Christ is the shepherd, not God.[/quote]
Thank you for correcting my mistake.
I do apologize.
In the Liberation-Way cultivation, after the elimination of self-view, then of self-attachment, one becomes a respectable arhat (阿羅漢) or solitary realizer (緣覺) [the highest fruition level of the Liberation-Way] worthy of receiving offerings from all humans and gods in the three realms. This is what the Liberation-Way practice is about. Upon his death, he will enter “nirvana,” since he has successfully broken the bond of karma force. In other words, he would perish entirely from the three realms, no more future births-and-deaths, yet his Alaya vijnana (Buddha nature) would exist alone (because the Alaya vijnana does not cease to exist). So it will be a state of no more future life within the three realms, and the Alaya vijnana does exist alone unceasingly – neither arising nor ceasing. This is the state of nirvana. This is also the main subject of the second round of the dharma transmission by the Buddha, during which the Buddha expounded the Prajna Paramita Sutras (the Diamond Sutra, the Heart Sutra, etc.). But arhat (or solitary realizer) would not be able to follow the teachings any more, therefore he could never become a Buddha.
It’s remarkable that someone who espouses a doctrine that is indistinguishable from the Hindu notion of liberation (moksa = nirvana) of the soul (atman = alaya-vijnana), would go around telling others that they are non-Buddhists.
I don’t claim to be an expert, but as far as I know …
-
The Prajnaparamita sutras mention nothing about alaya-vijnana. (Could you supply a reference?)
-
It was a doctrine developed by Asanga and the Yogacara school bacause they could not accept what they saw as the nihlist position of the Prajnaparamita.
-
Like all Mahayana sutras, the Prajnaparamita sutras were not taught by Sakyamuni. There is no record of them at the Great Councils held in the first few centuries after the Buddha’s demise, where the canon was recited.
-
And if you go and actually read the first few chapters of the sutra, where its basic message is set forth, you’ll see that it’s mostly Subhuti (representing the non-realist position) preaching to Sariputra (representing the realist position), while the Buddha watches from the sidelines. The sutra thus represents a debate that was going on amongst Buddhist monks several centuries after the Buddha.
It is curious that you cite the Lotus sutra in your other posts, since its central teaching is inclusivistic. Arhats have not reached the end of the path; they must continue on to become Buddhas. Hence the Buddha’s prophesies about the future Buddhahood of various arhats.
I just wonder what sutras your sect follows.
Yes, I have confidence in what I have learned and realized, which corroborate with the stages of the Sutras’ statement: the Four Agamas, the Prajna Paramita Sutras, and the Vijnana-Only Sutras. And that is why I am willing to share my true experiences with the ones who might be interested in as well.
The Buddha’s teachings that I referred to are all based on the Tripitaka, the Buddhist canon. The earliest sutras of the Tripitaka are the Four Agamas compiled around ninety days after the Buddha’s nirvana. The compiling job were undertaken by forty arhats and five hundreds sound-hearers (sravaka) led by Mahakasyapa, and recited by Ananda who was the Buddha’s cousin (recorded in the Nirvana Sutra, the Longer Agama).
In terms of Buddhism, when I took refuge in the Three Treasures (the Buddha, Dharma, and Samgha), I am responsible to the Buddha and all sentient beings for my statement. I certainly know what I am able to offer and the serious retributions I would have to confront should I misinform the readers. The intention of this thread is to provide an aspect of true Buddhism, which has long been misinterpreted.
Seeing the fact that from the very beginning the Mahayana Sutras and teachings are not agreeable to your viewpoint, and most of all, you view the “Highest Yoga Tantra” as the way to your ultimate cultivation, obviously there is nothing in common in our dialogue. Whatever sutras or document should I apply to would be denied as unreliable or interpreted in another way. I do beg your pardon if I am not always at your service to provide your request. Thank you for your enthusiastic remarks.
When the disciples followed the Buddha’s teachings and put into daily practices,
their initial focus points shall be on the worldly physical body and mind, namely the five aggregates (skandhas). The form-aggregate, sensation-aggregate, perception-aggregate, formation-aggregate, and the Vijnana-aggregate. These are the fundamental terms in Buddhism, similar to the landmarks on the chart to the Treasure Island. The form-aggregate refers to the physical parts of our body, which include the eyes (both the inner and external organs for seeing), ears (both the inner and external organs for hearing), nose (ditto), tongue (ditto), and the body (ditto). For example, when we see (with our external visible sense-organs, organs for seeing, eyes-root contacting) an object (the sight, visual object), the object-image will be transmitted to our inner supreme sense-organ in the brain of the eyes area. Our eyes are acting like a monitor merely to catch views from the outside world and transfer them to the brain, the function of our eyes is similar to the monitoring security system in front of every household, the eyes-root themselves are not able to discern the meaning of the views. The object-image shall be received (by the sensation-aggregate and the perception-aggregate) and pondered (by the conscious mind, the sixth vijnana), thereby a decision would be made (by the manas, the seventh vijnana) and carried out through speech and deeds.
[quote=“Buddhism”][quote=“adikarmika”]
…While it’s clearly aimed at excluding highest yoga tantra from the Buddhis umbrella, it won’t work.
First of all, who can say what the Buddha’s teachings actually were?
… I suggest you limit yourself to simply “someone who has taken refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Samgha.” That’s the standard defintion
[/quote]
Yes, I have confidence in what I have learned and realized, which corroborate with the stages of the Sutras’ statement: the Four Agamas, the Prajna Paramita Sutras, and the Vijnana-Only Sutras. And that is why I am willing to share my true experiences with the ones who might be interested in as well.
The Buddha’s teachings that I referred to are all based on the Tripitaka, the Buddhist canon. The earliest sutras of the Tripitaka are the Four Agamas compiled around ninety days after the Buddha’s nirvana. The compiling job were undertaken by forty arhats and five hundreds sound-hearers (sravaka) led by Mahakasyapa, and recited by Ananda who was the Buddha’s cousin (recorded in the Nirvana Sutra, the Longer Agama).
[/quote]
So how do you explain that the Mahayana sutras were not compiled at at the time of the First Council?
Why not accept the common sense view that they did not yet exist?
So you accept that taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Samgha is the basic definition of a Buddhist.
Therefore, Tibetans who take similarly take refuge are Buddhists.
One doesn’t have to practice the teachings of the Buddha purely in order to be a Buddhist.
Lots of Buddhists eat meat. Does this mean that you do not consider them to be Buddhists?
Your argument is totally circular.
You claim that your interpretation is correct, because it represents the true teachings of Buddhism.
Why does it represent the true teachings of Buddhism? Because it is the correct interpretation.
And so on ad infinitum.
Everyone has their own interpretation.
Those who claim their particular interpretation is “correct” must appeal to the concept of authorial intent.
But how do you know what the authors’ intention was?
This is especially difficult for someone in your position who believes that the author of the sutras was an enlightened Buddha.
Actually, I find the Prajnaparamita sutras absolutely fascinating, and I have spent a number of years trying to understand their philosophical viewpoint (with the help of Nagarjuna, Haribhadra, Wittgenstein, T.R.V Murti and others).
I consider them one of the most important series of religious/philosophical texts ever written.
But your statement that the doctrine of alayavijnana was the central teaching of the Prajnaparamita sutras was totally new to me. I wasn’t aware that the term was even mentioned anywhere in the sutra. I simply asked you to supply a reference.
Actually, I think we have a lot in common.
As I have mentioned elsewhere in the thread, tantra is not for me.
But plenty of people who call themselves Buddhist and who have taken refuge in the 3 Jewels undertake its practices.
The difference bewteen me and you is that you want to write them off as non-Buddhists heading down a highway to hell, whereas I am willing to accept them as practitioners of a heterodox form of Buddhism.
nevertheless, if you want to claim that alaya-vijnana is the main teaching of the Prajnaparamita, you should at least say where the term is mentioned.
And thank you for your reply.
I appreciate the fact that you are writing in a second language
Ah, the archilles heel of orthodox Buddhism - mind/body duality - on which the whole system of liberation from cyclic existence stands or falls.
[quote=“adikarmika”][quote=“Buddhism”][quote=“adikarmika”]
[/quote]
The Buddha’s teachings that I referred to are all based on the Tripitaka, the Buddhist canon. The earliest sutras of the Tripitaka are the Four Agamas compiled around ninety days after the Buddha’s nirvana. The compiling job were undertaken by forty arhats and five hundreds sound-hearers (sravaka) led by Mahakasyapa, and recited by Ananda who was the Buddha’s cousin (recorded in the Nirvana Sutra, the Longer Agama).
[/quote]
So how do you explain that the Mahayana sutras were not compiled at at the time of the First Council?
Mahayana Sutras were compiled right after the 500 sravaka First Council had completed the Four Agamas; when the excluded enlightened bodhisattvas heard the context of the Four Agamas, they were so disappointed that the core essence of the Buddhahood-Way cultivation was not recorded at all by those unenlightened sravaka, who did not comprehend the profound and complex content that the Buddha had taught, they simply noted down brokenly here and there with some terms only. “Agama” is supposed to be the way to Buddhahood, but it obviously does not deserve the name. So the enlightened bodhisattvas vowed to compile the Sutras right away by themselves and did finish the task within years. You could find the term “Thus-Come Store” (如來藏) in the Samyuktagama (雜阿含) already. Thus-Come Store refers to the Alaya vijnana, which stores the wisdom seeds to Buddhahood.
So you accept that taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Samgha is the basic definition of a Buddhist.
Therefore, Tibetans who take similarly take refuge are Buddhists.
Not exactly, Tibetan “Buddhism” takes four refuge, the gurus are considered to be higher than Buddha.
Actually, I find the Prajnaparamita sutras absolutely fascinating, and I have spent a number of years trying to understand their philosophical viewpoint (with the help of Nagarjuna, Haribhadra, Wittgenstein, T.R.V Murti and others).
I consider them one of the most important series of religious/philosophical texts ever written.
As I have mentioned, it sounds philosophical because it is very diffcult to describe the exact meaning of the True Reality. You will come to understand them sooner or later with your diligenct and persistent practice, provided that you need a correct guidance, thereby your prajna wisdom would be initiated, but certainly not through practicing sex or the Highest Yoga Tantra; you’re blessed by the Buddha that you’re not in for tantra.
But your statement that the doctrine of alayavijnana was the central teaching of the Prajnaparamita sutras was totally new to me. I wasn’t aware that the term was even mentioned anywhere in the sutra. I simply asked you to supply a reference.
That is the reason why Prajnaparamita sutras sound so philosophysical; I will give you an English version for your reference after I translate them into English.
Actually, I think we have a lot in common.
As I have mentioned elsewhere in the thread, tantra is not for me.
But plenty of people who call themselves Buddhist and who have taken refuge in the 3 Jewels undertake its practices.
The difference bewteen me and you is that you want to write them off as non-Buddhists heading down a highway to hell, whereas I am willing to accept them as practitioners of a heterodox form of Buddhism.
I have no right to write them off or not, it is a plain fact. “Buddhism” refers to the Buddha’s teachings to attain Buddhahood through enlightenment first. Once an individual has taken refuge in the 3 Jewels but does not follow the Buddha’s teaching, do you think this make any sense? It’s similar to the case that if one registered in a University to study but went daily to the market place, what is the bother then? There is a key issue here, mind you, the law of cause and effect, which will come upon not only this current life, the result would last much longer and serious than you think. Please be patient, more details will come if we have the chance to go further to the third round of the dharma transmission by the Buddha.
Anything to do with the Buddha is very serious, it was mentioned in the Sutras that when we use the Buddha’s name, we have to do exactly what was told in the Sutras, and ceratinly cannot do it with our own presumption or even lies. I am very cautious with my words, especially it’s using another language to explain something even not easy in the Chinese language. I heard several schoolmates told me, it took them years before they could really understand the meaning of the teachings while they attended school twice evenings weely. So if you or other readers do not know what I am writing about, firstly, my English has still to improve; secondly, it is very normal you do not understand.
The Buddha did repeat and repeat and repeat in the Prajnaparamita sutras, He knew the teachings are much too tough for us all.
I reply this mail, because the questions are very much dharma-involved.
Thank you all for not being choosy with my English.
[quote=“Buddhism”][quote=“adikarmika”]
So how do you explain that the Mahayana sutras were not compiled at at the time of the First Council?[/quote]
Mahayana Sutras were compiled right after the 500 sravaka First Council had completed the Four Agamas; when the excluded enlightened bodhisattvas heard the context of the Four Agamas, they were so disappointed that the core essence of the Buddhahood-Way cultivation was not recorded at all by those unenlightened sravaka, who did not comprehend the profound and complex content that the Buddha had taught, they simply noted down brokenly here and there with some terms only. [/quote]
A convenient story repeated by those who want us to believe in the Mahayana sutras because they are supposed to record the utterances of an enlightened being, and not on account of the merit of the contents the sutras themselves.
Unfortunately, there is no evidence whatsoever to support such a story, which is why no historian of India with an academic reputation to uphold as ever taken it seriously.
When the disciples followed the Buddha’s teachings to learn the Four Noble Truths of no-self, practice tranquility and insight [samatha and vipassana], eliminate self-view and self-attachment, the Liberation –Way practitioners (Hinayana) became doubtful and fearful that if they indeed would eliminate the body and mind, then they would be vanishing to utter nil. The Buddha taught the Liberation-Way practitioners that you would have nothing left in the three realms after your death (enter remainderless nirvana), but your Alaya vijnana would still exist beyond the three realms, without “you” per se.
When the Buddhahood-Way practitioners (Mahayana), also known as bodhisattvas, transcend the three realms, they know the reason why and how, whereas people on Hinayana do not nor do they need to know the reason why, because they will not be reborn in the three realms again. When bodhisattvas transcend the three realms, they also want to know, for benefiting sentient beings, what the three realms and twenty-eight heavens are like and how do they form; people on Hinayana need not to know. For this reason, it is also of vital importance for the Mahayana practitioners to get enlightened, thereby their prajna wisdom would be initiated and would enable them to understand the Budhha’s teachings in the Sutras; most importantly, bodhisattvas will pass down the Dharma lineage and benefit sentient beings for measureless eons.
In the “Lotus Sutra,” the Buddha reiterated his wish to have all disciples to take the Buddhahood-Way; before entering nirvana, sound-hearer arhats (sravaka) and solitary realizer (pratyekabuddha) still could have changed their mind to follow the Mahayana path.
Glossary:
Sravaka: Sound-hearer, the Buddha’s disciple of Hinayana who had directly heard His teachings, realized the Four Noble Truths of the Liberation-Way and eliminated both delusions of view and attachment
Pratyekabuddha: Solitary-realizer, the one who has realized the Liberation-Way and eliminated both delusions of view and attachment by themselves through observing the twelve links of dependent arising
Remainderless nirvana: The state of an arhat who has actually realized the Liberation-Way and passed away, with no more rebirth. From another aspect, it is a state of Tathagatagarbha [the eighth vijnana/Alaya vijnana] existing alone without the other seven vijnanas.
[quote=“Buddhism”]When the disciples followed the Buddha’s teachings to learn the Four Noble Truths of no-self, practice tranquility and insight [samatha and vipassana], eliminate self-view and self-attachment, the Liberation –Way practitioners (Hinayana) became doubtful and fearful that if they indeed would eliminate the body and mind, then they would be vanishing to utter nil. The Buddha taught the Liberation-Way practitioners that you would have nothing left in the three realms after your death (enter remainderless nirvana), but your Alaya vijnana would still exist beyond the three realms, without “you” per se.
…[/quote]
Again, I ask: how is the ālaya-vijñāna different from the Hindu notion of the ātman?
If it is not a kind of self that attains mokṣa, what is it?
It’s just my own personal, unenlightened opinion, but I’ve always differentiated between Buddhism and other religious systems on the basis of anātman/ātman.
Buddhists say there is no real self, soul or ātman. (According to the Madhyamaka school, there isn’t any real enlightenment, either).
Hindus strive to liberate their permanent, independently existing, ātman (soul) from cyclic existence.
Buddhists transcend cyclic existence when they realize that there is no permanent, independently existent, self-sufficient soul that is subject to cyclic existence.
Whether adherents practice celibacy, monogamy, or engage in multi-partner orgies is not particularly relevant, since it doesn’t disqualifiy them from being a Buddhist or Hindu.
As I said, it’s just my understanding, and I don’t claim to be an expert.
I won’t deny anyone the right to call him or herself a Buddhist, Hindu, Druid, Christian/Buddhist, athiest, or anything, regardless of what I think.
Why are you so militant about not accepting Tibetan Buddhists as Buddhists?
What is your problem?
What do really hope to achieve?
I realise the above comments belong on the other thread, and you can respond to them there, if you like.
Or you can ignore them.
[quote=“Buddhism”]
Indeed, this was what I have learned as well,
…Took seven steps and raised his right arm and said something like,“I am the unique honorable self.”
This is very meaningful to all Buddhists.[/quote]
I am confused here. Were there two Buddha in the history? The one we know in India was a Prince with lavish life who lost interest in regular living after seeing sufferings of his people and left everything, went away to meditate to find answers for sufferings; at the end realized sufferings are unavoidable and its a part of life which everyone should understand.
Whats said here is completely new to me. Probably there was another “Made in China” Buddha. Anyways, good to know that his mother gave birth to a grownup man!
Yes, these are good questions.
- “Hindus strive to liberate their permanent, independently existing, ātman (soul) from cyclic existence.”
To my understanding, this sentence is illogical; as being “independently existing,” there is no need to be liberated anymore; unless you wished to express some other idea?
From Hindus statement, among others are Atman (Vedanta, Purusha) and Brahman, the level of the yogi’s personal cultivation - atman (soul) is purely based on the Manas (the seventh vijnana) and the mind consciousness (the sixth vijnana) which is still within the scope of the Three Realms; the mental entity of the Hindu idea Atman (soul) or Brahman is not yet the eighth vijnana (Alaya vijnana) of Buddhism. This question was raised by the Buddha’s disciples already. (the Middle Length Agama, Vol. 24)
-
“Why are you so militant about not accepting Tibetan Buddhists as Buddhists?
What is your problem? What do really hope to achieve?”
For example, if you were the only one who could pilot a Aika salvation plane, you became extremely famous and well known. One day you found out in the neighboring country, people were gathering to meet the “Aika pilot” and the salvation plane. You saw their Aika pilot, using your name, abusing females and collecting money and showing a hardboard made plane. People there do not know any better, because Aika pilot is so well known and trusted. Worst of all, the plane could not take off at all. It is a matter of fairness and justice.
Also from the viewpoint of Buddhism, perhaps you may have already known, the rule of cause and effect, anyone who acts under the guise of Buddhism would bear the most severe retribution after passing away. Followers would be attracted to come due to the term “Buddhism.” And Buddhism should have the teachings of attaining enlightenment and Buddhahood, which consists of the transmundane wisdom. On the other hand, Tibetan teachings are all worldly activities as any society clubs or unions, but they coated everything with Buddhist terms. The worst part is that its central teaching focuses on “sexual pleasure,” but they would never announce the truth to the public, thereby guiding all the lamas and their followers into endless transmigrations. Do you know they could not be humankind anymore in their near future transmigrations?
We are in this desire-realm, full of emotions and desires. That is also why Tibetan “Buddhism” is so popular, because it matches humans’ longing for superficial vanity, myth, and sex.
Of course everyone can have his/her free choice to enjoy life and daily routines. Mind you, here we are talking about religious cultivation, apart from the normal life enjoyment. Why should someone take vows in a religion and still secretly going on with normal life enjoyment?
If you try to see this issue from an objective viewpoint, this is a very serious matter not only now, but would also influence many people in the future.
What do you think I can get from all these writings? More rolling eyes and shaking heads certainly! -
I am using the whole Buddhist canon “Tripitaka,” it is obtainable in CD rom, Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association (CBETA), but a Chinese version. (I reply to your query in the other thread, I could not locate your post any more.) The key issue here is not the publishing company or translation work, it is the right knowledge one has to have to understand Sutras. That is also why the fundamental build up of Buddhist-knowing is extremely important.
Another question is also very important, the reply will come later.
[quote=“Buddhism”]
“Hindus strive to liberate their permanent, independently existing, ātman (soul) from cyclic existence.”
To my understanding, this sentence is illogical; as being “independently existing,” there is no need to be liberated anymore; unless you wished to express some other idea?[/quote]
Nothing illogical at all.
Permanent in this context means static, unchanging and eternal.
This is the Hindu notion of the self that is rejected by Buddhists.
The Buddhist self is a product of causes and conditions.
In other words, it is dependent on causes and conditions.
(Or, according the the Madhamaka school, it is dependent on a designating consciousness.)
Since it is believed to be eternal, the Hindu ātman is not a product of causes and conditions.
It does not depend upon anything else in order to exist.
My point was that your ālaya-vijñāna also seems to be similarly independently existent.
It does not seem like the conventional “stream of consciousness” notion in Buddhism, where all conscious states arise and fall in dependence on causes and conditions.
I ask again: how is your liberated ālaya-vijñāna different from the Hindu notion of the soul.
You criticise others for not being orthodox, yet do not explain the apparent heterodoxy of your position.
[quote=“Buddhism”]
2. “Why are you so militant about not accepting Tibetan Buddhists as Buddhists?
What is your problem? What do really hope to achieve?”
For example, if you were the only one who could pilot a Aika salvation plane, you became extremely famous and well known. One day you found out in the neighboring country, people were gathering to meet the “Aika pilot” and the salvation plane. You saw their Aika pilot, using your name, abusing females and collecting money and showing a hardboard made plane. People there do not know any better, because Aika pilot is so well known and trusted. Worst of all, the plane could not take off at all. It is a matter of fairness and justice. [/quote]
Not a very good analogy.
We can all see whether a plane flies or not.
But spiritual progress…?
Who can see it?
Is there any evidence that such a thing even exists?
Speaking of evidence, convince me that the Zhengjue salvation plane flies and is not a fake.
Point out someone who has flown it to enlightenment.
And convince me that Tibetan lamas suffer “the most severe retribution after they pass away”.
Evidence …?
And even if, purely hypothetically of course, your analogy were accurate, saying Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism is like saying the whole pharmaceutical industry is a fraud just because there are a few companies selling fake pills on the internet.
[quote=“Buddhism”]
Of course everyone can have his/her free choice to enjoy life and daily routines. Mind you, here we are talking about religious cultivation, apart from the normal life enjoyment. Why should someone take vows in a religion and still secretly going on with normal life enjoyment?
If you try to see this issue from an objective viewpoint, this is a very serious matter not only now, but would also influence many people in the future.
What do you think I can get from all these writings? More rolling eyes and shaking heads certainly![/quote]
You ask us to to take an objective view of the situation.
But by saying that all Tibetan lamas are like Kalu Rinpoche, how is your own view objective?
Seems extremely jaundiced, to say the least.
[quote=“Buddhism”]
3. I am using the whole Buddhist canon “Tripitaka,” it is obtainable in CD rom, Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association (CBETA), but a Chinese version. (I reply to your query in the other thread, I could not locate your post any more.) The key issue here is not the publishing company or translation work, it is the right knowledge one has to have to understand Sutras. That is also why the fundamental build up of Buddhist-knowing is extremely important.[/quote]
I am not concerned about who publishes your scriptures.
I just thought your sect may have had taken your philosophical position from certain sūtras in particular.
Buddhist sūtras sometimes contradict each other, you know.
This “emptiness” question is extremely important.
“I would tolerate if one grasp self-view as huge as Sumeru mountain, I would not allow one hold emptiness view even as thin as one sixteenth of an single hair,” the Buddha stated in the “Unsurpassed Sutra” Vol. 1 (the original text is much longer, here is the extracted gist)
Buddhism teachings cannot stay away from the worldly logic, if the essence of Buddhism is pure “emptiness,” how did the Buddha attain His Buddhahood? In addition, what do we need the Buddha to tell us about? We shall all face utter emptiness, then we would be exactly the same as doggies and cats; they do not have to learn “emptiness” and why should we bother to study the nothingness? Moreover, the rule of cause-and-effect and the unceasing transmigration would be accordingly invalid since all would turn into emptiness.
The Hinayana practitioners will contemplate on the “worldly matters” as of conditional arising and conditional cessation; in this way, they realize the emptiness “manifestation of the mundane world in the three realms.” Therefore, they confirm the emptiness of the impermanent “ego of the perceptive mind” and actually realize that the conscious mind is impermanent and thus empty. This is called the “emptiness-appearance” of all dharmas in the mundane world during our periodic births-and-deaths; while simultaneously there is the Alaya vijnana sustaining every periodic births-and-deaths in the three realms, thereby transmigrating to the next life by the karma force after death.
The Alaya vijnana is without any form or appearance, but it does have its own functional distinctions beyond the three realms. It seems empty in this material world, yet, it possesses its own function in every sentient being’s life, so it possesses its “emptiness-nature.” The Liberation-Way (Hinayana) saints do not comprehend or realize the “emptiness-nature” of the true reality in all dharmas.
Please check the Sutra:
“Sūtra on the Past Vows of Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva” (地藏菩薩本願經)
This is one of the most popular Sutras among the Chinese Buddhists.There are a total of thirteen chapters, which are divided into three sections.
In Chapter 3 (觀眾生業緣品第三) : If there are sentient beings who should randomly engage in sex within the temples…., or pretend to be sangha, but in their mind they are not, they fool the public to have a lofty life and enjoy the offerings, violating precepts and committing evil deeds, people who have committed these sorts of wrongdongs shall fall to unremitting hell undergo continuous suffering without a moment’s pause, from where after thousands and millions of measureless eons they would still not be able to be freed.
[quote=“Buddhism”][quote=“adikarmika”]
And convince me that Tibetan lamas suffer “the most severe retribution after they pass away”.
Evidence …?
[/quote]
Please check the Sutra:
“Sūtra on the Past Vows of Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva” (地藏菩薩本願經)
This is one of the most popular Sutras among the Chinese Buddhists.There are a total of thirteen chapters, which are divided into three sections.
In Chapter 3 (觀眾生業緣品第三) : If there are sentient beings who should randomly engage in sex within the temples…., or pretend to be sangha, but in their mind they are not, they fool the public to have a lofty life and enjoy the offerings, violating precepts and committing evil deeds, people who have committed these sorts of wrongdongs shall fall to unremitting hell undergo continuous suffering without a moment’s pause, from where after thousands and millions of measureless eons they would still not be able to be freed.[/quote]
What your “evidence” suggests is that there was once a group of monks who thought they were holier (and therefore more deserving of alms) than another group.
So they composed “The Sūtra on the Past Vows of Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva” in order to point out how evil and degenerate (and underserving of alms) the other group was.
The bit about filial piety (which you have not quoted (T13n0412_p0779c24 - 5 : 不孝父母， … 當墮無間地獄)) shows a Confucian influence and suggests that it may have been composed by in China.
Moreover, for what it’s worth, Chinese Wikipedia also states that:
因為其源流不明，在明朝之後才被收入大藏經，有部份佛教學者懷疑它並非由印度傳入，而是在中國所寫作。
“On account of the fact that the source of the dissemination of this [sutra] is not clear, and that it was included in the Tripitaka (i.e., the canon) only after the Ming dynasty, some scholars of Buddhism suspect that it is not really translated from an Indian source, but was composed in China.”
(At least the tantras were translated from an original Sanskrit or Apabhramsha source, so Tibetans can, to some extent, be excused for thinking they were taught by the Buddha.)
I think you missed my point about “evidence”
There is of course, no “evidence” that Tibetan lamas are destined for hell.
Nobody in this day and age considers citation from religious scriptures as evidence for anything other than what a certain group of people once thought.
You don’t believe in it yourself.
Otherwise why would you be risking eternal damnation for slandering the samgha?
(T13n0412_p0779c26-7 毀謗三寶，… 亦當墮於無間地獄，)
Although you give the appearance of some sort of fundamentalist Mahayana sect, there are just too many inconsistancies in your position.
Isn’t it time you admitted that the purpose of you and your organisation is to further the political aims of the PRC through anti-Tibetan Buddhism propaganda, since it is mainly through Buddhism that Tibetans gain so much foreign sympathy for their cause?
BTW, I could make little sense of your post about alaya-vijnana, but never mind, I’ll consult some other sources.
This thread is titled “The Bodhi Way,” so the discussions here should provide the info to the True Reality. The Buddha did assure us that every sentient being has the potential to cultivate to see the Truth, and He did pass down the dharma-gates (practice methods); the rest is left to us, if we are indeed the blessed ones.
The essential teachings here are of Chan School (禪宗). As our ancient Chan Buddhist patriarchs oftentimes stated, “I point with my finger to show you the moon up there, you should grasp the moon (The Truth), not my finger!” The chart to the Treasure Island is never the treasure itself, so all the spoken words and explanations cannot be the Truth itself, but they lead to the Truth.
In a way, we have been used to the daily routine of going-on living, so an actual Buddhist cultivation is a sort of swim against the life enjoyment. In Buddhism, we have to use terms to express certain meanings or conditions to simplify the process, because all terms will be repeatedly coming into use in the future.
Just like we have the windscreen wiper to remove the rain in order to see the view clearer, the Buddhist cultivation methods have the same of that to tranquil our mind first, thereby our mind would be able to function as a zoom lens to sensitively observe within ourselves through our conscious mind, with the Buddha’s help can a Buddha’s follower then connect, in sudden enlightenment, with the prajna [transmundane wisdom] and realize the True Reality – Alaya vijnana, provided that we ought to have the right view regarding Alaya vijnana.
So the second round of the dharma transmission, during which the Buddha expounded the Prajna Paramita Sutras (the Diamond Sutra, the Heart Sutra, etc.); all are subject to the descriptions and characteristics of the Alaya vijnana.
A Buddhist cultivator would automatically hold precepts and restrain him/herself from indulging in sensual and desirous life style in order to facilitate his/her clear and pure mind. As such, a cultivator should properly know what the five aggregates (form, sensation, perception, formation and vijnana), the eight vijnanas, twelve sense-fields, and eighteen sense-realms are in his/her body. These are the basic teachings of the first round of the dharma transmission, without the fundamental knowledge one will not be able to go further to the second round of the dharma transmission.
After years of cultivating Buddhism, one would realize that many unanswered questions we have had since childhood can gradually get answers. Here, I try my best to give some superficial directions of the practices.
Why are some people so lucky and rich all the time, but not me? How does it work with love at first sight? How come I was born in this family but not others?
What shall happen after death, and how does the transmigration process work?
The human population seems ever growing, is there truly a doom day for us?
Once we manage to have a zoom lens mind to observe matters into the original of a cause, then we will know the whys and even be able to prevent bad effects to happen. In other words, our lives will not be dragged by our karma force which we have been accumulating through countless lives due to ill-informed of the true reality (inherent ignorance).
How did the Buddha teach us to polish our zoom lens mind then?
Obviously, we have to dig inwardly; we have to analyze “what (how) am I?”
What is the composition of a person? As “I” refer to a physical body (tangible part, the four great elements) and the mind (intangible part). The tangible part is the form-aggregate; the intangible parts are the rest of other four aggregates.
Glossary:
Vijnana: A mind-entity which can discern the difference of the objects perceived. Discernment is its intrinsic nature.
Four great elements: The four fundamental elements to form a physical world, i.e., earth, water, fire, and wind elements
Five aggregates: The five aggregates to form a living sentient being, namely, form-aggregate, sensation-aggregate, perception-aggregate, formation-aggregate, and vijnana-aggregate