All kinds of views? Describe them please and lets see of they are in fact views. For starters, what is a conventional truth according to Nāgārjuna. And why is this a thesis?gad rgyangs wrote:
which contains all kinds of views about what conventional truth is, what the ultimate and nirvana are. In short, a whole worldview, not to mention all kinds of epistemological beliefs about what is or isn't valid reasoning etc.
Reasons for Conventional Reality
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
- gad rgyangs
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
As it says two karikas earlier, conventional truth is worldly truth, that is, consensus reality. It isn't a thesis (neither he nor I said so), because he isn't trying to prove it: he's taking it as a given, which is even worse as it is an unproven belief.Namdrol wrote:All kinds of views? Describe them please and lets see of they are in fact views. For starters, what is a conventional truth according to Nāgārjuna. And why is this a thesis?gad rgyangs wrote:
which contains all kinds of views about what conventional truth is, what the ultimate and nirvana are. In short, a whole worldview, not to mention all kinds of epistemological beliefs about what is or isn't valid reasoning etc.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
So in other words, he is starting with what the opponenet takes as real, correct?gad rgyangs wrote:As it says two karikas earlier, conventional truth is worldly truth, that is, consensus reality. It isn't a thesis (neither he nor I said so), because he isn't trying to prove it: he's taking it as a given, which is even worse as it is an unproven belief.Namdrol wrote:All kinds of views? Describe them please and lets see of they are in fact views. For starters, what is a conventional truth according to Nāgārjuna. And why is this a thesis?gad rgyangs wrote:
which contains all kinds of views about what conventional truth is, what the ultimate and nirvana are. In short, a whole worldview, not to mention all kinds of epistemological beliefs about what is or isn't valid reasoning etc.
In this case, how is this a) his beleif b) a philosophical position of his? The answer is, actually, they are not his beleif nor his philosophical position.
M
- conebeckham
- Posts: 5718
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Apparently there is a major linguistic chaos generating unclear reactions here.conebeckham wrote:Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?
2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.
3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.
4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.
1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
- gad rgyangs
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
He's accepting the validity of the two truths scheme, which (he says) is what Buddhas rely on to teach "truth". He would have to maintain either that he has already demonstrated the validity of this schema through his argumentation earlier in the book, or that he's accepting it on faith since Buddhas rely on it. In either case, its a philosophical position.Namdrol wrote: So in other words, he is starting with what the opponenet takes as real, correct?
In this case, how is this a) his beleif b) a philosophical position of his? The answer is, actually, they are not his beleif nor his philosophical position.
M
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
-
- Posts: 292
- Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:04 am
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
conebeckham wrote:Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.
- View or position (Pali diṭṭhi, Sanskrit dṛṣṭi) is a central idea in Buddhism. In Buddhist thought, in contrast with the commonsense understanding, a view is not a simple, abstract collection of propositions, but a charged interpretation of experience which intensely shapes and affects thought, sensation, and action. Having the proper mental attitude toward views is therefore considered an integral part of the Buddhist path.
I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.
...
- gad rgyangs
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
N doesn't say he doesn't have any view (drsti) he says he has no thesis (pratijñā)Acchantika wrote:conebeckham wrote:Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_(Buddhism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)
- View or position (Pali diṭṭhi, Sanskrit dṛṣṭi) is a central idea in Buddhism. In Buddhist thought, in contrast with the commonsense understanding, a view is not a simple, abstract collection of propositions, but a charged interpretation of experience which intensely shapes and affects thought, sensation, and action. Having the proper mental attitude toward views is therefore considered an integral part of the Buddhist path.
I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
But if he does not accept the validity of conventional truth (he does not) how can you say he is erecting a philosophical position around the two truths?gad rgyangs wrote:He's accepting the validity of the two truths scheme, which (he says) is what Buddhas rely on to teach "truth". He would have to maintain either that he has already demonstrated the validity of this schema through his argumentation earlier in the book, or that he's accepting it on faith since Buddhas rely on it. In either case, its a philosophical position.Namdrol wrote: So in other words, he is starting with what the opponenet takes as real, correct?
In this case, how is this a) his beleif b) a philosophical position of his? The answer is, actually, they are not his beleif nor his philosophical position.
M
Remember, he states "Since the Jinas have proclaimed nirvana alone is true, what wise person would not understand the rest is false?"
The two truths, are for Nāgārjuna merely a pragmatic methodology used by Buddhas to lead sentient beings from delusion to non-delusion. But they are not a philosophical system, at least, not for Nagarjuna and Aryadeva. In other words, if anything, the two truths are a pedagogical method, and that is all.
N
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Sure he says he has no views:gad rgyangs wrote:N doesn't say he doesn't have any view (drsti) he says he has no thesis (pratijñā)Acchantika wrote:conebeckham wrote:Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_(Buddhism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)
- View or position (Pali diṭṭhi, Sanskrit dṛṣṭi) is a central idea in Buddhism. In Buddhist thought, in contrast with the commonsense understanding, a view is not a simple, abstract collection of propositions, but a charged interpretation of experience which intensely shapes and affects thought, sensation, and action. Having the proper mental attitude toward views is therefore considered an integral part of the Buddhist path.
I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.
gang gis thugs brtse nyer bzung nas/ /lta ba thams cad spang ba'i phyir/ /dam pa'i chos ni ston mdzad pa/ /gau ta ma de la phyag 'tshal lo
"I prostrate to Gotama, who, through his loving mind, taught the sublime Dharma in order to abandon all views".
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
The three own natures are irrevelant in any discussion of Madhyamaka.
-
- Posts: 1302
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
- Location: San Francisco, CA
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
deepbluehum wrote:Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?
No, I get the feeling that I am a non-smoker trying to convince smokers that they should breath fresh air.
-
- Posts: 1302
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
- Location: San Francisco, CA
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
I meant except you of course. I'd like to read a good fishin' tale. Know any?Namdrol wrote:deepbluehum wrote:Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?
No, I get the feeling that I am a non-smoker trying to convince smokers that they should breath fresh air.
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
deepbluehum wrote:I meant except you of course. I'd like to read a good fishin' tale. Know any?Namdrol wrote:deepbluehum wrote:Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?
No, I get the feeling that I am a non-smoker trying to convince smokers that they should breath fresh air.
Old man and the sea?
Moby Dick?
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Strictly speaking. But when reading the title of this thread and the initial post by its author, we can see that it is not strictly about Madhyamaka; and that the mentioning of the Three Natures could help to answer his questions.Namdrol wrote:
The three own natures are irrevelant in any discussion of Madhyamaka.
- conebeckham
- Posts: 5718
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
I like fresh air.
Just sayin'.
Just sayin'.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
- padma norbu
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
pretty sure my post was the most awesome one here. sorry you guys missed it.
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
I don't know about others, but I do try to establish for myself the reasonableness of various aspects of Buddhist teachings (e.g. cause and effect, impermance) and practices (e.g. rationale for yidam visualisation) through logical arguments/reasonings. But these logical arguments/reasonings cannot establish the validity of the teachings or practices.Astus wrote:By established I meant a logical system. That is rarely something people care to contemplate.Sherab wrote:I thought that agreement between people automatically means that whatever is agreed is "established" for them individually. Method of establishment could be different for each individual but there has to be "establishment" before agreement takes place.
In addition, the logical arguments/reasonings that I use for myself may not suit others because there are always assumptions upon which an argument/reasoning has to rest upon, and these assumptions may not make sense to or may not be accepted by others.
You may wish to ask yourself, how you yourself come to accept various aspects of Buddhist teachings.