Whose Buddhism is Truest?

A place for discussion of current events. Buddhist news would be particularly appreciated.

Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby uslic001 » Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:11 pm

Whose Buddhism is Truest?
No one’s—and everyone’s, it turns out.
Long-lost scrolls shed some surprising light.
Linda Heuman

http://www.tricycle.com/feature/whose-b ... t?page=0,0
uslic001
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:38 am

Re: Interesting article

Postby Pero » Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:08 pm

Thanks.
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar
Pero
 
Posts: 1797
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Interesting article

Postby Huifeng » Sun Sep 04, 2011 2:17 am

uslic001 wrote:Whose Buddhism is Truest?
No one’s—and everyone’s, it turns out.
Long-lost scrolls shed some surprising light.
Linda Heuman

http://www.tricycle.com/feature/whose-b ... t?page=0,0


This is a nice article, but I think that the title is misleading. It's far too PC.

There is no way that one can conclude from the Gandhari findings that to the question of "Whose Buddhism is truest?" the answer is "No one's and everyone's". It really only could conclude that if we were only comparing say Pali Theravada from Sri Lanka with Sarvastivada or Dharmagupta from Kasmir / Gandhara.
In fact in many ways, this article just further shows that the Mahayana in its various forms and later spin offs, is even more divergent from the common threads that existed in the mainstream traditions prior.

~~ Huifeng
User avatar
Huifeng
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Will » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:40 pm

Venerable,

I do not get your point. If so many early texts appear in differing languages with differing words why not conclude that there is no single, definitive written Dharma? Buddha had many Arhat disciples with, I assume, great memories, so why should Ananda's versions be the best & only "true" record?

This link permits one to read the full article: http://www.douban.com/group/topic/22375578/
Revealing one essence: this means the inherently pure, complete, luminous essence, which is pure of its own nature. -- Fa-tsang
User avatar
Will
 
Posts: 1730
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:21 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Astus » Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:34 pm

The Chinese Canon - in fact, several canons edited in China - contains thousands of texts, including multiple translations of the same work, but they did not start any movement saying that "nobody and everybody is correct". Since Buddhism never had a uniform and single Holy Scripture, the diversity of texts has been always present. At the end of the day, it is naturally MY (teacher's) BUDDHISM is the truest.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4126
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby catmoon » Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:37 pm

Ok fine, you go practice your way, and I'll go practice Buddha's way. :rolling:
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.
User avatar
catmoon
Former staff member
 
Posts: 2916
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Beatzen » Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:09 pm

Alan Watt's buddhism is fer true.

[/sarcasm]
"Cause is not before and Effect is not after"
- Eihei Dogen Zenji
User avatar
Beatzen
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Will » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:13 pm

Astus wrote:The Chinese Canon - in fact, several canons edited in China - contains thousands of texts, including multiple translations of the same work, but they did not start any movement saying that "nobody and everybody is correct". Since Buddhism never had a uniform and single Holy Scripture, the diversity of texts has been always present. At the end of the day, it is naturally MY (teacher's) BUDDHISM is the truest.


The point of the article that impressed me had not to do with diversity of translations so much, as that different languages have different versions of a text, all of which are of the same date. So there is no Ur-text, but parallel recensions, which means (for now) that no lineage, sect or school can brag that they represent fully & accurately what Buddha taught. Everyone has versions of what Buddha taught and we cannot say, based on the texts, that any one version is exactly what he said; only that it is a report of what someone recalled him teaching.

This will (hopefully) lead to the dying of sectarianism and the accepting of the plausibility that many Dharma heresies of the "lower" "mistaken" schools may have been genuine Dharma teachings direct from Buddha.
Revealing one essence: this means the inherently pure, complete, luminous essence, which is pure of its own nature. -- Fa-tsang
User avatar
Will
 
Posts: 1730
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:21 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby ronnewmexico » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:19 pm

In contrast to theism...where there is a strict qualification of this thing, and peoples presuppose....things have not changed or been changed over the years....historical record seems to deny that.

In any event I would say most lineages represent the teaching with nuance. But it is nuance not substantial part.
And it seems such is buddhism always the buddha presented things in such a fashion each to their own level and propensity.
So in that is it perhaps consistant.

Many many more similiarities then differences in this thing.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
User avatar
ronnewmexico
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Beatzen » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:29 pm

Does it strike anyone else as odd that this is such a concern here in the west?

I imagine that in thailand people don't sit around (at least as frequently as western students do) comparing one yana to another. and so on.

If you're a peasant in burma, or if you were a villager in pre-occupied tibet, then the dharma that was taught locally was "the dharma." And it was satisfactory in that it sated the spiritual needs of the population better than no-dharma at all.

I almost think about those ancient chinese monks who might live in a remote region, during a time when access to duplications of various scriptures was rare. They might have one or two sutras, and that'd be it. But they'd study those few texts religiously, and gain much enthusiasm and profound inspiriation for practice from those few textual sources.

We're so spoiled to live in a time and place with so many variant strains accessable to us. Most sutras are a mouse-click away on google. This is a revolutionary development.
"Cause is not before and Effect is not after"
- Eihei Dogen Zenji
User avatar
Beatzen
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Jikan » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:47 pm

Beatzen wrote:Does it strike anyone else as odd that this is such a concern here in the west?


It's the anxious, neurotic concern of someone who is out shopping for the best newest and brightest Dharma widget, and fears serious buyer's remorse. It's the logic of consumerism projected onto the spiritual scene IMO.
Jikan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4285
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby tobes » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:44 am

Jikan wrote:
Beatzen wrote:Does it strike anyone else as odd that this is such a concern here in the west?


It's the anxious, neurotic concern of someone who is out shopping for the best newest and brightest Dharma widget, and fears serious buyer's remorse. It's the logic of consumerism projected onto the spiritual scene IMO.


I would say that it's more a wariness of inauthenticity - maybe even a reaction against the logic of consumerism. Most religions tend to claim of themselves that they are the only or real or highest truth; I think modern folk are suspicious of this. So they want what is 'real' 'original' 'authentic' not what is fabricated.

I would say, primarily, a desire for truth in a world of (marketing) deception.

The error seems to me to be the assumption that philosophical-spiritual truth/authenticity is necessarily found externally.

:anjali:
User avatar
tobes
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Interesting article

Postby Jnana » Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:20 am

Huifeng wrote:In fact in many ways, this article just further shows that the Mahayana in its various forms and later spin offs, is even more divergent from the common threads that existed in the mainstream traditions prior.

Indeed.
Jnana
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Interesting article

Postby Huifeng » Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:40 am

Jnana wrote:
Huifeng wrote:In fact in many ways, this article just further shows that the Mahayana in its various forms and later spin offs, is even more divergent from the common threads that existed in the mainstream traditions prior.

Indeed.


Hi Jnana, :hi:

After going through this in depth elsewhere, do you want us to go through it all again? :tongue:
I'll wink at you, and you can wink back, and we can call it quits then, huh?

~~ Huifeng
User avatar
Huifeng
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 am

Re: Interesting article

Postby Jnana » Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:17 am

Huifeng wrote:After going through this in depth elsewhere, do you want us to go through it all again?

I'd sooner submit to a bit of corporal self-mortification.... :tongue:

Image
Jnana
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Interesting article

Postby Huifeng » Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:35 am

Jnana wrote:
Huifeng wrote:After going through this in depth elsewhere, do you want us to go through it all again?

I'd sooner submit to a bit of corporal self-mortification.... :tongue:

Image


Okay, but only if it'll help us attain samyaksambodhi a little faster ... :tongue:

~~ Huifeng
User avatar
Huifeng
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Will » Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:34 pm

Will one of you superior "winkers" deign to (not repeat, that would be tooo much) but give us a link to your previous "going over" of the article?
Revealing one essence: this means the inherently pure, complete, luminous essence, which is pure of its own nature. -- Fa-tsang
User avatar
Will
 
Posts: 1730
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:21 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Mr. G » Sat Jan 07, 2012 1:11 am

Topic Split: Omniscience
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Huifeng » Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:35 am

Will wrote:Will one of you superior "winkers" deign to (not repeat, that would be tooo much) but give us a link to your previous "going over" of the article?


Sorry Will, it was just a bit of personal between myself and Jnana, didn't mean to sound snooty.

We talked about it at length at Dhamma Wheel on this thread here, about half way down the page the article in question is mentioned and linked.

~~ Huifeng
User avatar
Huifeng
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 am

Re: Whose Buddhism is Truest?

Postby Will » Sat Jan 07, 2012 4:14 am

Huifeng wrote:
Will wrote:Will one of you superior "winkers" deign to (not repeat, that would be tooo much) but give us a link to your previous "going over" of the article?


Sorry Will, it was just a bit of personal between myself and Jnana, didn't mean to sound snooty.

We talked about it at length at Dhamma Wheel on this thread here, about half way down the page the article in question is mentioned and linked.

~~ Huifeng


I will check it out, thanks Venerable.

This is a reminder to myself & everyone - this is the public area of Dharma Wheel. For privacy there is PM or email.
Revealing one essence: this means the inherently pure, complete, luminous essence, which is pure of its own nature. -- Fa-tsang
User avatar
Will
 
Posts: 1730
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:21 am

Next

Return to News & Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

>