[Buddha-l] a worthwhile read--Red Pine (BIll Porter) interviewed

[Elvin Eldridge]

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:48 AM, Elvin Eldridge <elvineldridge at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Dan Lusthaus <vasubandhu at earthlink.net>wrote:
>
>> > I read the scholars review of Bill Porters book "Two Entrances and Four
>> > Practices" (I can't find a reference now, but I remember the point),
>> >
>> > The review said the two entrances were called liru and xingru. Liru
>> should
>> > have the meaning of "enterance by principle" and xingnu should have the
>> > meaning of "entrance by practice". And the first one means a kind of
>> > sudden
>> > enlightenment entrance and the second one means a kind of gradual
>> > practice.
>> > But Porter tanslated liru as "entry by rationality," which the reviewer
>> > said
>> > is a complete misunderstanding.
>>
>> The reviewer is full of crap. 理 li means a lot of things. "Principle" has
>> become a kind of mindless default equivalent used by lots of so-called
>> scholars, not realizing that they are buying into Neo-Confucian
>> developments
>> and usages of the term, not home-grown Buddhist usages.
>
>
>
>
And OK about homegrown, I checked two books, by Kenneth Chen and Wingsit
Chen and both books say that the Hwa-yen and Chinese Zen came before the
NeoConfucism which was from Chushi. That means Li of Principle is before
Chushi. So I think we can say that

Li of Principle (Hwa-yen) = home grown

Li of Rationality = un home grown

Maybe I'm wrong but thats what these books said.

Elvin



>
>
>> Li does mean reason,
>> even logic, in Buddhist contexts. Porter obviously gave the matter some
>> thought and decided as he did. Whether one agrees or not is another
>> matter.
>>
>> > But I think that from the practitioners viewpoint maybe we shouldnt
>> worry
>> > so
>> > much about these kinds of details and just accept all the translations
>> as
>> > they are without criticizing.
>> > Elvin
>>
>> Anyone, practitioner or otherwise, who does that is an idiot and a victim
>> of
>> his/her own idiocy. Buddhists should practice perspicaciousness, not
>> voluntary blindness. Unless one is practicing a certain kind of tantra,
>> there is a definite difference between "food" and "fecal matter," and one
>> shouldn't accept both equally and with equanimity on one's plate. Basic
>> nutrition -- and Buddhism, from its earliest days, has been concerned with
>> nutriments of all sorts.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> buddha-l mailing list
>> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
>> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>>
>
>