Unorthodox Ideas

[viniketa]

You can see from the link free Chandrakirti ebook, which I posted yesterday.

Yes, but that is a teaching book. From the way it is presented, the sources are not clear.

To check my understanding, those talking about 'enlightenment' in 'one lifetime', are you saying individuals have become Buddhas within a single lifetime (no preceding lives, at all)?

[SSJ3Gogeta]

If you take up Vajrayana practice it is possible to obtain Buddhahood in one lifetime because it works with the body's channels, bindus etc.

The alternative is three incalculable eons of perfect practice.....which is impossible, and frankly silly.

[viniketa]

If you take up Vajrayana practice it is possible to obtain Buddhahood in one lifetime because it works with the body's channels, bindus etc.

The alternative is three incalculable eons of perfect practice.....which is impossible.

This seems to state orthodox Vajrayana thinking. Please clarify whether this is a 'single, no-precedent lifetime' and substantiate.

Also, it would seem that DKR's book is paraphrasing one excerpt of a Dharmakīrti argument from the Pramāṇaviniścaya in response to a hypothetical question, and probably not a doctrinal position. See Sara McClintock's Omniscience and the Rhetoric of Reason: Santaraksita and Kamalasila on Rationality, Argumentation, and Religious Authority, p. 136-7

http://books.google.com/books?id=I349Le ... 36&f=false

[viniketa]

If you take up Vajrayana practice it is possible to obtain Buddhahood in one lifetime because it works with the body's channels, bindus etc.

This is not standard Mahāyāna... and still needs clarification and substantiation.

[pueraeternus]

With further development of buddha-nature concept occurred the option of a short cut path to buddhahood, thus appeared Chan and later Vajrayana.

This is the first I'm hearing that Buddha Nature texts gave rise to Vajrayana.

Ronald Davidson said Madhaymaka gave rise to Vajrayana. This makes sense since tantric texts are often written in the voice of Nagarjuna, Aryadeva etc., for example:

http://www.amazon.com/Aryadevas-Lamp-In ... 0975373455

No, it is quite commonly acknowledged that the overall structure of vajrayana is built upon tathagatagarbha. From Alan Wallace's "Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge":

awallace_tathagatagarbha_vajrayana.jpg (48.68 KiB) Viewed 233 times

[SSJ3Gogeta]

With further development of buddha-nature concept occurred the option of a short cut path to buddhahood, thus appeared Chan and later Vajrayana.

This is the first I'm hearing that Buddha Nature texts gave rise to Vajrayana.

Ronald Davidson said Madhaymaka gave rise to Vajrayana. This makes sense since tantric texts are often written in the voice of Nagarjuna, Aryadeva etc., for example:

http://www.amazon.com/Aryadevas-Lamp-In ... 0975373455

No, it is quite commonly acknowledged that the overall structure of vajrayana is built upon tathagatagarbha. From Alan Wallace's "Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge":

awallace_tathagatagarbha_vajrayana.jpg

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

[Astus]

All we are left with is empty appearances: they are not real because no existence, etc., can be ascertained regarding them; they are not unreal since they appear. All we can say about them is that they arise in dependence.

The very same idea is in the early texts, where the below section is followed by the teaching of dependent arising.

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one" (SN 12.15)

Same thing in the Discourse on Arising and Ceasing,

"The processes arise and the processes cease, they arise with causes and conditions, and they cease with causes and conditions. There is the view about causes, and the view about continuity in existence, ‘with causes processes arise’, monks, seeing this with right wisdom as it really is there will be no existence-view or eternity-view; ‘with causes processes cease’, monks, seeing this with right wisdom as it really is there will be no extinction view, or annihilation view. So not having approached either of these two extremes, monks, the Realised One teaches the Dhamma which is a middle practice"

[SSJ3Gogeta]

The very same idea is in the early texts, where the below section is followed by the teaching of dependent arising.

Madhyamaka is indeed the perfect summary of all Buddhism, except Dzogchen.

[DarwidHalim]

It is on the basis of the buddha-nature teaching that it becomes possible to say that with becoming free from attachment simply by realising the nature of mind all the buddha qualities are present. This is the fundamental idea of all sudden teachings that are believed to be the ultimate and supreme methods by the majority of Mahayana followers. From this it is just one more step to say that since an arhat is free from attachment there is complete enlightenment. And this is what I did here. With this one can argue saying that arhats are not free from all attachments, practically making arhats not free from samsara but stuck in the illusion of liberation; or say that tathagatagarbha teachings are only provisional, turning sudden paths into illusory baits.

Arhat is free from attachment of self, but not characteristics. And the issue here is, freeing from samsara is not defined by characteristic, it is defined by attachment to self.

Bodhisattva 1 to 6, have some sort of attachment. But this attachment is not something like grasping. I think attachment is not the right word. It is something like you think it has a character like that, so you again assert that like that, again and again.

FOr example, you can say that you don't have any attachment to a piece of paper. But, you always see this white stuff as paper. WHen you see that white stuff, immediately the idea of paper appear in you, and you again think yes this is paper, so it against imprint in you. There is no attachment there. But, there is something like assertion.

They are indeed this word of "With this one can argue saying that arhats are not free from all attachments, practically making arhats not free from samsara but stuck in the illusion of liberation; or say that tathagatagarbha teachings are only provisional, turning sudden paths into illusory baits."

But if you see the teaching like Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, they don't say something like that. Those sentences are more to personal view.

[viniketa]

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

This isn't just Wallcace's idea. See: Sree Padma. Barber, Anthony W. (2008). Buddhism in the Krishna River Valley of Andhra, pp. 155-156.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

This isn't just Wallcace's idea. See: Sree Padma. Barber, Anthony W. (2008). Buddhism in the Krishna River Valley of Andhra, pp. 155-156.

Viniketa, are you Indian?

How do you know about such an obscure book?

By the way, there are definite errors in this book. I tried to find the email of A.W. Barber, but I gave up.

Malcolm said that A.W. Barber is extremely speculative, and I have to agree with that.

[viniketa]

By the way, there are definite errors in this book.

Definite errors can be found in most books. That does not mean that the entire book is in error.

[Jnana]

So did Yinshun emphasise the early Mahayana view of a long path and criticised all the later ideas of instant methods. If I take this a little further - while I'm not very familiar with Yinshun's teachings - it is as he quotes Taixu in Human Centered Buddhism (p. 48) that "Chinese Buddhism has been speaking the Mahayana doctrines and yet practicing the Hinayana way.", this applies to all who say there is liberation close at hand.

I don't really know Ven. Yinshun's views on this subject well enough to comment.

In fact, if we can say that many Mahayana ideas were already present in mainstream schools like the Dharmaguptaka, Mahasanghika, etc., then it is the sravakayana everywhere in shiny buddha robes. But this is just a side note here.

Yes, the basic narratives for the bodhisattvayāna were developed in the Jātakas, Avadānas, etc. For example, there's plenty of material even in the Pāli Khuddakanikāya that could easily be threaded together to create proto-bodhisattvayāna sūtras. These were pan-Buddhist themes. And if one looks at comprehensive śāstras such as the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra or the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, or even a later compendium like the Śikṣāsamuccaya, much of the content of these texts correlates well with the mainstream Āgama teachings.

Unlike Yinshun, I prefer the idea of a single vehicle, where the paths are not separate or hierarchical, but provisional in form and one in nature.

A pragmatic approach is, well, practical.... But it seems that a bodhisattva is still required to develop a number of capabilities that aren't necessary for an arhat liberated through discernment. For example, the first five of the six higher knowledges and samyaksaṃbodhi. These differences are also accepted by Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda, etc.

[pueraeternus]

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

He is not the only one who said this. Skilton, Williams and many other scholars and practitioners said the same thing.

[viniketa]

Malcolm said that A.W. Barber is extremely speculative, and I have to agree with that.

Oh, I did not say it does not speculate in places, but the ref is given to say this is not just Wallace's idea. I've seen it in other texts, as well, but don't have the refs ready at-hand. The explication of 'Buddha-nature' comes from Tathāgatagarbha, after all...

[SSJ3Gogeta]

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

He is not the only one who said this. Skilton, Williams and many other scholars and practitioners said the same thing.

And Ronald Davidson says something else. So what?

[DarwidHalim]

Yes, but that is a teaching book. From the way it is presented, the sources are not clear.
To check my understanding, those talking about 'enlightenment' in 'one lifetime', are you saying individuals have become Buddhas within a single lifetime (no preceding lives, at all)?

That is the source. That is the teaching from Chandrakirti, where Chandrakirti work is to explain the work of Nagarjuna, and Nagarjuna work is to explain PP Sutra and many other sutra.

FOr the buddha, even we say that he become a buddha in single lifetime, actually you really cannot say that. Because you forget your past life, and you don't know where you are starting form.

One time the student of Padampa Sangye (Kamalasila) asked him. THe student said how can we don't follow gradual path, instead of instantaneous? THen Kamalasila said that you should consider whether you have studied in the past or not.

You see here: If you have studied buddha dharma for 5 aeons. ANd in this life, you become buddha, people will say you become buddha in single life time. THat is because they don't consider what you have done before. But if they consider when you start, they really can't say it is instantneous.

Although there are so many part that talk about instantaneous, it is actually a very wrong word. Because what do you mean by instantaneous? DO you consider your study in past life or not?

If you don't, then you can't say it is instantaneous.

And for anyone who never study buddhism in the past life, even they follow Zen, Mahamudra, or Dzogchen for example, they won't understand.

THe teaching can claim anything, but reality does show that not all practitioner in those group success.

So, instantaneous or gradual are very useless word.

Unless, in your past life you never ever study buddhism, you never ever know about it at all, then today at this second you hear one word you can become buddha, then you can say there is such thing called instantaneous.

I do not have this notion about instantaneous or gradual, because I put my reference point in the past past life.

[viniketa]

Unlike Yinshun, I prefer the idea of a single vehicle, where the paths are not separate or hierarchical, but provisional in form and one in nature.

A pragmatic approach is, well, practical.... But it seems that a bodhisattva is still required to develop a number of capabilities that aren't necessary for an arhat liberated through discernment. For example, the first five of the six higher knowledges and samyaksaṃbodhi. These differences are also accepted by Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda, etc.

I must say I'm with Astus on this one! The 'provisional' is easy enough to substantiate. Yes, there is liberation with 'extra' qualities -- that is difficult to refute -- but the hierarchical rankings come primarily from commentarial literature, do they not? There is probably something I am missing, here...

[viniketa]

That is the source. That is the teaching from Chandrakirti, where Chandrakirti work is to explain the work of Nagarjuna, and Nagarjuna work is to explain PP Sutra and many other sutra.

Yes. Again, it would seem that DKR's book is paraphrasing excerpt of a Dharmakīrti argument from the Pramāṇaviniścaya in response to a hypothetical question, and probably not a doctrinal position. See Sara McClintock's Omniscience and the Rhetoric of Reason: Santaraksita and Kamalasila on Rationality, Argumentation, and Religious Authority, p. 136-7

http://books.google.com/books?id=I349Le ... 36&f=false

Unless, in your past life you never ever study buddhism, you never ever know about it at all, then today at this second you hear one word you can become buddha, then you can say there is such thing called instantaneous.

Agreed.

[Astus]

Um, I accept Allan Wallace is a great practitioner. But like Malcolm pointed out, he is wrong on some stuff.

"However defined, the essence of enlightenment corresponds to what in tantra is called “actuality” or the “causal continuum” (rgyu’i rgyud, hetu tantra), the original ground of being to be recognized as enlightenment itself. Thus, when we consider the above three aspects of tantra, it becomes apparent that tantra is based primarily on the theory of the essence of enlightenment or tath›gatagarbha. Although ancient practices of pre Buddhist origin were absorbed into the Buddhist tantric systems, it is this theory of Buddhist origin—the essence of enlightenment—that may be said to be the fundamental basis, or core teaching, from which tantra developed."
(Jamgön Kongtrul: Systems of Buddhist Tantra, p. 18)

"The most essential point in the Vajrayana is the buddha nature, and all Vajrayana practices are based on understanding this."
(Ringu Tulku: Confusion Arises As Wisdom, p. 97)

"The sole subject of the Vajrayana teachings is to show us how to aweken and realize this buddha-nature. There is nothing more than that."
(Ringu Tulku: Daring Steps, p. 21)

"Directly realising mind's nature and removing the afflictions generated in mind is the Vajrayana approach."
(Kalu Rinpoche: Luminous Mind, p. 174)

"Among the vehicles taught by the Buddha, both the mahayana and vajrayana lead to enlightenment; the main difference is that the mahayana is a more gradual path, whereas the vajrayana directly reveals the nature of mind."
(Khenchen Sherab: The Buddhist Path, p. 79)

"The view that buddha nature is the essential nature of each and every being is common to the Mahayana os the sutras, or Paramitayana, and to the Vajrayana, or Tantrayana. The Vajrayana goes into detail about what this means. Vajrayana explains that buddha nature is the innate presence of the source of all the realms and bodies of all buddhas and that these are innate within us. It talks about the presence of this as dakas and dakinis and so on. The Vajrayana explanation is essentially saying the same thing as the sutras. It is just saying it in a little bit more detail."
(Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche: Karma Chakme's Mountain Dharma, vol 1, p. 65)

"In essence, the secret-mantra vajrayana can be understood in terms of ground, path, and fruition. Regarding the ground, the minds of all sentient beings are pervaded by the tathagatagarbha."
(Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche: Pure Appearance, p. 1)