Robert Healion
"You, monks, should not thus cultivate the notion (samjna) of impermanence, suffering and non-Self, the notion of impurity and so forth, deeming them to be the true meaning [of the Dharma], as those people [searching in a pool for a radiant gem but foolishly grabbing hold of useless pebbles, mistaken for priceless treasure] did, each thinking that bits of brick, stones, grass and gravel were the jewel. You should train yourselves well in efficacious means.
In every situation, constantly meditate upon [bhavana] the idea [samjna] of the Self, the idea of the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure ... Those who, desirous of attaining Reality [tattva], meditatatively cultivate these ideas, namely, the ideas of the Self [atman], the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure, will skilfully bring forth the jewel, just like that wise person [who obtained the genuine, priceless gem, rather than worthless detritus misperceived as the real thing.]"
- The Buddha, Chapter Three, "Grief",The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra
Now someone inform me is there a notion of a self or not a self. There is multiple contradictions in these postings. Not that it matters a lot to me as I have formulated an opinion. I maintain some aspects of Buddha was expedient means, to counter a poison of mistaken beliefs.
My readings into Buddhism has not been two years yet. So it is not structured but according to the wind of karma.
Like · · February 11 at 4:58pm
Stuffs RedTurtle and 2 others like this.
Robert Healion "The Tathagata also teaches, for the sake of all beings, that there is, in truth, the Self in all phenomena" (The Buddha in The Mahaparinirvana Sutra, Chapter Three).
February 11 at 4:58pm · Like · 2
Robert Healion "... one who knows himself (atmanam) as nondual, he wisely knows both Buddha and Dharma. And why? He develops a personality (atmabhava) which consists of all dharmas [phenomena]; for all dharmas are fixed on the self in their own-being (atma-svabhava-niyata). One who wisely knows the nondual dharma, wisely knows also the Buddhadharmas. From the comprehension of the nondual dharma follows the comprehension of the Buddhadharmas and from the comprehension of the self the comprehension of everything that belongs to the triple world. 'The comprehension of self', that is the Beyond of all dharmas ..." (The Buddha in the "perfect insight" scripture, The Questions of Suvikrantavikramin, from Perfect Wisdom: The Short Prajnaparamita Texts, tr. by Edward Conze, BPG, England, 2002).
February 11 at 4:59pm · Like · 1
Robert Healion A reference http://www.nirvanasutra.net/
February 11 at 5:00pm · Like
Soh "Similarly, that tathaagatagarbha taught in the suutras spoken by the Bhagavan, since the completely pure luminous clear nature is completely pure from the beginning, possessing the thirty two marks, the Bhagavan said it exists inside of the bodies of sentient beings.
When the Bhagavan described that– like an extremely valuable jewel thoroughly wrapped in a soiled cloth, is thoroughly wrapped by cloth of the aggregates, aayatanas and elements, becoming impure by the conceptuality of the thorough conceptuality suppressed by the passion, anger and ignorance – as permanent, stable and eternal, how is the Bhagavan’s teaching this as the tathaagatagarbha is not similar with as the assertion of self of the non-Buddhists?
Bhagavan, the non-Buddhists make assertion a Self as “A permanent creator, without qualities, pervasive and imperishable”.
The Bhagavan replied:
“Mahaamati, my teaching of tathaagatagarbha is not equivalent with the assertion of the Self of the non-Buddhists.
Mahaamati, the Tathaagata, Arhat, Samyak Sambuddhas, having demonstrated the meaning of the words "emptiness, reality limit, nirvana, non-arisen, signless", etc. as tathaagatagarbha for the purpose of the immature complete forsaking the perishable abodes, demonstrate the expertiential range of the non-appearing abode of complete non-conceptuality by demonstrating the door of tathaagatagarbha.
Mahaamati, a self should not be perceived as real by Bodhisattva Mahaasattvas enlightened in the future or presently.
Mahaamati, for example, a potter, makes one mass of atoms of clay into various kinds containers from his hands, craft, a stick, thread and effort.
Mahaamati, similarly, although Tathaagatas avoid the nature of conceptual selflessness in dharmas, they also appropriately demonstrate tathaagatagarbha or demonstrate emptiness by various kinds [of demonstrations] possessing prajñaa and skillful means; like a potter, they demonstrate with various enumerations of words and letters. As such, because of that,
Mahaamati, the demonstration of Tathaagatagarbha is not similar with the Self demonstrated by the non-Buddhists.
Mahaamati, the Tathaagatas as such, in order to guide those grasping to assertions of the Self of the Non-Buddhists, will demonstrate tathaagatagarbha with the demonstration of tathaagatagarbha. How else will the sentient beings who have fallen into a conceptual view of a True Self, possess the thought to abide in the three liberations and quickly attain the complete manifestation of Buddha in unsurpassed perfect, complete enlightenment?"
~ Lankavatara Sutra
Basically those who adhere to a very literalist interpretation of Tathagatagarbha will easily fall into one of the non-Buddhist extremes as warned above. Tathagatagarbha is taught as a skillful means for guiding sentient beings to the realization of emptiness because it is not easy for certain groups of people to accept it if there were not some positive language involved.
Also see:
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha191.htm
The Significance Of 'Tathagatagarbha' --
www.budsas.org
February 11 at 7:14pm · Like · Remove Preview
Soh Also, a post by Loppon Namdrol in 2006:
Were the Buddha to teach such a doctrine, it might be so. However, in the Nirvana sutra is states quite plainly the following:
That is called ‘Buddha-nature’ because all sentient beings are to be unsurpassedly, perfectly, completely enlightened at a future time. Because afflictions exist in all sentient beings at present, because of that, the thirty two perfect marks and the eighty excellent exemplary signs do not exist”.
Here, the Nirvana sutra clearly and precisely states that buddha-svabhaava, the "nature of a Buddha" refers not to an actual nature but a potential. Why, it continues:
"Child of the lineage, I have said that ‘curd exists in milk’, because curd is produced from milk, it is called ‘curd’.
Child of lineage, at the time of milk, there is no curd, also there is no butter, ghee or ma.n.da, because the curd arises from milk with the conditions of heat, impurities, etc., milk is said to have the ‘curd-nature’."
So one must be quite careful not to make an error. The Lanka states unequivocably that the tathagatagarbha doctrine is merely a device to lead those who grasp at a true self the inner meaning of the Dharma, non-arising, the two selflessnesses and so on, and explains the meaning of the literal examples some people constantly err about:
"Similarly, that tathaagatagarbha taught in the suutras spoken by the Bhagavan, since the completely pure luminous clear nature is completely pure from the beginning, possessing the thirty two marks, the Bhagavan said it exists inside of the bodies of sentient beings.
When the Bhagavan described that– like an extremely valuable jewel thoroughly wrapped in a soiled cloth, is thoroughly wrapped by cloth of the aggregates, aayatanas and elements, becoming impure by the conceptuality of the thorough conceptuality suppressed by the passion, anger and ignorance – as permanent, stable and eternal, how is the Bhagavan’s teaching this as the tathaagatagarbha is not similar with as the assertion of self of the non-Buddhists?
Bhagavan, the non-Buddhists make assertion a Self as “A permanent creator, without qualities, pervasive and imperishable”.
The Bhagavan replied:
“Mahaamati, my teaching of tathaagatagarbha is not equivalent with the assertion of the Self of the non-Buddhists.
Mahaamati, the Tathaagata, Arhat, Samyak Sambuddhas, having demonstrated the meaning of the words "emptiness, reality limit, nirvana, non-arisen, signless", etc. as tathaagatagarbha for the purpose of the immature complete forsaking the perishable abodes, demonstrate the expertiential range of the non-appearing abode of complete non-conceptuality by demonstrating the door of tathaagatagarbha.
Mahaamati, a self should not be perceived as real by Bodhisattva Mahaasattvas enlightened in the future or presently.
Mahaamati, for example, a potter, makes one mass of atoms of clay into various kinds containers from his hands, craft, a stick, thread and effort.
Mahaamati, similarly, although Tathaagatas avoid the nature of conceptual selflessness in dharmas, they also appropriately demonstrate tathaagatagarbha or demonstrate emptiness by various kinds [of demonstrations] possessing prajñaa and skillful means; like a potter, they demonstrate with various enumerations of words and letters. As such, because of that,
Mahaamati, the demonstration of Tathaagatagarbha is not similar with the Self demonstrated by the non-Buddhists.
Mahaamati, the Tathaagatas as such, in order to guide those grasping to assertions of the Self of the Non-Buddhists, will demonstrate tathaagatagarbha with the demonstration of tathaagatagarbha. How else will the sentient beings who have fallen into a conceptual view of a True Self, possess the thought to abide in the three liberations and quickly attain the complete manifestation of Buddha in unsurpassed perfect, complete enlightenment?"
Thus, the Lanka says:
All yaanas are included
in five dharmas, three natures,
eight consciousnesses,
and two selflessnesses
It does not add anything about a true self and so on.
If one accepts that tathaagatagarbha is the aalayavij~naana, and one must since it is identified as such, then one is accepting that it is conditioned and afflicted and evolves, thus the Lanka states:
Tathaagatagarbha, known as ‘the all-base consciousness’, is to be completely purified.
Mahaamati, if what is called the all-base consciousness were (37/a) not connected to the tathaagatagarbha, because the tathaagatagarbha would not be ‘the all-base consciousness’, although it would be not be engaged, it also would not evolve; Mahaamati, it is engaged by both the childish and Aaryas, that also evolves.
Because great yogins, the ones not abandoning effort, abide with blissful conduct in this at the time of personally knowing for themselves…the tathaagatagarbha-all basis consciousness is the sphere of the Tathaagatas; it is the object which also is the sphere of teachers, [those] of detailed and learned inclinations like you, and Bodhisattva Mahaasattvas of analytic intellect.
And:
Although tathaagatagarbha
possesses seven consciousnesses;
always engaged with dualistic apprehensions
[it] will evolve with thorough understanding.
If one accepts that the tathaagatagarbha is unconditioned and so on, and one must, since it is identified as such other sutras state:
"`Saariputra, the element of sentient beings denotes the word tathaagatagarbha.
`Saariputra, that word ‘tathaagatagarbha’ denotes Dharmakaaya.
And:
`Saariputra, because of that, also the element of sentient beings is not one thing and the Dharmakaaya another; the element of sentient beings itself is Dharmakaaya; Dharmakaaya itself is the element of sentient beings.
Then one cannot accept it as the aalayavij~naana-- or worse, one must somehow imagine that something conditioned somehow becomes conditioned.
Other sutras state that tathaagatagarbha is the citta, as the Angulimaala suutra does here:
"Although in the `Sraavakayaana it is shown as ‘mind’, the meaning of the teaching is ‘tathaagatagarbha’; whatever mind is naturally pure, that is called ‘tathaagatagarbha’.
So, one must understand that these sutras are provisional and definitive, each giving different accounts of the tathaagatagarbha for different students, but they are not defintive. Understood improperly, they lead one into a non-Buddhist extremes. Understood and explained properly, they lead those afraid of the profound Praj~naapaaramitaa to understanding it's sublime truth. In other words, the Buddha nature teaching is just a skillful means as the Nirvana sutra states
"Child of the lineage, buddha-nature is like this; although the ten powers and the four fearlessnesses, compassion, and the three foundations of mindfulness are the three aspects existing in sentient beings; [those] will be newly seen when defilements are thoroughly conquered. The possessors of perversion will newly attain the ten powers (44/B) and four fearlessness, great compassion and three foundations of mindfulness having thoroughly conquered perversion.
Because that is the purpose as such, I teach buddha-nature always exists in all sentient beings.
When one can compare and contrast all of these citations, and many more side by side, with the proper reading of the Uttataratantra, one will see the propositions about these doctrines by the Dark Zen fools and others of their ilk are dimmed like stars at noon.
February 11 at 7:14pm · Like
Robert Healion Soh so many words…
I will read them, however is there a concept of self as referenced in the texts. Expedient means, yes however excepting one you except all. Clinging to concepts is the take home message from Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence
Translator's Introduction
The Buddha taught that clinging to views is one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience.
Of course, I am a fully paid up member of the cave dwelling demon society, so I will cling to a sense of self (lets not elaborate here) and a belief inherent to this, that I have an opinion.
February 11 at 7:31pm · Like
Robert Healion Vedànta vis-à-vis Shentong
http://www.byomakusuma.org/.../VedantaVisAVisShentong.aspx
If we analyze both the Hindu Sankaràcàrya’s and the Buddhist Śāntarakṣita’s, we find that both agree that the view of the Hindu Advaita Vedànta is that the ultimate reality (âtmà) is an unchanging, eternal non-dual cognition. The Buddhists as a whole do not agree that the ultimate reality is an eternal, unchanging non-dual cognition, but rather a changing eternal non-dual cognition. These statements found in the 6th century Hindu text and the refutations of the Hindu view found in the 9th century Buddhist texts (both of which were after the Uttara Tantra and Asanga), show that the Hindu view of the ultimate reality as an unchanging, eternal non-dual cognition is non-existent amongst the Buddhists of India. Not only was such a view non-existent amongst Buddhists of India, but it was also refuted as a wrong view by scholars like Śāntarakṣita. He even writes that if and when Buddhists use the word ‘eternal’ (nitya), it means ‘parinàmi nitya’, i.e., changing eternal, and not the Hindu kind of eternal, which always remains unchanged.
Byoma Kusuma Buddhadharma Sangha
www.byomakusuma.org
Although he was from around the 8th century, he became popular among the Hindus ...See More
February 11 at 7:36pm · Like · Remove Preview
Soh The concept of 'Self' in the Tathagatagarbha teachings is a late doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, it is not universally accepted (for example the early traditions like Theravada would not even accept Mahayana scriptures). Mahayana scriptures are generally late writings by masters from their visionary accounts of Buddha, while Theravada take the pali canon to be authoritative which are words passed down from the historical Shakyamuni Buddha, they do not accept visionary accounts or literature as authoritative scriptures. In particular, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra you quoted from has signs of being written by not only one author but a number of authors.
In the Mahayana and Vajrayana teachings, we accept the Tathagatagarbha teachings as valid, but it is not definitive, and requires interpretation. In the Vajrayana teachings, it is taught to be the union of luminous clarity and emptiness. It is fundamentally empty so it cannot be asserted as a real existent or true self like Vedanta.
February 11 at 7:41pm · Edited · Like
Soh http://dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.sg/.../tathagatagar...
Kyle Dixon Loppon Malcolm comments on Tony Page's interpretation of the Nirvana Sutra, cites provisional and definitive interpretations of tathāgatagarbha, and some more:
Malcolm wrote:
...Yogacara/cittamatra insists forcefully that awareness/consciousness, whatever you want to the call it is individuated. There really is no Buddhist school that argues for an uniform uber-consciousness out of which individual consciousness are instantiated.
Basically, folks like Tony Page really are faced two alternatives, either their "true self" is like Purusha of the Saṃkhya school, a totally unconditioned individuated knower, as opposed to the nonsentient evolutes of prakriti (buddhi, ahaṃkara, manas, five sense organs, five organs of action, the five subtle elements (sound, etc.) and the five coarse elements; or it is like brahmin of the Vedantins and so on. They really have only these two choices if they insist on a literal interpretation of the term "atman", bdag nyid in texts like the Nirvana Sutra and so on.
In Saṃkhya there are an infinite number of purushas, while in Advaita, using the basic model of Saṃkhya, proposes that purusha and brahmin are synonymous and further, that there is only one purusha, and that further, prakriti and its evolutes are also included in purusha.
Malcolm wrote:
The term bdag nyid, atman, just means, in this case, "nature", i.e. referring to the nature of reality free from extremes as being permanent, blissful, pure and self. The luminosity of the mind is understood to be this.
There are various ways to interpret the Uttaratantra and tathāgatagarbha doctrine, one way is definitive in meaning, the other is provisional, according to Gorampa Sonam Senge, thus the tathāgatagarbha sutras become definitive or provisional depending on how they are understood. He states:
'In the context of showing the faults of a literal [interpretation] – it's equivalence with the Non-Buddhist Self is that the assertion of unique eternal all pervading cognizing awareness of the Saṃkhya, the unique eternal pristine clarity of the Pashupattis, the unique all pervading intellect of the Vaiśnavas, the impermanent condition, the measure of one’s body, in the permanent self-nature of the Jains, and the white, brilliant, shining pellet the size of an atom, existing in each individual’s heart of the Vedantins are the same.'
The definitive interpretation he renders as follows:
'Therefor, the Sugatagarbha is defined as the union of clarity and emptiness but not simply emptiness without clarity, because that [kind of emptiness] is not suitable to be a basis for bondage and liberation. Also it is not simple clarity without emptiness, that is the conditioned part, because the Sugatagarbha is taught as unconditioned.'
Khyentse Wangpo, often cited as a gzhan stong pa, basically says that the treatises of Maitreya elucidate the luminosity of the mind, i.e. its purity, whereas Nāgarjuna's treatises illustrate the empty nature of the mind, and that these two together, luminosity and emptiness free from extremes are to be understood as noncontradictory, which we can understand from the famous Prajñāpāramita citation "There is no mind in the mind, the nature of the mind is luminosity".
dzogchungpa wrote:
If I understand what you've written above, the clarity referred to is conditioned? If so, how can the
Sugatagarbha, which is unconditioned, be the union of a conditioned part and something else?
Malcolm wrote:
Is emptiness conditioned or unconditioned? It is unconditioned. Are all conditioned things empty? Yes. Therefore, the conditioned and the unconditioned are actually non-dual.
Your second question is misphrased, sentient beings are tathāgatagarbha, without them there is no possibility of Buddhahood, they are the matrix, nexus, locus etc. of tathatā.
dzogchungpa wrote:
OK, so there's one matrix etc. for each being?
Malcolm wrote:
Each being is a matrix. This is illustrated by such statements like the Hevajra Tantra:
'Great wisdom is present in the body,
perfectly free from all concepts,
pervading all things,
present in, but not arising from the body.'
dzogchungpa wrote:
Are you saying that the body is the matrix?
Malcolm wrote:
Of course. Where else can consciousness be located?
dzogchungpa wrote:
OK, then I'm a little confused. If I'm not mistaken 'matrix' = 'garbha', which, according to your Gorampa quote is unconditioned. Is the body then considered to be unconditioned?
Malcolm wrote:
Garbha means something that holds, what is being held, tathatā. Who holds tathatā? Sentient beings.
Sugatagarbha is a short hand way of saying "the dharmakāya encased in afflictions".
What becomes afflicted, clarity. What is the nature of clarity? Emptiness. Tathatāgarbha is just a way of saying that sentient beings have the potential for awakening because the mind and the mind essence are inseparable, the former conditioned and the latter unconditioned.
Dharma Connection: Tathagatagarbha
dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.com
February 11 at 7:40pm · Like · Remove Preview
Stuffs RedTurtle Thanks for the great post
February 11 at 7:58pm · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle Soh, I have a question, when I was reading the Dalai Lamas book, the clear light of mind, he talks about death, and the base energies consisting of the bottom half of the body to the heart, and then the other energies that go from the heart to the top of the head. At death if you lose heat from the head down you are in trouble; your going to hell or lower rebirth like asura or animal.
Is this because if we are base, that energy is predominant?
February 11 at 8:02pm · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle If that is the case I can see why it would be very important to create good energy for yourself..
February 11 at 8:03pm · Like
Robert Healion Having an opinion is not a problem, the problem is linking them to a structured premises that all agree with. That is not going to happen.
Having a conceptual understanding of emptiness is different to experiential emptiness. Many of the posts are clearly conceptual, correctly and based on other conceptual understanding. However the Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence
The Buddha taught that clinging to views is one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience…..
….. Although at present we rarely think in the same terms as the Samkhya philosophers, there has long been — and still is — a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All" — the entirety of our sensory & mental experience — is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, "perceive") a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that "we are the knowing"), and then view that level of experience as the ground of being out of which all other experience comes.
Any teaching that follows these lines would be subject to the same criticism that the Buddha directed against the monks who first heard this discourse.
A wonderful teaching, if deconstructed simple states that “ the "All"” is constructed according to many such experiences and texts as interpreted, deemed real or correct. We construct our reality according to our/ these belief, our experiences are measured according to these.
Though the sixth is not the Buddha his ‘all’ was based on a non-conceptual reality, there was no mirror, no luminesce, no Buddha nature yet to be, no expedient self, no deconstructed sense of self based on a conceptual reality.
Yes expedient means. Most of the tangle of verbs and nouns, that appears in sutras and discourses are expedient means. This applies to venatic texts and Buddhist texts. There is no self, hence there is no Buddha. No gods, no nothing based on conceptualisations. This is the teaching of emptiness. But if there is an “ultimate ‘no nothing’” then the experience of emptiness is not possible. You have reached the end of the line of nihilism.
Hence the third turning, not a collateral damage as I think Malcolm suggested. But a something the Buddha avoided direct pointing too, possibly to avoid the same error of judgment as the Vedanta’s.
“If you don’t experience (get) this even for a second then you are dead.”
February 11 at 10:40pm · Like · 1
Soh The third turning does not contradict emptiness, but is simply the union of luminous clarity and emptiness. Luminous clarity is not denied - it is just empty. Empty of being a Self, empty of self-existence, empty of substance.
This collateral damage of rejecting an ultimate self allows us to see the true face of awareness. Awareness is not a Self, not a perceiver behind perception, in perceiving just perception, in seeing only the seen, in hearing just sound... the manifestation is the self-luminous clarity, not some hidden Self. Luminous clarity is always manifesting, is always only manifestaiton, not a ghostly hidden entity, or some source or substratum behind phenomena.
February 11 at 10:45pm · Like · 1
Stuffs RedTurtle Is that wHat emptiness means? There is only the seen, heard etc?
I thought it was things don't arise...
Wait a second
February 11 at 10:55pm · Like
Soh Stephanie Marie: There are twofold emptiness. The firstfold emptiness allows you to see through the imputation of a Self, a Subject, Agent, or even 'Awareness-as-changeless-subject' and realize the true face of awareness as the manifestation, the transience, and realize that 'self' is a mere convention for the five aggregates in direct experience. One realizes the emptiness and non-arising of that imputation.
The secondfold emptiness allows you to realize the emptiness and non-arising of the aggregates, the pure sensory experience, not merely the imputation.
February 11 at 11:06pm · Edited · Like · 2
Soh Here is an excerpt from a Buddhist glossary site on the definition of twofold Emptiness:
Two emptinesses (二空) include (1) emptiness of self, the ātman, the soul, in a person composed of the five aggregates, constantly changing with causes and conditions; and (2) emptiness of selves in all dharmas—each of the five aggregates, each of the twelve fields, and each of the eighteen spheres, as well as everything else with no independent existence. No-self in any dharma implies no-self in a person, but the latter is separated out in the first category. Realization of the emptiness of self in a person will lead to attainment of Arhatship or Pratyekabuddhahood. Bodhisattvas who have realized both emptinesses ascend to the First Ground on their Way to Buddhahood.
February 11 at 11:03pm · Like · 1
Soh "Soh, I have a question, when I was reading the Dalai Lamas book, the clear light of mind, he talks about death, and the base energies consisting of the bottom half of the body to the heart, and then the other energies that go from the heart to the top of the head. At death if you lose heat from the head down you are in trouble; your going to hell or lower rebirth like asura or animal.
Is this because if we are base, that energy is predominant?"
Ven. Hui Lu said this in a talk, I might try to translate it into English:
Ven Hui Lu:
诸 位，在唯识学里面讲：人死了以后，顶圣眼生天，一个做善事的人，又不执着，不希望人家赞叹，又能够坚持念佛的人，临命终，神识一出来，顶部是热的，全身都 冷的喔！师父去助念过几百个人，全身都冷的，很奇怪，这顶部很热很热，这个热气就从这里出去。顶圣眼生天，全身都冷的，头顶就是热的，就是非常不可思议！ 你看，今天科学家发现，我们的神识是遍满全身的；佛在二千五百年前就告诉你：意识本就遍全身的。到最后，意识从这里出去，这里是热的。如果婆罗门教行善， 基督教、天主教行善，不念佛，不求生净土的人，往生以后，他这个脸，眼睛是热的，行善，他也会生天啊，他不是上帝救的，他是行善的因果，因果是自然的法 则。师父去助念过一个，他老婆拜佛，他有的佛经，统统拿起来撕掉，她穿这个袈裟‥‥‥不是袈裟，海青，他的老婆穿那个海青，用那个剪刀，啪！拜什么佛？拜 芭乐佛、拜龙眼佛、拜榴梿佛！就是不让她信佛，他这个老婆，半夜都起来哭，她这个先生在菜市场杀生，杀生，就是卖一些鱼啊‥‥‥他就是不给你吃素，就是不 给你拜佛，他的老婆就哭，很难过，她就偷偷摸摸的。
有 一次碰到了师父，跪着哭得很惨，因为她很虔诚，我就很感动她，师父啊，那怎么办啊？我说：你要有智慧啊！是不是啊？不要跟他敌对啊，毕竟他是你的老公啊！ 佛在心中，以后你就顺他，什么都不要跟他敌对，他不喜欢你拜佛，你就默默的念佛，这样也是在念啊，心中。我说：你平常在做什么？她说：我平常没有做什么 啊，平常就是洗衣服、煮饭、拖地板啊！我说：很简单！拖地板的时候，拖出去：「阿弥」，拖回来：「陀佛」，阿弥陀佛‥‥‥知道吗？发泄下。不要念那个台语 的，拖出去：××，拖回来：娘，××娘‥‥‥骂人家的话，不好！所以，业就是我们的心、无明转变的，我们的心灵，也可以自己转动，不须要任何人。所以，这 个居士，我就告诉她，她就这样讲了。
我 告诉你喔：后来她的先生死得多惨？每天都谤佛，每天都骂他老婆，佛经烧掉，多惨？她先生往生以后，他的老婆：师父啊，我先生往生了！我电话挂着，我说：哎 呀！好，好！反对佛教，终于死掉。好，这个好，死得好。没有啦！电话再拿起来，假装关心一下，内心很舒服，你有什么‥‥‥师父啊，来帮我先生加持啊！因为 她很虔诚，我很感动：好！马上就答应，去！全身都发黑，脸像非洲人，我没有看过脸黑到这种程度的，黑到连那个手，整只统统都黑掉，那像我这样漂亮，那怎么 可能？这是不可能的。那个黑得‥‥‥后来，我又看他的脚，摸他的脚底，热的！顶圣眼生天，人心，投胎成人，是心最慢冷；饿鬼腹，饿鬼，投胎成饿鬼，肚子最 慢冷；傍生膝盖离，畜生就是傍生，膝盖最慢冷；地狱脚板出，地狱啊！
知 道吗？地狱就是这个地方，这个地方，脚板，脚板出，他的脚，整只脚都热的。毕竟夫妻是有因缘嘛，好了，她说：师父，那怎么办？我说：这没办法，太严重了！ 师父就持毗卢遮那佛大灌顶光真言，给他加持，还是不行。后来没办法了，我说：他叫做什么名字？我先跟他办三皈依，叫他要求忏悔，你在世这样谤佛、谤法、谤 僧，还阻碍人家修行！好，在佛前祈求，跟他皈依佛、皈依法、皈依僧，在那边，师父也是很虔诚，毕竟是众生啊！是不是啊？我一边鼓掌，可是，一边要救他啊！ 是不是啊？
救 他，好！就救他，一直跟他办皈依。我告诉你：不可思议的事情发生了，他多不可思议呢？你知道吗？那个亡者掉眼泪，死了多久的时间，掉眼泪喔！诸位，你们以 前有过谤佛、谤法、谤僧，赶快忏悔啊，不要等到临命终才哭，来不及了！有谤过三宝的，阻碍人家修行的，赶快求忏悔，人家要了生死的，你拼命阻止他，这个不 行的！
February 11 at 11:05pm · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle Dannon and Albert are right, I am very lucky to understand this, and you and Robert and Kyle are right as well, I should really make the most of this and practice being present in experience.
I really must have some good karma;
How does merit work Soh?
February 11 at 11:06pm · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle Oh, that was all characters I can't read
February 11 at 11:07pm · Like
Albert Hong After each sitting or practice session. Or when you wake up in the morning, throughout the day and even before you go to sleep. It's helpful to contemplate these:
A Buddhist takes refuge in the three jewels (buddha, dharma, sangha).
A Buddhist cultivates bodhicitta so that one can attain unsurpassed enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings.
A Buddhist lastly dedicates all of his or her actions and practice and benefit to all sentient beings.
Merit brings us to the jewel of dharma and at the same is the jewel of dharma.
February 11 at 11:11pm · Unlike · 3
Albert Hong To have faith in the dharma is good merit. Merit in the cause and effect of faith.
So even if we fake it, act on it and then see the benefits we can see how merit works in our lives.
Fundamentally merit is unconditional optimism about our practice and life. We literally open up to the wealth that exists inherently as our lives.
In a large sense this is what is missing from most spirituality.
The law of cause and effect. Goodness follows goodness.
February 11 at 11:28pm · Unlike · 4
Stuffs RedTurtle Awesome! Even at a conventional level, being selfless and making others happy actually makes me extremely happy. I am often so miserable because I am always so focused on my pain that derives from watching people suffer, with some egotistical whining to boot.
Cool. Nice I can do, nice is easy and natural. Awesome
Thank you, all of you. I wish I had the financial means to express my gratitude, is buy all of you amazon gift cards
February 11 at 11:32pm · Like
Soh Ven Hui Lu said in the talk:
Gentlemen, in Yogacara teachings it is taught: when a person dies, beings rise to the heaven through the eyes, a person that does virtuous deeds, and does not grasp, does not seek for people's praises, and furthermore is able to persist in reciting the Buddha's name, at the time of death, once one's mental consciousness comes out, the top (of one's body) is hot, the rest of the body is cold! Shi Fu (the Ven himself) has went for chanting-assistance of hundreds of people, the whole bodies are very cold, yet strangely the top part is very warm, this warm energy leaves right from there. Beings who emerge from the eyes and rise to heaven, their whole bodies will be cold, the top of the head will be hot, it is just so inconceivable! You see, the scientists nowadays discover that our mind-consciousness pervades the entire body; the Buddha from two thousand five hundreds years have already told you: mind-consciousness has always been pervading the whole body. At the end, (if) mind-consciousness leaves from there, that area will be hot. If the Brahmanism teachings, Christianity, Catholicism teaches practicing virtue, but without reciting the Buddha's name, without seeking for rebirth in pure land, at the time of death their (devotees') faces and eyes will be hot, cultivating virtues, they will be reborn in heaven, this is not because their God has saved them, it is because they cultivated virtues and accumulated wholesome karmas, karma/cause and effect is a natural law.
Shi Fu has went to a chanting-assistance for a person, his wife venerates the Buddha, all the sutras he have he took them away and tore them apart, the Kassaya (a patchwork wear worn by monks)... no, not Kassaya, the Haiqing (worn by lay practitioners for pujas and group practices), his wife wore that Haiqing, use that scissors, (cuts it away)! Venerates what Buddha? Venerates guava Buddha, longan Buddha, durian Buddha! Just doesn't allow her to believe in Buddha, his wife cries in the midnight, (saying) that her husband goes to the market to kill, kill the fishes he bought... he just does not allow her to eat vegetarian meals, just does not allow her to venerate the Buddha, his wife cried and had a hard time, she secretly (practices Buddhism).
(to be continued)
February 11 at 11:34pm · Edited · Like · 1
Albert Hong We left to our own devices naturally act our of the klesha momentum of ignorance, greed and aversion.
The path is all about ending these afflictive emotions.
Just like a depression person hopes for salvation and see's the hopelessness of their situation. Their negativity is endless because its a made up process.
We can turn our minds to do the exact opposite and literally set the ground and conditions for infinite joy and love and happiness.
There is no external requirements. We just have to realize the causes and condition that go into cultivation of the positive.
This is the whole path of dharma. In cultivating the positive we have a greater chance of breaking through into realization and insight.
The goal in Buddhadharma afterall is realization into the nature of reality. Best wishes.
February 11 at 11:37pm · Like · 1
Stuffs RedTurtle Thank you
February 11 at 11:38pm · Like
Soh (continued from above)
Once she meets up with Shi Fu, kneels down and cries badly, because she was very devout, I was very touched by her, 'Shifu, shifu, what can I do?' I say: you must have wisdom! Isn't that right? Do not make hostility with him, after all she is your husband! Buddha is in your mind, in future just follow him, do not oppose him, if he does not like you to venerate the Buddha, then just silently recite the Buddha, in this way you are still mindful (of the Buddha), in the mind. I said: what do you usually do? She said: I usually do not do anything, usually I just wash my clothes, cook rice, mop the floor. I said: then it's very simple! Mopping the floor, when you mop outwards: 'Ami-', when you mop inwards, 'tuofuo', Amituofuo (Amitabha Buddha)... understand? Vent it out. Do not recite that Taiwanese word, mop outwards: XX, mop inwards: mother (expletive word), XX mother... insulting words, not good! Therefore, karma is our own mind, once ignorance transforms, our mind and spirit can also turn around on its own, does not require anyone (else). Therefore, this lay practitioner, I told her that, then she (acts?) like this.
(to be continued)
February 11 at 11:46pm · Like
Soh (continued from above)
I tell you: when her husband dies how tragic it is? Everyday he slanders the Buddha, everyday he scolds his wife, burns the Buddha's sutras, how tragic (it turns out?) When her husband passes away, his wife said: Shi Fu, my husband has passed away! (At this point the Venerable jokes to the audience) I put down the phone and said: Aiya! Great, great! Slanderer of Buddha, finally he died. Good, this is good, this is a good death. No! I pick up the phone again, act a little concerned, mind is feeling very comfortable, “what do you...”. “Shi fu! Please help bless my husband!” Because she was very devoted, I am very touched, “Ok!” Immediately agreed, and went! (His) whole body turned black, face is like African, I have never seen a face that has turned to that degree of blackness, even the entire hand has turned black, how can it be as beautiful as me, how is that possible? That is not possible. That blackness... later on, I saw his legs, touched his foot, it is hot! Those who emerge from the eyes enter heaven, human (emerges from) heart, those who are reborn as human, the heart region is the slowest to turn cold; the hungry ghosts belly, those who are reborn as hungry ghosts, their belly will become cold the slowest; those born as animal leaves from the knees, their knees are the slowest to turn cold; those who are reborn in hell emerges from the feet, hell!
(to be continued)
February 12 at 12:01am · Like · 1
Stuffs RedTurtle Damn!!!
Soh, since all of this has started, I am deathly cold in the middle of my body
Does that have any significance to energy changes?
February 12 at 12:03am · Edited · Like
Soh (continued from above)
Do you understand? Hell is this place, this place, the feet, from the feet (one) emerges, his whole feet is hot. After all his wife has the yin yuan (causes and conditions/karmic affinity), good, she says: “Shi fu, then what should we do?” I said, “This can't be helped, it is too serious!” Shi fu recited the Vairocana Buddha's mantra, blessed him, yet it still does not work. I said: this can't be helped, I said: what is his name? First I'll stage a refuge (ceremony) for him, ask him to seek repentance, he has in this life slandered the Buddha, slandered the Dharma, slandered the Sangha, and furthermore obstructed people from practicing! So, in front of the Buddha pray (for him), let him take refuge in the Buddha, take refuge in the Dharma, take refuge in the Sangha, at that point, Shi Fu was very sincere, after all it is a sentient being! Isn't that right? On one hand I applause, yet, on the other hand I must save him! Isn't that right?
Help him, right! So I helped him, keep staging the refuges for him. I tell you: an inconceivable miracle happened, how inconceivable is it, do you know? That deceased dropped a tear, he died for many hours, (yet) dropped a tear! Gentlemen, if anyone of you had slandered the Buddha, slandered the Dharma, slandered the Sangha, quickly repent, do not wait until the time of death to cry, that would be too late! Those who have slandered the triple gems, obstructed people from practicing, quickly repent, people wanting to escape from birth and death, you go all out at obstructing him, that cannot do!
February 12 at 12:19am · Edited · Like · 1
Soh finished translating.
I think it's a matter of karma. If your karma is unwholesome or wholesome it ripens at death and affects one's rebirth-destination. I don't think being cold while alive is that much of a concern... be more concerned about one's karma
February 12 at 12:18am · Edited · Like · 1
Stuffs RedTurtle Cool.
February 12 at 12:18am · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle Wow.
After I came out of hall of mirrors, and I didn't understand Buddha is everything, all appearences are Buddha., because I didn't understand, I made a remark about the Buddha not existing; that night I had a dream I was standing infront of huge alien gods on thrones and prostrating and apologizing to Buddha for my lack of understanding. That was very weird. My faith is strong inside, the not seeing it with my eyes gets in the way, but I feel it in my heart, intuitively
Thank you Soh
Om Mani Padme Hung
February 12 at 12:36am · Edited · Unlike · 1
Stuffs RedTurtle Sorry for the run on sentences when I get excited
February 12 at 12:37am · Like
Stuffs RedTurtle That was the same morning I woke up to that black hole in my room I think
Weird dreams
Gods were huge, with crowns and still, utterly still
My subconscious is full of weird stuff
February 12 at 12:39am · Like
Soh Haha.. mine too
February 12 at 12:42am · Like · 1
Kyle Dixon Son of Buddha wrote:
The sutra [Nirvana Sutra] even quotes old anatman(not self) teachings and explains them in the context of True Self.
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, indeed, which is why it is treated as a provisional text.
The Āryākṣayamatinirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra sets out the criteria for a sūtra of definitive meaning:
'Any sūtrānta which explains in a variety of different terms a self, a sentient being, a living being, a personality, a person, an individual, one born from a human, a human, an agent, an experiencer — teaching an owner in what is ownerless — those sutras are called "of provisional meaning". Any sūtrānta which teaches emptiness, the signless, the wishless, the unconditioned, the non-arisen, the unproduced, the insubstantial, the non-existence of self, the non-existence of sentient beings, the non-existence of living beings, the non-existence of individuals, the non-existence of an owner up to the doors of liberation, those are called "definitive meaning". This is taught in the sūtrāntas of of definitive meaning but is not taught in the sūtrāntas of the provisional meaning.'
This is why the tathāgatagarbha doctrine can be either provisional or definitive depending on one's understanding and method of explication.
February 12 at 1:10am · Unlike · 2
Tom Radcliffe I change the way I put things according to who I am talking to. If I am talking to a Christian I am happy to use the term God (for Nirvana). If I am talking to a Mahayanist I say emptiness. To a Thera; anatta. To an advaitin - self. It's all the same to me.
February 12 at 2:38am · Like · 1
Robert Healion This is a particularly insightful story concerning attainment and conceptual understanding. It is from the collection of Haukin who I am particularly fond of. The instruction itself is insightful of these mysterious turning phrases left behind by these old scoundrels. However the conceptual understanding no matter how brilliant is only a treasure of the cave of the 8th.
“Ch'ien-feng said that the Dharma-body has three kinds of sickness and two kinds of light; he also says that there is an opening through which to pass beyond these obstructions. Now, even if I have to lose my eyebrows for doing it, I'm going to explain the true meaning of Ch'ien-feng's words to you.2
As a rule, mountains, streams, the great earth, light and darkness, form and emptiness, and all the other myriad phenomena obstruct your vision and are, as such, impediments to the Dharma-body. That is the first of the sicknesses Ch'ien-feng refers to.
When you go on to realize the emptiness of all things and begin dimly to discern the true principle of the Dharma-body, but are unable to leave your attachment to the Dharma behind—that is the second sickness,
When you are able to bore through and attain the Dharma-body, but you realize upon investigating it anew that there is no way to grasp hold of it, no way to postulate it or to indicate it to others, attachment to the Dharma still remains. That is the third sickness.
The first sickness is a kind of light that doesn’t penetrate freely. The second and third sicknesses are likewise a kind of light; it doesn’t penetrate with unobstructed freedom either.
When a student has bored his way through the opening mentioned, he is beyond these obstructions and is able to see clearly the three sicknesses and two lights, with no need for even the slightest bit of further effort."
Haukins comment: Complete nonsense! Discriminatory drivel of the first water. When I read that, my hands involuntarily closed the book. Doubting my own eyes, I shut them and sat there, utterly appalled. How could anyone. believe such feeble remarks are capable of clarifying the ultimate principle of Zen?”
February 12 at 5:32am · Edited · Like
Tom Radcliffe After 20 years of meditation on transience a Dharma friend asked me what I knew. I said,"Everything is transient, there is nothing to hold onto" - it was not a theory but a bleak and awful reality at that time. I asked him to tell me something. "He said have you ever looked for what does not change?". I was obsessed with this question "What doesn't change?" for several hours, after which the answer suddenly came. I don't think the question would really have meant anything without the preceding clarification of transience. This is just my experience. I know others have woken up by other routes. The passage above makes sense to me. I think that the right pointer for one is wrong for another. It depends on the timing. The Buddha, here is talking to people for whom transience is a given.
February 12 at 5:36am · Edited · Like
Tom Radcliffe I could describe experience both as one seamless self or as absolute emptiness - both make sense to me.
February 12 at 5:38am · Like
Robert Healion The mystery of mysteries, what is the mystery, confused so am I, however this post, the desire to post, the interest in this post, the understanding of this post, all stem from the consciousness that will drag you into your next rebirth.
February 12 at 5:42am · Like
Robert Healion “This collateral damage of rejecting an ultimate self allows us to see the true face of awareness.”
Collateral damage suggesting an unavoidable consequence. Rejecting comes from the mirror bright, polish it all you like it will only reflect the relative. Experiencing the true face of awareness will clearly define the relationship of all these fine dharma words to the true face of awareness. The mirror bright is a reflection of the true face of awareness, yet it the mirror can never reflect the true face of awareness. Though emptiness is from, form is always empty.
February 12 at 5:52am · Edited · Like
Kyle Dixon Transience or impermanence has two main meanings in the buddhadharma. The first is the coarse transience of passing events and phenomena which is measured from the standpoint of the allegedly changeless observing point of reference. The other subtle meaning of transience is encountered through recognizing the emptiness of phenomena. In that recognition, since there is no core or essence [svabhāva] for phenomena, the apparent arising of apparent phenomena is truly non-arising, and so with no valid arising in mere arising every alleged instance of manifestation is disjoint and unique, even if it appears as if it belongs to an enduring entity. With no core to tether appearances and instances of manifestation to one another, and no way to validate instances to begin with, every expression of manifestation arises and ceases in the very instance of appearing. That is the definitive impermanence.
February 12 at 6:24am · Unlike · 2
Soh Looking into "what doesn't change" usually leads to I AM realization. Then One Mind. When you realize anatta the view shifts. There is not even a trace of a seamless all-subsuming Self. Nothing changeless or independent.. in hearing just sound, no hearer, in seeing just scenery, no seer
February 12 at 10:17am · Like · 1
Robert Healion I guess it all comes down to terminology. holding the mind in absence controlling of thoughts, allows a space for not mind to manifest. this is analogous to seek the source of which thoughts arise from. But mostly thoughts arise from thoughts, and seeking the I am as in Rramana often results in excessive thoughts. .... from memory; after a light meal and a change in attitude, Buddha not seeking anything, being likened to the string on instrument, too lose it dose not sound too tight it snaps. Sat, where upon opening his eyes to the evening star, the merit of all his years of practice came to pass. Then the rest of the night was series of unfoldment's or deepening of experience and wisdom.
February 12 at 12:26pm · Like
Piotr Ludwiński "I guess it all comes down to terminology." nope
February 13 at 9:11pm · Like
No comments:
Post a Comment