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.
Nichiren taught this? I have yet to read his teach it as such. One can take any teaching out of context and misinterpret it. However in this misinterpretation the teaching still proves to be potent. This does not seem well understood yet it is a mark of Shakyamuni's enlightenment.
What Nichiren did do is speak to people of different developmental capacities through his writings and addressed them accordingly. Some of his teachings he himself considers provisional because they were adapted to the minds around him. This has an academic basis that I can validate.
jake wrote: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?)
I did not include practices specifically but leave that to the side for now. I will gladly unpack it if required.
Provision is just that. Words lead but aren't in themselves awakening. Shakyamuni's supreme and complete enlightenment It is a state that transcends verbal descriptors. However the lack of bounds, characteristics displayed along with cause and effect can all be understood through THIS sutra.
It is what the words represent, where they point to, and the enlightenment they define that matters. It matters in accordance to cause, conditions, capacity and the time. More importantly however what matters is the state of the populous in this regard. The Lotus puts all of this in perfect context when one contemplates it from the perspective of their own life. The evidences used are not disputable as such if they were this traditions would be easily dismissed.
Instead it is just painfully misunderstood and represented.
jake wrote: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?
Nichiren created a teaching based on the LS which reconciles all vehicles to the one vehicle. The Daimoku speaks to the teacher which is one's own mind. How it is perceived is a reflection of that person's understanding of these teachings. A reflection of their causes, their capacities and their conditions.
The degenerate age is such that sensual corruption, desire and intellect nullify external agency and thus harmony among various provinces. The people, their minds and the teachings are not separate in such a way that they can me.
That was the whole purpose of fulfilling the requests of Shakyamuni made in the Lotus Sutra.
Now at some point Nichiren's apocalyptic warnings and the correction of all traditions in Japan might come to mind. This might cause some to project that this is still very necessary.
However I argue that even this is provisional. Yes I just said that and I am very keen on the potential ramifications and am quite prepared for the discussion meant to be born of it.
Jake wrote: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?
First the provisional is a condition of existence. Planting a seed to manifest a complete understanding of this does not remove provision but it removes attachment to it. Even the buddha's teachings become provisional to awakening itself.
The difference with the lotus is that it does not teach provision to lead to itself. Rather it explains the depth of provision and how it is discarded by all thus come ones. It also explains that they may appear to others as either the one or multiple vehicles dependent on the causes, capacities and conditions of the person encountering them.
All of these discussions lead to those two sentences I post from expedient means. It is the perfect proof for this.
So no Jake understanding this does not mean you have accomplished it however it has implications as far as entering the room of the thus come one Shakyamuni.
It is why lacking doubt is so paramount here. One can't replace provision within one's one life with more provision to achieve Shakyamuni's enlightenment according to this sutra. However if one can not doubt that provision is meant to be discarded to reveal the absolute perhaps it will reveal the absolute from the perspective of one's own life, breaking attachment to provision itself.
Shakyamuni's own enlightenment was based on this very dynamic. He didn't verbosely know the nature of his own enlightenment when he sought to accomplish it. However do you think he could have withstood the challenge of accomplishing as much if he doubted any sentient being's potential to be freed from suffering? Was it some concrete belief in something he already understood or was it an absolute desire and lack of doubt to kept him on the path til completion?
The reason Nichiren is so critical of all Buddhist practitioners is that like a child clings to one's own father and mother for love and support one clings to provision for the same. Not out of dark manipulative desires but out of admiration and affection. The children of Shakyamuni within Japan did not recognize that they all shared the same underlying nature as if they where children of the same family.
Nichiren taught them as much and even then the other teachings did not perish. This is might be the hardest part for many to fathom. Was it success? was it failure? or was it meant to unfold exactly as it has?
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?
One of the four conditions for practicing Mayahana is equanimity for all sentient beings. In the LS it is assumed that this has been established for Bodhisattva Mahasattva. They come to the table with it already developed. It seemed this was a mark of Shakyamuni's existence as well.
In today's age this concept is been so diminished and abstracted the value is seen as unreasonably attainable.
This is why presenting a practice that does not represent the totality of Shakyamuni's enlightenment in the later age is seen as categorically evil.
It was not denied in the cause and effect of Shakyamuni's existence from then to now. It only exists in how humans propagate the teachings.
Jake wrote: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?
The whole reason for the Lotus Sutra was that there would be people who would act as the "eye of the world". That is there is meant to be a segment of those who understand the application of the teachings according to these dynamics to act as a "mirror" so Shakyamuni's ultimate teaching could be sown. Without a contrast of provision there is no absolute. People would be born awakened and this discussion would never have cause.
Enlightenment happens internally but eventually is expressed over a demographic. The assembly is meant to dissolve all separation and allow for one to see that the only thing keeping one from achieving this enlightenment it is realizing it. Of course this isn't as easy or even simple as it sounds.
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?
That people would cling to traditions as if they had their own source and exclusive benefits. Humans have a propensity to attach proprietorship to these things as a product of their own design because this is an underlying facet of how desire conditions growth on the path.
I never once doubted anyone here is in the auspices of the buddha through their own intent. I do doubt that many understand the influence of their own preferences and how they express bias against other traditions.
The Nichiren one is the best because it truly extends to the most in need, those with the least capacity and the most suffering.
Nichiren was clear that anyone who doubts a teacher who would accommodate people as Shakyamuni buddha did will suffer hell because he is right.
Why? It is absolute counter intuitive to what Shakyamuni dedicated his entire existence to. He is very clear in the LS to call anyone who denies the LS as arrogant and not a follower. Basically Devadatta or the devil of the sixth heaven.
Jake wrote:
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?
[/quote]
The enemies are defined by the reaction this teaching gets because of the contrast it creates.
It exposes the provisional as such. Bad reactions to this reveal attachment to provision. That is the good physician at work.
I always felt this teaching was meant to be internalized until grasped then I understood it as such.
The first person I shakabuku'd was myself. For a good ten years. Reading all those overly burdensome internet discourses on the evils of Nichiren Buddhism. I guess I had rightly figured the first enemy I needed to conquer was myself.
However It is easier to question everyone and doubt the world in the face of one's own provision. Pretty much one of the factors that makes samsara so prevalent.
One of things that really lets one understand the minds of others is spending a lifetime suffering for the sake of others. Something most people simply wont do which is why the buddha taught the way he did.
None of that means denying suffering or avoiding it in the process can be avoided if one seeks the supreme and complete enlightenment of Shakyamuni.
What Nichiren is saying that a votary will enjoy peace in this existence while saying they will undoubtedly encounter enemies and obstacles is this.
By applying these teachings in light of later one loses the condition that makes them appear as such. They simply are enemies to themselves and for this there is no anger to be had. Rather bountiful compassion because of the equanimity it is founded on.
Hope this helps.