Any Comments On Mr. Xiao Pingshi?
-
Xiao pingshi view is totally too subtle to see his flaws ,especially his own interpretation of Flower Adornment sutra of the Alaya consciousness
When sutra like Flower Adornment sutra ,its actually mentioning the Buddha qualities of the alaya consciousness
I really cannot understand why he still persist in his viewpoint .
Because he is always based on Ven Yinshun "the path to Buddhahood" and Je Tsong Khapa Lam Rim
He cant realised it and start making wrong view unless he humble himself to take the samaya vows to practise Esoteric school of Tangmi or Tibetan Buddhism
I pity his future live in the hell for distorted teachings
Compassionate Affinity Forum do not recognise Xiao Ping Shi teachings
-
I read his posting before
He really think he is some kind of Realised Pureland Patriach to authenticate the disciple on "Pureland Chanting Samadhi "
This is clearly deviant since thousands of years all the 13th Patriach from Hui Yuan to Ying Guang have never done such preposterous act of authenticate people realisation in Nienfo
-
Totally agree... he is too stubborn, refuse to listen to his masters, and thinks his experience is it. This will prevent all further insights from occuring. He is thus destroying himself.
Forummers, I have written 5 posts countering Mr Xiao Pingshi.
Please check page 2.
-
Originally posted by bohiruci:
Xiao pingshi view is totally too subtle to see his flaws ,especially his own interpretation of Flower Adornment sutra of the Alaya consciousness
When sutra like Flower Adornment sutra ,its actually mentioning the Buddha qualities of the alaya consciousness
I really cannot understand why he still persist in his viewpoint .
Because he is always based on Ven Yinshun "the path to Buddhahood" and Je Tsong Khapa Lam Rim
He cant realised it and start making wrong view unless he humble himself to take the samaya vows to practise Esoteric school of Tangmi or Tibetan Buddhism
I pity his future live in the hell for distorted teachings
Compassionate Affinity Forum do not recognise Xiao Ping Shi teachings
BTW Bohiruci, I don't think he will end up in hell.
Just delay his progress and store up bad karma.
Lets not pass judgments, we're not Buddha or omniscient.
-
http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol7no2e.htm
...v. If we happen to pass by an abattoir, a place where pigs, cows or other animals are slaughtered, and since we understand that the effect of the karma of killing is rebirth in the realm of hell, and we make a verbal comment to that effect, is it appropriate? While we do not know whether the person who is committing the killing will be reborn in hell, but when we speak of hell, we immediately strike a resonance with hell. Because suffering and darkness prevail in hell, at the mention of the word, we have already struck an accord with suffering and darkness. If we say "Amitabha Buddha" instead, then brightness spontaneously illumines in our mind and the image of the abattoir will not take root in our mind....
Amituofuo!
-
Hi Uncreated,
May I know what books of Mr Xiao are you reading?
I am currently reading his 狂密与真密 series, however still stuck at book one (of four).
So far my impression of him from the book is that he brought up academic point views, the contraversial ones of course, in relation to practical cultivation issue.
I don't remember him claming to be a realised teacher. However, on the preface, one of his students did honour him as a realised teacher. But I see that more from a courteous way in addressing one's teacher and I don't take it literally that Mr Xiao is realised per se.
In modern times, who's to judge who has realised and who hasn't? Is the person who judge a realised person himself? Then if so, who verifies his realisation then?
However, we can think for ourselves the interesting and contraversial points that Mr Xiao had brought up and examine on our whether or not do they make sense.
Personally, I do think that many of the points (so far that I had read) that Mr Xiao had brought up do make sense. I don't agree his points on Ven Yinshun though, that to me is a bit out of context.
Anyway, I see no harm in reading his materials in fact, any other materials (I read Satanic Bible before, a very cool book) as long as you keep an open mind.
Surely there must be some issues worth discussing that caused him to write book(s) about it. Not easy to write books you know?
AEN,
I also came from an era that doesn't use traditional chinese writing. It's up to individual whether or not we going to learn about it. All along, I am not comfortable in writing English, which explain my poor command in it, but what to do?
If you really need it, you will learn how to adapt to it. =)
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
BTW Bohiruci, I don't think he will end up in hell.
Just delay his progress and store up bad karma.
Lets not pass judgments, we're not Buddha or omniscient.
AEN,
Maybe bohiruci is realised person leh?
Hehe =P
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Totally agree... he is too stubborn, refuse to listen to his masters, and thinks his experience is it. This will prevent all further insights from occuring. He is thus destroying himself.
Forummers, I have written 5 posts countering Mr Xiao Pingshi.
Please check page 2.
Wah seh,
You 18 year old also countering Mr Xiao who's in the circle for decades ah?
You must be realised too!
So many realised people in this forum.
That's so cool =)
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Totally agree... he is too stubborn, refuse to listen to his masters, and thinks his experience is it. This will prevent all further insights from occuring. He is thus destroying himself.
Forummers, I have written 5 posts countering Mr Xiao Pingshi.
Please check page 2.
Who is his master?
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
Wah seh,
You 18 year old also countering Mr Xiao who's in the circle for decades ah?
You must be realised too!
So many realised people in this forum.
That's so cool =)
Nope, I'm not realised, never claimed to be, but doesn't mean I cannot counter his claims by scriptural support. Honestly I only have a theoretical understanding thats all. :) From some years of reading and discussing, my understanding improve a bit.
His claims of the 8th consciousness is simply not in line with Emptiness or Dependent Origination teachings.
All teachings in Buddhism cannot contradict this fundamental truth, otherwise how can it be in accord with Dharma?
When discussing or debating, lets not talk about personal things like you're how old lah, etc... its the teachings that matters at heart.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Nope, I'm not realised, never claimed to be, but doesn't mean I cannot counter his claims by scriptural support. Honestly I only have a theoretical understanding thats all. :) From some years of reading and discussing, my understanding improve a bit.
His claims of the 8th consciousness is simply not in line with Emptiness or Dependent Origination teachings.
All teachings in Buddhism cannot contradict this fundamental truth, otherwise how can it be in accord with Dharma?
When discussing or debating, lets not talk about personal things like you're how old lah, etc... its the teachings that matters at heart.
Probably he has his own reasoning in his explanations.
Keep an open heart.
What you believe may not be according to Dharma in the first place.
Age does matter as it gives you the experience that you might find it verified with scriptural explanation as well. Not that I am belittling about you being young, but probably hope that you will keep an open mind to non-mainstream thinking.
Why not you write to Mr Xiao and have a healthy exchange?
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Nope, I'm not realised, never claimed to be, but doesn't mean I cannot counter his claims by scriptural support. Honestly I only have a theoretical understanding thats all. :) From some years of reading and discussing, my understanding improve a bit.
His claims of the 8th consciousness is simply not in line with Emptiness or Dependent Origination teachings.
All teachings in Buddhism cannot contradict this fundamental truth, otherwise how can it be in accord with Dharma?
When discussing or debating, lets not talk about personal things like you're how old lah, etc... its the teachings that matters at heart.
Anyway, I wish you well in your reading and may you achieve your own spiritual goals. =)
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
Probably he has his own reasoning in his explanations.
Keep an open heart.
What you believe may not be according to Dharma in the first place.
Age does matter as it gives you the experience that you might find it verified with scriptural explanation as well. Not that I am belittling about you being young, but probably hope that you will keep an open mind to non-mainstream thinking.
Why not you write to Mr Xiao and have a healthy exchange?
Hi Yamizi, I am not at all against non-mainstream thinking. If you read my first post, I actually agreed with Mr Xiao Pingshi on an important point (which I misunderstood), because it was written in traditional Chinese, and I sort of misunderstood what Mr Xiao Pingshi written.
But as more postings unfold and someone sent me a link to his writings, I could clearly see that its in contradiction in dharma.Who cares about mainstream or nonmainstream, Dharma is Dharma, if you see my first post you'll see that I was saying that even some famous Ajahns in Thai Forest Tradition didn't quite get it, and have the same sort of misunderstandings. They are pretty mainstream. They're very famous, and it's not only the ones that the monk criticized. I don't wish to name names. Even Ajahn Brahmavamso, himself from Thai Forest Tradition, admitted this problem.
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
Anyway, I wish you well in your reading and may you achieve your own spiritual goals. =)
Thanks, you too...
Sorry I didn't reply reply your SMS the other day, cos I don't know you well enough. But I appreciate your willingness receive criticisms and comments. It is something we ought to learn from you.
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
AEN,
Maybe bohiruci is realised person leh?
Hehe =P
Hmm, if you do not know Yogacara and feels you are right ,theres nothing to shout out loud ... how do you think i know less than you ,when you already criticise the teachings of old dying people school -PurelandNah , please show some wisdom in your "cultivation" =)
must apply what you have learned in law firms and studying law @@@@@@
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
Probably he has his own reasoning in his explanations.
Keep an open heart.
What you believe may not be according to Dharma in the first place.
Age does matter as it gives you the experience that you might find it verified with scriptural explanation as well. Not that I am belittling about you being young, but probably hope that you will keep an open mind to non-mainstream thinking.
Why not you write to Mr Xiao and have a healthy exchange?
Goodness sake ,Mr Xiao wont entertain ur letters,
from the whole taiwan buddhist community ,he have never entertain their letters
so ,WHAT makes you think your letter stands out to million of them ?
I can only laughed at your level of craftiness idea =)
-
I want to add on to Zen Master Huang Po's 'Yi Xin' (One Mind). Even though he is already very clear that One Mind is non-dual [not in opposition to phenomena] and non-inherent, this post will hopefully clarify it further.
This is from the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana (大乘起信論), by Asvaghaso,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awakening_of_Faith_in_the_Mahayana
Written from the perspective of essence and function (tiyong) 體用, this text sought to harmonize the two soteriological philosophies of the tathÄ�gatagarbha (or Buddha nature) and Ä�layavijñÄ�na (or yogacara) into a synthetic vision based on the One Mind in Two Aspects.
You can see here that One Mind described here is totally non-dual and non-inherent. It is totally unlike what Mr Xiao Pingshi sees as Mind.
Even though terms like 'eternal', 'immutable' is used, it has nothing to do with the sort of the dualistic and inherent kind of understandings, or a permanent substance/void background behind phenomena. In a thread discussing on Impermanence and the Tathagathagarbha in 2006, http://buddhism.sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/184819, Thusness posted: ...There truly exists a reality beyond conceptual fabrication. Its presence is abiding, the clarity unsurpassed, its action is natural and arising is spontaneous. However this reality should not be taken to mean a permanent unchanging entity. It is ultimate because it is non-dual. Conceptual fabrication categorizes and creates a subject and object division. It is the Tathagatagarbha when lost and Dharmakaya when enlightened.
.........Yes and most important. But I would use the word ‘Spontaneity’. An unborn and non-dual luminosity that arises spontaneously. This is the ‘form’ of all emptiness and must come with the complete abeyance of the 'Self'. All at once, the full essence of all arising will be understood, from the rising sun, the sky, the trees and the grass...etc. It can only be intuitively understood.
Permanence is a strong word in 'Buddhism', I would refrain from using it to cause misconceptions (Though it is explicitly used in certain sutras). But the Presence is abiding.
...Anyway, below the verse I'm talking about, from Awakening of Faith in Mahayana. Those reading Mr Xiao Pingshi's work will see the difference between his writings and the following explanation.
You have to carefully pay attention to every word to get what it's saying, don't skip and read past. Even Thusness told me in the past that this passage is truly good.
http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/Sruti-Smriti/Shastras/awakening-of-faith.html
A. Mind in Terms of the Absolute
The Mind in terms of the Absolute is the one World of Reality (dharmadhatu) and the essence of all phases of existence in their totality. That which is called "the essential nature of the Mind" is unborn and is imperishable. It is only through illusions that all things come to be differentiated. If one is freed from illusions, then to him there will be no appearances (lakshana) of objects regarded as absolutely independent existences; therefore all things from the beginning transcend all forms of verbalization, description, and conceptualization and are, in the final analysis, undifferentiated, free from alteration, and indestructible. They are only of the One Mind; hence the name Suchness.
All explanations by words are provisional and without validity, for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable of denoting Suchness. The term Suchness likewise has no attributes which can be verbally specified. The term Suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words. But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put an end to, for all things in their Absolute aspect are real; nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of Suchness. It should be understood that all things are incapable of being verbally explained or thought of; hence the name Suchness.
Question: If such is the meaning of the principle of Mahayana, how is it possible for men to conform themselves to and enter into it?
Answer: If they understand that, concerning all things, though they are spoken of, there is neither that which speaks, nor that which can be spoken of, and though they are thought of, there is neither that which thinks, nor that which can be thought of, then they are said to have conformed to it. And when they are freed from their thoughts, they are said to have entered into it. Next, Suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty (sunya), for this aspect can, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty (a-sunya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities.
1. Truly Empty
Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence, it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind. It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously. In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness; hence, the definition "empty"; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.
2. Truly Nonempty
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, i.e., devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called "nonempty". And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.
-
Chinese version:
http://www.fofaseng.cn/jingshu/books2/1146.htm
心 真如者，å�³æ˜¯ä¸€æ³•ç•Œå¤§æ€»ç›¸æ³•é—¨ä½“，所谓：心性ä¸�生ä¸�ç�。一切诸法，唯ä¾�å¦„å¿µè€Œæœ‰å·®åˆ«ï¼Œè‹¥ç¦»å¿ƒå¿µï¼Œåˆ™æ— ä¸€åˆ‡å¢ƒç•Œä¹‹ç›¸ã€‚æ˜¯æ•…ä¸€åˆ‡æ³•ï¼Œä»Žæœ¬å·²æ�¥ï¼Œç¦»è¨€è¯´ç›¸ï¼Œç¦»å�� å—相，离心缘相，毕竟平ç‰ï¼Œæ— 有å�˜å¼‚，ä¸�å�¯ç ´å��。唯是一心，故å��真如。以一切言说，å�‡å��æ— å®žï¼Œä½†éš�妄念，ä¸�å�¯å¾—æ•…ï¼›è¨€çœŸå¦‚è€…ï¼Œäº¦æ— æœ‰ç›¸ã€‚è°“è¨€è¯´ä¹‹æž�ï¼Œå› è¨€ é�£è¨€ï¼Œæ¤çœŸå¦‚ä½“ï¼Œæ— æœ‰å�¯é�£ï¼Œä»¥ä¸€åˆ‡æ³•æ‚‰çš†çœŸæ•…ã€‚äº¦æ— å�¯ç«‹ï¼Œä»¥ä¸€åˆ‡æ³•çš†å�Œå¦‚故。当知一切法ä¸�å�¯è¯´ã€�ä¸�å�¯å¿µæ•…，å��为真如。
问曰：若如是义者，诸众生ç‰ï¼Œäº‘何éš�顺，而能得入？
ç”æ›°ï¼šè‹¥çŸ¥ä¸€åˆ‡æ³•ï¼Œè™½è¯´æ— æœ‰èƒ½è¯´å�¯è¯´ï¼Œè™½å¿µäº¦æ— 能念å�¯å¿µï¼Œæ˜¯å��éš�顺。若离于念，å��为得入。
å¤�次，æ¤çœŸå¦‚者，ä¾�言说分别，有二ç§�义。云何为二？
一者�如实空，以能究竟显实故；
二者ã€�如实ä¸�ç©ºï¼Œä»¥æœ‰è‡ªä½“å…·è¶³æ— æ¼�性功德故。
所 言空者，从本已æ�¥ï¼Œä¸€åˆ‡æŸ“法ä¸�ç›¸åº”æ•…ã€‚è°“ç¦»ä¸€åˆ‡æ³•å·®åˆ«ä¹‹ç›¸ï¼Œä»¥æ— è™šå¦„å¿ƒå¿µæ•…ã€‚å½“çŸ¥çœŸå¦‚è‡ªæ€§ï¼Œé�žæœ‰ç›¸ï¼Œé�žæ— 相，é�žé�žæœ‰ç›¸ï¼Œé�žé�žæ— 相，é�žæœ‰æ— 俱相ã€�é�žä¸€ç›¸ï¼Œé�ž 异相，é�žé�žä¸€ç›¸ï¼Œé�žé�žå¼‚相，é�žä¸€å¼‚俱相。乃至总说，ä¾�一切众生，以有妄心，念念分别，皆ä¸�ç›¸åº”ï¼Œæ•…è¯´ä¸ºç©ºã€‚è‹¥ç¦»å¦„å¿ƒï¼Œå®žæ— å�¯ç©ºæ•…。所言ä¸�空者，已显法体空 æ— å¦„æ•…ï¼Œå�³æ˜¯çœŸå¿ƒï¼›å¸¸æ�’ä¸�å�˜ï¼Œå‡€æ³•æ»¡è¶³ï¼Œåˆ™å��ä¸�ç©ºã€‚äº¦æ— æœ‰ç›¸å�¯å�–，以离念境界，唯è¯�相应故。
-
Originally posted by bohiruci:
Goodness sake ,Mr Xiao wont entertain ur letters,
from the whole taiwan buddhist community ,he have never entertain their letters
so ,WHAT makes you think your letter stands out to million of them ?
I can only laughed at your level of craftiness idea =)
It's good to know that I made you laughed. You sound so angry.
Anyway, I believe with AEN's knowledge and tactfulness, he would have sure written something much more intelligent than someone here =)
-
Originally posted by bohiruci:
Hmm, if you do not know Yogacara and feels you are right ,theres nothing to shout out loud ... how do you think i know less than you ,when you already criticise the teachings of old dying people school -PurelandNah , please show some wisdom in your "cultivation" =)
must apply what you have learned in law firms and studying law @@@@@@
I had never claim to know Yogacara and I am not saying Mr Xiao's version is right or wrong.
And I didn't say you know lesser than me ah. I was even speculating that you might be a realised person ah! Relax man.
The point views that I have for pureland has nothing to do in this discussion ba.
I never claim to have wisdom or cultivation like you do ah. You know just sooo much leh. I know nothing. =)
So what does my working experience in law firm and studying law has to do with this discussion? Then can I say your angry and passionate posts came from your experience as a navy sergeant who couldn't get his renewal contract and hence you are filled with a lot of anger?
=)
Relax man.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Thanks, you too...
Sorry I didn't reply reply your SMS the other day, cos I don't know you well enough. But I appreciate your willingness receive criticisms and comments. It is something we ought to learn from you.
No worries, appreciate your kind thoughts. =)
-
Let's us go back to the time before the "Xiao Ping Shi" was mentioned in the forum.
Amituofo. Thread closed. -
Originally posted by Display Name:
Let's us go back to the time before the "Xiao Ping Shi" was mentioned in the forum.
Amituofo. Thread closed.No, Xiao Ping Shi discussion is ok. There are some important points discussed. I believe this will help clarify certain doubts on the TS.
Try not to get personal thats all.
If Uncreated still has doubts, he can always reply. So far he hasn't replied, maybe he is clear.
BTW I believe I know who is Uncreated. :) (since second day, I realised... hehehe)
-
Originally posted by yamizi:
I had never claim to know Yogacara and I am not saying Mr Xiao's version is right or wrong.
And I didn't say you know lesser than me ah. I was even speculating that you might be a realised person ah! Relax man.
The point views that I have for pureland has nothing to do in this discussion ba.
I never claim to have wisdom or cultivation like you do ah. You know just sooo much leh. I know nothing. =)
So what does my working experience in law firm and studying law has to do with this discussion? Then can I say your angry and passionate posts came from your experience as a navy sergeant who couldn't get his renewal contract and hence you are filled with a lot of anger?
=)
Relax man.
Hmm .its not i couldnt get my renewal contract in navy .its i choose to leave ..and I not angry , i have no dig deep about your story ..so it seems u always so worked up .
I am not angry .Only people like you like to get angry
I am at Peace .
for all your attacks on Pureland and Vajrayana ,you are being noted =)
Dun act like a book-faith people standing high up on a pedestal to criticise other while he himself is a big sinner
lets be fair and square = )
-
Originally posted by bohiruci:
Hmm .its not i couldnt get my renewal contract in navy .its i choose to leave ..and I not angry , i have no dig deep about your story ..so it seems u always so worked up .
I am not angry .Only people like you like to get angry
I am at Peace .
for all your attacks on Pureland and Vajrayana ,you are being noted =)
Dun act like a book-faith people standing high up on a pedestal to criticise other while he himself is a big sinner
lets be fair and square = )
Anyone who can't get it usually say they choose to leave one lah, only you yourself know it best whether you belong to this lot or not.
I'm only curious that, does it mean that everyone has to agree with your belief totally?
So are you trying to imply that if I do not agree with Pureland and Vajrayana teachings I cannot discuss in this forum?
And really, stop diverting away, this thread is about Mr Xiao, probably your inner anger that is built up due to your prejudice against me had blinded your perception on my posts. Since which entry in this thread am I "standing high up on a pedestal to criticise other"?
When we are discussing on a certain issue, we stick to that, I do not understand why almost everytime when I contribute, you have to bring up that I criticise/disagree with Pureland and Vajrayana.
Hereby, I like to ask the moderator(s), does me not fullly agreeing with the above two schools render me a lesser right to discuss in this forum? Here it is an obvious issue that anyone with a rationale and calm mind can see for themselves:--
-we talking about Mr Xiao's issue
-bohiruci ranting on me for not agreeing with Pureland and Vajrayana
-what is the relation?
I think there is little to no relation to the whole issue at all. We are here discussing about the credentials of Mr Xiao. And I just ran through my posts, I did not say I am his hardcore fan/follower. I merely mentioned that it's not exactly bad to read about contraversial issues. And this is what I get from bohiruci.
Now, back to the question that I post to the moderator(s), if me, being not agree with Pureland and Vajrayana teachings do render me a lesser right to discuss freely, in such a sense that not receiving flaming from the likes of bohiruci, please make it official in your forum. Then people like me, will have the choice to either:-
a) leave and ignore this forum completely and probably share this little information with other buddhists out there that in order to join this forum, one has to fully agree with bohiruci's "gold" standard.
or
b) have the mental preparation to take the chance of braving the flaming from the likes of bohiruci.
I would gladly choose option (a) because I have better things to do if it turns out that the moderator(s) intend to have rules like this.
However, if the moderator(s) believe in respecting individual's take on the Dhamma, such as one need not subscribe to the idea of Pureland and Vajrayana (probably you may be surprised that there are many buddhists who don't believe in Pureland and Vajrayana in the real world out there); and that in the spirit of discussion to agree to disagree, I do hope the moderator(s) should start to take note or take some actions for bohiruci's behaviour.
I'm an old bird and I know bohiruci in real life, so I know how's he like. However, such behaviour by him, may deter the many other budding or aspiring buddhists to come forth to share and discuss the Dhamma. I do hope that the moderator(s) do take necessary precaution against over-dominating characters.
Do hope to hear from the moderator(s) soon and soon revert this discussion back on Mr Xiao.
=)