thing lines, became indignant that I did not understand the point of your statements since a) they did not appear to be relevant to the question and b) were not themselves particularly deep.

You topped that off with a nice sprinkle of ad homs, while ignoring the fact that Illarazza flat out stated that buddhas have afflictions.
LOL. Its not always about you.

I was giving background of this teaching - nothing to do directly with anything you have written in this thread.
When one sees a post written in response to something one says, one assumes that the post is directed at oneself.

You did not present this as "background."

My interjection earlier was trying to clarify a teaching that was not being treated accurately.
Yes, I understood that. I did not think your point was remarkable.
I guess you assumed Illaraza and I were tag teaming. That was not the case.
No, I did not assume anything of the sort. Time for you to take a break from moderating. You are losing your cool.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by DGA »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 pm
DGA wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:44 pm Hold on.

We're in the Nichiren sub. Therefore, whatever Nichiren may have had to say on the topic of whether or not Buddha Shakyamuni had afflictions should be definitive here.

Do Nichiren's writings comment on this topic? I'm asking out of ignorance. I don't know the answer to this question.
No. The Buddha is freed of afflictions. Period.

This is why this whole line of inquiry has no point.

There is a teaching in Tiantai that Buddha encompasses afflictions, but it doesn't mean that the Buddha is afflicted. This is a teaching on the function of the Buddha in response to afflicted beings, explaining why the Buddha is able to help beings. It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.

I summarized the nature of this teaching above. Coemgenu cited one of the passages where this teaching is invoked.
That's helpful, thanks. I'm familiar with the Tientai material in question, but not with how that may or may not have translated in to Nichiren's teachings.

I bring it up because I suppose I'm responsible for starting this line of inquiry by asking for clarification on something illarraza said that puzzled me. Rory mentioned in a post I can't find at the moment that illarraza's comments represented mainstream Nichiren Buddhist thought. Now I'm still puzzled: if Nichiren didn't say anything about it, how could that be so?

Edit: here's that post
rory wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:15 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:33 am
illarraza wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:23 am

That's why you hate the Lotus Sutra and its votaries...Because they overturn everything you believe and were taught for the last forty years. As the Infinite Meanings Sutra teaches, "In these last forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth "(Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo). With this clear statement, he overturns his teachings of the last forty years and he overturns your pie in the sky Buddha who has eradicated all afflictions. A Buddha who has eradicated all afflictions, is an Expedient teaching, including the teachings of the first Fourteen Chapters of the Lotus Sutra. A corollary to this is that the Buddha first attained Enlightenment for the first time under the Tree when in fact He attained Enlightenment in the infinite past.
Mark, this is pure religious fanaticism. You poor man. You are so wrapped up in Buddhist dogma you cannot even have a real conversation with anyone.
Malcolm this is purely normal Nichiren Buddhism, you are the one who is seemingly without faith, especially coming here and trying to downgrade Chih-I and the primacy of the Lotus Sutra, frankly it says a lot about you as a practitioner; none of it good.
gassho
Rory
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:20 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:15 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:10 pm

Where did I ever assert such a thing? Why produce a polemic against a point I am not raising?

I said buddhas by definition are free of affliction.

In response, you wrote a few thing lines, became indignant that I did not understand the point of your statements since a) they did not appear to be relevant to the question and b) were not themselves particularly deep.

You topped that off with a nice sprinkle of ad homs, while ignoring the fact that Illarazza flat out stated that buddhas have afflictions.
LOL. Its not always about you.

I was giving background of this teaching - nothing to do directly with anything you have written in this thread.
When one sees a post written in response to something one says, one assumes that the post is directed at oneself.

You did not present this as "background."

My interjection earlier was trying to clarify a teaching that was not being treated accurately.
Yes, I understood that. I did not think your point was remarkable.
I guess you assumed Illaraza and I were tag teaming. That was not the case.
No, I did not assume anything of the sort. Time for you to take a break from moderating. You are losing your cool.
Sigh. OK, dude.

Our exchange is there for the record.

Believe me, I'm not excited. Annoyed, sure.
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,
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:50 pm
Malcolm wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:20 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:15 pm LOL. Its not always about you.

I was giving background of this teaching - nothing to do directly with anything you have written in this thread.
When one sees a post written in response to something one says, one assumes that the post is directed at oneself.

You did not present this as "background."

My interjection earlier was trying to clarify a teaching that was not being treated accurately.
Yes, I understood that. I did not think your point was remarkable.
I guess you assumed Illaraza and I were tag teaming. That was not the case.
No, I did not assume anything of the sort. Time for you to take a break from moderating. You are losing your cool.
Sigh. OK, dude.

Our exchange is there for the record.

Believe me, I'm not excited. Annoyed, sure.
Let's reset this. If we've disabused each other of mistaken understandings, let's move on. :group:
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,
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14454
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Queequeg »

DGA wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:33 pm
Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:02 pm
DGA wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:44 pm Hold on.

We're in the Nichiren sub. Therefore, whatever Nichiren may have had to say on the topic of whether or not Buddha Shakyamuni had afflictions should be definitive here.

Do Nichiren's writings comment on this topic? I'm asking out of ignorance. I don't know the answer to this question.
No. The Buddha is freed of afflictions. Period.

This is why this whole line of inquiry has no point.

There is a teaching in Tiantai that Buddha encompasses afflictions, but it doesn't mean that the Buddha is afflicted. This is a teaching on the function of the Buddha in response to afflicted beings, explaining why the Buddha is able to help beings. It is a critique of the assertion that the Buddha is separate from the threefold world.

I summarized the nature of this teaching above. Coemgenu cited one of the passages where this teaching is invoked.
That's helpful, thanks. I'm familiar with the Tientai material in question, but not with how that may or may not have translated in to Nichiren's teachings.

I bring it up because I suppose I'm responsible for starting this line of inquiry by asking for clarification on something illarraza said that puzzled me. Rory mentioned in a post I can't find at the moment that illarraza's comments represented mainstream Nichiren Buddhist thought. Now I'm still puzzled: if Nichiren didn't say anything about it, how could that be so?

Edit: here's that post
rory wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:15 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:33 am

Mark, this is pure religious fanaticism. You poor man. You are so wrapped up in Buddhist dogma you cannot even have a real conversation with anyone.
Malcolm this is purely normal Nichiren Buddhism, you are the one who is seemingly without faith, especially coming here and trying to downgrade Chih-I and the primacy of the Lotus Sutra, frankly it says a lot about you as a practitioner; none of it good.
gassho
Rory
I appreciate Rory's sympathies. And I appreciate Illaraza's zest. I'm not sure that these contributions are accurate.

For one, I'm not quite sure where Illaraza is going with this, but the reference to "not revealing the truth in 40 years" specifically has to do with the Buddha's real life span.

As for a Buddha with afflictions - maybe I've forgotten or am not aware of something.

The significance of this teaching as I understand has to do with universal Buddhanature, particularly with the picture presented in the Lotus Sutra that we are all treading the path to Buddhahood, whether we are Devadatta who caused the Buddha to bleed, or Maitreya sitting in Tushita waiting for his time to appear. In all cases, the Buddha appears perfectly in response to our ignorance.

If this is not impressive, if its unremarkable, then what is there to argue about? cough. snap.
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,
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by Malcolm »

Queequeg wrote: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:06 pm For one, I'm not quite sure where Illaraza is going with this, but the reference to "not revealing the truth in 40 years" specifically has to do with the Buddha's real life span.
Yes, and since it was such a complete non sequitur...

As for a Buddha with afflictions - maybe I've forgotten or am not aware of something.
This is the present subject of inquiry.

The significance of this teaching as I understand has to do with universal Buddhanature, particularly with the picture presented in the Lotus Sutra that we are all treading the path to Buddhahood, whether we are Devadatta who caused the Buddha to bleed, or Maitreya sitting in Tushita waiting for his time to appear.
Yes, this is very standard Mahāyāna accepted and followed by all Buddhists in all Mahāyāna countries. It is also not a doctrine unique to the Lotus Sūtra.
In all cases, the Buddha appears perfectly in response to our ignorance.
Again, this is noncontroversial. If there were no sentient beings, there would be no need for buddhas to appear.
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by DGA »

Malcolm wrote: Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:19 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:57 pm Some Buddhisms, not naming any in particular, not even the Buddhism of this subforum necessarily, seem to insist that ordinary beings are already completely enlightenment Buddhas & that there is no progress to be made, no afflictions to be lost, the radical thing is when this is believed of both the ultimate & conventional perspectives. It makes for a very triumphalist Buddhadharma, in which everyone is on a nonretrograding coaster for awakening, and there is no need to practice anything ever, because the results of the practice are already in fruition.
This kind of "Buddhism" is as far removed from Buddhadharma as Advaita Vedanta.
This may be a useful jumping off point for a (hopefully serious and respectful) discussion on the question at hand, regarding claims of Buddha Shakyamuni being afflicted. Related thread from some years back for context:

viewtopic.php?t=7905
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: I've been so wrong/pure lands

Post by DGA »

DGA wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:43 am
illarraza wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:15 am The Lotus Sutra teaches that this IS the Eternal Pure land. The deluded like Malcolm see Samsara as a World of suffering. Like wise they think the Buddha has eradicated afflictions. The Buddha too gets hungry and eats. Likewise the Buddha has an urge to defecate and does.
Would you mind elaborating on what you mean by the Eternal Pure Land? Specifically: I'm trying to understand your perspective, but I don't see the connection between your claims on the here-and-now as the Eternal Pure Land and the need for Shakyamuni to eat and digest on one side, and your rejection of the idea that the present is also samsaric and that afflictions exist.

Nor do I recall reading anywhere that Malcolm has claimed that the Buddha has eradicated all afflictions, as you claim he has.

Nor do I recall reading in the Lotus Sutra that the present is an Eternal Pure Land.

Please, set us right.

Finally, and somewhat unrelated to this discussion, here's a post that I think will be of interest to you.

viewtopic.php?f=66&t=27062&start=60#p423181
illarraza wrote: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:23 amThat's why you hate the Lotus Sutra and its votaries...Because they overturn everything you believe and were taught for the last forty years. As the Infinite Meanings Sutra teaches, "In these last forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth "(Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo). With this clear statement, he overturns his teachings of the last forty years and he overturns your pie in the sky Buddha who has eradicated all afflictions. A Buddha who has eradicated all afflictions, is an Expedient teaching, including the teachings of the first Fourteen Chapters of the Lotus Sutra. A corollary to this is that the Buddha first attained Enlightenment for the first time under the Tree when in fact He attained Enlightenment in the infinite past.
Going back to these posts earlier in this very thread... I have to say that the intervening discussion hasn't really clarified much regarding the claim illarraza makes that the Buddha is afflicted, except for Queequeg's observation that Nichiren doesn't make such a claim.

If you are going to practice Dharma (and the point of all these doctrinal discussions is to open onto practice, right?), you need confidence in your path. What is the basis of confidence in *this* Dharma path? Do posts like the ones I quoted above support that confidence?
Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”