NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments (spinoff)
-
wat 4th? see text in blue, it is refering to middle way and only middle way.Originally posted by casino_king:There is a 4th level but you need to understand what the 3rd level is talking about. See verse 2, what is Empty?
Verse Two
First you must reject non-being, the source of all faults. But now hear the argument by which being also is rejected!
(The gradual path: First eliminating nihilism by observing the working of karma , the law of dependent origination; then eliminating realism by realizing the emptiness of all dharmas. Then uniting those two by going beyond the duality dependent origination vs. emptiness. Everything is not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither. Dependent origination and emptiness, the Two Truths, are interdependent, one cannot exist without the other. They are not different, not the same. They are inseparable, non-dual: not two, not one.)
The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana
The duality being vs. non-being
/\ -
Finally after so many days... so the REALITY referred to is "samsara?"Originally posted by sinweiy:The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana
The duality being vs. non-being[/i]
/\ -
wrong rather the oppositeOriginally posted by casino_king:Finally after so many days... so the REALITY referred to is "samsara?"
we r trap in samsara like NEO who is trapped in the matrix b4 he meet Morpheus -
Originally posted by casino_king:
conventional REALITY is samsara.
Finally after so many days... so the REALITY referred to is "samsara?" [/b]
ultimate REALITY is nirvana.
think already mention liao. but ur cup was inverted so the sunlight cannot enter.
another word for 'form' is existence.
/\ -
The opinion of the 60 verses is more valid than yours, wouldn't you say?Originally posted by neutral_onliner:wrong rather the opposite
we r trap in samsara like NEO who is trapped in the matrix b4 he meet Morpheus
"The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana" -
"The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana"Originally posted by sinweiy:conventional REALITY is samsara.
ultimate REALITY is nirvana.
think already mention liao. but ur cup was inverted so the sunlight cannot enter.
another word for 'form' is existence.
/\
Is there Nirvana? What is Nirvana in relation to samsara? -
I might not be around for the next few days... so all the best in your cultivation until we meet again.
-
u mk no sense.Wat i say does not go against the opinion of the 60 verses .i'm just trying to put it in a lay man term for uOriginally posted by casino_king:The opinion of the 60 verses is more valid than yours, wouldn't you say?
"The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana"
To put it simple u,me and everyone of us r now trapped in tis samsara world.An good example is the pple and NEO who r trapped in matrix -
May u & all be happyOriginally posted by casino_king:I might not be around for the next few days... so all the best in your cultivation until we meet again. -
The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana" = non-duality of samsara vs. Nirvana; non-duality of conventional and ultimate; non-duality of samsara and nirvana.Originally posted by casino_king:"The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana"
Is there Nirvana? What is Nirvana in relation to samsara?
Nirvana = emptiness of self nature
samsara = existence of suffering
they are inseparable.
there's actually a 4th level from Tian Tai school...
/\ -
Originally posted by casino_king:
change; conditional; non-ownership.
I might not be around for the next few days... so all the best in your cultivation until we meet again. [/b]
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
or rather Avatamsaka Hua Yen school:
there's actually a 4th level from Tian Tai school...
http://sg.search.yahoo.com/search?p=%E7%90%86%E6%97%A0%E7%A2%8D%E3%80%81%E4%BA%8B%E6%97%A0%E7%A2%8D%E3%80%81%E7%90%86%E4%BA%8B%E6%97%A0%E7%A2%8D%E3%80%81%E4%BA%8B%E4%BA%8B%E6%97%A0%E7%A2%8D&y=All+the+Web&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt
(note : the sequencing is different frm below, but not a big deal)
Ch'eng-kuan discusses the perfect teaching, the teaching of the Hua-yen school in the third section, the division of doctrines. He devides this section into four parts:
I. Non-obstruction in realm of phenomenon;
II. Non-obstruction in realm of noumenon;
III. Non-obstruction in both realm of phenomenon and noumenon;
IV. Total Non-obstruction in ALL realms of phenomena.
..which subsequently became known as the standard formula of the Hua-yen dharmadhaatu doctrine.
According to his explanation, the first one is the dharmadhaatu particularized or phenomenalized into innumerable concrete things. The second one, is the "essential" aspect of the dharmadhaatu which is the foundation of all the manifested phenomena. The third one is the aspect of the dharmadhaatu in which phenomena and noumenon interfuse each other. The fourth dimension of the dharmadhaatu, which teaches basically the twin principle of interrelationship of all phenomena: mutual identification and interpenetration.
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
the chinese text is "shi shi" which literally mean phenomenon phenomenon.
IV. Total Non-obstruction in ALL realms of phenomena.
phenomenon + phenomenon = phenomena.
why there's no "li li" or noumenon noumenon? as there only ONE noumenon.
all the leaves on the tree can only come down to One root. very chim.
illustrate using the father and son analogy:
Remind me,
THERE was an old monk sitting in the room, doing nothing with one of his students standing behind him.
Two of his students, student A and B were arguing about something outside the room, for a while, student A rushing to the room, giving the description of argument to the old monk, and asking "Master, am I right?", the old monk answering "You are right", student A rushing to student B who is outside the room, few minutes later, student B also rushing to the room and giving his opinion about the argument to the old monk, and asking the same question "Master, am I right?", the old monk answering "You are right", student B so happy and leaving the room, in this moment the student behind the old monk asking the old monk with whispering voice "Master, if A is right, B must be wrong, if B is right, A must be wrong, how come they are all (right)?", the old monk answering "You are right too".
WHY? Because the old monk is already in the level of the WHOLE ONE, he can accept all kinds of opinions. As a matter of fact, the old monk can also give negative answers to his students like "You are wrong", it all because that the old monk already surpassed any standpoint and does not have his original nature. "Everything are affirmative, everything are negative", is the "Perfection and Completion" idea of the Hua Yen theory, is also the conclusion of "Existence" and "Emptiness" ecoming "ONE"(Existence equal Emptiness).
When we understand his "ONE", then we might understand the next "In the level of higher dimension, (Everything are one, one is everything) (This is that, that is this) (Big equal small) (Past same as present), everything are not interfere with one another".
/\ -
There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.Originally posted by casino_king:"The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana"
Is there Nirvana? What is Nirvana in relation to samsara?
- Nibbana Sutta -
Hi casino_king,
if you are so keen in finding answer , you shld consult a venerable who is enlightened. Debating here to understand or trying to disprove or prove buddhism teachings...doesnt really helps...
We ( majority of us ) are not qualified to teach or even debate with you dharma teaching. Dharma isnt the same as other religious teachings.
I hope you can find the answers that you want one day. Nevertheless if you have found the answer or haven't find the answers, may you be happy and have peace.
Best regards,
Isis -
In the spirit of Nagarjuna (and further clarified by Chandrakirti):Originally posted by sinweiy:conventional REALITY is samsara.
ultimate REALITY is nirvana.
/\
At the ultimate level, nothing truly exists.
("Nothing" includes "Samsara, Nirvana, everything, nothing")
At the conventional level, anything can exist, only as an illusion.
Therefore at the ultimate level, even "Samsara" and "Nirvana" do not truly exist; and even "conventional" and "ultimate" do not truly exist.
Establishing the view is very importantin the Dharma practice. Therefore it's great if anybody starts to study texts on The Middle Way - Madhyamika (e.g. Nagarjuna's Mula-Madhyamaka-karika, or Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara)
People who are interested could actually attend a very interesting teaching on Madhyamakavatara, led by a Khenpo who is veyr fluent in Mandarin (with Eng translation) and who loves students to hurl him with questions and debate with him. He's giving this teaching on
1 July (Sat) 3-5pm
1 July (Sat) 7.30-9.30pm
2 July (Sun) 2-5 pm
Venue: Karma Choying Kunkyab Ling
Yeo's Building, 2nd Floor
2, Telok Blangah Street 31,
Singapore 108942
For more information, pls visit: http://www.karmachoying.org/event.html -
Wow! Looks like someone should really goOriginally posted by _wanderer_:and who loves students to hurl him with questions and debate with him.
-
btw,
1 July (Sat) 3-5pm
1 July (Sun) 7.30-9.30pm
2 July (Mon) 2-5 pm
---
should be:
1 July (Sat) 3-5pm
1 July (Sat) 7.30-9.30pm
2 July (Sun) 2-5 pm
i have edited for you. -
Originally posted by _wanderer_:
i agree if ultimately it's neither Nirvana nor Samsara. but it's not to be mistaken as nothingness/nihilism.
In the spirit of Nagarjuna (and further clarified by Chandrakirti):
At the ultimate level, nothing truly exists.
("Nothing" includes "Samsara, Nirvana, everything, nothing")
At the conventional level, anything can exist, only as an illusion.
/\ -
as we know ch'an is excellent in sunyata/emptiness.
in ch'an expression of jian shan zi shi shan "seeing the mountain are still mountian".
1st level - normally seeing mountian is mountian.
2nd level - when in meditation, one see mountian is not mountain.
3rd level - when enlightened, seeing mountian is just mountain only. go figure.
http://www.guxiang.com/xueshu/others/guoxue/200105/200105110031.htm
http://sg.search.yahoo.com/search?p=%E8%A7%81%E5%B1%B1%E6%98%AF%E5%B1%B1%E3%80%80%E8%A7%81%E5%B1%B1%E4%B8%8D%E6%98%AF%E5%B1%B1%E3%80%80%E8%A7%81%E5%B1%B1%E5%8F%AA%E6%98%AF%E5%B1%B1&y=All+the+Web&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt
/\ -
At the ultimate level, even "nothing" also does not truly exist.Originally posted by sinweiy:i agree if ultimately it's neither Nirvana nor Samsara. but it's not to be mistaken as nothingness/nihilism.
/\
That's why the viewless view of Madhyamika does not fall into the four extremes of:
(i) existence (sometimes referred to as eternalism)
(ii) non-existence (sometimes referred to as nihilism)
(iii) both existence and non-existence
(iv) neither existence nor non-existence. -
Originally posted by _wanderer_:
indeed, that's the level/"realm" of "jian shan zi shi shan - seeing mountian is JUST mountain" OR shi shi wu ai fa jia (IV) Total Non-obstruction in ALL realms of phenomena.
At the ultimate level, even "nothing" also does not truly exist.
That's why the viewless view of Madhyamika does not fall into the four extremes of:
(i) existence (sometimes referred to as eternalism)
(ii) non-existence (sometimes referred to as nihilism)
(iii) both existence and non-existence
(iv) neither existence nor non-existence.
/\ -
Page 135, Buddhism Plain and Simple:
We've seen that the abiding self or soul we commonly assume we are is an illusion, a figment of the imagination. Perhaps we've also begun to understand that we conceive all the innumerable aspects of the world in the same manner. Rather than see the wind, or waves - or a stream or a cup or a book - as the constant flux that each is, we imagine them to be solid, persisting, separate, unchanging things.
We attribute this "thingness" to them in the same way we attribute selfhood to human beings. Instead of seeing the thoroughgoing motion, flux, and flow of experience, we imagine a vast proliferation of innumerable, separated things. In short, we grant selfhood to whatever we find "out there."
Then we make another error. Just as we conceive of a self and counter this notion with a non-self, so also are we taken in by another set of opposing concepts - existence and non-existence. We get repeatedly caught in this duality, unwilling to see that, like self and not-self, both are phantoms created by consciousness. These concepts (like any concept) simply don't capture Reality.
The Buddha expressed this situation eloquently:
The world...is generally inclined towards two [views]: existence and non-existence. To them who perceives with right wisdom the uprising of the world as it has come to be, the notion of non-existence in the world does not occur... To them who perceive with right wisdom the ceasing of the world as it has come to be, the notion of existence in the world does not occur. -
Wow...good post!Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Page 135, Buddhism Plain and Simple:
We've seen that the abiding self or soul we commonly assume we are is an illusion, a figment of the imagination. Perhaps we've also begun to understand that we conceive all the innumerable aspects of the world in the same manner. Rather than see the wind, or waves - or a stream or a cup or a book - as the constant flux that each is, we imagine them to be solid, persisting, separate, unchanging things.
We attribute this "thingness" to them in the same way we attribute selfhood to human beings. Instead of seeing the thoroughgoing motion, flux, and flow of experience, we imagine a vast proliferation of innumerable, separated things. In short, we grant selfhood to whatever we find "out there."
Then we make another error. Just as we conceive of a self and counter this notion with a non-self, so also are we taken in by another set of opposing concepts - existence and non-existence. We get repeatedly caught in this duality, unwilling to see that, like self and not-self, both are phantoms created by consciousness. These concepts (like any concept) simply don't capture Reality.
The Buddha expressed this situation eloquently:
The world...is generally inclined towards two [views]: existence and non-existence. To them who perceives with right wisdom the uprising of the world as it has come to be, the notion of non-existence in the world does not occur... To them who perceive with right wisdom the ceasing of the world as it has come to be, the notion of existence in the world does not occur.
Most of the time, even when we had profound experiences we keep trying to verify them later. But we forget that the verification process are also conceptual thoughts. 'Think' that all is illusion, we will only see the concept of 'all is illusion'. 'Think' that all is non-existence, we will only see the concept of 'all is non-existence'. Let each moment be the way it is, no verifying and testifying and it is complete.
Conceptual understanding is a major hindrance... both before and after having profound experiences.
Again, easier said than done (for me)
-
Once again anyone who is interested can read tis book...
Buddhism Plain and Simple
Steve Hagen
oso available in libraries