Dahui's Treasury vol 2:
No. 155. Mazu said, You should each believe your own mind is Buddha. This mind itself is Buddha. The great teacher Bodhidharma came to Chinafrom South India, transmitting the supreme vehicle’s teaching of one mind, to get you to wake up. He also cited the Lankavatara Sutra to seal people’s mind ground, lest in your confusion you fail to believe for yourself that each of you has the reality of one mind. So the Lankavatara sutra has Buddha’s talks on mind as its source; the method of denial is the method of teaching. Those who seek the teaching should not be seeking anything—there is no separate Buddha outside of mind, no separate mind apart from Buddha.
100 Questions:
No. 33 Question: When Bodhidharma came from the West, he didn’t establish writings—why did he say ‘the Diamond and Lankavatara sutras are my mind’?
Answer: Luckily they are keys to mind.
Verse: Luckily they are keys to mind—
Obliterating mystery and marvel,
Penetrating the barriers of Chan,
The one opening through the sky—
Who would have known the blue-eyed old foreign monk
Would even now still be inviting the laughter of bystanders?Note:
Bodhidharma, the founder of Chan, is said to have used the Lankavatara sutra, which explicitly states that the scriptural teachings are not dogma, but rather like specific medicines for specific ailments, to be prescribed for particular needs. The use of the Diamond sutra is generally attributed to the fifth and sixth patriarchs of Chan, but it is mentioned in this context because it also makes a point of saying that the teachings are not to be taken as dogma in themselves. In the last line of the verse, “still inviting the laughter of bystanders” refers to turning around and taking these scriptures as totems or sacred dogma rather than expedient means.
It is also cited a few times in the BCR, etc.
What does everyone think of a /r/zen translation of the Lankavatara sutra?
Hypothesis: Can the Lankavatara sutra function as a sort of like public cases can function? cite and account for? Making public cases... public?
Here’s some suggestions I can think of:
- Using 21st century technology to lookup themes and footnote (recoll) (past, present, future footnotes for at that time?).
- Triangulating Suzuki’s and Cleary’s works (and others?).
- /r/zen translation the community pitches in on?
- /r/zen commentary?
- Public domain? (Can be posted / published anywhere without copyright fears and can be reproduced and voiced anyone on YouTube, Audible, podcasts, etc).
Any other input for what we would talk about including / excluding?
Maybe there should be some sort of standard?
- Translation / Footnote quality equal or better to ____ (Cleary?)
- Commentary... if so... should be... debated and voted on by a partial panel of judges (???)
The suggestion horse that I have in this race would be public domain... Bringing the public domain Chinese into public domain English... I like the idea of bringing these public cases / works... public.... And as I said above, it probably shouldn't be crap if it were compared to Cleary or similar?
An added consideration, "better or equal" to Cleary, for example, doesn't have to mean more "intellectual"... it could mean more... "readable" to a high-school level audience?
What do you all think?
Submitted September 02, 2022 at 06:59PM by spectrecho https://ift.tt/UmLdvSy
No comments:
Post a Comment