Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:06 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
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.


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?

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:50 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Posts: 860
Namdrol wrote:
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.


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?


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.

_________________
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
gad rgyangs wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
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.


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?


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.


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

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.

_________________
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:02 pm 
Offline
Former staff member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Posts: 4203
Location: Budapest
conebeckham wrote:
Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.


Apparently there is a major linguistic chaos generating unclear reactions here.

_________________
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

"Neither cultivation nor seated meditation — this is the pure Chan of Tathagata."
(Mazu Daoyi, X1321p3b23; tr. Jinhua Jia)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T2076p461b24-26)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:03 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Posts: 860
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


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.

_________________
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:04 am
Posts: 292
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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_(Buddhism)

I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.

_________________
...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:10 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Posts: 860
Acchantika wrote:
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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_(Buddhism)

I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.


N doesn't say he doesn't have any view (drsti) he says he has no thesis (pratijñā)

_________________
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
gad rgyangs wrote:
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


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.


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?

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

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Parikalpita, Paratantra, and Paranishpanna.


Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
gad rgyangs wrote:
Acchantika wrote:
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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_(Buddhism)

I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.


N doesn't say he doesn't have any view (drsti) he says he has no thesis (pratijñā)


Sure he says he has no views:

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".

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Lhug-Pa wrote:



The three own natures are irrevelant in any discussion of Madhyamaka.

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
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.

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
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.


I meant except you of course. I'd like to read a good fishin' tale. Know any?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
deepbluehum wrote:
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.


I meant except you of course. I'd like to read a good fishin' tale. Know any?



Old man and the sea?

Moby Dick?

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

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Namdrol wrote:
Lhug-Pa wrote:



The three own natures are irrevelant in any discussion of Madhyamaka.


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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
I like fresh air.
Just sayin'.

_________________
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am
Posts: 1999
pretty sure my post was the most awesome one here. sorry you guys missed it. :shrug:

_________________
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am
Posts: 806
Astus wrote:
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.


By established I meant a logical system. That is rarely something people care to contemplate.

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.

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.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: smcj and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group