They Lankavantara Sutra was the first Buddhist sutra I read, and I take a certain pride in that. Being without understanding, I got through it pretty easily, but didn't retain anything besides "A word about a thing is not the thing."
I never came across the sutra mentioned till this Brad video. So I went into google search to investigate about it. Downloaded book reference in video plus Suzuki last investigation study into it. It appears that there have been three different Chinese translations plus two different Tibetan translations. So, at first sight it gives the impression of being a kind of messy sutra.
"Everything is mind" doesn't necessarily have to mean Supernatural or Mystical. Technically since our brains are subjective then the reality we witness has to pass through the subjective filter before we experience it. Therefore we only see the filtered version i.e. the version our mind creates. It ultimately is perception. Once you drop perceptions, concepts, and beliefs then you see "Universe as it is" which is emptiness.
I think we could be in general agreement. I certainly agree with your first statement. But i want to make some remarks, perhaps just to clarify terms that can otherwise be ambiguous. * First, you don’t know for certain that you’re a brain. You can’t prove absolutely that such a thing exists. This is precisely why anti-realist doctrines like mind-only can exist. You could be a simulation of a "human" generated within an alien civilization’s quantum computer, from scratch, as a purely creative endeavor, without such a thing as "humans" ever actually being the case in the real world. Even in the case someone undergoes brain surgery and the doctors open up their skull and put a mirror in front of their eyes so that they see their own brain, this is not an absolute proof of the existence of the brain. They could be hallucinating, they could be in a simulation. I tend to believe that i am a brain, but i have no ultimate proof of that. * The second thing is that brains (as we know them) are *objective* physical things. What’s *subjective* is the internal phenomenal experience they’re giving rise to. * The third thing is that the "reality" we experience is *fully* created by the brain. It’s *not* the result of a mere "passing through a filter". * Four. Emptiness is *just one* fundamental aspect of existence, so by perceiving it you’re not "seeing the universe as it is". There are countless aspects of the universe that you’re not seeing and you’ll never see. NB-emptiness is non-conceptual grasp (lived experience) of the fact that "nothing is what it is by itself", or otherwise said "nothing sustains itself into existence and nothing has intrinsic identity", or yet another way of putting it "the existence and meaning of everything is distributed and disappears into its relations with everything else". When the egocentric mind melts, leaving way for the lived experience of this principle, what remains is (allegedly) the sense of pure freedom.
@@raresmircea 100% agree with your comments. Beautiful. i've been reading a lot of Schopenhauer these days, and the confusion between the "I" as an object of cognition and the same grammatic "I" as the subject of cognition, which for him is the "Will", is the very "knot of philosophy" for him. That which is aware of awareness could never be an object, and therefore escapes space, time, and causality as such.
@@integralsonic I have very vague knowledge of Schopenhauer. I see a very similar situation, where there’s an ‘object’ and a ‘subject’ side to us. One is an illusion and the other is perhaps a fundamental mystery. Both important though-according to Julian Jaynes, way back when we were at the beginning of humanity we didn’t have an internal image of ourselves, we were just a bundle of free flowing instincts and emotions. But the mind registered a monumental transition when it took the outside material world and internalized it as an internal abstraction. We can imagine our ancestors hitting their chests as if "this is mine!" or "Me!" and in doing such things an internal sense of ‘me’ took shape, informed by traits and movements of the physical body. We stoped being a maelstrom of instincts and emotions. These gathered and articulated around a sense of me, and just as the body was seen to roam the physical space, the abstract ego started roaming the abstract mental space. A dog or an ape *cannot* sit and say to himself "Hmm.. let me think about what i was doing 10 years ago..". For them memories are only triggered *automatically* by events, based on similitudes, and the memories only serve a survival purpose. But once a mental ego formed, this thing could do stuff, reach for mental things just like the physical body was seen reaching and manipulating physical objects. I can sit and say "Hmm.. let me think of my vacation in the summer after graduation". That’s important. The internal representation of myself is a very crude albeit convincing illusion, yet its immensely important for internal organization and for the esthetic feel of life.
Thank you Brad, very interesting talk. Quite complex stuff so will listen again. I’m glad you didn’t become a spoilt rich rock star! Laughed when I heard your comments about TM. My parents were into it at one time way back and I always had suspicions about it! It is so good to listen to you as you always speak the truth in a down to earth humorous way and haven’t been corrupted by money and power. Thank you for keeping on keeping on. 🙏🏽
Thanks. TM is definitely not the worst thing someone could get into as a practice. But their methods make me suspicious. A lot of money is involved and they seem to be a little too good at getting celebrities to join and endorse them.
Funny this came out today I was listening to Bernardo Kastrup all day talking about his idealist philosophy against materialism and explicitly talking about “mind only” it fits really well with the Lanka
心 is pretty much the same in Chinese (sheen). Between this, the Red Pine Diamond Sutra and Huang Po you've pretty much gone through my whole Amazon save for later list. There is a "Nonduality in Buddhism and beyond" book in there too if your up for it lol.
When I played World of Warcraft, my personal guild was called "Icchantikas R Us." Ha ha! Re: TM. My mom, who was always looking for magic bullets to fix her great discomfort, signed the whole family up for TM lessons(?). Of everybody in the family, only my mom and I continued to do TM after the lessons were over. We might check in with each other, but we never seriously talked about our experiences with TM until we'd been doing it for several years. I found that it was very helpful in managing stress and keeping some sense of perspective on things. My mom, on the other hand, was more or less the same as ever. When we did talk about it finally, she told me tales of being surrounded by white light and that was a sign to her that she was "right" (whatever that meant). I found this idea to be crazy, but the lady who taught us - with whom my mom had kept in touch - was all about it. She kept trying to sign my mom up for things, further training and retreats. Thank goodness we were too poor to afford anything but the initial training.
I also don't get why Mr. Batchelor propounds this idea that going back to the basics, i.e. the Buddha's teachings, while dismissing insights that have occurred since the Buddha's time as non-contributive in some manner, is a good thing. In my mind, the Buddha began this great conversation that's been taking place for a few thousand years with many many people adding helpful insights as they have had them. Is there something that gives the original talker more weight in the conversation than all the others who've participated? I've missed it somewhere. I thought the Buddha didn't want his words used as a standard of truth, hence he didn't write them down. The other thought I had about your discussion with S.B. had to do with the question "Why do you have such an interest in Dogen?" and your response about Dogen's writing style...I had this insight that Dogen felt this calling to bring Chinese Zen to Japan and when the Chinese version didn't seem to be producing the expected results, he formed a new temple so that the Chinese approach could be modified by the Japanese culture and turned into "Japanese Zen". He wasn't afraid to put his Zen teaching into a different context in order to reach his native people. He didn't think it was losing something by doing so. This is kind of like what you've (and other modern Zen masters) done in bringing Zen to the U.S. You've adapted/interpreted it into Western culture so that others can benefit from your knowledge, and now we have a sort of "Western Zen". Do you think there's something in Dogen's writing style that speaks to you from that similar experience?
I purchased a copy of this translation a couple-few years back. It wasn't long after, that I started to realize I probably should have started with the Diamond Sutra, then Heart Sutra, THEN the Lankavatara Sutra. Truth be told, I haven't finished the book yet, but I read Tao Te Ching multiple times since then. I have no idea what I'm going or why. 🤷♂️
[Redbeard pulls his toque down over his ears and begins to sing] Take off to the Great White North Take off, it's a beauty way to go Take off to the Great White North Take off, it's a beauty way to go Take off!!!
I was reading it .... wanted to hear someone who is reading it .. and hence came hear .... as I started reading it ... I got the feeling that matrix movie must be written by someone who read this ......
Suzuki and Cleary translated from the Sanskrit. Red Pine translated from Chinese. One who wants to study the Lankavatara Sutra seriously ought to compare at least the three English translations. There are three extent Chinese translations of the Lankavatara Sutra. There are also two Tibetan translations, one based on the Sanskrit and one based on Bodhiruci (in Chinese). Words are not inherently meaningful. The meaning is determined partly by extra-textual factors that one should take into account. In a way, a text is akin to a sumi painting where without "empty space" - if it were not for the white canvas - it would resemble nothing.
Thanks sir from India Buddhism has denied by terrorism of Hinduism they occupied all the Buddhist monuments and literature and presents as Hinduism wisdom or sanatan dharm .....so called Hindu having caste discrimination in India they snatched right of equality....so sad Buddhism is dying in India...I hope it will revive if you want..,we want...
The Lankavatara Sutra is THE sutra that openly discuss the principles and the foundations of reality! It is not about their is only emptiness at the end. Far from it, there is 'something' at the 'end'. Buddha used 'emptiness' really to denote that 'something' is metaphysical, not even remotely comprehensible by human logic or our sixth consciousness thoughts. That 'something' is our 'original form' or 'primordial form' beyond space time, beyond consciousness. Consciousness is the result of this 'something' 'in action'. Everything became as a result of this 'something' in action. Including meditative stages like achieving the Ninth Jhana - Cessation by an Arhat! Full enlightenment goes beyond an Arhat of achieving Four Jhanas and Eight Samadhis plus Cessation. That is only half the journey. An Arhat will eventually have to transit across to the Mahayana path and with his rock solid foundation in the Four Jhanas and Eight Samadhis plus Cessation, the transition will be straight to the Eight Bhumi (Ground) Bodhisattva. From then on, all the way to the Tenth Bhumi Bodhisattva and beyond and then Buddhahood. The Lankavatara Sutra is a Mahayana Sutra and many people will find the concept hard to grasp because even an Arhat may not accept the teaching until the right time. Let alone for people who cannot even get into the First Jhana.
@@Teller3448 What you talking about? Mahayana Buddhism fits right in with Quantum Mechanics. According to QM, the moon is not there until we look into it. Why? Until there is an observer, the moon is in a state of superposition. This has been proven in all quantum experiments dealing with particles and atoms and had puzzled myriads of great scientists . No matter how hard they try, no one (including Einstein) has ever been able to disprove such conjecture posed by Quantum Mechanics. Time and time again, QM has been proven to be correct. The latest Leggett-Garg experiments (due out in a couple of months) using a nanocrystal oscillator might be able to verify if Quantum superposition allies to macro objects as well.
@@DeeOneLight That would mean the eyes with which you SEE the moon arent there either...being the alleged material objects they are. Your fingers used for typing aren't there either so how am I reading your comments??? Ancient monks didnt even understand Newtonian physics never mind Quantum mechanics. They didnt even know how to make matches. There is no evidence for any of their claims about physics. Deepak Chopra tried making your same arguments on stage in front of real science students and was reminded that Quantum phenomenon only apply to the quantum scale. See the video called... 'Deepak Chopra destroyed by himself'.
They Lankavantara Sutra was the first Buddhist sutra I read, and I take a certain pride in that. Being without understanding, I got through it pretty easily, but didn't retain anything besides "A word about a thing is not the thing."
Good work! I wonder if I retained even that much!
I never came across the sutra mentioned till this Brad video. So I went into google search to investigate about it. Downloaded book reference in video plus Suzuki last investigation study into it. It appears that there have been three different Chinese translations plus two different Tibetan translations. So, at first sight it gives the impression of being a kind of messy sutra.
I just want to say that I know The Great Gazoo and Bob and Doug McKenzie ("Good day, and welcome to Day Twelve"). Your references are not lost on us!
You're surely the only zen master in the galaxy with a Great Gazoo t-shirt.
Could be!
But don't call him Shirley.
Why you regard this man a master?
@@Ronalddegroote
Why not? Give me your definition of a Zen Master, and we'll see if we agree or not.
He's the only one who's oblivious to the lankavatara sutra.
"Everything is mind" doesn't necessarily have to mean Supernatural or Mystical. Technically since our brains are subjective then the reality we witness has to pass through the subjective filter before we experience it. Therefore we only see the filtered version i.e. the version our mind creates. It ultimately is perception. Once you drop perceptions, concepts, and beliefs then you see "Universe as it is" which is emptiness.
I think we could be in general agreement. I certainly agree with your first statement. But i want to make some remarks, perhaps just to clarify terms that can otherwise be ambiguous.
* First, you don’t know for certain that you’re a brain. You can’t prove absolutely that such a thing exists. This is precisely why anti-realist doctrines like mind-only can exist. You could be a simulation of a "human" generated within an alien civilization’s quantum computer, from scratch, as a purely creative endeavor, without such a thing as "humans" ever actually being the case in the real world. Even in the case someone undergoes brain surgery and the doctors open up their skull and put a mirror in front of their eyes so that they see their own brain, this is not an absolute proof of the existence of the brain. They could be hallucinating, they could be in a simulation. I tend to believe that i am a brain, but i have no ultimate proof of that.
* The second thing is that brains (as we know them) are *objective* physical things. What’s *subjective* is the internal phenomenal experience they’re giving rise to.
* The third thing is that the "reality" we experience is *fully* created by the brain. It’s *not* the result of a mere "passing through a filter".
* Four. Emptiness is *just one* fundamental aspect of existence, so by perceiving it you’re not "seeing the universe as it is". There are countless aspects of the universe that you’re not seeing and you’ll never see.
NB-emptiness is non-conceptual grasp (lived experience) of the fact that "nothing is what it is by itself", or otherwise said "nothing sustains itself into existence and nothing has intrinsic identity", or yet another way of putting it "the existence and meaning of everything is distributed and disappears into its relations with everything else". When the egocentric mind melts, leaving way for the lived experience of this principle, what remains is (allegedly) the sense of pure freedom.
@@raresmircea 100% agree with your comments. Beautiful. i've been reading a lot of Schopenhauer these days, and the confusion between the "I" as an object of cognition and the same grammatic "I" as the subject of cognition, which for him is the "Will", is the very "knot of philosophy" for him. That which is aware of awareness could never be an object, and therefore escapes space, time, and causality as such.
@@integralsonic I have very vague knowledge of Schopenhauer. I see a very similar situation, where there’s an ‘object’ and a ‘subject’ side to us. One is an illusion and the other is perhaps a fundamental mystery. Both important though-according to Julian Jaynes, way back when we were at the beginning of humanity we didn’t have an internal image of ourselves, we were just a bundle of free flowing instincts and emotions. But the mind registered a monumental transition when it took the outside material world and internalized it as an internal abstraction. We can imagine our ancestors hitting their chests as if "this is mine!" or "Me!" and in doing such things an internal sense of ‘me’ took shape, informed by traits and movements of the physical body. We stoped being a maelstrom of instincts and emotions. These gathered and articulated around a sense of me, and just as the body was seen to roam the physical space, the abstract ego started roaming the abstract mental space. A dog or an ape *cannot* sit and say to himself "Hmm.. let me think about what i was doing 10 years ago..". For them memories are only triggered *automatically* by events, based on similitudes, and the memories only serve a survival purpose. But once a mental ego formed, this thing could do stuff, reach for mental things just like the physical body was seen reaching and manipulating physical objects. I can sit and say "Hmm.. let me think of my vacation in the summer after graduation". That’s important. The internal representation of myself is a very crude albeit convincing illusion, yet its immensely important for internal organization and for the esthetic feel of life.
Thank you Brad, very interesting talk. Quite complex stuff so will listen again. I’m glad you didn’t become a spoilt rich rock star! Laughed when I heard your comments about TM. My parents were into it at one time way back and I always had suspicions about it! It is so good to listen to you as you always speak the truth in a down to earth humorous way and haven’t been corrupted by money and power. Thank you for keeping on keeping on. 🙏🏽
Thanks. TM is definitely not the worst thing someone could get into as a practice. But their methods make me suspicious. A lot of money is involved and they seem to be a little too good at getting celebrities to join and endorse them.
Love this considering I'm from Sri Lanka
Funny this came out today I was listening to Bernardo Kastrup all day talking about his idealist philosophy against materialism and explicitly talking about “mind only” it fits really well with the Lanka
Playing this while running around. Just gotta comment on the Strange Brew reference - nicely done!
心 is pretty much the same in Chinese (sheen). Between this, the Red Pine Diamond Sutra and Huang Po you've pretty much gone through my whole Amazon save for later list. There is a "Nonduality in Buddhism and beyond" book in there too if your up for it lol.
P. B. Tan just released a new translation (April 2022). It's idiosyncratic but you might be interested.
Great video, Brad. It’s much appreciated as I’ve been kind of fixated on this sutra recently.
For a shortened version (highlights):
The Lankavatara Sutra: An Epitomized Version
by D.T. Suzuki, Dwight Goddard
Good video, hozer...
its funny how chan/zen is said to be transmitted without words but there so many terms and categories to learn first !
Mammas, don't let your babies grow up to be Icchantikas!
Nice one!
I would really love it if you would do a sustained series of sutra commentaries.
When I played World of Warcraft, my personal guild was called "Icchantikas R Us." Ha ha!
Re: TM. My mom, who was always looking for magic bullets to fix her great discomfort, signed the whole family up for TM lessons(?). Of everybody in the family, only my mom and I continued to do TM after the lessons were over. We might check in with each other, but we never seriously talked about our experiences with TM until we'd been doing it for several years. I found that it was very helpful in managing stress and keeping some sense of perspective on things. My mom, on the other hand, was more or less the same as ever. When we did talk about it finally, she told me tales of being surrounded by white light and that was a sign to her that she was "right" (whatever that meant). I found this idea to be crazy, but the lady who taught us - with whom my mom had kept in touch - was all about it. She kept trying to sign my mom up for things, further training and retreats. Thank goodness we were too poor to afford anything but the initial training.
Whoa! What a name for your guild!
This is the best book. I wish we could hear the mantra somewhere on youtube too…
Which mantra?
@@HardcoreZen Lankavatara Mantra (it's at the end of the first book you showed)
I keep hearing about TM but still have no idea what they do beyond the name of the practice
Do the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra next.
Taken this books from SriLanka in years back and practice in China.
I also don't get why Mr. Batchelor propounds this idea that going back to the basics, i.e. the Buddha's teachings, while dismissing insights that have occurred since the Buddha's time as non-contributive in some manner, is a good thing. In my mind, the Buddha began this great conversation that's been taking place for a few thousand years with many many people adding helpful insights as they have had them. Is there something that gives the original talker more weight in the conversation than all the others who've participated? I've missed it somewhere. I thought the Buddha didn't want his words used as a standard of truth, hence he didn't write them down.
The other thought I had about your discussion with S.B. had to do with the question "Why do you have such an interest in Dogen?" and your response about Dogen's writing style...I had this insight that Dogen felt this calling to bring Chinese Zen to Japan and when the Chinese version didn't seem to be producing the expected results, he formed a new temple so that the Chinese approach could be modified by the Japanese culture and turned into "Japanese Zen". He wasn't afraid to put his Zen teaching into a different context in order to reach his native people. He didn't think it was losing something by doing so. This is kind of like what you've (and other modern Zen masters) done in bringing Zen to the U.S. You've adapted/interpreted it into Western culture so that others can benefit from your knowledge, and now we have a sort of "Western Zen". Do you think there's something in Dogen's writing style that speaks to you from that similar experience?
buddha, jesus, muhammad
a triumvirate of futility
and fiction
It’s just Protestant thinking applied to Buddhism
Ancient Technology and Culture of Sri Lanka. Victory to Buddhism. Victory to King ravana🇱🇰
I too am old. I get your references. 😊
"I refute it thus!" Samuel Johnson kicked a stone.
the great white north!
YES!
What this means..?
@@evilsun1000 a Canadian thing... th-cam.com/video/OJE3EgTGg9k/w-d-xo.html
The suzuki translation is very good.. Red pines Heart Sutra, Diamond sutra and Platforms sutra translations all very good.
I just had another look at Suzuki's. It's better than I remembered.
'bout time you made a good video.
One is the road that leads to vanity, the other is the road that leads to nirvana!!
I purchased a copy of this translation a couple-few years back.
It wasn't long after, that I started to realize I probably should have started with the Diamond Sutra, then Heart Sutra, THEN the Lankavatara Sutra.
Truth be told, I haven't finished the book yet, but I read Tao Te Ching multiple times since then.
I have no idea what I'm going or why. 🤷♂️
Look we are at the same way. I, m also reading the Pureland Sutras of Am8tabha Buddha. Reading again all of the three
@@kawaiiufocafe5399
I finished the Lanka. It's just a vegetarian sales pitch once you get to the last page or so.
[Redbeard pulls his toque down over his ears and begins to sing]
Take off to the Great White North
Take off, it's a beauty way to go
Take off to the Great White North
Take off, it's a beauty way to go
Take off!!!
def get your references lol excellent shirt!
Lanka - now known as sri lanka. This is originated from sri lanka. Text stollen at times of looting
I definitely get the references, ya hoser.
I was reading it .... wanted to hear someone who is reading it .. and hence came hear .... as I started reading it ... I got the feeling that matrix movie must be written by someone who read this ......
Maybe they did!
Lankavathara sutra is lord buddha speak with devil king " ravana" in sri lanka 🇱🇰
Suzuki and Cleary translated from the Sanskrit. Red Pine translated from Chinese. One who wants to study the Lankavatara Sutra seriously ought to compare at least the three English translations.
There are three extent Chinese translations of the Lankavatara Sutra. There are also two Tibetan translations, one based on the Sanskrit and one based on Bodhiruci (in Chinese).
Words are not inherently meaningful. The meaning is determined partly by extra-textual factors that one should take into account. In a way, a text is akin to a sumi painting where without "empty space" - if it were not for the white canvas - it would resemble nothing.
lol “slippery slope”
batchelor is a fool
I remember the Great Gazoo.
Thanks sir from India Buddhism has denied by terrorism of Hinduism they occupied all the Buddhist monuments and literature and presents as Hinduism wisdom or sanatan dharm .....so called Hindu having caste discrimination in India they snatched right of equality....so sad Buddhism is dying in India...I hope it will revive if you want..,we want...
It's interesting what has happened to Buddhism in India. It seems there is a revival of interest in Buddhism in India these days.
I totally remember the GG! Do you remember Underdog? :-)
Of course!
A Zen Master who hadn't read the Lanka? Really?
The Lankavatara Sutra is THE sutra that openly discuss the principles and the foundations of reality! It is not about their is only emptiness at the end. Far from it, there is 'something' at the 'end'. Buddha used 'emptiness' really to denote that 'something' is metaphysical, not even remotely comprehensible by human logic or our sixth consciousness thoughts. That 'something' is our 'original form' or 'primordial form' beyond space time, beyond consciousness. Consciousness is the result of this 'something' 'in action'. Everything became as a result of this 'something' in action. Including meditative stages like achieving the Ninth Jhana - Cessation by an Arhat! Full enlightenment goes beyond an Arhat of achieving Four Jhanas and Eight Samadhis plus Cessation. That is only half the journey. An Arhat will eventually have to transit across to the Mahayana path and with his rock solid foundation in the Four Jhanas and Eight Samadhis plus Cessation, the transition will be straight to the Eight Bhumi (Ground) Bodhisattva. From then on, all the way to the Tenth Bhumi Bodhisattva and beyond and then Buddhahood. The Lankavatara Sutra is a Mahayana Sutra and many people will find the concept hard to grasp because even an Arhat may not accept the teaching until the right time. Let alone for people who cannot even get into the First Jhana.
Oh man tm people are not gonna like that. It is true tho.
there is no god
mind
absolute
nothing behind
beyond
nothing here
or not here
flames waver in the breeze
that is all
"So its pretty nutty stuff".
Yeap...that's why Mahayana Buddhism is completely incompatible with science.
Is it, though?
@@HardcoreZen Sure, try taking the Sutra to a science convention for a reading.
@@Teller3448 What you talking about? Mahayana Buddhism fits right in with Quantum Mechanics. According to QM, the moon is not there until we look into it. Why? Until there is an observer, the moon is in a state of superposition. This has been proven in all quantum experiments dealing with particles and atoms and had puzzled myriads of great scientists . No matter how hard they try, no one (including Einstein) has ever been able to disprove such conjecture posed by Quantum Mechanics. Time and time again, QM has been proven to be correct. The latest Leggett-Garg experiments (due out in a couple of months) using a nanocrystal oscillator might be able to verify if Quantum superposition allies to macro objects as well.
@@DeeOneLight That would mean the eyes with which you SEE the moon arent there either...being the alleged material objects they are. Your fingers used for typing aren't there either so how am I reading your comments??? Ancient monks didnt even understand Newtonian physics never mind Quantum mechanics. They didnt even know how to make matches. There is no evidence for any of their claims about physics.
Deepak Chopra tried making your same arguments on stage in front of real science students and was reminded that Quantum phenomenon only apply to the quantum scale.
See the video called... 'Deepak Chopra destroyed by himself'.
Only if you're excessively literal about it. And I think we can both agree that being excessively anything is problematic