smcj wrote:I think Alfredo is using the quote to try to say that R. is anti-intellectual/anti academic:(formatting mine)Alfredo wrote:...even though he has had some Western education, and is aware of critical scholarly approaches to Buddhism (I have heard him criticize them back), his version of ris med engages in more or less the same sort of special pleading as other sectarian movements, and cannot withstand scholarly criticism.
Supported by R. saying that the non-dual cannot be intellectualized:(formatting mine)...even the most seasoned dharma practitioner in the West sometimes I do have doubt, how much they are really understanding. Of course we are not talking about actual realization of nonduality, but we are talking about intellectual understanding of nonduality. Because the concept is just not proveable. Because every logic, language, method of measurement, is dualistic. So dualistic method cannot measure and value something nondualistic. Always! And anything that cannot be proved, or anything that does not have a "manufacturing date," so to speak, I think in the materialistic world, modern world, it's all not really...it's a [struggle?], it's like a [struggle?], it really doesn't have much value in it
Western scholars have the worst kind of sectarian attitude, the believe they are only dealing with facts and so their truths are absolute. Just reviewing the last 100 years of scientific history will reveal something quite different.