"At that time the four assemblies of Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, and Upasikas of overweening pride who had ridiculed him and named him Never-Slighting saw that he had gained great powers of spiritual penetrations, the power of the eloquence of delight in speech, and the power of great wholesome silence. Hearing what he said, they faithfully submitted to him and followed him.
.."Great Strength, what do you think? At that time, could the Bodhisattva Never-Slighting have been anyone else? He was none other than myself!
Had I not in former lives received, upheld, read, and recited this Sutra and explained it to others, I would not have been able to gain anuttarasamyaksambodhi so quickly. Because in the presence of former Buddhas I received, upheld, read, and recited this Sutra and explained it to others, I quickly gained anuttarasamyaksambodhi.
"Great Strength, because at that time the four assemblies of Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, and Upasikas hatefully reviled me,
for two hundred kotis of eons they did not encounter a Buddha or hear the Dharma or meet the Sangha. For a thousand eons they suffered great torment in the Avici Hell. Having received their punishment, they once again encountered Never-Slighting Bodhisattva, who taught and transformed them to anuttarasamyaksambodhi.
"Great Strength, what do you think? At that time could the four assemblies who constantly slighted this Bodhisattva have been anyone else? They were just Bhadrapala Bodhisattva and the five hundred Bodhisattvas in this assembly, Lion Moon and the five hundred Bhikshus, and Sugatachetana and the five hundred Upasakas, all of whom are irreversible from anuttarasamyaksambodhi.
- Excerpt from Lotus Sutra, Chapter 20: Never-Slighting Bodhisattva
I have a doubt on the highlighted and bold phrase: Didn't those who reviled the Never-Slighting Bodhisattva follow him in the end? Couldn't this be considered as sincere repentance already?
Why did they have to suffer the terrible fate of not being able to hear the Dharmma or meet any Buddha for such a long time?
Why did they also have to suffer in Avici hell?
Is there anyone who can enlighten me on the above doubts?
Originally posted by Spnw07:I have a doubt on the highlighted and bold phrase: Didn't those who reviled the Never-Slighting Bodhisattva follow him in the end? Couldn't this be considered as sincere repentance already?
Why did they have to suffer the terrible fate of not being able to hear the Dharmma or meet any Buddha for such a long time?
Why did they also have to suffer in Avici hell?
i heard those 4th level Formless realms devas, when their 84000 kalpas are up, they also slander the Buddha and they straight away fall to Avici.
they thought they attained nirvana, but actually, it's not Buddha who taught the wrong nirvana, but because, they cultivated wrongly.
have u ever have this "relative" experience when u say something bad to a teacher or master or monk. and that slandering someone especially to a good master, is a very very uncomfortable thing to do. that very uncomfortable feeling can last for a very very long time. see inward, and u'll roughly get the idea.
/\
Originally posted by sinweiy:
i heard those 4th level Formless realms devas, when their 84000 kalpas are up, they also slander the Buddha and they straight away fall to Avici.they thought they attained nirvana, but actually, it's not Buddha who taught the wrong nirvana, but because, they cultivated wrongly.
have u ever have this "relative" experience when u say something bad to a teacher or master or monk. and that slandering someone especially to a good master, is a very very uncomfortable thing to do. that very uncomfortable feeling can last for a very very long time. see inward, and u'll roughly get the idea.
/\
I think the important point to establish here is, what is considered 'slandering'. The above example provided by the sutra is indeed 'slandering' without a doubt. There is even physical violence on the part of the slanderers as well.
I had asked about repentance, because this is something that the Buddhist teachings would often emphasise.
However, from the sutra, it seems to suggest repentance is useless, or maybe futile?
Originally posted by Spnw07:I think the important point to establish here is, what is considered 'slandering'. The above example provided by the sutra is indeed 'slandering' without a doubt. There is even physical violence on the part of the slanderers as well.
I had asked about repentance, because this is something that the Buddhist teachings would often emphasise.
However, from the sutra, it seems to suggest repentance is useless, or maybe futile?
sorry, which statement says that they truely repented?
i think in terms of repentence, it do depends on one's true sincerity.
One good example is Vasubandhu (bodhisattva).
Vasubandhu (Bodhisattva) (fl. 4th cent. AD)
The second of three sons, born in Purusapura (Peshwar), India, into the Kausika family of Indian Brahmins. All three sons were called Vasubandhu and all three became Buddhist Bhikshus. His older brother was known as Asanga and his younger brother as Virincivatsa. He is known simply as Vasubandhu. In his youth he adhered to the Hinayana teachings of the Sautrantika School and wrote the Abhidharmakosa, perhaps the most well-known of all treatises on the Abhidharma. He was converted to the Mahayana by his older brother the Bodhisattva Asanga. After his conversion, he wrote many celebrated works on the Consciousness-Only School of the Mahayana, including the Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only and the Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only.
VASUBANDHU'S CONVERSION
"Asanga, teacher of the Law [Dharma], saw that his younger brother was endowed with an intelligence surpassing that of others, his knowledge being deep and wide, and himself well-versed in esoteric and exoteric doctrines. He was afraid that the latter might compose a sastra and crush the Mahayana. He was living then in the land of the Hero (Purusa-pura) and sent a messenger to Vasubandhu in Ayodhya with the following message: "I am seriously ill at present. You had better attend to me quickly." Vasubandhu followed the messenger to his native land, saw his brother and inquired what was the cause of his illness. He answered: "I have now a serious disease of the heart, which arose on account of you." Vasubandhu again asked: "Why do you say on account of me?" He answered: "You dot no believe in the Mahayana and are always attacking and discrediting it. For this wickedness you will be sure to sink forever in a miserable Life. I am now grieved and troubled for your sake to such an extent that my life will no long survive. On hearing this Vasubandhu was surprised and alarmed and asked his brother to expound the Mahayana for him. He then gave him a concise explanation of the essential principles of the Mahayana. Thereupon the Teacher of the Law (Vasubandhu), who was possessed of clear intelligence and especially of deep insight, became at once convinced that the truth of the Mahayana excelled even that of the Hinayana.
"He then fully investigated, under his brother, the principles of the Mahayana. Soon after he became as thoroughly acquainted with the whole as his brother was. When its meaning was already clear to him, he would meditate on it. From the beginning to the end everything was perfectly in accordance with the truth, there being nothing contradictory to it. For the first time he realized that the Hinayana was wrong and the Mahayana right. If there were no Mahayana, then (he thought) there would be no path (marga) and no fruition (phala) of the Tri-yana [Three Vehicles]. Since he formerly did harm by speaking ill of the Mahayana, in which he then Bodhisattva Vasubandhu
had no faith, he was now afraid that he might fall into a miserable life on account of that wickedness. He deeply reproached himself and earnestly repented of his previous fault. He approached his brother and confessed his error, saying: 'I now desire to make a confession. I do not know by what means I can be pardoned for my former slander.' He said (further): 'I formerly did harm speaking ill (of the truth) by means of my tongue. I will now cut out my tongue in order to atone for my crime.' His brother answered: 'Even if you cut out your tongue a thousand times, you cannot wipe out your crime. If you really want to wipe out your crime, you must find some other means.' Thereupon he asked his brother to explain the means of wiping out the offence. The latter said: 'Your tongue was able to speak very skillfully and effectively against the Mahayana, and thus discredit it. If you want to wipe out your offence, you must now propound the Mahayana equally skillfully and effectively.'" (The Life of Vasubandhu, J. Takakusu, tr., pp. 290-292)
A eulogy says:
It is difficult to practice two teachings at once.
He brought forth the secret meanings of the Compassion ate Sage.
In awesome Shastras like piled up clouds,
Explaining the untransmitted doctrine,
Revealing the Consciousness-Only,
complete in both the Nature and Appearance Schools.
An eternal Dharma lamp,
He lights a million generations.
(VBS #20, p. 2)
another good example is Master Yin Guang. He also used to slander Pureland teaching. But look at Him, He became the 13th PL patriarch! but old Master Chin Kung thinks that, this is just an act/display of teaching people, as Master Yin Guang is the emanate of Great Strength Bodhisattva.
Master Chin Kung also don't use to believe in PL method.
/\
Originally posted by sinweiy:
sorry, which statement says that they truely repented?i think in terms of repentence, it do depends on one's true sincerity.
One good example is Vasubandhu (bodhisattva).
another good example is Master Yin Guang. He also used to slander Pureland teaching. But look at Him, He became the 13th PL patriarch! but old Master Chin Kung thinks that, this is just an act/display of teaching people, as Master Yin Guang is the emanate of Great Strength Bodhisattva.
Master Chin Kung also don't use to believe in PL method./\
"At that time the four assemblies of Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, and Upasikas of overweening pride who had ridiculed him and named him Never-Slighting saw that he had gained great powers of spiritual penetrations, the power of the eloquence of delight in speech, and the power of great wholesome silence. Hearing what he said, they faithfully submitted to him and followed him".
If I say I have submitted to and follow Master Chin Kung, obviously it implies I have to sincerely repent all my evil ways and follow the teachings of Master Chin Kung now or as soon as possible.
Likewise, the four assemblies of the Buddhist community decided in the end to faithfully submit to and follow Never-Slighting Bodhisattva.
I don't think one can claim to be submitting and following a Master if he/she does not intend to wholeheartedly repent on the spot or later on. It just doesn't make sense.
Yup, I do know about the above two examples. However, please note that, these people began with great intelligence and character before they started to eventually practise the Pureland Dharma Door.
How many of us are even near Vasubandhu (世亲��), Master Yin Guang（�光法师） or Master Jing Kong (净空法师） in intelligence and character before or after they become known as Pureland practitioners?
Originally posted by Spnw07:"At that time the four assemblies of Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, and Upasikas of overweening pride who had ridiculed him and named him Never-Slighting saw that he had gained great powers of spiritual penetrations, the power of the eloquence of delight in speech, and the power of great wholesome silence. Hearing what he said, they faithfully submitted to him and followed him".
If I say I have submitted to and follow Master Chin Kung, obviously it implies I have to sincerely repent all my evil ways and follow the teachings of Master Chin Kung now or as soon as possible.
Likewise, the four assemblies of the Buddhist community decided in the end to faithfully submit to and follow Never-Slighting Bodhisattva.
I don't think one can claim to be submitting and following a Master if he/she does not intend to wholeheartedly repent on the spot or later on. It just doesn't make sense.
but that's After the "punishment" already no? in between the "punishment" period, they might not have notice or realise to repent, i think.
Yup, I do know about the above two examples. However, please note that, these people began with great intelligence and character before they started to eventually practise the Pureland Dharma Door.
How many of us are even near Vasubandhu (世亲��), Master Yin Guang（�光法师） or Master Jing Kong (净空法师） in intelligence and character before or after they become known as Pureland practitioners?
these people showed that true repentence do work, is what i mean. u don't have to be learnt like them to repent sincerely.
/\
Originally posted by sinweiy:
these people showed that true repentence do work, is what i mean. u don't have to be learnt like them to repent sincerely.
/\
I think it takes certain amount or level of å–„æ ¹ (spiritual merits or cultivation) for any one to be able to repent sincerly and not half-heartedly. To repent sincerly and not repeat the same mistake again. It is not something that can be easily willed by all. For if it is, why would 3 evil realms exist? Lack of will and lack of understanding are both common but yet critical flaws leading to unhappy rebirths.
I'm referring to myself, saying that I don't seem to have the necessary good merits in me to repent sincerely. My repentence at present, is at most, done half-heartedly and fearfully.
From what I have heard or read so far, nearly all Masters seem to think or agree that fear of evil karma works to help a person repent sincerely, and I also gather the same idea from how Ksitgarbha Bodhisattva describes the conditions of hell in details. Maybe he does not intend to frighten us, for to him, these are facts witnessed personally by him. But the fact is, fear is instilled.
It is true, no doubt in my opinion, that the 3 evil realms exist for many of us (who are neither very kind and tolerant nor very unscrupulous and intolerant at the same time) after our physical death. However, what would eventually happen to a person if he becomes too fearful of evil karma to the extent that he becomes emotionally disturbed or unstable before he even succeeds in changing himself?
Fear is a double-edged sword, it can lead one to do good, to change one's evil ways, but there is another possible outcome: he/she becomes very emotionally disturbed to the extent that he exhausts himself in the process and is unable/unwilling to listen in to the Dharma anymore. That would be a very sad unintended outcome of learning about the 3 evil realms mentioned in Buddhist teachings.
You can instil fear in a person to force him to change for the good, but likewise due to differering circumstances experienced by each individual, not all are able to meet those who instil fear for the altruistic purpose of teaching what is truly good to learn and follow. Furthermore, if a fellow Buddhist or any kind person can instil fear to 'motivate' a person to repent, then fear would work for any one who uses it to 'motivate' a person to be shameless and unfeeling in doing evil as well.
Hence I try not to mention hells or any karmic punishments in front of Buddhists or layman, be it beginners or not, whenever possible. Except for cases that involves direct killing or indirect killing that would cause the loss of many lives at a particular moment or over a lifetime.
For example, I have two family members who likes to eat crabs. We all know crabs are slaughtered live before being cooked, and some, directly cooked over hot fire and steam. This is indirect killing in a way, though one does not get to see which crab is slaughtered and how it is being slaughtered. But he/she knows that a living crab is being slaughtered the moment any customer orders for crabs. And the negative karma would be accumulate further if one were to set aside a specific time in a year for such eating joys and/or further recommends or guides another new person to join in. This is regardless of how many times in year. Karma is accumulative.
Their argument is that the crabs would be slaughtered and eaten by others anyway, so the placing in the queue to eat is not important. I disagreed, explaining karma to them, as they are still inclined towards Buddhism for the moment. But to date, they have only progressed from direct killing to eating out at live seafood restaurants.
Seeing how hard it is to repent and change completely for others and myself, I start to realise that perhaps, all is fated, even though there may be chances in future rebirths.
I'm grateful that I have been able to hear of the Amitabha Pureland's dharma door, so that we can help one another concentrate on more positive and hopeful aspects of Buddhist teachings. Even though it sounds like escapism at the core to many.