jdoskow@Tymnet.COM (Jonathan Doskow) (02/15/91)
mayne@nu.cs.fsu.edu ( Bill Mayne) writes: > kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov ( Keith Evans) writes: > >[Someone (probably keith - jd) wrote:] > > > >>>Even *** Buddhas are reborn *** endlessly throughtout the universe. > >>>In the Lotus Sutra, Shakyamuni says that he has always been in the > >>>world (since he attained enlightenment, many, amny aeons ago) to > >>>lead the people towards enlightenment. > (don't know who wrote this) > >>words to discover the buddha nature by himself. This is not the same as > >>the final enlightenment which involves complete permanent detachment from > >>the mental defilements to attain a mind free from greed,hatred and delusions. > > >Freedom from "mental defilements" does NOT mean not to be born again. > >The Buddha is as human as we are. > Mr. Evans may be correctly stating the doctrine of his sect > (Nicheren Shoshu, I believe). This would certainly not be the > only instance in which his beliefs and those of his sect are at > variance with those of most other schools of Buddhism, and some > other devotees of the Lotus Sutra. The Lotus Sutra reads in part: "... But, young men of good family, the truth is that many hundred thousand myriads of kotis of Aeons ago I have arrived at supreme perfect enlightenment." [kern p 299] "... there are not, ..., in all those hundred thousands of myriads of kotis of worlds so many dust atoms as there are hundred thousands of myriads of kotis of Aeons since I have arrived at supreme, perfect enlightenment." [kern p 300] "... the Tathagata who so long ago arrived at perfect enlightenment declares himself to have but lately arrived at perfect enlightenment, he does so in order to lead creatures to full ripeness and make them go in." [kern p 301] "... The Tathagata who so long ago was perfectly enlightened is unlimited in the duration of his live, he is everlasting." [kern p 302] and finally "I have not accomplished my ancient Bodhisattva course, and the measure of my lifetime is not full. ... I shall have twice as many hundred thousand ... Aeons before the measure of my lifetime be full." [kern p 302] I'm basically uncomfortable with talk about "reincarnation" or being "born again" (an exceptionally poor choice of words.) But unless I misunderstand the meaning of "supremem perfect enlightenment," I believe that the Sutra clearly justifies the position the Keith states and contradicts the view that the Bodhisattva's enlightenment is of a lesser sort, or that attaining final Nirvana means that life ceases. If there are other sects that revere the Lotus Sutra but disagree with these interpretations I would like to request that Bill name them and their teachings. Bill has also suggested that this might be due to translation problems, but since the Kosei edition agrees very closely with Kern on this point, and since the origins of the original texts are quite different, I think that unlikely. As to his reference to "most other schools of Buddhism," and "The vast majority of Buddhists," below, I would remind him that he himself has indicated that numbers alone hardly testify to the correctness of a doctrine. This is not a valid way to bolster an arguement. > The vast majority of Buddhists believe just the opposite on the > first part, i.e. that Buddhas, having achieved freedom from mental > defilements are not reborn. Mahayanists may believe that > Bodhisattvas have achieved freedom from defilements but voluntarily > take rebirth for the benefit of others. But most would agree (correct > me if I am wrong) with Theravadins that Buddhas, at least, are not > reborn. The above citations should suffice. Since only tiny fragments of T'ien-t'ai's work is available in english, I cannot verify the importance of these passages, but to me they seem also to verify the teaching that Keith has mentioned of "ichinen sanzen" or 3000 worlds in a momentary state of existence, and "mutual posession of the 10 worlds" which explains 1) how a buddha can have other life conditions such as anger and 2) how a common mortal can attain buddhahood in his/her present form. > As for the second assertion, that "The Buddha is as human as > we are", the orthodox position would agree that the Buddha was as > human as we are. I hardly consider myself competent to comment on what THE orthodox position is, assuming that there is such a thing. But I would point out that many sects disagree. For example, Dainichi Buddha (Skt Mahavairochana), revered by the esoteric Shingon sect, is considered by some not to have a physical manifestation, i.e., to not be human. And the same could, I believe, be said for the various Pure Land sects' view of Amida. (And by the way, I believe that in terms of numbers of believers, Pure Land sects are by far the most numerous in China and Japan.) > I do not mean by any of this to be taking the position of a > doctinaire Theravadin, nor making much of the difference > between Theravada and Mahayana. Actually, at the level of lay > practice and most matters of understanding the differences > between Theravadins and most Mahayanists is not that great, IMO. > The big differences are between a few sects like Nicheren Shoshu > and everybody else. They are entitled to their beliefs, and being > in the minority by no means indicates their doctrines are wrong. > I just present some of the other side lest readers get rather > distorted and idiosyncratic ideas about Buddhism from statements > like Mr. Evans. If you mean that the Lotus is "distorted and idiosyncratic," please explain. > To illustrate the orthodox position that Buddhas are not reborn > and hopefully contribute something more than personal opinion > to the discussion, I close with the following from the Dhammapada, > verses 153 and 154. > *** QUOTE - Dhammapada 153, 154 *** > Thro' many a birth in existence [Pali "Samsara"] wandered I, > Seeking, but not finding, the builder of this house. > Sorrowful is repeated birth. > O housebuilder [I.e., Craving (tanha).], thou art seen, > Thou shalt build no house [Body.] again. > All thy rafters [Passions (kilesa)] are broken. > Thy ridgepole [Ignorance (avijja).] is shattered. > Mind attains the Unconditioned. [Nibbana (Skt. Nirvana)] > Achieved is the End of Craving. > *** END QUOTE *** An excellent quotation! I don't believe that Keith, I, or anyone else, ever maintained that all forms of Buddhism had equivilent doctrines. Indeed, quite the opposite. It would be quite pointless to talk about T'ein-t'ai's classification of the Sutras according to the relative profundity of their doctrines if no such distinctions exist.