chee1a1@jetson.uh.edu (11/08/90)
Meditation two ways: different yet the same
Literally, there are two methods given in Buddhist Meditation, namely:
Samatha yana (way of concentration) and Vipassana yana (way of insight)
as mentioned in earlier postings. Even though as a way
of practice these seemed to be two distinct ways, as far as attaining the
goal of nirvana is concerned both concentration and insight are
required.
In practice, concentration is the basis for development of insight
and ultimate enlightenment, and to a buddhist, concentration is not
the end itself (as opposed to that sought by non-followers of Buddha
Dhamma e.g., in Transcendental Meditation or in trying to attain various
mental powers). A buddhist seeks concentration because with a
distracted and untamed mind it is impossible to see the true
nature of oneself and the true nature of the world. The mind gets
obstructed from seeing the truth by the fetters,identified as:
laziness(sloth and torper), sensual longings, hatred, wandering,
lack of confidence or wavering(which I do not like to translate as
lack of faith - because word faith has other meanings attached to it).
By developing concentration and attaining jhana factors, a person
overcomes these fetters temporarily allowing to see things in
their true nature easily.
But to achieve beyond to attain the goal of enlightenment, a person has
to develop the insight in analysing the true nature of the world.
That is where vipassana or insight meditation comes into use. Refering
to the teachings in Buddha Dhamma, the practice of four foundations
of mindfulness (Pali tr.- Satipatthana Sutta) starts with the
instructions on breathing meditation (anapanasati). Again in Noble
Eightfold Path, right mindfulness (samma sati) and right concentration
(samma samadhi) are two factors that must cultivated.
Since the goal of concentration for a buddhist is enlightenment
or seeing the true nature of things, objects chosen for meditation
should not arouse the fetters (such as lust,hatred, laziness etc.)
in mind. Therefore fourty or so meditation subjects are taught for
the convenience of Buddhists (so they do not have to search all over
the world looking for a suitable meditation subject), some of which
leads to all five jhanas while some leads only to basic concentration
needed for development of insight. Once the mind is strong and does
not get carried away by distractions it is easily turned towards
analysing the true nature of things ((i)impernancy or anicca -
changing nature of things, Nothing is forever. Nature changes,
flowers,leaves, trees, etc. decay, even solar systems, and galaxies
gets destroyed. (2) dukkha, Because of this changing nature of things
they bring us dukkha or unhappiness. We feel sorrowful when something
we loved departs from us. It is understaning this existence of
unhapiness in nature that leads to further understanding of non-self.
(3) The third perception ,anatta, is non existence of a soul or self.
When we see,hear, smell etc. something lovely we see it as ours, or
ourselves loving it, grasping it. But when we see everything changes,
uselessness in grasping lust etc. as good, then it is easy to see
that there is no self(or soul)). A buddhist does not develop a negative
attitude in mind perceiving these three factors (anicca, dukkha, and
anatta) because of the mind which becomes strong due to concentration.
A buddhist faces the nature of things and understands them by analysing
and studying with concentration as the basis.
In Zen also, as I have read, both concentration and insight are
practiced. A method of developing concentration, meditation, is used
in attaining the jhanas and then the analysis of true nature is
carried out, as seen from the various sayings, parabales,
and questions of Zen masters.
In summary, the only difference in two methods (samath yana -
way of concentration, and vipassana yana - way of insight) are the
amount of effort on concentration. But both concentration and
insight are required to attain the goal, nirvana. Concentration
is required for analysis or insight. Analysis or insight is required
for attaining the freedom, nirvana.
Bandula Jayatilakakde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov ( Keith Evans) (11/16/90)
In <1990Nov8.012939.14684@nas.nasa.gov> chee1a1@jetson.uh.edu writes: > In practice, concentration is the basis for development of insight > and ultimate enlightenment, and to a buddhist, concentration is not One will never gain enlightenment through meditation. Shakyamuni Buddha did!, you say. In the Lotus Sutra, when talking about the length of his life, he said he had gained enlightenment many lifetimes age, in the distant past. Then he predicted that none of his teachings would lead people to enlighenment 2000 years after he died. Meditation is not the Buddhist practice in this day and age. > But to achieve beyond to attain the goal of enlightenment, a person has > to develop the insight in analysing the true nature of the world. If you want to understand the true nature of the world, then you should first try to understand the true nature of yourself. > analysing the true nature of things ((i)impernancy or anicca - > changing nature of things, Nothing is forever. Nature changes, > flowers,leaves, trees, etc. decay, even solar systems, and galaxies > gets destroyed. (2) dukkha, Because of this changing nature of things > they bring us dukkha or unhappiness. We feel sorrowful when something > we loved departs from us. It is understaning this existence of > unhapiness in nature that leads to further understanding of non-self. > (3) The third perception ,anatta, is non existence of a soul or self. > When we see,hear, smell etc. something lovely we see it as ours, or > ourselves loving it, grasping it. But when we see everything changes, > uselessness in grasping lust etc. as good, then it is easy to see > that there is no self(or soul)). A buddhist does not develop a negative Yes, everything changes. The question is whether it changes for the better or the worse. This comes down to your actions. What you are talking about sounds like Hinayana (lesser teaching) Buddhism. Part of an individual's happiness is getting married, having enough money, etc. You should try to understand the true entity of yourself that makes all one's feelings work in their most enlightened state. I think you are also confusing no self with the greater self. Obviously, you are a self as your actions will reflect back on you yourself and not anyone else. -- Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Respectfully, Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov
hms@princeton.edu (Hsing-Mean Sha) (11/19/90)
> One will never gain enlightenment through meditation. Shakyamuni Buddha > did!, you say. In the Lotus Sutra, when talking about the length of his > life, he said he had gained enlightenment many lifetimes age, in the > distant past. Then he predicted that none of his teachings would lead > people to enlighenment 2000 years after he died. Meditation is not the > Buddhist practice in this day and age. I am a Chinese Buddhist. The most popular way I know for practicing Mahayana Buddhism is so-called 'six Paramitas.' (() is Chinese Mandarin prenounciation) 1. Dana (Bu4 She1), charity or giving, including the bestowing of truth on others. 2. Sila (Che2 Jei4), keeping the disciplins. 3. Ksanti (Jen3 Ju4), patience under suffering and insult. 4. Virya (Jin1 Jin4) zeal and progress. 5. Dhyana (Chan2 Din4) Meditation. 6. Prajna (Je4 Hwei4), wisdom. Therefore, meditation is one of the important Buddhist practices. I cannot remember the prediction you mentioned in Lotus Sutra. Anyway, this prediction does not make any meaning to me, even thougth it is from Shakyamuni, because our strong determinations can change everything. You said "One will never gain enlightenment through meditation." I think it is HARD to gain enlightment ONLY by meditation for us. But, it is possible that, depending on his/her Karma, meditation is his/her unique way to achieve the enlightment. > > analysing the true nature of things ((i)impernancy or anicca - > > changing nature of things, Nothing is forever. Nature changes, > > flowers,leaves, trees, etc. decay, even solar systems, and galaxies > > gets destroyed. (2) dukkha, Because of this changing nature of things > > they bring us dukkha or unhappiness. We feel sorrowful when something > > we loved departs from us. It is understaning this existence of > > unhapiness in nature that leads to further understanding of non-self. > > (3) The third perception ,anatta, is non existence of a soul or self. > > When we see,hear, smell etc. something lovely we see it as ours, or > > ourselves loving it, grasping it. But when we see everything changes, > > uselessness in grasping lust etc. as good, then it is easy to see > > that there is no self(or soul)). A buddhist does not develop a negative > > Yes, everything changes. The question is whether it changes for the better > or the worse. This comes down to your actions. What you are talking about > sounds like Hinayana (lesser teaching) Buddhism. Part of an individual's > happiness is getting married, having enough money, etc. You should try to > understand the true entity of yourself that makes all one's feelings work > in their most enlightened state. I think you are also confusing no self > with the greater self. Obviously, you are a self as your actions will > reflect back on you yourself and not anyone else. Can you clarify what is "The question is whether it changes for the better or the worse." I thik what Bandula said is very basic for both Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism. Actually, if you have read Shurangama Sutra, you would know that Avalokitesvara (Kuan-Yin) Bodhisattva cultivate realization based on the process of hearing. The first several stages of the way that Kuan-Yin uses are similar what Bandula wrote. In the same Shurangama Sutra, after twenty-five Bodhisattvas explain their methods of cultivation and spiritual attainment, Bodhisattva Manjushri pointed out that Kuan-Yin's method was best suited for the people. Therefore, I do believe what Bandula wrote is very basic for all branches of Buddhism, not only Hinayana. > > -- > Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. > Respectfully, > Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov Hsing-Mean Sha in Princeton hms@cs.princeton.edu
kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov ( Keith Evans) (11/21/90)
In <1990Nov18.195707.15515@nas.nasa.gov> hms@princeton.edu (Hsing-Mean Sha) writes: >I am a Chinese Buddhist. The most popular way I know for practicing >Mahayana Buddhism is so-called 'six Paramitas.' (() is Chinese Mandarin >or the worse." I thik what Bandula said is very basic for both Hinayana >and Mahayana Buddhism. Actually, if you have read Shurangama Sutra, you >would know that Avalokitesvara (Kuan-Yin) Bodhisattva cultivate >realization based on the process of hearing. The first several stages of >the way that Kuan-Yin uses are similar what Bandula wrote. >In the same Shurangama Sutra, after twenty-five Bodhisattvas explain their >methods of cultivation and spiritual attainment, Bodhisattva Manjushri >pointed out that Kuan-Yin's method was best suited for the people. >Therefore, I do believe what Bandula wrote is very basic for all branches >of Buddhism, not only Hinayana. You are probably right. But you are talking about Shakymuni's Buddhism and not Nichiren Daishonin's. Shakyamuni said that none of his teachings would lead the people to enlightenment 2000 years after he died. But he also predicted a Buddha greater than to be born in a small, island country northeast of India and provide a way for everyone to gain enlightenment. Nichiren Daishonin (1222-1282), born in Japan, studied all of Shakyamuni's teachings, and proclaimed the True Law to be Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the Law by which all Buddhas have gained their enlightenment. This is the Law hidden in the Lotus Sutra, which Shakyamuni entrusted to Boddhisattva Jogyo with to propagate in the Latter Day of the Law (2000 years after he died) and was reborn as Nichiren. This is the true Buddhism to follow in this day and age. What you are talking about is Hinayana or provisional Mahayana Buddhism, which Shakyamuni himself declared just before preaching the Lotus Sutra (in which he talks about his enlightenment) "discarding the provisional teachings, I will expound only the supreme Way" and "in these more than 40 years or so, I have not yet revealed the truth" (from the Muryogi Sutra, this is tha Japanese name for it. I don't know the Sanskrit ort Pali for reasons stated above). Shakyamuni's Buddhism is the Buddhism of harvest and Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism is the Buddhism of sowing. -- Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Respectfully, Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov
hms@princeton.edu (Hsing-Mean Sha) (11/22/90)
> > You are probably right. But you are talking about Shakymuni's Buddhism > and not Nichiren Daishonin's. Shakyamuni said that none of his teachings > would lead the people to enlightenment 2000 years after he died. But > he also predicted a Buddha greater than to be born in a small, island > country northeast of India and provide a way for everyone to gain > enlightenment. Nichiren Daishonin (1222-1282), born in Japan, studied > all of Shakyamuni's teachings, and proclaimed the True Law to be > Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the Law by which all Buddhas have gained their > enlightenment. This is the Law hidden in the Lotus Sutra, which Shakyamuni > entrusted to Boddhisattva Jogyo with to propagate in the Latter Day of > the Law (2000 years after he died) and was reborn as Nichiren. > > This is the true Buddhism to follow in this day and age. What you are > talking about is Hinayana or provisional Mahayana Buddhism, which I personally believe that Lotus sutra is one important sutra of Mahayana Buddhism. Six paramitas which I wrote in my previous posting are also written in the Lotus sutra. I don't know what is provisional Mahayana Buddhism. As I said before, there are many branches of Buddhism. Depending on your own karma, you choose the best suitable one to follow. But, for the interest of knowledge, I really would like to know how to practice in Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism and what the difference between Nichiren Daishonin's and Shakyamuni's. In buddhism, everybody has the Buddha mind, and in the eyes of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, we are all Buddhas in some sense. The prediction is not too much important to me. Actually, this is my first time to hear about this prediction. I am also very interested in knowing which chapter of Lotus sutra about the claim of no-one-get-enlightment-2000-years... I maybe missed again after I checked my Lotus sutra at home (I cannot find out this claim). As Diamond sutra said, even Buddhist Dharma can be got rid of,... and Buddhist dharma is like a ship, we can not go to the other side without getting rid of the ship... Yes, this may not be proper for the beginners, and this is a teaching for Bodhisattvas. But, this is also the main reason I like Buddhism, since it even says we should not just follow the dharma while we are going to reach the other side. In the Buddhist sutras I have read, I never found any idea of *absolute truth*. This is the reason I dont understand why you claim Nichiren Daishonin's is the true Buddhism to follow in this day and age. I think it may be true for you, and I respect your confidence. > Respectfully, > Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov Hsing-Mean Sha in Princeton hms@cs.princeton.edu
heru@byron.u.washington.edu (heru-ra-ha) (11/23/90)
Nichiren shoshu buddhism.... Only buddhist sect I know of with the (to me, personally distasteful) penchant for proselytization "My way is the best way, your way is at best, erroneous and at worst, horribly evil" Most other religions which do this tend to be phases of the western Asian/european monotheistic tradition. Oh well. Ge Iad, ge ol; ge Iad i-L. Josh Geller heru@byron.u.washington.edu
kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov ( Keith Evans) (11/25/90)
>But, for the interest of knowledge, I really would like to know how to >practice in Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism and what the difference between >Nichiren Daishonin's and Shakyamuni's. Before ND died, he realized that he had fulfilled all the Buddha's predictions (about the person who would propagate the law in the Latter Day (2000 years after his death)) and he enscribed the Gohonzon, which is the physical manifestation of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. By chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo to the Gohonzon, one actually attains the state of Buddhahood as they are. The practice is to recieve a Gohonzon (a copy of the original, made only by the High Priest), to recite the 2nd and 16th chapters of the Lotus Sutra morning and evening (everyday) and chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, abundantly (everyday). To study Buddhisma and help others learn about the greatness of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism. Living one's life based on this practice is Nirvana. It does not mean to be a Buddhist and not live in society. One must use this practice to live the best life poossible. >In buddhism, everybody has the Buddha mind, and in the eyes of Buddhas and >Bodhisattvas, we are all Buddhas in some sense. The prediction is not Yes, we all have the potential for Buddhahood, but delusion from our past karma hides it from us and we deny it. Even if we know about it, we still have to manifest it. >too much important to me. Actually, this is my first time to hear about this >prediction. I am also very interested in knowing which chapter of Lotus >sutra about the claim of no-one-get-enlightment-2000-years... I maybe missed >again after I checked my Lotus sutra at home (I cannot find out this claim). I'm sorry if I lead you to think that that prediction was from the Lotus Sutra, I do not think it is and am not sure right now which one it is from. But he actually speaks in terms of 500 year periods. >As Diamond sutra said, even Buddhist Dharma can be got rid of,... and With the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. >Buddhist dharma is like a ship, we can not go to the other side without >getting rid of the ship... Yes, this may not be proper for the You need the ship to cross the sea of sufferings. >beginners, and this is a teaching for Bodhisattvas. But, this is also >the main reason I like Buddhism, since it even says we should not just >follow the dharma while we are going to reach the other side. In the >Buddhist sutras I have read, I never found any idea of *absolute truth*. See the quotes from the Sutra of Infinite Meaning above. >This is the reason I dont understand why you claim Nichiren Daishonin's >is the true Buddhism to follow in this day and age. I think it may be Very few understood or believed Nichiren when he proclaimed it. According to the sutras, when the true law is lost, the 3 disasters and 7 calamities occur. Nichiren proclaimed that in Japan at that time all but 2 had not yet occurred and predicted that they would occurr (based on the sutras) and his predictions (based on the sutras, not his own wisdom) came true. P.S. Thank you, Danesh, for posting my postings. -- Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Respectfully, Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov
jdoskow@decwrl.dec.com (Jonathan Doskow) (11/27/90)
In article <1990Nov18.195707.15515@nas.nasa.gov> hms@princeton.edu (Hsing-Mean Sha) writes: > >> One will never gain enlightenment through meditation. Shakyamuni Buddha >> did!, you say. In the Lotus Sutra, when talking about the length of his >> life, he said he had gained enlightenment many lifetimes age, in the >> distant past. Then he predicted that none of his teachings would lead >> people to enlighenment 2000 years after he died. Meditation is not the >> Buddhist practice in this day and age. > >I am a Chinese Buddhist. The most popular way I know for practicing >Mahayana Buddhism is so-called 'six Paramitas.' (() is Chinese Mandarin >prenounciation) ... >5. Dhyana (Chan2 Din4) Meditation. ... >Therefore, meditation is one of the important Buddhist practices. > >I cannot remember the prediction you mentioned in Lotus Sutra. The specific references about the 2000 years are found in the Daishutsu (Sutra of the Great Assembly) Sutra. In general, though, there are many references throughtout the Lotus and other Sutras. For example, Chapter XIII (p 218 in Threefold Lotus Sutra, Kosei, Tokyo, 1975 - the famous "20 line verse of the Kanjii chapter" ) reads in part "Be pleased to be without anxiety! After the Buddha's extinction, In the [last] dreadful evil age, We will proclaim abroad [this sutra]. "The Daishutsu Sutra predicts that this fifth period will be an "age of conflict," when monks will disregard the precepts and feud constantly among themselves, heretical views will prevail, and Shakyamuni's Buddhism will be lost. In contrast, the Lotus Sutra views [this time] when Shakyamuni's teachings lose their power of redemption, as the time when the essence of the Louts Sutra transferred to Bodhisattva Jogyo at the Ceremony in the Air will be propogated ... and benefit mankind far into the future." (p 224 in A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and Concepts - NSIC, Tokyo, 1983) In order to really understand Nichiren's Buddhism from a theoretical point of view it is necessary to understand T'ien T'ai doctrine on which it is based. Founded by Chih-i (538-597,) T'ien T'ai organizes Shakyamuni's teachings into catagories according to doctrines and according to method of teachings. So to simply say, Sutra x says y is not sufficient. It is necessary to understand where sutra x fits in. There is some evidence, for example, of certain translations of Sutras that say the women can never attain enlightenment, while others say they can. Which one is to be believed? This subject is quite complex, however, of T'ien T'ai, Kenneth Ch'en says (p 313, Buddhism in China, A Historical Survey, Princeton, 1972) "The T'ein-t'ai tenets have been generally regarded as among the finest products of the Buddhist philosophical development in China. They are called the final and round doctrines of Buddhism - final because they synthesize all the extreme and one-sided doctrines of the other schools, and round because the school assures universal salvation by affirming the presence of the Buddha-nature in all sentient beings and because it employs all possible means to salvation." >> Respectfully, >> Keith Evans kde@heawk1.gsfc.nasa.gov > > Hsing-Mean Sha in Princeton > hms@cs.princeton.edu ============================================================================= The thing I like about moral absolutes is that there are so many to choose from. Opinions expressed are those of the author. jdoskow@Tymnet.COM ============================================================================