Pokrewne
- Strona Główna
- (eBook) James, William The Principles of Psychology Vol. I
- Williams Tad Smoczy tron (SCAN dal 952)
- Wharton William Historie rodzinne (SCAN dal 105
- Gibson William Mona Liza Turbo
- Justyniusz Zarys dziejow
- balzac honoriusz komedia ludzka vi
- Grisham John Bractwo (4)
- Quinnell A J Szlak lez
- Swiderkowna Rozmowy o Biblii, Nowy Testamen
- Corel DRAW (6)
- zanotowane.pl
- doc.pisz.pl
- pdf.pisz.pl
- negatyw24.htw.pl
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.With the growth of great and powerful land-owning ShinShe temples in the centuries after the death of Shinran, eventually complete with privatearmies, the Jddo Shin She hierarchs at times looked more like feudal barons than simpledevotees of Amitabha.But then Amitabha s vow (the eighteenth vow, which is of crucial importance to JddoShin She) is precisely for those enmeshed in worldly passions, the greedy, the angry, theignorant, the vicious, those who otherwise have no hope.Shinran s principal work isknown as the KyDgyDshinshD, a series of extracts, with his own commentary, from the scrip-tures and the writings of the Shin She patriarchs.177 His teaching is found in its most access-ible form, however, in the TannishD, a short work written by Yui-en, one of Shinran s disciples(or friends ).It is in two parts.In the first part Yui-en gives Shinran s oral teachings ashe remembered them from the Master himself.In part two, Yui-en clarified Shinran steaching on a number of issues on which disputes or misinterpretations had arisen sinceShinran s death.Amitabha, Shinran says, set out precisely to save those incapable of saving themselves, the foolish being[s] full of blind passions.Amitabha s vow is hence precisely for peoplelike Shinran himself, he observes, and that is why he feels it to be all the more worthy ofhis trust and reliance (Hirota 1982: 27).His vow is for those lowest beings who cannot savethemselves through their Own Power.Yui-en comments that one should not dispute withor defame the advocates of Own Power.But as for us, we are simply incapable of that difficultpath (ibid.: 31).Shinran described himself as drowned in a broad sea of lust and wandering 9780203428474_4_010.qxd 16/6/08 11:59 AM Page 261The cults of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas 261 confusedly in the great mountain of fame. O how shameful, pitiful (Bloom 1965: 29).He is not the kind of person who can become a Buddha through the Own Power pathof strenuous religious practices.He is definitely a sinner, definitely destined for hell.There-fore what can he do? He is going to hell anyway, so there is nothing to be lost in taking agamble and following what Hdnen taught: Just say the Name and be saved by Amida ;nothing else is involved (Hirota 1982: 22 3).It was on Amitabha s vow that Shinranbased his entire hope:When I consider deeply the Vow of Amida.I realize that it was entirely for the sakeof myself alone! Then how I am filled with gratitude for the Primal Vow, in which Amidasettled on saving me, though I am burdened thus greatly with karma.(Hirota 1982: 43)Like Hdnen, Shinran extrapolated from his own sense of immorality and powerlessness tothe general human condition itself.Not only is he riddled with vice, but we are all like this.We cannot perform a non-egoistic act, and for this reason we cannot perform a truly goodact.178 We are self-centred and therefore, compared with the Buddha, we unenlightened beingsare evil by our very nature as unenlightened beings.Acts, consequently, cannot lead toBuddhahood, and attaining Buddhahood has nothing to do with earning it through meritor good deeds (Hirota 1982: 29 30; Bloom 1965: 32 ff.).The only meaning that can be given to the notion of egolessness, not-Self, is to let go ; it is when a person leaves both good and evil to karmic recompense and entrusts wholly tothe Primal Vow that he is one with Other Power (Yui-en s words).Amitabha saves despitesins (Hirota 1982: 34).If Buddhism is based on the doctrine of not-Self, then Shinran claimsthat Other Power alone is completely letting go, complete abandonment of all notions ofself.As Yoshifumi Ueda puts it:In Shinran s Buddhism, one s mind is transformed by the Buddha s power, so that oneacquires the Buddha s wisdom.This realization of shinjin [ trust , i.e.self-abandonment]is not a union of our minds and the Buddha s mind brought about through a gradualdeepening of human trust or acceptance perhaps this is a fundamental distinction betweenshinjin and our ordinary conceptions of faith.Rather, it comes about through an utternegation in which all our efforts and designs fall away into meaninglessness, being foundboth powerless and tainted by egocentric attachments.In this negation our minds of blindpassions are transformed into wisdom-compassion, and at the same time they remainprecisely as they are or rather, their fundamental nature becomes radically clear for thefirst time.With the wisdom that we realize as shinjin, we are enabled to see ourselvesas we are the foolish being whose every act is conditioned by eons of karmic evil anddominated by passions, thoroughly devoid of truth and reality and also to know, andto be filled with gratitude for, the working of the Primal Vow.179But Shinran does not want us to think that his teaching enables us to behave as we like.He does not deny the karmic law if we do evil we still suffer and, as Shinran said in a 9780203428474_4_010.qxd 16/6/08 11:59 AM Page 262262 MahÖyÖna Buddhismletter, [d]o not take a liking to poison just because there is an antidote (Hirota 1982: 34).Shinran seems to have thought that the real devotee would cease to struggle to do gooddeeds in a contrived egoistic way, as a means to a desired end.Egoistic good deeds mustreally be a contradiction in terms.Rather, truly good deeds, like the nenbutsu, if they are tooccur at all will flow naturally from his or her inner nature.They will hence come not fromthe ego-ridden individual, who cannot really do good deeds at all, but rather from that naturewhich is Amitabha himself.None of this is in any way an act of (one s own) merit.Onesimply lets go, and truly trusts in Amitabha s salvific promises.Nor is it some sort of religious act , or religious duty, on one s own part.In fact, even the voice that recites thenenbutsu is not one s own voice but the voice of Amitabha issuing from the mouth of theone who is reciting.180It could be argued that it is in Shinran s reading of the Pure Land way that we find some-thing not austere but genuinely easy.But I am not at all sure that is correct, at leastpsychologically.We have seen that there were those who would not adopt the wayof the Pure Land because it was alleged to be easy and therefore could not be thegenuine Bodhisattva path at all.For them it was very difficult to accept an easy path.For Shinran we cannot be saved by Own Power (Japanese: jiriki), but only throughOther Power ( Japanese: tariki).Put another way, we can be saved only through self-abandonment to Amitabha and his vow [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl agnieszka90.opx.pl
.With the growth of great and powerful land-owning ShinShe temples in the centuries after the death of Shinran, eventually complete with privatearmies, the Jddo Shin She hierarchs at times looked more like feudal barons than simpledevotees of Amitabha.But then Amitabha s vow (the eighteenth vow, which is of crucial importance to JddoShin She) is precisely for those enmeshed in worldly passions, the greedy, the angry, theignorant, the vicious, those who otherwise have no hope.Shinran s principal work isknown as the KyDgyDshinshD, a series of extracts, with his own commentary, from the scrip-tures and the writings of the Shin She patriarchs.177 His teaching is found in its most access-ible form, however, in the TannishD, a short work written by Yui-en, one of Shinran s disciples(or friends ).It is in two parts.In the first part Yui-en gives Shinran s oral teachings ashe remembered them from the Master himself.In part two, Yui-en clarified Shinran steaching on a number of issues on which disputes or misinterpretations had arisen sinceShinran s death.Amitabha, Shinran says, set out precisely to save those incapable of saving themselves, the foolish being[s] full of blind passions.Amitabha s vow is hence precisely for peoplelike Shinran himself, he observes, and that is why he feels it to be all the more worthy ofhis trust and reliance (Hirota 1982: 27).His vow is for those lowest beings who cannot savethemselves through their Own Power.Yui-en comments that one should not dispute withor defame the advocates of Own Power.But as for us, we are simply incapable of that difficultpath (ibid.: 31).Shinran described himself as drowned in a broad sea of lust and wandering 9780203428474_4_010.qxd 16/6/08 11:59 AM Page 261The cults of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas 261 confusedly in the great mountain of fame. O how shameful, pitiful (Bloom 1965: 29).He is not the kind of person who can become a Buddha through the Own Power pathof strenuous religious practices.He is definitely a sinner, definitely destined for hell.There-fore what can he do? He is going to hell anyway, so there is nothing to be lost in taking agamble and following what Hdnen taught: Just say the Name and be saved by Amida ;nothing else is involved (Hirota 1982: 22 3).It was on Amitabha s vow that Shinranbased his entire hope:When I consider deeply the Vow of Amida.I realize that it was entirely for the sakeof myself alone! Then how I am filled with gratitude for the Primal Vow, in which Amidasettled on saving me, though I am burdened thus greatly with karma.(Hirota 1982: 43)Like Hdnen, Shinran extrapolated from his own sense of immorality and powerlessness tothe general human condition itself.Not only is he riddled with vice, but we are all like this.We cannot perform a non-egoistic act, and for this reason we cannot perform a truly goodact.178 We are self-centred and therefore, compared with the Buddha, we unenlightened beingsare evil by our very nature as unenlightened beings.Acts, consequently, cannot lead toBuddhahood, and attaining Buddhahood has nothing to do with earning it through meritor good deeds (Hirota 1982: 29 30; Bloom 1965: 32 ff.).The only meaning that can be given to the notion of egolessness, not-Self, is to let go ; it is when a person leaves both good and evil to karmic recompense and entrusts wholly tothe Primal Vow that he is one with Other Power (Yui-en s words).Amitabha saves despitesins (Hirota 1982: 34).If Buddhism is based on the doctrine of not-Self, then Shinran claimsthat Other Power alone is completely letting go, complete abandonment of all notions ofself.As Yoshifumi Ueda puts it:In Shinran s Buddhism, one s mind is transformed by the Buddha s power, so that oneacquires the Buddha s wisdom.This realization of shinjin [ trust , i.e.self-abandonment]is not a union of our minds and the Buddha s mind brought about through a gradualdeepening of human trust or acceptance perhaps this is a fundamental distinction betweenshinjin and our ordinary conceptions of faith.Rather, it comes about through an utternegation in which all our efforts and designs fall away into meaninglessness, being foundboth powerless and tainted by egocentric attachments.In this negation our minds of blindpassions are transformed into wisdom-compassion, and at the same time they remainprecisely as they are or rather, their fundamental nature becomes radically clear for thefirst time.With the wisdom that we realize as shinjin, we are enabled to see ourselvesas we are the foolish being whose every act is conditioned by eons of karmic evil anddominated by passions, thoroughly devoid of truth and reality and also to know, andto be filled with gratitude for, the working of the Primal Vow.179But Shinran does not want us to think that his teaching enables us to behave as we like.He does not deny the karmic law if we do evil we still suffer and, as Shinran said in a 9780203428474_4_010.qxd 16/6/08 11:59 AM Page 262262 MahÖyÖna Buddhismletter, [d]o not take a liking to poison just because there is an antidote (Hirota 1982: 34).Shinran seems to have thought that the real devotee would cease to struggle to do gooddeeds in a contrived egoistic way, as a means to a desired end.Egoistic good deeds mustreally be a contradiction in terms.Rather, truly good deeds, like the nenbutsu, if they are tooccur at all will flow naturally from his or her inner nature.They will hence come not fromthe ego-ridden individual, who cannot really do good deeds at all, but rather from that naturewhich is Amitabha himself.None of this is in any way an act of (one s own) merit.Onesimply lets go, and truly trusts in Amitabha s salvific promises.Nor is it some sort of religious act , or religious duty, on one s own part.In fact, even the voice that recites thenenbutsu is not one s own voice but the voice of Amitabha issuing from the mouth of theone who is reciting.180It could be argued that it is in Shinran s reading of the Pure Land way that we find some-thing not austere but genuinely easy.But I am not at all sure that is correct, at leastpsychologically.We have seen that there were those who would not adopt the wayof the Pure Land because it was alleged to be easy and therefore could not be thegenuine Bodhisattva path at all.For them it was very difficult to accept an easy path.For Shinran we cannot be saved by Own Power (Japanese: jiriki), but only throughOther Power ( Japanese: tariki).Put another way, we can be saved only through self-abandonment to Amitabha and his vow [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]