Another indicator that the Lotus Sutra is no earlier than about the 2nd Century CE is its insistence that people are absolutely degenerate in Mappo, the Evil Latter Day of the Law, and that the earlier teachings hold no power to save people in this time period. This is virtually *identical* with Christianity's insistence that Judaism is "just too hard" and thus the no-effort salvation blah blah. The Lotus Sutra teaches that Shakyamuni Buddha's teachings will have lost their power to save people, and no one will be able to practice them anyhow.

This is all patently false. There are *plenty* of Buddhists around the world - by some counts, upwards of 1.5 BILLION, and guess what? THEY practice Shakyamuni's Buddhism! Not all of them, to be sure, but the overwhelming majority do not share the Lotus Sutra's insistence that the older sutras are all garbage now.

I was first exposed to the Therevada teachings at the Deer Park Monastery, founded by Thich Naht Than (sp?), the famous Vietnamese priest. Here is a section from THEIR gongyo, which they recite as the SGI does but that includes the English translation below each line (how sensible, right?):

Quote

"Properly considering the robe, I use it: simply to ward off cold, to ward off heat, to ward off the touch of flies, mosquitoes, simply for the purpose of covering the parts of the body that cause shame.

"Properly considering almsfood, I use it: not playfully, nor for intoxication, nor for putting on weight, nor for beautification; but simply for the survival and continuance of this body, for ending its afflictions, for the support of the chaste life, (thinking) I will destroy old feelings (of hunger) and not create new feelings (from overeating). Thus I will maintain myself, be blameless, and live in comfort.

"Properly considering the lodging, I use it: simply to ward off cold, to ward off heat, to ward off the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun and reptiles; simply for protection from the inclemencies of weather and for the enjoyment of seclusion.

"Properly considering medicinal requisites for curing the sick, I use them: simply to ward off any pains of illness that have arisen and for the maximum freedom from disease." [www.accesstoinsight.org]

What's so hard about THAT ^? It demonstrates a wise way of looking at various essentials of life, which I find enormously helpful. Imagine how this might help someone gripped with addiction, for example.

Once, during a gosho study, I raised the point that, doctrinally speaking, according to the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Shoshu, NO ONE alive during Mappo has made *any* good causes. I remember one Chapter WD leader, who happened to be black but that's just a detail, bristled at that, insisting that SHE was certain that SHE had chanted NMRK in a previous lifetime!

This insistence that EVERYONE in this time period is "depraved" corresponds to the "original sin" doctrine of Christianity (not shared by Judaism).

The doctrine that the older religion cannot "save" people and thus they need a new one to "save" them is the parallel of Christianity (replacing Judaism in that case).

The emphasis on rejecting and discarding the older religious teachings in favor of completely focusing on and embracing the newer one is completely in line with Christianity's attitude toward Judaism.

The fact is, though, that Buddhism isn't supposed to "save" people! It teaches people how to save themselves! Thus, the Lotus Sutra stems from the same time/place as Christianity's roots, and is an obvious and extreme departure from the Buddhist canon.

I think we can all see why, in spite of insisting that "faith, practice, and study" are absolutely *essential* to Buddhism, the SGI does not really encourage study O_O

Stace: Hi Mark,Did you read his article on “How the Mahayana Began”? He points out that in the essay you provide the “Corruption” of the Pali texts. The same could be applied to the Mahayana. Can you tell How this is possible: Chapter 10: The Teacher of the Law – This chapter presents the five practices of the teachers of the Lotus Sutra. These practices are accepting and upholding, reading, chanting, explaining and writing the Sutra. The Sutra begins, “Thus I Have Heard”. Ananda ,the Buddhas attendant recalling verbally, (orally) what the Buddha said. How and why would the Buddha then instruct the “hearers” of this sutra to READ and; WRITE it?

Mark: I just read it. I’m sure you are aware of one of the honorific titles of the Buddha, that of Omniscience. Gilbrich disagrees with Rys David, whether “books” were mentioned in the canon. Let me say that it is probable that the Buddha who talked about the decline, not only of his teachings but of the capacities of individuals, would have realized that one day his words would be lost unless they were written down. Tientai and Nichiren taught that the Lotus Sutra was not ostensibly taught for the people of the Middle Day, let alone for the people of the Former Day. Why would anyone believe that such capable monks who could memorize thousands of lines of oral texts were incapable of keeping secret, a teaching meant for a later time? These were highly disciplined men, unlike our present day politicians and heads of state who have successfully kept secrets [documents] for hundreds or even thousands of years. This is hardly an anomally but rather a misunderstanding of the greatness of the Buddha and his followers.

Stace: Other anomalies in the sutra are the use of the term Hinayana and Mahayana. In the Buddha’s time there was only the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha. No distinction of any Yanas. How could these terms be uttered by the Buddha or his followers when they hadn’t yet been created and would have no meaning?

Mark: Nearly the entire Buddhist Canon is devoted to correcting wrong thought. It is only natural that the words “Hinayana” and “Mahayana” were inserted when these words came into being. They don’t change one iota the words, “superficial thought and its adherents” and “superior thought and its adherents”, of the Buddha. This argument that anything was added too, is not tenable.

Stace: You wrote, “By the way, what I was referring to in the original post is the contention of some that the “Nikayas” are the actual words of the Buddha while the Lotus Sutra is not.”

All he is talking about are “corruptions” of the pali. I don’t see him addressing the validity of the Lotus Sutra as the actual words of the Buddha. This is what I thought, read “How the Mahayana Began”. He doesn’t necessariy refute your position.

Mark: Not him, others. Gombrich, in many ways supports our position. That is why I cited him, even though his understanding of the mind of the Buddha and the nature of the Sangha is incomplete.

Stace: You state that my summation is in err that SGI is a legitimate form of Buddhism in accord with teachings of Nichiren. I am arguing that “Nichiren Buddhism” and any lineage born from his teaching is valid because of the arguments put forth in the article you present so long as the purpose is Liberation.

Mark: I am very sorry if anyone misconstrues that the import of citing this article in any way supports the validity of Ikedaism and Gakkaism. Of course, this was not my intent. You know Stace, I don’t consider SGI to be Buddhism even though it has borrowed extensively from Buddhism. No Buddha, no Buddhahood is my contention.

Stace: I base it off of this excerpt:

”These processes are not random (adhicca-samuppanna) but causally determined. Any empirical phenomenon is seen as a causal sequence, and that applies to the sasanna too. ‘One thing leads to another,’ as the English idiom has it. Whether or not we can see features common to the religion of Mr Richard Causton, the late leader of the UK branch of Soka Gakkai International,(we could add here Kempon Hokke or any other Nichiren based group) and that of Nargarjuna, or of the Buddha himself, there is a train of human events which causally connects them. Buddhism is not an inert object: it is a chain of events.” PG.3

Mark: Devedatta and Shakyamuni were causally connected. That Gombrich fails to see this [that SGI is to Buddhism as Devedatta was to Shakyamuni]relates to his inability to know the mind of the Buddha.

Stace: Anyway, I do not think the article you presented puts forth the superiority of any teaching over the other but simply points out that there are things in the canon which were added and that this to be understood in an orally preserved teaching, but we can separate the wheat for the chaff and know what the buddha said.

Mark: How much harder is it to know what the Buddha meant and to know the reality of the Buddha?

Stace: I cannot, I mean physically cannot, force my brain to take most religious statement literally and therefor will never be a true believer. I love Dharma and Liberation wherever it be found, as there are so many flowers and scents to delight our senses I believe there are many pathways to liberation. I do not doubt the Lotus, Nichirens teachings, and the teachings Kempon Hokke offers such a pathway but I will never believe that it is the only door.

Mark: Of course, the Kempon Hokke, is not the only pathway. Namu Myoho renge kyo, the Lotus Sutra, and Shakyamuni Buddha is the only pathway and not the claims and reality of the SGI and Nichiren Shoshu that the only pathway is a living mentor in the seat of the Law. The only living mentor in the seat of the Law is Shakyamuni Buddha.

You too be well.

"Modern editors of the Pali Canon, however, have generally contented themselves with trying to establish a textus receptus or ‘received text’. Let me explain. Most of our physical evidence for the Pali Canon is astonishingly recent, far more recent than our physical evidence for the western classical and biblical texts.

While talking of this, I want to take the opportunity to correct a mistake in something I published earlier this year. In Professor K. R. Norman’s splendid revision of Geiger’s Pali Grammar, published by the Pali Text Society (Geiger, 1994), I wrote an introduction called ‘What is Pali?’ (Gombrich, 1994a). In that I wrote (p. xxv) that a Kathmandu manuscript of c.800 A.D. is ‘the oldest substantial piece of written Pali to survive’ if we except the inscriptions from Devnimori and Ratnagiri, which differ somewhat in phonetics from standard Pali. This is wrong. One can quibble about what ‘substantial’ means; but it must surely include a set of twenty gold leaves found in the Khin Ba Gôn trove near Sri Ketra, Burma, by Duroiselle in 1926-7. The leaves are inscribed with eight excerpts from the Pali Canon. Professor Harry Falk has now dated them, on paleographic grounds, to the second half of the fifth century A.D., which makes them by far the earliest physical evidence for the Pali canonical texts (Stargardt, 1995). -- Richard F. Gombrich

Therefore, according to this reliable information, the Sanskrit text of the Lotus Sutra is older than the Pali texts that the Hinayana Buddhists arrogantly claim to be the only authoritative texts of what the Buddha actually taught.

[www.tricycle.com] ... -turns-out

"It is now clear that none of the existing Buddhist collections of early Indian scriptures—not the Pali, Sanskrit, Chinese, nor even the Gandhari—“can be privileged as the most authentic or original words of the Buddha.” -- Linda Heuman

"Only the Lotus Sutra represents the wonderful teaching preached directly from the golden mouth of Shakyamuni Buddha, who is perfectly endowed with the three bodies." -- Nichiren Daishonin

There are various teaching methods employed by the Buddha in the Lotus Sutra: simile; metaphor; parable [of which there are seven]; skillful or expedient means; logic; historical precedent; narration [current events and prior birth stories]; questions and answers; and most importantly, a direct exposition of his Enlightenment. When studying the Lotus Sutra one can reflect, "here the Buddha is speaking of his experience in a previous existence and here the Buddha is answering the question of Sariputra", etc. Are there worlds where the Buddha actually experienced parthenogenesis as the physiological method of reproducing the species or is it a metaphor or is it something else? Is the Treasure Tower a metaphor only? Bodhisattvas 500 feet tall on other worlds? Flying cars? Some things are fruitless to question or contemplate and the Buddha was silent.

Lastly the principle of Ichinen Sanzen is unsurpassed whether theoretical, the 3000 Realms in a Momentary Existence of Life of person, society, and environment simultaneously and the reality of Actual Ichinen Sanzen [the Daimoku and the Gohonzon]. Let me expound a bit more on the Lotus Sutra and other religious faiths:

Each person, society, and environment, even the Buddha's land has a defiled and pure aspect. When the pure aspect is manifest we speak in terms of Enlightenment. When the defiled aspect manifests, we speak of delusion. Were there not the inferior teachings to contrast with the Lotus Sutra there would be no way of ascertaining the truth. Likewise, were there no deluded teachers, we could never come to know the merits and virtues of Shakyamuni Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin, teachers without peer.

Generally, those who have faith in and practice the Lotus Sutra are Bodhisattvas of the Earth. Specifically, Nichiren Daishonin is the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra. Generally we are all Buddhas but specifically, from a deeper sense, Shakyamuni Buddha is the Original Eternal Buddha. From the deepest sense, we are the Three Bodied Tathagata of Original Enlightenment, Shakyamuni Buddha ourselves. Nichiren teaches that this most difficult to believe and most difficult to understand teaching should not be bandied about lightly. In our mundane thoughts and activities, it is best to think in terms of the general meaning, having gratitude for and giving praise to the Lotus Sutra [Law], Eternal Buddha Shakyamuni and Nichiren Daishonin. Similar reasonings can be given in the case of our relationship to the Law. Generally, everyone is a manifestation of the Mystic Law, even a dust mite. Specifically, Shakyamuni Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin are those who are one with the Mystic Law. There is a saying derived from the Infinite Meanings Sutra, the introduction to the Lotus Sutra: "Infinite meanings derive from the one Law." Equally, infinite phenomena derive from the one Law.

Even Nichiren Daishonin and the Buddha couldn't convert everyone. "To the best of our ability" while employing the strategy of the Lotus Sutra and the wisdom of the Buddha is the means outlined by the Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin to awaken the masses of beings. The Three Proofs, documentary, theoretical, and actual is what will capture other's attention. For example, in converting a Christian or Muslim, documentary proof is comparing and contrasting the Bible or Q'uran with the Lotus Sutra. Theoretical proof is pointing out the reasonableness and sound logic of such concepts as the Mutual Possession of the Ten Worlds and 3000 Realms in a Momentary Existence of Life [Ichinen Sanzen], and the functioning of the Law of Cause and effect. Proof of actual fact is the joy of practicing this teaching, overcoming our limitations and pointing out the hellish reality of a society based on Judeo-Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and even scientific rationalism.

Nichijew



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2013 10:31PM by Nichijew.

Quote

"It is now clear that none of the existing Buddhist collections of early Indian scriptures—not the Pali, Sanskrit, Chinese, nor even the Gandhari—“can be privileged as the most authentic or original words of the Buddha.” -- Linda Heuman

Correct. Because no such person as the Buddha ever existed outside of myth and legend.

Quote

"Only the Lotus Sutra represents the wonderful teaching preached directly from the golden mouth of Shakyamuni Buddha, who is perfectly endowed with the three bodies." -- Nichiren Daishonin

Really? If that's the case, then why did it take until the 2nd Century CE to actually write it down? Why was it *unknown* to the scribes who wrote down the earlier texts of the Pali canon, and why is it so drastically different from the Buddhist canon?

It's not enough to just state "This is the case", you know. You have to be able to support your contention or at least admit "This is only my opinion and I happen to like it."

Quote

Even Nichiren Daishonin and the Buddha couldn't convert everyone.

The Buddha never sought this. Of the two, only Nichiren wanted to be the boss of everyone and to be hailed as the most important person in all of Japan. The Buddha is never portrayed with such a colossal black-hole of ego and arrogance, not to mention spitefulness, vindictiveness, and wishing harm upon others. The Buddha never stated that he had the "only" way - the Buddha understood that not everyone needs or wants the same thing. The intolerance and "my way's the only way" were characteristic of the medieval time period in which Nichiren and the founders of Zen and Japanese Pure Land lived:

Quote

Zen in Japan, along with Pure Land Buddhism and Nichiren Buddhism, both of which also have large followings in the West, has its roots in medieval Japan—a period in which the Lotus Sutra was, not incidentally, the preeminent scripture. Those three traditions did indeed all originate in medieval Japan, specifically in the Kamakura period, from 1185 to 1333, a seminal moment in the history of Japanese Buddhism. Their founders—Esai and Dogen for Zen, Honen and Shinran for Pure Land, and Nichiren [Single Practice Masters]—all lived during this time and were all rooted in the same Buddhist culture. More specifically, they all started out as monks in the Tendai tradition centered on Mount Hiei, and this was formative for all of them. Although practitioners in each of these traditions often see themselves as having little in common with those of the others, there are some important similarities.

The most striking similarity is that they all originate as what historians of Japanese Buddhism call single-practice movements. That is, out of the many forms of Buddhist practice, they each embrace one as being universally efficacious. For Nichiren Buddhists, this means chanting the daimoku, the title of the Lotus Sutra, Namu-myoho-renge-kyo. For Zen Buddhists, in particular those of Eihei Dogen's Soto school, it means doing zazen, or seated meditation. For Pure Land Buddhists, it means reciting the nembutsu, the name of Amida Buddha, Namu Amida Butsu. The traditions agree in their exclusive belief in the effectiveness of a single practice; they disagree about what that practice is.

The idea that one particular practice is the only effective practice seems to contradict the Lotus Sutra's emphasis on the multiple means for reaching enlightenment. So how did the logic of pursuing a single practice develop, and why did it catch on? One might well say that inclusiveness is a defining characteristic of Tendai Buddhism and the mainstream Buddhist position at the time was that all Buddhist teachings have their own validity, depending on the capacity of individual practitioners. So the notion of abstracting a single form and giving it unique status and claiming that it was equally appropriate for all people was really a challenge to the dominant religious establishment. I strongly suspect that the logic of single-practice approaches has its roots at least in part in an exclusive reading of the Lotus Sutra's idea of the One Vehicle. For Nichiren and Honen and Shinran, though not for Dogen, single practice is also connected to the idea of mappo. [webcache.googleusercontent.com]
It's exactly like the different sects of Evangelical Christianity that insist each is the only correct one and every other is wrong. In fact, Nichiren's vitriol and antagonism toward his brother Buddhisms mirrors *precisely* the various religious conflicts within Christianity. So similar... And likewise, no room whatsoever for personal realization or interpretation, unless it happens to be the leader's (Nichiren, in this case; Paul most famously in the case of Christianity).

Quote
TaitenAndProud

Quote

"It is now clear that none of the existing Buddhist collections of early Indian scriptures—not the Pali, Sanskrit, Chinese, nor even the Gandhari—“can be privileged as the most authentic or original words of the Buddha.” -- Linda Heuman

Correct. Because no such person as the Buddha ever existed outside of myth and legend.

“Have you or your teachers seen the Buddha?”
“No, great king.”

“Then, Nâgasena, there is no Buddha!”
“Have you or your father seen the River Ûhâ?¹ in the Himalayas?”

“No venerable sir.”
“Then would it be right to say there is no river Ûhâ?”
“You are dexterous, Nâgasena, in reply.”

¹ The source of the Ganges.

Nichijew

I see. So if there is no evidence of something, the only sensible course of action is to believe whatever people tell you - is that it?

If someone left *no* footprint on history, if there are *NO* artefacts attesting to this person in or near the time period he is supposed to belong to, then it is not only rational but wise to suspect that this person never existed.

While Buddhism has, to some degree, escaped the withering scrutiny Christianity has received, it is a great embarrassment for Christians and Christianity that there are *no* contemporary mentions of their all-important godman and, in fact, no mentions at all until many decades later, at the very least, and not *one* of these is an eye-witness account.

"Again, if God, like Jupiter in the comedy, should, on awaking from a lengthened slumber, desire to rescue the human race from evil, why did He send this Spirit of which you speak into one corner (of the earth)? He ought to have breathed it alike into many bodies, and have sent them out into all the world. Now the comic poet, to cause laughter in the theatre, wrote that Jupiter, after awakening, despatched Mercury to the Athenians and Lacedaemonians; but do not you think that you have made the Son of God more ridiculous in sending Him to the Jews?" - Celsus, supposed 2nd Century critic of Christianity

Buddhism never claims that its central figure is in any way divine, but the fact remains - the earliest Buddhist scriptures do not show up until CENTURIES after the Buddha supposedly died. That means that all the eye-witnesses to the Buddha would have died as well (had there been any). And I don't share your confidence in the supposed superhuman memories of people neither you nor I have ever met nor will ever meet.

I ran into a woman online, who was stating with complete confidence that the Buddha taught "secret teachings" to the most advanced of disciples. And that these were still being taught. Despite never having been written down.

"How can you tell whether what's now being taught is the same as what was originally supposedly taught, given that nothing was ever written down?" I asked.

She did not reply.

Quote

Mark: Devedatta and Shakyamuni were causally connected. That Gombrich fails to see this [that SGI is to Buddhism as Devedatta was to Shakyamuni]relates to his inability to know the mind of the Buddha.

Oh. But YOU do. YOU know the mind of the Buddha O_O

I'm with Gombrich :D



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2013 05:45AM by TaitenAndProud.

Google epidemics and nichiren

[www.google.com] and, for variety, google smallpox and nichiren

[www.google.com]

Nichiren began his teaching career during a time of terrible social unrest in Japan. The end of the Heian period and the beginning of the Kamakura period was marked by famines, epidemics and social unrest.

[webcache.googleusercontent.com]
(
(tiny excerpt)

Quote

II: History and Philosophy of Nichiren’s Buddhism Nichiren’s philosophy, however, is of necessity at the same time historical. This is because his fundamental beliefs in the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra come from the reflection of the time he lived in. He explains why he felt the need to write his philosophical treatise, On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land, as a result of discovering the true reason for why there had been natural disasters epidemics constantly destroying the lives of people, even though the Buddhist teachings were everywhere practiced.

Supposedly the first introduction of smallpox to Japan in the 6th century CE was catastropic--one third of the people were estimated to have died. Thi is comparable to the mortality rate produced by the 14th century bubonic plague pandemic in Western Europe.

[webcache.googleusercontent.com]

Quote

As early as the 6th century
cultural and trading contacts were increasing
between China and Japan, both directly and
via Korea. Buddhism was first introduced
into Japan from Korea in AD 552, and further
contacts were made later that centurv. Small-
pox was introduced at about the same time,
and the Japanese were perplexed to know
whether to ascribe the pestilence to their
indigenous Shinto gods or-to the new Buddha.

There were repeated reintroductions during
the 7th and 8th centuries. Nara, the first real
city in Japan, was established in 710; in 735
smallpox, introduced by a shipwrecked sailor,
devastated the city of half a million inhabi-
tants and killed manv of the nobles. Small~ox
continued to be the focus of religious argu-
ment between the Shinto priests and the
adherents of Buddhism, and in 748 the great
bronze statue of Buddha, the Nara Daibutsu,
was completed, having been commissioned by
the Emperor to put an end to his troubles
with smallpox. Endemic smallpox was estab-
lished in Japan during the 10th century, but
there were still recurrent severe epidemics
that affected villages and towns in which the
endemic disease did not occur

Smallpox had been repeatedly introduced
into Japan from China and Korea ever since
AD 585. At first it died out after each
introduction but by the 10th century the
disease was endemic. Numerous outbreaks
occurred throughout the 10th century, with
major epidemics recorded in the years 915,
925, 947, 974, 993 and 998. In 982 the "red
treatment" (see box) was first described in
Isbinbo, a Japanese medical book. This practice
later spread around the world and persisted in
Europe and the USA down to the 20th
century, as described by Hopkins (1983a).
Isbinbo also makes mention of special isolation
hospitals for smallpox patients, several
hundred years before the London Small-Pox
and Inoculation Hospital was established in
1746

.

Quote

During the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries
Japan recorded 7 widely spaced epidemics of
smallpox (1209,1277,1311,1361,1424,1452
and 1454). Only 2 epidemics were recorded in
the 16th century (1522 and 1550), but in the
17th century the country was more severely
afflicted by outbreaks, during which the
Japanese royal family was affected. The north-
ern island of Hokkaido recorded an average of
1 epidemic of smallpox every 14 or 15 years
during the 17th and 18th centuries.

Quote
TaitenAndProud
I see. So if there is no evidence of something, the only sensible course of action is to believe whatever people tell you - is that it?

If someone left *no* footprint on history, if there are *NO* artefacts attesting to this person in or near the time period he is supposed to belong to, then it is not only rational but wise to suspect that this person never existed.

While Buddhism has, to some degree, escaped the withering scrutiny Christianity has received, it is a great embarrassment for Christians and Christianity that there are *no* contemporary mentions of their all-important godman and, in fact, no mentions at all until many decades later, at the very least, and not *one* of these is an eye-witness account.

"Again, if God, like Jupiter in the comedy, should, on awaking from a lengthened slumber, desire to rescue the human race from evil, why did He send this Spirit of which you speak into one corner (of the earth)? He ought to have breathed it alike into many bodies, and have sent them out into all the world. Now the comic poet, to cause laughter in the theatre, wrote that Jupiter, after awakening, despatched Mercury to the Athenians and Lacedaemonians; but do not you think that you have made the Son of God more ridiculous in sending Him to the Jews?" - Celsus, supposed 2nd Century critic of Christianity

Buddhism never claims that its central figure is in any way divine, but the fact remains - the earliest Buddhist scriptures do not show up until CENTURIES after the Buddha supposedly died. That means that all the eye-witnesses to the Buddha would have died as well (had there been any). And I don't share your confidence in the supposed superhuman memories of people neither you nor I have ever met nor will ever meet.

I ran into a woman online, who was stating with complete confidence that the Buddha taught "secret teachings" to the most advanced of disciples. And that these were still being taught. Despite never having been written down.

"How can you tell whether what's now being taught is the same as what was originally supposedly taught, given that nothing was ever written down?" I asked.

She did not reply.

Gombrich is a devout protestant, never a practicing Buddhist, so how could he understand the mind of the Buddha? Those who practice and defend the teachings of the Buddha from icchantikas might be expected to understand the mind of the Buddha, don't you think so?

Nichijew

Quote
TaitenAndProud

Quote

Mark: Devedatta and Shakyamuni were causally connected. That Gombrich fails to see this [that SGI is to Buddhism as Devedatta was to Shakyamuni]relates to his inability to know the mind of the Buddha.

Oh. But YOU do. YOU know the mind of the Buddha O_O

I'm with Gombrich :D

Gombrich is a devout protestant, never a practicing Buddhist, so how could he understand the mind of the Buddha? Those who practice and defend the teachings of the Buddha from icchantikas might be expected to understand the mind of the Buddha, don't you think so?

Nichijew



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2013 11:27AM by Nichijew.