That's not a matter of agreeing with my rendering, it is an accurate translation of Dharmarakṣa's Song dynasty translation: 一切眾生皆有如來勝智在於身中Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:54 pm I don't agree with your rendering of this part of the passage:
ཆོས་སྨྲ་བ་དེ་དག་ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱི་ལུས་ལ་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པའི་ཡེ་ཤེས་གནས་སོ
This states very clearly in Tibetan, "The gnosis of the tathāgata abides in the bodies of all those dharmabhāṇakas."
It does not say the the gnosis of the tathāgata abides in the bodies of all sentient beings. This being so, I reject your argument.
The Tibetan version agrees with the Ratnakuta version: 敢佛弟子班宣經典: "When the disciples of the Buddha venture to recite the sūtras..." though the rest deviates in a few ways.
There are multiple layers of development in the sūtra, as I demonstrate in the introduction. If you reject an argument simply because your tradition's text says differently, then you are relying purely on argumentum ad verecundiam and are simply falling into the criticism that you levelled against Astus for using quotes:
Actually, we can talk about the Dharma in various ways. This does not have to be an argument where you have to try to defeat people every time, sometimes it is worth taking the time to try to understand other people's points of view when they diverge from your own. Part of that might involve incorporating quotes or relying on scriptural tradition.
Then it shouldn't be such a surprise to suggest that all beings can attain buddhahood. Again, this is just a conventional statement, but the point should be clear. This is why the sūtras clearly state that all will inevitably be buddhas.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:54 pm The ultimate perspective is that no buddha, sentient being, liberation, bondage, or buddhakāyas can be established at all. Buddha, sentient being, liberation, bondage, kāyas, gnoses, etc. are all just conventional designations and do not refer to anything real. Why? Your sūtra itself states it as follows:
I see where you are coming from. But without the larger web of meaning that is conventionally structured with the attainments of Buddhahood and so forth, it is hard to see how you can escape nihilism and the Dharma-lite of merely improving day to day life. More meaningful bodhisattva practice and aspirations lose their value. Even on the conventional level (i.e. on the "story" level), all beings do become Buddhas. They do so because of what holds true on the ultimate level—that there is no buddha, no being, no bodhisattva, etc.Queequeg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:57 pm Here's what I'm taking away from this - both this Mahayana view you describe and the view Malcolm is describing are dealing with these teachings as literal truths.
I don't take them that way. When I say these are edifying stories, I actually mean that, literally. Edifying. Stories. They're guidelines directing us on the path to awakening and away from wrong views. When they become dogma and cease having the function of edifying, they become baggage to be dropped.
When I sit and try to observe my mind, whether every amoeba eventually awakens is quite irrelevant. Maybe there comes a point on the path where this does come to matter... I don't see it yet. These stories do, however frame the way I ought to address and interact with beings in my day to day activity. I do feel better at the end of the day when I've been able to conduct myself in a respectful way through my daily activities. Having a clear conscience helps to cultivate concentration and to carry out insight practice.