XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: daletx@gnusguy.com   
      
   Evelyn wrote:   
   >   
   > "Allen Barker"  wrote in message   
   > news:i42v3s$i2t$1@news.eternal-september.org...   
   >> On 08/12/2010 08:26 PM, Jigme Dorje wrote:   
   >>> On Aug 12, 1:18 pm, Julian  wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/08/2010 17:42, DT wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Well, here's a question for you, or Jigme, or whoever.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> If somebody were to ask me for a brief synopsis of the New   
   >>>>> Testament, or   
   >>>>> of Jesus' teachings, I'd tell 'em to read Matthew 5-7, the Sermon   
   >>>>> on the   
   >>>>> Mount.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Is there a comparable portion of the Lotus Sutra that might hit all   
   >>>>> the   
   >>>>> high points,   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No (imo)   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> or do I need to just start at the beginning and go through   
   >>>>> all 28 chapters?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You might as well, but you can skip nearly half of each chapter   
   >>>> since often the prose is repeated as verse.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ps.   
   >>>> Nichiren followed the T'ien-t'ai line in emphasising   
   >>>> ch. 2  Expedient Means   
   >>>> and, particularly, the "jewel"   
   >>>> ch.16 The Life Span of the Tathāgata   
   >>>   
   >>> Expedient means? That's ALL it's about.   
   >>>   
   >>> I'll save you the trouble of reading it. Here's the Cliff Notes   
   >>> version, which I call "Lotus in a Nutshell":   
   >>>   
   >>> The Buddha admits that everything he's told us up to now has been just   
   >>> a pack of lies. Now he's decided to come clean.   
   >>>   
   >>> But first, he makes a bunch of excuses for all those lies. It seems he   
   >>> did it for our own good because we were too childish to understand for   
   >>> real, and he just wanted to save our sorry asses.   
   >>>   
   >>> So the real truth is: I wasn't really a man who became enlightened.   
   >>>   
   >>> I was an immortal god all along, deserving of your worship. I'm only   
   >>> telling you this now because you're so much better than all those   
   >>> other uncomprehending dolts.   
   >>>   
   >>> A beautiful story with a special appeal to triumphalist egotists.   
   >>   
   >> Wow, I wasn't expecting that "analysis" from Jigme...   
   >   
   >   
   > There are many others just as scathing in their opinions.   This is what   
   > Richard Hayes, author of "land of no buddha" and others, had to say   
   > about it when he used to post here.   
   >   
   > Buddha Baby wrote:   
   >   
   >> Seeing that you have touched upon the subject of Buddhist traditions,   
   >> I would like to   
   >> take this opportunity to ask you to clarify your position on a related   
   >> matter. The   
   >> Saddharmapundarika Sutra a.k.a. the Lotus Sutra.   
   >   
   > My position in a nutshell is that I quite like the Lotus Sutra for its   
   > poetry, its imagery, its imaginative parables, its irony and its humour.   
   > I think it is a brilliant piece of literature. As a long-time Zen   
   > practitioner, I also happen to love it as liturgy. The chapter on   
   > Avalokiteshvara moves me deeply. (I have said all these things many   
   > times.)   
   >   
   > Like Chih-I, I think the Sad-dahrma-pundarika is a text that a person   
   > should study only after having a mastery of the nikaayas, the   
   > praj~naa-paaramitaa and some of the other suutras such as the   
   > Vimalakiirti-nirdes'a. It is only when one has a firm foundation in the   
   > full dharma tradition that the subtlety of the text becomes apparent.   
   > Therefore, I think it is lamentable when people focus exclusively, or   
   > even primarily, on the Lotus Sutra and turn it into a polemic text   
   > trivializing other forms of Buddhism and suggesting that they offer   
   > lesser goals, lower aspirations and diminished attainments. Used as a   
   > pretext for triumphalism, as SOME (but by no means all) followers of   
   > Nichiren use it, the Lotus Sutra becomes a platform for a kind of   
   > bigotry that I find completely contrary to the spirit of the sad-dharma.   
   > Studied properly and in the proper sequence of study, as the   
   > T'ien-t'ai/Tendai traditions studied it, it is a beautiful text with a   
   > sublime message. It saddens me deeply to see it abused, both by some of   
   > its more ignorant and fanatical admirers (whose abuse is obviously   
   > unintentional but nevertheless quite damaging) and by its various   
   > detractors.   
   >   
   > Mubul   
   > (Richard P. Hayes)   
   >   
   > And here is another;   
   >   
   >   
   > Doc Mark Rogow wrote:   
   >   
   >>        The Lotus Sutra teaches that icchantikas can be saved by virtue   
   >> of the   
   >> Sutra but nowhere does it teach that they don't exist.   
   >   
   > If you have the time to give me a precise reference, I would appreciate   
   > getting it. You can cite the page number of any English translation of   
   > the Lotus Sutra. I have five of them. The reference works I have give   
   > many references to passages in the Lankavatara but not to any in the   
   > Lotus where the term is used.   
   >   
   > I cannot recall seeing a discussion of icchantikas in the Lotus Sutra. I   
   > am, of course, quite familiar with the concept as it comes up in the   
   > Lankavatara. There is it said that for every icchantika there is a   
   > bodhisattva dedicated to bringing the icchantika to full realization of   
   > the Dharma. This is quite a wonderful image, like that of the   
   > irresistible force meeting the immovable object. Part of the emotional   
   > impact of the image, of course, is that bodisattvas are so altruistic   
   > that they will forever postpone their own entry into final nirvana. They   
   > will remain eternally in samsara, if need be, in order to work for the   
   > welfare of others. They will forgo the greatest good so that others can   
   > have it. That's a very beautiful image of nobility of spirit.   
   >   
   >> I know quite a few personally.   
   >   
   > It is said that only an icchantika can recognize another icchantika. One   
   > of their characteristics is that they flock together.   
   >   
   >>                                                                What   
   >> is the cause for attaining buddhahood in the latter day? Only chanting   
   >> Namu   
   >> myoho renge kyo with faith in the Lotus Sutra(Eternal Buddha).   
   >   
   >>          It  is in no way the fault of the Buddha if one refuses to   
   >> believe the   
   >> Lotus Sutra and to attain Buddhahood quickly.   
   >   
   > Let me speak to you as one poet to another, Mark. As a poet, I quite   
   > like the Lotus Sutra. I think of it as being like the golden crown   
   > sitting on the head of a splendid and dignified King. The body of that   
   > monarch is the Body of Dharma, the corpus of all Buddhist texts of all   
   > the vehicles. Flowing through the body of that great monarch is the   
   > royal lifeblood of Dependent Origination, also known as Emptiness. It is   
   > that royal blood that runs in the veins of every great King worthy of   
   > the name. And sitting atop that splendid and radiant monarch is a sutra   
   > that inspires the imagination, fires the emotions, gladdens the heart   
   > and inspires one to revere the King with full dedication of his body,   
   > heart and mind.   
   >   
   > But if that crown is taken off the king, it becomes a cheap bauble. It   
   > is only the vast corpus of all Buddhist sutras that give the Lotus its   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)