Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

A forum for scholastic discussion/debate.

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:09 pm

conebeckham wrote:First, we need only discuss the first two Paths--as the Path of Seeing, and everything above it, is predicated on direct experience, rather than conceptual frameworks or "sets of teachings."


Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa. Here a quote from Tsong-kha-pa Lo-sang-drak-pa’s "Extensive Explanation of (Chandrakīrti’s) “Supplement to (Nāgārjuna’s) ‘Treatise on the Middle’”: Illumination of the Thought":

Since Superiors who have not been Buddhafied have not abandoned
the ignorance that is an obstruction to omniscience, they have
an alternation between conceptuality involving the appearance [of inherent
existence and/or conventional phenomena] in states subsequent
to meditative equipoise and the absence of [such] appearance in
meditative equipoise. Buddhas, on the other hand, have completely,
that is, entirely, become enlightened, that is, have realized actualization
of the ultimate and conventional aspects of all phenomena; hence,
all movements of conceptual minds and mental factors have utterly
vanished, due to which they have no alternation between having or not
having the conceptuality involving appearance [of inherent existence
and/or conventional phenomena] in meditative equipoise and in states
subsequent to meditative equipoise.
:smile:
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:14 pm

Mariusz wrote:
Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa.



It is fairly straightfoward.

Gelugpas care very much about what Tsongkhapa says, and accept his as the supreme authority, even over Nāgārjuna.

Non-gelugpas don't, and don't accept him as an authority at all, let alone as an authority more important than Nāgārjuna.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Caz » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:21 pm

Namdrol wrote:
Mariusz wrote:
Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa.



It is fairly straightfoward.

Gelugpas care very much about what Tsongkhapa says, and accept his as the supreme authority, even over Nāgārjuna.

Non-gelugpas don't, and don't accept him as an authority at all, let alone as an authority more important than Nāgārjuna.

N


Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings. ;)
Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Liberation in the Palm of your hand~Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche.
Caz
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby conebeckham » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:27 pm

Caz wrote:Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings. ;)


Well, most Gelukpas do.....but see Gendun Chophel, for example....as for others- Sakayapas, Kagyupas, Nyingmapas, and Jonangpas generally do not.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:27 pm

Caz wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Mariusz wrote:
Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa.



It is fairly straightfoward.

Gelugpas care very much about what Tsongkhapa says, and accept his as the supreme authority, even over Nāgārjuna.

Non-gelugpas don't, and don't accept him as an authority at all, let alone as an authority more important than Nāgārjuna.

N


Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings. ;)


yes, whereas non-Gelugpas think he was deluded by a spirit posing as Manjushri.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:28 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Caz wrote:Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings. ;)


Well, most Gelukpas do.....but see Gendun Chophel, for example....as for others- Sakayapas, Kagyupas, Nyingmapas, and Jonangpas generally do not.



Ganden Chophel, from the beginning, was a Nyingmapa. He was never a "pure" Gelugpa.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby conebeckham » Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:29 pm

Thanks, Namdrol...did not know that!
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby conebeckham » Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:41 pm

Reposted here, originally from the Conventional Reality thread of Astus, because it seemed fitting somehow:

Here's the thing, and apologies to Astus, again.......it strikes me that those who assert Tsong Khapa's view, here on Dharma Wheel, as the final position are not familiar with the positions of Gorampa, Pawo Rinpoche, Karmapa Mikyo Dorje, etc.
However, those of us who question various points of Tsong Khapa's view ARE familiar with his positions--it's fairly hard not to be, if one has been studying the Dharma for more than a decade or so, as Tsong Khapa's position was the ONLY Indo-Tibetan interpretation you could find until fairly recently--or nearly so.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Tue Nov 15, 2011 10:16 pm

I very like Je Tsongkhapa because His intention was to built epistemological very complicated system, validated conceptually by valid cognition, that should fit together, althought in the very madhyamaka itself, no matter what you investigate, it just collapse chosen "object" because this very "object" never was at the first place, never even "arisen", but only seems to. I guess if Tsongkhapa would live longer His system will be even more complicated until everyone would collapse exhausted either :smile: It reminds me of modern science, more and more complicated, when it looks endlessly for example Higgs particle.
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Tue Nov 15, 2011 10:27 pm

Mariusz wrote:I very like Je Tsongkhapa because His intention was to built epistemological very complicated system, validated conceptually by valid cognition, that should fit together,


The problem is that pramanas and prameyas are just conventional fictions, as Nagarjuna shows in the Vigrahavyavartani. In other words, there are no ultimate pramanas, so elaborating a Madhyamaka systems which makes use of this kind of language is very faulty indeed.

In other words, valid cognitions, like all relative truths, are the objects of faulty cognitions.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:38 pm

I like Je Tsongkhapa, as for example initiator of Yamantaka Ekavira Single Hero HYT system from Manjusri, because He wrote (in Tsongkhapa's Final Exposition of Wisdom; page.158):
"during states subsequent to meditative equipoise on the stages of generation and completion (of Highest Yoga Tantra)
one takes suchness to mind within analyzing it...with respect to that occasion, do not posit analytical meditation
as one-pointed meditation"
and there were many masters of His Yamantaka system who got Vajrayana realizations :smile:
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:43 pm

Mariusz wrote:I like Je Tsongkhapa, as for example initiator of Yamantaka Ekavira Single Hero HYT system from Manjusri, because He wrote (in Tsongkhapa's Final Exposition of Wisdom; page.158):
"during states subsequent to meditative equipoise on the stages of generation and completion (of Highest Yoga Tantra)
one takes suchness to mind within analyzing it...with respect to that occasion, do not posit analytical meditation
as one-pointed meditation"
and there were many masters of His Yamantaka system who got Vajrayana realizations :smile:



Intellectual views do not count for much in Vajrayāna.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby conebeckham » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:57 pm

I think Tsong Khapa's elaboration of "inherent" emptiness can be helpful in clarifying the "object of negation" --the mistaken "assumption" ( I use that, instead of "idea," because I think our wrong conception of existence is almost "pre-conscious," it's a habitual propensity) that phenomena each demonstrate/possess/"contain"/"embody" an essence/definition/reality.

At any rate, such elaboration was helpful for me. Once one understands that the "assumption" or thorough-going habitual misconception, though, and goes back to Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti, one finds that such elaborations aren't necessary. In fact, they're "forced" and lead to absurd consequences.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:46 am

conebeckham wrote:I think Tsong Khapa's elaboration of "inherent" emptiness can be helpful in clarifying the "object of negation" --the mistaken "assumption" ( I use that, instead of "idea," because I think our wrong conception of existence is almost "pre-conscious," it's a habitual propensity) that phenomena each demonstrate/possess/"contain"/"embody" an essence/definition/reality.

At any rate, such elaboration was helpful for me. Once one understands that the "assumption" or thorough-going habitual misconception, though, and goes back to Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti, one finds that such elaborations aren't necessary. In fact, they're "forced" and lead to absurd consequences.

There is the link between conceptual analysis and realization of sunyata indeed. For Tsongkhapa it is gradual and constant until Buddhahood, as I quoted. Like some kind of very well oiled machine, but not the mere illusion-like interdependent connection never ever "arisen" like in svatantrika or yogacara.
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Caz » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:09 am

[/quote]

Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings. ;)[/quote]

yes, whereas non-Gelugpas think he was deluded by a spirit posing as Manjushri.

N[/quote]

Wow Namdrol its no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty. :jumping:
Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Liberation in the Palm of your hand~Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche.
Caz
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:17 am

Namdrol wrote:
Mariusz wrote:I very like Je Tsongkhapa because His intention was to built epistemological very complicated system, validated conceptually by valid cognition, that should fit together,


The problem is that pramanas and prameyas are just conventional fictions, as Nagarjuna shows in the Vigrahavyavartani. In other words, there are no ultimate pramanas, so elaborating a Madhyamaka systems which makes use of this kind of language is very faulty indeed.

In other words, valid cognitions, like all relative truths, are the objects of faulty cognitions.

N


Perhaps "faulty" is not correct here, because suggests "useless". I prefer "seeming" because is "useful" although in illusion-like manner only, the seeming. As for example Santideva explained the collapse of any analysis using valid cognition, until realization of sunyata:

If what has been analyzed
Is analyzed through further analysis,
There is no end to it,
Because that analysis would be analyzed too.

Once what had to be analyzed has been analyzed,
The analysis has no basis left.
Since there is no basis, it does not continue.
This is expressed as nirvana


Santideva's Bodhisattva's way of life agrees:

The ultimate is not the sphere of cognition.
It is said that cognition is the seeming."
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Mariusz » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:39 am

Caz wrote:...no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty. :jumping:


Followers of non-sectarian Rime know the fact I posted above that Je Tsongkhapa had visions of Manjushri at least considering Yamantaka Single Hero practice of HYT.
Mariusz
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:34 pm

Caz wrote:
yes, whereas non-Gelugpas think he was deluded by a spirit posing as Manjushri.

N


Wow Namdrol its no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty. :jumping:


Gorampa mentions this as possibility in his differentiation of views, and basically asserts that Tsongkhapa was lead astray by Umapa's channeling of "Manjushri".

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:35 pm

Mariusz wrote:
Caz wrote:...no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty. :jumping:


Followers of non-sectarian Rime know the fact I posted above that Je Tsongkhapa had visions of Manjushri at least considering Yamantaka Single Hero practice of HYT.



This lineage actually starts with Lama Umapa. Nevertheless, it is preserved in Kongtrul's Dam sngags mdzod in the Kadampa section.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika

Postby Malcolm » Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:59 pm

Mariusz wrote:
Perhaps "faulty" is not correct here,


Faulty is quite correct, since that is what Candrakirti says i.e.:

mthong ba brdzun pa kun rdzob bden par gsungs

"False perception is said to be relative truth".

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10202
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

PreviousNext

Return to Academic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

>