Teachings of a few Buddha's

last SG · 2010-08-15T16:37:22+00:00

My understanding is that in India then, there were many high level of Theravada practitioners that can not achieve a breakthrough. When Buddha Sakyamuni atta...

Rooney9 SG

since there can be one king or PM or president, can there be a few Buddha teachings at the same time? There can only be a Buddha to appear, but not 2 Buddha's appearing at the same time, or there can only be a Buddha appearing and when his teachings ended, then the next Buddha will appear after a long period of time.

An Eternal Now SG

There can only be one Nirmanakaya Buddha in one universe in one era. In our era, it is Shakyamuni Buddha.

However, there are numberless Buddhas belonging to different universes.

Rooney9 SG

how come there are Amitabha Buddha teachings and Buddha Medicine teachings?

since there can only be one Buddha who appear. too many teachings spoil the broth, since all Buddha teachings are the same. But Pureland Paradise practise is to chant Buddha Amitabha's name in order to be reborn there, which is different from what Buddha Shakayamuni taught.

anyway is Pureland within or outside of Samsara, how does it compare to Nirvana?

An Eternal Now SG

how come there are Amitabha Buddha teachings and Buddha Medicine teachings?

anyway is Pureland within or outside of Samsara, how does it compare to Nirvana?

Amitabha Buddha and Medicine Buddha are from another universe.

Pure Land is not a samsaric realm. However, depending on which level of pure land (there are four), it may not necessarily be Nirvana. At the lowest level it could be an expedient means, a place for people to practice to attain Nirvana.

zero thought SG

how come there are Amitabha Buddha teachings and Buddha Medicine teachings?

Shakyamuni Buddha taught us about Amitabha Buddha and Buddha Medicine, that's why we have these teachings.

since there can only be one Buddha who appear. too many teachings spoil the broth, since all Buddha teachings are the same.

Doesn't spoil the broth. Sentient beings are different. Some like salty broth, some like spicy broth, some like sweet broth. So they pick the dharma door they prefer and practice.

But Pureland Paradise practise is to chant Buddha Amitabha's name in order to be reborn there, which is different from what Buddha Shakayamuni taught.

Pureland practice is not different from what Buddha Shakayamuni taught. It is one of the dharma doors taught by Shakyamuni Buddha without being request - indicating it's importance.

anyway is Pureland within or outside of Samsara, how does it compare to Nirvana?

When pureland practitioners recite Amitabha Buddha's name and get reborn in pure land, they will never backslide from there, and only progress forward to Buddhahood.

2009novice SG

Amitabha Buddha and Medicine Buddha are from another universe.

interesting question.. I thought Pureland is a samaric place...

2009novice SG

how come there are Amitabha Buddha teachings and Buddha Medicine teachings?

Shakyamuni Buddha taught us about Amitabha Buddha and Buddha Medicine, that's why we have these teachings.

Ahh thanks for the explanation...

But what about those who made Pu Sa's vow? I assumed those who made Pu Sa's vow will go into samsaric world to enlighten others and delay Nirvana... including Pureland as well?

Rooney9 SG

Amitabha Buddha and Medicine Buddha are from another universe.

it is at odds with what Shakyamuni taught ie Nirvana.

anything not Nirvana like heaven etc, is within samsara isnt it. when a person unenlightened when he/she was alive, how to be reborn in pureland and become enlightened even if Amitabha Buddha was there. even the Buddha himself said he is a teacher, you yourself has to walk the path. even Amitabha Buddha also cannot guarantee one to attain Nirvana reborn in his pureland

Rooney9 SG

how come there are Amitabha Buddha teachings and Buddha Medicine teachings?

Shakyamuni Buddha taught us about Amitabha Buddha and Buddha Medicine, that's why we have these teachings.

I am more inclined to Theravada. Amitbaha and Buddha Medicine was not in the Theravada canon, which brings to a question, why wasnt it included when it was taught by the historical Buddha. there is no reason why it was not included if it was indeed taught by the Buddha isnt it.

2009novice SG

haha then I assume theravada broth suits u... lol

Rooney9 SG

I am wondering if it was taught by the Buddha, why wasnt it included in th theravada canon during the first council. during that time, Mahayana wasnt formed yet and there was no notion of theravada nor Mahayana during the Buddha's time. unless it wasnt taught by the Buddha himself.

An Eternal Now SG

There are many theories about how Mahayana sutras came about, many still believe they were the words of the historical Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni.

However as I have explained my position on this before, based on evidence and the views of Loppon Namdrol. ALL Mahayana Sutras are later revelations by enlightened masters who received visions of Sambhogakaya. Pure visions of the Buddha. So are Mahayana Sutras taught by Shakyamuni? I would say yes: but the Sambhogakaya manifestation, not Nirmanakaya.

Mahayana Sutras are revealed later when the conditions to spread Mahayana has come to be. It was not taught 2500 years ago by the historical appearance of Buddha. This however, does not mean that Mahayana sutras are invalid.

As Namdrol stated, "That is completely irrelevent to the quality of the teaching of this or that sutra. One's criteria ought not be authorship, but wisdom."

An Eternal Now SG

it is at odds with what Shakyamuni taught ie Nirvana.

It is not at odds because the lowest level of pure land is set as expedient means for practitioners to practice and attain enlightenment/nirvana.

Even in Pure Land, if you are unenlightened, you have to practice yourself to become enlightened. Amitabha simply provides you with the best environment and conditions to help you along. You still have to practice yourself.

Rooney9 SG

There are many theories about how Mahayana sutras came about, many still believe they were the words of the historical Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni.

As Namdrol stated, "That is completely irrelevent to the quality of the teaching of this or that sutra. One's criteria ought not be authorship, but wisdom."

fair enough, but then it doesnt state why it was not included in the theravada canon in the first council. I am not siding theravada or anything, I just want to establish the facts.

masters? are they as the same level as the Buddha? what about Namdrol then? I was wondering if the Buddha did forsee this? did he mentioned anything on this? The Buddha, during his 45 years of teaching, I was wondering why did he hold back on this?

I am not anti Mahayana, dun get me wrong. someone told me something, which is highly controversial, which If I post it here, will create alot of ruckus and endless debate. Buddha Amitabha, Guan Shi Yin Pusa and Lotus Sutra was not included in the Theravada canon. If it was taught by the historical Buddha, there should be included in.

Rooney9 SG

It is not at odds because the lowest level of pure land is set as expedient means for practitioners to practice and attain enlightenment/nirvana.

the issue is if u are unenlightened, you can create alot of problems for urself even if u r in heaven. same when these people go to pureland. due to their ignorance, what makes you think they will practise and be good.

An Eternal Now SG

fair enough, but then it doesnt state why it was not included in the theravada canon in the first council. I am not siding theravada or anything, I just want to establish the facts.

What your friend told you is nothing new. It is all known before already.

Not only is Lotus Sutra not in Theravadin canon, basically every single Mahayana canon scripture except the Agamas are not found in Theravadin canon. You name it: Heart Sutra, Diamond Sutra, Prajnaparamita Sutras, Lankavatara Sutra, Shurangama Sutra, Amitabha Sutra, Lotus Sutra, Avatamsaka Sutra, Virmalakirti Sutra, Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva Sutra, etc etc.

Same goes to Bodhisattvas and Buddhas - Guan Yin, Amitabha, Medicine Buddha, Manjusri, Ksitigarbha, Samantabhadra, you name it - all those bodhisattvas/buddhas cannot be found in Theravada.

The only bodhisattvas mentioned in Theravada is 1) Shakyamuni, before he became Buddha, 2) Maitreya, the next-to-be-Buddha, Bodhisattva, currently residing in Tusita Heaven.

As I said, all Mahayana sutras are revealed only later when the conditions have come. The Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni Buddha wanted to focus on certain teachings that he felt will be more beneficial/acceptable to that particular group of students and conditions, due to their inclinations and capacities. Particularly he wanted to focus on teaching the way to the attainment of Arhantship and the end of suffering - it was seen as a more immediate and practical and acceptable goal for those people at that time, rather than focusing on how to practice as a Bodhisattva to attain Buddhahood in order to save all sentient beings.

As for Sambhogakaya: it could be that those masters are fully enlightened, or even if not, they are at least 8th bhumi bodhisattvas, otherwise they will not be able to have visions of the sambhogakaya Buddha.

zero thought SG

Ahh thanks for the explanation...

But what about those who made Pu Sa's vow? I assumed those who made Pu Sa's vow will go into samsaric world to enlighten others and delay Nirvana... including Pureland as well?

It depends on their vow. But if they know enough of Pureland, they will very likely choose to go there 1st, then return to samsara to help sentient beings, because in Pureland you can't retreat from Nirvana, and only progress forward in the conducive environment.

If they choose not to go to Pureland and want to practice here till they are able to help enlighten others, still can backslide in practice. As ordinary sentient beings trying for Bodhisattvahood and Buddhahood, we are still easily turned by evil states hence can still fall to the lower realms. In Pureland, no one who goes there will ever fall back into the 3 lower realms.

When we are still drowning in the ocean of suffering, it's difficult to help others in the sea to safety. So for those who make Pu Sa vow, it is still best to get climb on to the PL ship 1st where they will be safe and dry before trying help others onto it.

2009novice SG

oh... thanks for the information... zero thought

@ TS - just for further thought, u said that too many teachings spoil the broth. I remembered there was once I attended a dharma talk and the fa shi mentioned that there were various teachings because our nature self is different. So that's the reason to help spread and enlighten the diverse types of people.

Mahayana blends into various cultures of different type of people so that the teachings can "speak" their languages.

zero thought SG

Originally, there wasn't and any Theravada or Mahayana, it was just "The Buddha's Teachings".

Like what AEN mentioned, the ability to receive and accept the Buddha's teachings depend on conditions. If everything is put in one canon, beings whose conditions for the Mahayana has not ripen see the teachings, they will not be able to accept the teachings. If a student do not believe in 1 teaching of a teacher, will there be a higher tendency for the student to doubt the other teachings? Things have to be revealed according to conditions, if conditions are not right, throwing everything out will not help but may in fact hinder the situation.

To understand this point, you will have to read the Pureland Sutras and their commentaries. The Pure Land is not like our turbid world with all kind of impurities and stuff to distract us and dull our minds. The environment there is very conducive and beings in the Pureland only progress forward to Buddhahood, they don't get lazy and slacken off in practice.There are many birds (from the transformations of Amitabha Buddha), wonderous music, etc. in the Pureland that are constantly speaking the dharma to the beings there and hence the beings there are constantly mindful of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. If they are constantly mindful of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, how can they commit evil out of ignorance?

Fcukpap SG

the broth is empty as much as the meat is a vegetable..