Response to PadmaVonSamba

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Response to PadmaVonSamba

Post by Minobu »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:19 pm
Minobu wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:19 pm Cause correct me if I’m wrong but the middle way is saying it’s both existence and non existence.
No. That is the third of the four extremes.

That which arises dependently is free of all four extremes: existence, nonexistence, both, and neither.

That’s the middle way, according to the Buddha and Nagarjuna.
this has been bugging me and i think i figured out why.

What i said was pure Madhyamika ...the way Lord Nagarjuna taught it and the way Gelug teaches.

You know there is a big rift in this between Nyingma and Gelug.

so you input your Nygma Dzogchen view and call it Lord Nagarjuna's ..thats not nice..

Teaching the newer revised Nygma version and saying it is Buddha's and Lord Nagarjuna Buddha's teaching...

unacceptable

at least be honest when you say stuff.

i recall when i first explained sunyata and a bunch of Dzogchen people here jumped on me and started in on their version of Emptiness..
totally some dzogchen thing as finally i think he was called smjc said you guys were mixing up stuff.

remember..
then set your crowd straight..

it's all here somewhere a couple years back...

you talk about some meditation practice mixed with Tantra and you cannot compare that to this practice.

You are like lost in some intellectual trip ..

we are working out our's and the collective Karma of all sentients in Mappo..all the realms we are working on..

not some trip that produces only intellectual banter.
so stay honest..don't; say what you think Sunyata is according to Lord Nagarjuna Buddha and insert some other thought on the matter and actually say it is Lord Nagarjuna';s teaching..
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Response to PadmaVonSamba

Post by Minobu »

jake wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:17 pm Hi tkp, thanks for making the time to respond.

I will try to repeat back to you what I think you're saying, this is to see if I understand the latest post.
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm n't
In the context of NIchiren's propagation of the Lotus Sutra? No, not exactly. Not to say that within the context of the TB teachings they are not in perfect accord. I accept that from that perspective it is well elucidated for which I am most grateful. The predicates of condition, causes and capacity are not necessarily the same in all "countries" and Nichiren taught based on these delineations.

That is the very point of the sutra. Even though provision points to the LS it is not the LS itself.
The Nichiren tradition that developed in Japan does not fully adopt the teachings of Nagarjuna because things are different in Japan. That Nichiren taught that things both exist and don't exist (what Malcolm called the "third extreme" earlier). Nichiren taught this, which diverges greatly from common Mahayana doctrine, including other Japanese traditions, because the causes, conditions, and capacities of Nichiren practitioners are different than other Buddhist practitioners.
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm The very proof is one's own life.

Examining the truth they lead to AND basing the efficiencies of the teachings that lead to this very truth are not one in the same. Every tradition, every commentary and the like are provisions. None of which alone define entry or achievement as defined by the cause and effect of Shakyamuni's existence.
Every tradition (I assume here you mean practices of a tradition?), written commentary, etc. are provisional and no practice tradition, commentary, etc. have the cause and effect of Shakyamuni. (Meaning they don't lead to awakening?)
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm Moreso Nichiren developed a teaching that transcends the conditioning of path by proxy of daimoku and a mandala of the lotus for mediation. Coupled against the backdrop of one's own existence this is how Nichiren teaches Lotus practice.
Nichiren developed a teaching that, unlike all other traditions and commentaries, isn't provisional. So, I'm guessing this means it alone leads to the same awakening as that of Shakyamuni?
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm It is hard to understand from even the respected perspective of provision because provision in and of itself is conditioning, and conditioning is and of itself pervasive and systemic.
I have a hard time understanding this because I am conditioned and all my thoughts on this are conditioned. Does this mean that if I understand this does it mean I'm no longer provisional?
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm However it is critical to realize that all sentient beings is foundational in LS practice. That is if one does not seek enlightenment with this as an unwavering condition in the process one is conditioning one's self against the sentient beings one's path does not inherently recognize.
I don't understand this at all. Sorry. If I seek awakening without an unwavering belief in what?
tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm None of the cause and effect of Shakyamuni's existence is left out, not one mind out of consideration including the needs of those minds. Shakyamuni's enlightenment was marked by the knowledge of such things as was Nichiren's to accommodate them through fulfillment of the LS in accordance to Shakyamuni's predictions.
So, Shakyamuni and Nichiren both understand the minds and needs of all other sentient beings and have fully accommodated them in their teaching of the non-provisional path, the ultimate path. However, even with the perfect teaching of Nichiren all those sentient beings who don't understand the Lotus Sutra or follow provisional paths do so because their minds are unable to escape the provisional conditioning they're trapped in and therefore are unable to realize the perfect teaching of Nichiren which was created because he understood the needs of all minds?

tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm Because these teachings are aimed towards the buddha's ultimate goal of making all people equal to him it was predicted this dynamic would occur.
What dynamic?

tkp67 wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 4:40 pm

On Practicing the Buddha’s Teachings

https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/42
If you practice the perfect, non-conditional path of Nichiren/Shakyamuni you will face enemies? If you don't face enemies are you not practicing the perfect non-conditional path of Nichiren?
you can only understand anything Nichiren but by practicing...

watch your life show you what you are and what needs to be addressed..

it's not an intellectual trip ..it's hard work..

tkp why are you confusing someone who does not yet know the power of this practice..
or even what this practice is about ..
narhwal90
Global Moderator
Posts: 1432
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Response to PadmaVonSamba

Post by narhwal90 »

Will lock this thread for a while, happy to unlock if on-topic discussion is likely to develop again.
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:19 pm
Minobu wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:19 pm Cause correct me if I’m wrong but the middle way is saying it’s both existence and non existence.
No. That is the third of the four extremes.

That which arises dependently is free of all four extremes: existence, nonexistence, both, and neither.

That’s the middle way, according to the Buddha and Nagarjuna.
this has been bugging me and i think i figured out why.

What i said was pure Madhyamika ...the way Lord Nagarjuna taught it and the way Gelug teaches.

You know there is a big rift in this between Nyingma and Gelug.

so you input your Nygma Dzogchen view and call it Lord Nagarjuna's ..thats not nice..

Teaching the newer revised Nygma version and saying it is Buddha's and Lord Nagarjuna Buddha's teaching...

unacceptable

at least be honest when you say stuff.

i recall when i first explained sunyata and a bunch of Dzogchen people here jumped on me and started in on their version of Emptiness..
totally some dzogchen thing as finally i think he was called smjc said you guys were mixing up stuff.

remember..
then set your crowd straight..

it's all here somewhere a couple years back...

you talk about some meditation practice mixed with Tantra and you cannot compare that to this practice.

You are like lost in some intellectual trip ..

we are working out our's and the collective Karma of all sentients in Mappo..all the realms we are working on..

not some trip that produces only intellectual banter.
so stay honest..don't; say what you think Sunyata is according to Lord Nagarjuna Buddha and insert some other thought on the matter and actually say it is Lord Nagarjuna';s teaching..


i truly worry that misinformation is being spread into this Nichiren section.

If you want to say something..please stay honest and don't put one sect's view into another sects view... as you did here with claims that your view on emptiness are Lord Nargajuna's view as taught by Gelug perfectly...

because it is different ... it is different.

you speak from a Nygma thing and say it is Lord Nargarjuna and you know thats not true...you have debated this on here for years...


now if i am wrong and there is no difference and you totally accept madhyamika as a perfect teaching and you have not inserted Nygma view then sorry for getting it all wrong...
Malcolm
Posts: 33897
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Malcolm »

Minobu wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:34 pm

What i said was pure Madhyamika ...the way Lord Nagarjuna taught it and the way Gelug teaches.
No. Actually it isn't.

The rest of your screed is purely sectarian, uneducated bullshit. So I am not going to respond to it. I have better things to do.
"Nonduality is merely a name;
that name does not exist."
—Kotalipa
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 11723
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Queequeg »

I realize this is a spinoff of another conversation and have no particular dog in the fight...

1. It seems to me, some people claiming to explain Nichiren's view on Nagarjuna really have no idea what they're talking about, taking scattered remarks in his writing out of context without understanding those are scattered, off hand comments coming from someone addressing another where both share basic common background knowledge. The isolated remarks get twisted into some very un-Buddhist views, frankly.

2. The Nichiren view of Madhyamika is through the lens of Tendai, which identifies the Middle as a third truth - not to overturn Nagarjuna, but to emphasize the profoundly subtle identity of the conditioned and the ultimate, also described as "inconceivable". Nichirenists, when they recite the Second Chapter of the Lotus Sutra as part of their standard liturgy, recite the ten factors three times for the three perspectives on all dharmas - Empty, Relative, and Buddhanature/MiddleWay.

3. Those who think that Nagarjuna is rejected should consider his appearance on Nichiren's mandalas.

There's a saying, if you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are. Nichirenists taking that rhetoric about discarding the provisional have worked themselves into a corner that valorizes ignorance in the name of faith. They've defiled sraddha into some sort of blind faith that is somehow purified by sincerity. Don't do it, fellas. Its going to take you a long time to get yourself out of that mess. I've walked that path. Just my 2 cents.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Upaya Chapter

純一実相。実相外。更無別法。法性寂然名止。寂而常渉照名観。
There is only reality; there is nothing separate from reality. The naturally tranquil nature of dharmas is shamatha. The abiding luminosity of tranquility is vipashyana.

-From Guanding's Introduction to Zhiyi's Great Shamatha and Vipashyana
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

I have no idea what Nichiren says on Sunyata. But I do know what is taught and Malcolm is teaching another view There is a reason when people make statements that are questioned and refuse to answer

His response with add ons negates the original teaching Not to mention. confuses the issue.

As for what Nichiren taught I would love to read his teaching. Not a Tendai version one thinks he might’ve said.

But his words. If QQ quoted his words I missed it and will read again.
But Malcolm is not teaching actual Lord Nargarjuna version.
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

I know Nichiren understood Lord Nagarjuna. And placed in him in the lotus Buddhism by Showing us in Gohonzon

But I have never seen him talk of such things.

I see agenda here
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

Queequeg wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:53 pm
3. Those who think that Nagarjuna is rejected should consider his appearance on Nichiren's mandalas.

There's a saying, if you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are. Nichirenists taking that rhetoric about discarding the provisional have worked themselves into a corner that valorizes ignorance in the name of faith. They've defiled sraddha into some sort of blind faith that is somehow purified by sincerity. Don't do it, fellas. Its going to take you a long time to get yourself out of that mess. I've walked that path. Just my 2 cents.
This is just your view. Sounds like someone who no longer practices.
Nichiren left Tendai. He also studied in different schools. He created a whole new Buddhist Practice for everyone in Mappo.

People do just fine more than fine. So have your little belittling trip and enjoy telling everyone what we are
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

anyway the thing is Q i wasn't talking anything about Nichiren and His views...

I'm talking about putting words into lord Nargajuna's work and saying it His words..

just because some dzogchen guy decides this is it ...well thats ok if you want to go about a different thing...knock yourselves out...
but don't say it is Lord Nagarjuna's words to give a seal of approval to something that is not.

and Malcolm will not come clean on this ..
just rants and swears calling it bullshit...
Sādhaka
Posts: 893
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Sādhaka »

Minobu,

Are you saying that Nagarjuna never said that the Four Extremes consists of: Existence, nonexistence, both, and neither?
User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 3088
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Caoimhghín »

AFAIK, he is claiming that Ven Nāgārjuna taught that all dharmas are slightly real and slightly unreal, the "both" option from the negated tetralemma.

The claim I believe comes from the "Response to PadmavonSamba" thread. It was: "according to sunyata it's a view of existence and nonexistence both at same time in order to come to the view."
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.
(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
User avatar
FiveSkandhas
Posts: 406
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by FiveSkandhas »

I also have "no dog in this fight." I respect both Malcolm and Minobu and consider them both sincere dharma friends.

However, let me just throw this out there:

The term shunyata has been translated in East Asia generally as 空, which originally had strong, pre-existing Daoist overtones in China. From studying early Chinese Buddhism, I believe this at first created misunderstandings. By the time of mature sectarian Chinese Mahayana, these misunderstandings had been mostly resolved, but I believe they had long-lasting "echoes" in nuance throughout the entire region, including in Japan. (I say this as a follower of a Japanese tradition myself.)

To be clear, let me underscore that I would never claim that mature East-Asian Buddhism failed to grasp shunyata. After the initial centuries of Buddhism in China, the concept of Buddhist "emptiness" became more refined and differentiated from Daoistic concepts like "無爲" and "虚" as doctrinal understanding deepened. The East Asian Madhyamaka tradition (i.e., 三論宗) lacks nothing in terms of orthodoxy IMHO, and the concept is also quite firmly grasped in the other mainline traditional 宗.

Nevertheless, I cannot help but feel East Asian 空 may have abiding connotations that subtly and in certain contexts create a different "atmosphere of understanding" than Tibetan སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་.

It is my personal opinion that because Tibetan is not logographic like Chinese, earlier meanings (like a Daoistic usage of 空) do not have the same type of "stickiness" or "persistence" in translation. Of course, there may be other types nuances that subtly "have tended to" differentiate Indian shunyata from Tibetan སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་ throughout history. Not being a Tibetan linguistic scholar, I really couldn't say much about that.

(For the record, I also think the choice of the English word "emptiness" for this concept has also been problematic, but as in East Asia I trust the issues will eventually be ironed out...for most thoughtful Western scholars and practioners, they already have been).

All this may be controversial, but I think it is worth pondering.
"One should cultivate contemplation in one’s foibles. The foibles are like fish, and contemplation is like fishing hooks. If there are no fish, then the fishing hooks have no use. The bigger the fish is, the better the result we will get. As long as the fishing hooks keep at it, all foibles will eventually be contained and controlled at will." -Zhiyi
Norwegian
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Norwegian »

Minobu wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:52 pm But Malcolm is not teaching actual Lord Nargarjuna version.
You really need to receive teachings on these topics, and then study them over and over again, many times.

The tetralemma of Nagarjuna is not his invention, as such, it is a distillation of the Buddha's teachings, as found in the texts like Prajnaparamita, etc. What is the tetralemma? It is a presentation of the four ontological views or positions that are possible to have. They are as follows:

1. Existence.
2. Non-existence.
3. Both existence and non-existence (the view you propose is the Middle Way, which is completely wrong.)
4. Neither existence nor non-existence.

All of these four views are negated as being false. Nagarjuna dispenses with any and all ontological mode possible to conceive of with this tetralemma. Which means, the right view of a Bodhisattva is not found within this tetralemma.

From Nagarjuna's Shunyatasaptati:

"Through understanding the truth, ignorance, which arises from the four perverted views, does not exist. When this is no more, the karma-formations do not arise."

Again referencing the four (perverted) views of the tetralemma which are all to be understood as wrong views.

Furthermore, via Nagarjuna's primary student, Aryadeva:

"Not existence and not non-existence,
Not these two conjoined nor the opposite of this:
Freed from four extremes, the truly wise
Are those who keep within the middle way."


Being freed from the four extremes means to be free of the four views outlined by Nagarjuna in the tetralemma.

Echoed again elsewhere:

"Neither is it being, non-being,
Or neither being nor non-being,
Nor indeed an embodiment of them both,
But it is genuinely liberated from the four extremes."

-- Sugatamatavibhangakarika ["Analysis of the Sugata's Texts"]

So, when you say that Nagarjuna never taught this, you're just completely wrong. Do yourself a favor and study these things for once.
"The Guru is the Buddha, the Guru is the Dharma,
The Guru is the Sangha too,
The Guru is Śrī Heruka.
The All-Creating King is the Guru."

-- The Secret Assembly Tantra
Norwegian
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Norwegian »

Caoimhghín wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 8:49 pm AFAIK, he is claiming that Ven Nāgārjuna taught that all dharmas are slightly real and slightly unreal, the "both" option from the negated tetralemma.

The claim I believe comes from the "Response to PadmavonSamba" thread. It was: "according to sunyata it's a view of existence and nonexistence both at same time in order to come to the view."
This of course is negated and refuted as wrong view.

"What exists not, that non-existent the foolish imagine;
Non-existence as well as existence they fashion.
As dharmic facts existence and non-existence are both not real.
A Bodhisattva goes forth when he wisely knows this."

-- Prajnaparamita Ratnagunasamcayagatha
"The Guru is the Buddha, the Guru is the Dharma,
The Guru is the Sangha too,
The Guru is Śrī Heruka.
The All-Creating King is the Guru."

-- The Secret Assembly Tantra
User avatar
KeithA
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by KeithA »

Sādhaka wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 8:38 pm Minobu,

Are you saying that Nagarjuna never said that the Four Extremes consists of: Existence, nonexistence, both, and neither?
I am a dumb Zennie, and even I know this teaching (the tetralemma). Not sure what the fuss is all about. This is Buddhism 101.
Last edited by KeithA on Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You make, you get.

New Haven Zen Center
narhwal90
Global Moderator
Posts: 1432
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Response to PadmaVonSamba

Post by narhwal90 »

Unlocked thread due to continuing productive discussion. Please stay on-topic.
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

Norwegian wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 9:06 pm
Caoimhghín wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 8:49 pm AFAIK, he is claiming that Ven Nāgārjuna taught that all dharmas are slightly real and slightly unreal, the "both" option from the negated tetralemma.

The claim I believe comes from the "Response to PadmavonSamba" thread. It was: "according to sunyata it's a view of existence and nonexistence both at same time in order to come to the view."
This of course is negated and refuted as wrong view.

"What exists not, that non-existent the foolish imagine;
Non-existence as well as existence they fashion.
As dharmic facts existence and non-existence are both not real.
A Bodhisattva goes forth when he wisely knows this."

-- Prajnaparamita Ratnagunasamcayagatha


here is where i went off on mr M...it's not sectarian bullshit by the way...it's taking what it is written and then adding what you think is going to make it better...

when i first came here and discuss this i got ganged up by Dzogchen people screaming about something entirely different....not a clue as to what i am talking about...

then there is this whole sectarian feud with Tibetans over this very subject....ok so....from there i was instrucred by my Root Guru Zasep Tulku rinpoche that to mess with this stuff is really like the worse cause it leads people away and they are left confused...

so when i see this...

Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:19 pm
Minobu wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:19 pm Cause correct me if I’m wrong but the middle way is saying it’s both existence and non existence.
No. That is the third of the four extremes.

That which arises dependently is free of all four extremes: existence, nonexistence, both, and neither.

That’s the middle way, according to the Buddha and Nagarjuna.
i think his four extremes have been tweeked ...
it don't look Kosher...

thats me
User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 3571
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: malcolm please have a look here

Post by Minobu »

Norwegian wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 9:02 pm
Minobu wrote: Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:52 pm But Malcolm is not teaching actual Lord Nargarjuna version.
You really need to receive teachings on these topics, and then study them over and over again, many times.

The tetralemma of Nagarjuna is not his invention, as such, it is a distillation of the Buddha's teachings, as found in the texts like Prajnaparamita, etc.
Prajnaparamita
i believe Lord Nagarjuna is attributed to this Work
Last edited by Minobu on Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 4599
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Response to PadmaVonSamba

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

I think it’s funny that this thread is called,
“Response To PadmaVonSamba”.

I’m touched. Really I am.
:jumping:
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook develops outward insight.
Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”