The Bodhi Way (三乘菩提)

[Zla'od]

This is too big a question for me to reply in English here, though Zhengjue does have them in detailed Chinese on the website.

I don't mean to make more work for you, but as long as you're going to be disseminating your views in English (as you already do for the anti-Lamaism message), this is an obvious sort of thing that people are likely to ask about.

A question you did raise before on the other thread (I could not trace it), that why didn't Zhengjue discuss the matter on the table with the Dalai Lama face to face.

I'm afraid that wasn't me. In my opinion, your complaints fall into several categories, each of which suggests a different approach:

(1) Criminal complaints (such as rape). These should be heard in a criminal court, assuming there is any evidence. At the very least, we ought to know who is making the accusation, and what the accusation is.

(2) Purely religious disagreements (such as Madhyamaka vs. Cittamatra). These can be discussed most fruitfully in academic fora (such as scholarly journals) or, if the two sides basically respect one another, interfaith dialogue events. However, such questions typically boil down to matters of opinion which no amount of dialogue can resolve.

(3) Ethical violations (that are recognized to be such by Tibetan tradition), such as monk-lamas who sleep with their disciples. There is not much that can be done about this. Tibetan Buddhism is decentralized, and lacks effective judicial mechanisms to punish offenders. Many such scandals turn out to be "he said, she said" disputes, and it is unclear to what extent the entire tradition is responsible. Zhengjue has chosen to publicize such scandals, but has not done so in a careful, even-handed, or balanced way; as a result, your publications are not taken very seriously.

(4) Questions of fact (such as whether the Dalai Lama and/or other Tibetan Buddhist authorities teach that actual sex is necessary to achieve full and perfect enlightenment; and if so, whether such sex might under certain conditions be consistent with the vows of a monk or a nun). These can only be resolved if you can agree on reliable authorities. For example, you might just as a lama, but then you would have to trust that the lama is both honest and fully representative of his tradition. Scholarly books might shed light on such matters, but many of these will have been written by Tibetan Buddhist practitioners, and anyway, they may not completely agree.

My two ngultrum.

[adikarmika]

If the topic of your proposed debate was "that Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism", then of course I can understand XX Rinpoche's unwillingness to debate with you.

The standard definition of a Buddhist is: someone who "takes refuge" in the Buddha, Dharma and Samgha.
Whether one believes in the doctrine of ālayavijñāna or is a practitioner of anuttarayoga tantra is irrelevant.
Therefore all Tibetan Buddhists are Buddhists.
End of debate.

Yet, you do not accept this standard definition. So what's the point of further discussion, other than to try to discover the real motives underlying your absurd and often self-contradictory position?

[SauLan]

As mentioned from the very start, the Buddhist cultivation method is to have our perceiving mind serve as a zoom lens to observe within ourselves through routine daily life. Let’s have some superficial practice; since visitors can only receive messages through reading the post without hearing, please read slowly and observe carefully (for the ones who are truly interested in Buddhist cultivation).

When we speak, the statement would be orderly spoken a word after another, with a flowing sequence of different pronunciations; we cannot pour all the letters in one go! Someone might ask “What are you talking about?” if we put this person in a slow motion scenario, please observe all the changes: the time gap between the first word “What” and the last “about,” his facial and bodily expressions; most importantly, each and every word is disappearing instantly.
“What” does not indicate the meaning, neither “are,” neither “you.”

From this example, we could notice that in our daily activities, any accomplishment has to be fulfilled through flowing sequences of changes; just the same as a film reel keep rolling, or we would just stay still as one snap shot; in that case, we would not have a life at all. Throughout our whole life, the changing procedures are so swift and smooth beyond our notice, we aged before we know.

It is exactly the same way of function with our thoughts. In a way, we are changing from instant to instant without even knowing the fact; in terms of Buddhism, this is called impermanence.

Buddhism, would it be possible for you to scan or photocopy "Tsongkhapa, Extended Treatise on the Progression of the Esoteric Path, translated into Chinese by dharma-master Fazun, Wondrous Favor Publishin Co., 1986," p. 376? Are there multiple copies of this book at your ZhengJue center, i.e. do many people refer to this book, or is it something you personally own? How would I get a copy? Thank you!

I can't find this edition anywhere; however there is Fazun's 1939 original, which was also republished in 1996 (Mizong zidi guanglun (1939; reprint, Shanghai: Shanghai Foxue shuju, 1996). Have you compared these versions to see whether they are the same, by chance?

[Buddhism]

Buddhism, would it be possible for you to scan or photocopy "Tsongkhapa, Extended Treatise on the Progression of the Esoteric Path, translated into Chinese by dharma-master Fazun, Wondrous Favor Publishin Co., 1986," p. 376? Are there multiple copies of this book at your ZhengJue center, i.e. do many people refer to this book, or is it something you personally own? How would I get a copy? Thank you!

I can't find this edition anywhere; however there is Fazun's 1939 original, which was also republished in 1996 (Mizong zidi guanglun (1939; reprint, Shanghai: Shanghai Foxue shuju, 1996). Have you compared these versions to see whether they are the same, by chance?

Yes, certainly, I will check with Zhengjue library and scan the page for you. Please give me some days.
I do not personally own this book.

Wait till I locate the book first; if the 1996 version does not mention any "revised edition" (修訂版), then the two would be the same, I presume. Sorry, I did not compare these two versions. Thank you.

[Buddhism]

Buddhism, would it be possible for you to scan or photocopy "Tsongkhapa, Extended Treatise on the Progression of the Esoteric Path, translated into Chinese by dharma-master Fazun, Wondrous Favor Publishin Co., 1986," p. 376? Are there multiple copies of this book at your ZhengJue center, i.e. do many people refer to this book, or is it something you personally own? How would I get a copy? Thank you!

I can't find this edition anywhere; however there is Fazun's 1939 original, which was also republished in 1996 (Mizong zidi guanglun (1939; reprint, Shanghai: Shanghai Foxue shuju, 1996). Have you compared these versions to see whether they are the same, by chance?

Before I get hold of the book, for your reference, there is something here for your reading.
Please visit http://www.wretch.cc/blog/kc4580455/13716912
There are more detailed info regarding this book.
Dharma Master Yinshun 印順法師 did polish the book; there are some texts about p. 366 and p.377 as well.
Hope this would help a bit.

[Buddhism]

I don't mean to make more work for you, but as long as you're going to be disseminating your views in English (as you already do for the anti-Lamaism message), this is an obvious sort of thing that people are likely to ask about.

Many thanks for your kind intent.
You are right, indeed, Zhengjue is currently working on it, the English part is in progress.
I will come back to your points some other time. Thanks again.

[Buddhism]

If we observe our daily routines, among other things, we eat, work and enjoy life. Our physical body consumes all sorts of food while our minds also get full fed with various sensations; we do need our name-and-form 名色 (the five aggregates; skandhas;五蘊; eighteen sense-realms 十八界) to perform all different functions and discern the results.

For a normal sentient being, the perceiving mind (the sixth vijnana 意識 ) is the most replied upon vijnana. Unknowingly, we are constantly feeding our minds with various sensations of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches all our life except during deep sleep, become unconscious or in meditative concentration; all the incoming stuffs, whether good or defiled (excluding the morally neutral bits), would be faithfully stored in the Alayavijnana and added to our karmic force which would influence our future lives in many details. That is why the Hinayana practitioners are so extremely cautious with the deeds of their six sense-roots 六根 in order not to create any cause to impede their nirvana seeking.

The Buddhist teachings do not only demonstrate the cultivation methods, but also probe to the roots of matters and tell the reasons why; so the Buddhist sutras are mostly very long and seemingly with repeated contents. Once we know how things originally work and the possible outcome, the practice methods will certainly be more convincing and effective instead of merely following instructions or accepting as a suppressant. Consequently, the transformation process of a practitioner’s karmic seeds would advance slowly and surely; apart from the practitioner’s character or health conditions, even the people or matters he/she deals with would be influenced accordingly. For a Buddhist, the scope of life is decided in one’s own hands, and it all depends on how one collects his/her karmic seeds; the formation of reincarnation is fully in line with everyone’s thoughts, speeches, and deeds. It is because the Buddha nature is unceasingly holding the database and will substantiate the effects when the time is due. Therefore to have a common knowledge of the law of causality is definitely very crucial for everyone.

[Buddhism]

Buddhism, would it be possible for you to scan or photocopy "Tsongkhapa, Extended Treatise on the Progression of the Esoteric Path, translated into Chinese by dharma-master Fazun, Wondrous Favor Publishin Co., 1986," p. 376? Are there multiple copies of this book at your ZhengJue center, i.e. do many people refer to this book, or is it something you personally own? How would I get a copy? Thank you!

I can't find this edition anywhere; however there is Fazun's 1939 original, which was also republished in 1996 (Mizong zidi guanglun (1939; reprint, Shanghai: Shanghai Foxue shuju, 1996). Have you compared these versions to see whether they are the same, by chance?

Yes, certainly, I will check with Zhengjue library and scan the page for you. Please give me some days.
I do not personally own this book.

Wait till I locate the book first; if the 1996 version does not mention any "revised edition" (修訂版), then the two would be the same, I presume. Sorry, I did not compare these two versions. Thank you.

Thank you for your patience, I did post the pdf attachment for your refernce on the other thread.
I have also made three sets of copies (from different publishers) if you wish to have a good look at them, please sent a PM to the adm. then I can sent you the copies by post. There is no cost involved, you do not have to pay anything.

[Buddhism]

If the topic of your proposed debate was "that Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism", then of course I can understand XX Rinpoche's unwillingness to debate with you.

I did bring forth this issue to inquire. The fact was that when Zhengjue published the book "The Wrong Views Versus the Buddha Dharma 邪見與佛法" (which also listed the erroneous viewpoints of Tibetan Buddhism on p. 65-72), in which an invitation of "open assembly for doctrine debate 法義辨正無遮大會" (p.135-136) was issued to all readers in Jan. 2001. (It was before my time into Zhengjue) The conditions were set similar to that of Bodhisattva Xuanzang 玄奘菩薩 in the Tang Dynasty.

Dear Adikarmika, for your reference, the proposed debate was meant for "doctrinal debate"法義, and the terms of "Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism" is entirely irrelevant to this case. Besides, it was called an "open" debate which meant everyone, including non-Buddhists, is allowed to participate to debate over the Buddha dharma.

[adikarmika]

Dear Adikarmika, for your reference, the proposed debate was meant for "doctrinal debate"法義, and the terms of "Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism" is entirely irrelevant to this case. Besides, it was called an "open" debate which meant everyone, including non-Buddhists, is allowed to participate to debate over the Buddha dharma.

All right then. State your thesis, and if I disagree, I'll debate with you.

BTW, I don't think the issue of whether Tibetan Buddhists are Buddhists or not is, as you say, "entirely irrelevant to this case".
I mean, if you start citing scripture to support your thesis (as I imagine you would), you may be implying that your opponent in the debate is a Buddhist.
After all, you can't expect a non-Buddhist to accept scriptural authority as valid reason for anything.
(It's not even a valid reason for some Buddhists (e.g., Dharmakīrti and his school.))