NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments (spinoff)
-
This is a spinoff from Is God A Thing?
AEN proposed that I read NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments since he cannot provide relevant points in that thread anymore (implied.)
So we shall examine "NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments" and see exactly what it says and whether AEN is right in saying that it addresses the issues raised in Is God a Thing?
Those who wants to join in this thread, please read NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments and then comment.
CLICK HERE FOR LINK -
I don't think I implied thatOriginally posted by casino_king:AEN proposed that I read NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments since he cannot provide relevant points in that thread anymore (implied.)
But let's continue discussing here then. -
Gd morning everyone & AENOriginally posted by An Eternal Now:I don't think I implied that
But let's continue discussing here then.
,
Obviously MR.CASINO 's learning process has gone 'haywire' liao.Pls do help him
Hav a nice day -
Buddha said that Buddhist must learn. You are totally most unhelpful and non Buddhist if I may say so.Originally posted by neutral_onliner:Gd morning everyone & AEN ,
Obviously MR.CASINO 's learning process has gone 'haywire' liao.Pls do help him
Hav a nice day -
My initial reading is that Buddha does not reject "existence."
-
What Buddha taught was, Dependant Origination & Emptiness.Originally posted by casino_king:My initial reading is that Buddha does not reject "existence."
* But how is it thoroughly known? *
* By seeing dependent origination! *
The [Buddha], best among knowers of reality, also said that what is dependently born is unborn.
(And this realization of emptiness is gained by first directly seeing dependent origination: The real nature of everything is seen by realizing that everything is dependently arisen. Everything is empty of inherent existence because dependently arisen.)
Because it is dependant origination, therefore unborn, 'empty'. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
correct.
]My initial reading is that Buddha does not reject "existence."[/b]
hence it's called:
everything is yuan1 qi3 (exist dependent on something else, not independent);
xing1 kong1 (the nature of everything is voidness, as they are always changing). the key is the inside nature is kong, not the outside.Here is a useful maxim to remember the core concept of Sunyata by:
All teachings in the Tripitaka (Buddhist Canon) are tools to induce sentient beings to sever attachment. To those attached to Emptiness, Buddha Sakyamuni taught Existence to break that grasp. To those attached to Existence, He taught Emptiness so as to loosen that grasp. To those grasping at both Emptiness and Existence, He taught "neither Emptiness nor Existence" to break that grasp. Lastly, to those grasping at "neither Emptiness nor Existence," He taught both Emptiness and Existence to break that attachment. (1)
Sunyata Affirms the Existence of Existence;
Sunyata Negates the Self-nature of Existence.
In short, the purpose is to draw all sentient beings away from attachments. That is the Buddhist teaching of salvation. There is no other way to return to the source [the Mind], though there are many different expedient methods. We Buddhist students and practitioners should not become attached to these methods. When thoughts arise in our mind discriminating between what method is right and what method is wrong, that is against the purpose of the Buddhas and is a deviation from the Buddhist path.
For example, when Buddha Sakyamuni taught the Dharma of Emptiness, His message was not that it was the opposite of Existence, but rather that it was Truth and Reality. What are Truth and Reality? Let me quote the T'ien T'ai Patriarch Chih I:
When one dharma is empty, then all dharmas are empty; there is no separate Non-Emptiness. Without Non-Emptiness to contrast with Emptiness, Emptiness itself is unattainable [i.e., does not exist].
Similarly, when Buddha Sakyamuni taught Existence, this was not the opposite of Emptiness, but was rather to say:
When one dharma exists, then all dharmas exist; there is no separate Non-Existence. Without Non-Existence to contrast with Existence, Existence itself is unattainable.
We should understand the true meaning of Emptiness and Existence. Nothing we say about Emptiness or Existence is attainable (i.e., truly valid). And since this is so, why are we still attached to them?
The Great Master Han-Shan thoroughly understood the goal of the Buddhas. In tune with the minds of the Patriarchs, he spread the Dharma (teaching), grasping at neither Emptiness nor Existence, neither Non-Emptiness nor Non-Existence -- thereby manifesting the Middle Way. Thus, he promoted the cultivation of both Zen and Pure Land, pointing to the non-duality of Emptiness and Existence. That teaching is "Wonderful Enlightenment" (see Glossary). http://www.ymba.org/han/hanfrm.htm
/\ -
agreed with you on some level, NO.Originally posted by neutral_onliner:Gd morning everyone & AEN ,
Obviously MR.CASINO 's learning process has gone 'haywire' liao.Pls do help him
Hav a nice day
some people just gotta learn the hard way round.
i never offered my help nor will i ever help. he gotta help himself.
even if i have comments or sharing, it is only for the benefit for everyone and not for a particular individual. -
some people's ego is just so small and he tries so hard to inflate it.
-
It might be empty; inherently empty but that does not mean non existing.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:What Buddha taught was, Dependant Origination & Emptiness.
* But how is it thoroughly known? *
* By seeing dependent origination! *
The [Buddha], best among knowers of reality, also said that what is dependently born is unborn.
(And this realization of emptiness is gained by first directly seeing dependent origination: The real nature of everything is seen by realizing that everything is dependently arisen. Everything is empty of inherent existence because dependently arisen.)
Because it is dependant origination, therefore unborn, 'empty'. -
Originally posted by casino_king:It might be empty; inherently empty but that does not mean non existing.
Anyway where you want to discuss? here or 'Is God A Thing?'? lets be focused. -
Since you posted in both, I respond in both!Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Anyway where you want to discuss? here or 'Is God A Thing?'? lets be focused. -
how can u accuse me of being unhelpful when i'm trying to ask AEN to guide u bk to the right track.Originally posted by casino_king:Buddha said that Buddhist must learn. You are totally most unhelpful and non Buddhist if I may say so. Gd morning everyone & AEN ,
Obviously MR.CASINO 's learning process has gone 'haywire' liao.Pls do help him Hav a nice day -
That makes AEN and not you helpful?Originally posted by neutral_onliner:how can u accuse me of being unhelpful when i'm trying to ask AEN to guide u bk to the right track. Cool
Anyway I am trying to guide AEN... -
Let us clean our lens of perception first. The path of spiritual progress is not as easy as our mind imagine it to be. Understand our self and our own karmic tendencies first. Then, the lens of perception can be cleaner.Originally posted by casino_king:That makes AEN and not you helpful?
Anyway I am trying to guide AEN... -
Please post relevant information if you have anything to contribute to aid everybody's understanding.
-
Longchen is giving advice with true and kind intention... take HeedOriginally posted by longchen:Let us clean our lens of perception first. The path of spiritual progress is not as easy as our mind imagine it to be. Understand our self and our own karmic tendencies first. Then, the lens of perception can be cleaner. -
Hi Casino King,
Normally I don't like to do this... I am reading you 'symbolically via vision' since you want relevant information.
The following is just my interpretation.
You have a belief that you need to obtain accurate information. You feel defensive and that your survival depends on the correct information. I see that the belief is hollow inside... meaning that it is build up to be a strong emotional belief, although the thought/belief is empty or hollow inside. That means when you realise it, it will loses its importance. This is one karmic aspect of yourself.
There is another aspect. This other aspect binds and interwine with the first aspect... complicating your thought processes. This other aspect is your strong need to compare and be better than others. These 2 aspect oscillate in you, seeking for dominance.
These are just my intuitive interpretations of the symbols that i see. I hope it is meaningful to you. -
Hi longchen,
Your kindness is appreciated. You are reading me wrongly. I hardly tell anybody anything, if you read my posts. I ask more questions then I give answers. This is so that the answers does not come from me but comes from within the reader. I cannot claim credit when the reader realises it for himself. He did it himself.
I do give some pointers here and there if I think that the responder needs some prodding. If I think that the responder is stuck.
How can I claim credit when I did not give the answers?
You are reading me wrongly again when you say that I am trying to get accurate information. When I ask the questions it is for the Buddhist to search Buddhist scripture for the answers that I want them to realise for themselves. -
There's very little hope now. The karmic grip is too strong and too unconscious. Perhaps, all is as it is.Originally posted by casino_king:Hi longchen,
Your kindness is appreciated. You are reading me wrongly. I hardly tell anybody anything, if you read my posts. I ask more questions then I give answers. This is so that the answers does not come from me but comes from within the reader. I cannot claim credit when the reader realises it for himself. He did it himself.
I do give some pointers here and there if I think that the responder needs some prodding. If I think that the responder is stuck.
How can I claim credit when I did not give the answers?
You are reading me wrongly again when you say that I am trying to get accurate information. When I ask the questions it is for the Buddhist to search Buddhist scripture for the answers that I want them to realise for themselves.
Time to move on... -
Why complain of the speck that is in the brother's eye when there is a log in your own?Originally posted by longchen:There's very little hope now. The karmic grip is too strong and too unconscious. Perhaps, all is as it is.
Time to move on... -
Look... I am not there yet... but i know it. so 'i' continue to prod along.Originally posted by casino_king:Why complain of the speck that is in the brother's eye when there is a log in your own?
When perception are still viewed with a 'me' interacting with the environment or with 'others'... we are still on the side of the dream (samsara). And even this realisation of no subject-object division is not the end of the road. But 'i' intuitively know it. This is a marker.
As i say, what is ahead is not something our mind can imagine... but from your writing, those who are enlightened or have passed through your stage know that you are not there yet.
Please understand that all this might be a waste of time... but it is hard 'for me' to remain silence and 'xiu shou pang guang'. ..knowing how hard suffering can feel on the side of the dream. -
repeat post
-
think compare to bible, there's like abt 3000++ Theravada scripture and 3000++ Mahayana scripture..we read only like a very small potion of it.
..Buddhist scripture ..
Nargarjuna at first also tot He read all and become very proud. but later He found abt the Avatamsaka Sutra, he become very humble.
that said the Avatamsaka Sutra is jus the summary by Nargarjuna, the actual one is so huge that it need 10 Chiliocosm/cosmo to hold! and Buddha took just 7 days(some said 14) to complete expounding!
can realise how many we miss, so that one can bring down the ego.
/\ -
I appreciate your kindness. You are not me and you have no idea what you are saying when you are talking about me. You only know about yourself and I know about myself.Originally posted by longchen:Look... I am not there yet... but i know it. so 'i' continue to prod along.
When perception are still viewed with a 'me' interacting with the environment or with 'others'... we are still on the side of the dream (samsara). And even this realisation of no subject-object division is not the end of the road. But 'i' intuitively know it. This is a marker.
As i say, what is ahead is not something our mind can imagine... but from your writing, those who are enlightened or have passed through your stage know that you are not there yet.
Please understand that all this might be a waste of time... but it is hard 'for me' to remain silence and 'xiu shou pang guang'. ..knowing how hard suffering can feel on the side of the dream.
What we are all doing here is very simple. It is no point teaching anybody anything. Everybody realises it for themselves.
Those who have gone a bit further help those a little behind by asking the correct questions. These questions are meaningless to people who have no idea what is going on. That is the way it should be.
The one asking the question cannot claim any credit because the one who realises it for himself did the realisation for himself.
What you are doing now is trying to tell people what you know. That is very pointless. Even if people know exactly what you are trying to say, they might not have realised that which you are trying to say.
To sinweiy : That is why we need people who have gone a little further to help those a little behind. There are so much scriptures. Which part is relevant? Which part is superflous? Which part comes first? Which part comes later?
You start by realising "existence" (the seekers.) Existence is empty so you realise "non-existence " (the Buddhist.) Then you realise the non existence of the doctrine of emptiness. When does the doctrine of emptiness itself become empty? Realise that.