All things are impermanent
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LFJ
The Buddhist texts (Sūtras and Śāstras) in Chinese always have Nirvāṇa as 涅磐 (Nièpán). This term is not translated.
Also in the Chinese texts, Karma is rendered 业 (Yè), which while being a translation differs from mere Cause & Effect- 因果 (yīnguǒ), which would correspond to Hetu-madbhiḥ. This 业 character is a distinctly Buddhist term without parallel in Daoism.
The only thing that often gets conflated is the use of the term 道 (Dào) in Buddhist texts that corresponds to the Sanskrit term Mārga, the Buddhist "Path". But this has nothing to do with the more abstract and spiritual meaning of "the Dao" as treated in Daoism, and in no way alters Chinese Buddhism. This conflation is usually done by non-Chinese anyway, who don't understand the usage of the term.
If the term is unchanged, why do they say it differently? Nirvāṇa does not equal Nièpán. In the same vein, in America, Nirvana is a grunge rock band, so they kept the name and changed the meaning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LFJ
Buddhism adapts to every culture, but the integration of tenants from an external path is not to be expected. From a Buddhist perspective, it inherently mirrors much of what Daoism endorses, but Daoism lacks the Dao.. ironically. In this sense, the Dao again corresponds to Mārga. That is, Daoism lacks "the path" leading to Nirvāṇa and Bodhi. So the integration of Daosim, or any other outer path, would be completely irrational.
Why not? Case and point - Tibetan Buddhism.