Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 1:14 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 185
Namdrol wrote:

There are some who thought the Buddha taught such a thing aka the Pudgalavadins. I myself have never seen a sutra statement, for example, in the Pali canon, where the Buddha unambiguously claims there is an ultimate self of the kind proposed by Pudgalavadins.


interesting.

Namdrol wrote:

Perhaps you can send me a citation by PM where he says such a thing. To me it seems a little strange and not in accordance with what I have understood about the Buddha's teaching in the Pali canon, etc.



sure, I'll have to find it. It's in his commentary on the Avatara, probably on this section, bet 35 and 44... I'll let you know.

Namdrol wrote:
I suggest you read the Kosha, Chapter nine.

love to

Namdrol wrote:
If you think the Buddha taught such an ultimate self, or the aggregate(!?) as ultimate, please tell me where.


can't, just picked it up out of the air after reading thousands of pages of commentary. Never heard the notion challenged, so never really invesigated. I'll see if I can trace it down to something concrete.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 185
conebeckham wrote:
Cloudburst-

Doesn't it make more sense to "birth" a storehouse consciousness, inherent or not, due to things such as "memories," "habits," etc., than to create the notion of ālayavijñāna as that which is merely the "mental consciousness knowing emptiness?"


Only if it were requited to explain conventional reality such as memory, habit etc.. Since the mental consciousness can perform the function, there is really no need for an eighth consciousness. If this explanation were born from a misunderstanding of Buddha, better to excise it.

Namdrol wrote:
The ālaya is emptiness, that is all that is needed for karma to function. No consciousness that stores seeds is required. But consciousness can know that emptiness, this is how Jayananda is glossing things because of the Lanka passage which describes the ālayavijñāna as subtle and deep, and easily mistaken for a self and also the Lanka passage to declares ālayavijñāna is emptiness.

N


ok. or that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 185
Namdrol wrote:
So then the question becomes not so much about the this consciousness, the ālayavijñāna, but paratantra, dependent nature.


pass. It's the two truths fro me, you an keep your three natures. I find the explanation produces more problems than it solves

Namdrol wrote:
As to your first question -- definitely this is Jayananda's interpretation. Given the way Candrakirti cites the Lanka to this effect, it is probable that this is Candra's point of view as well, though I would not swear to it. Given that the Budddha of the Lanka also treats the Ālaya as an interpretable doctrine, the Buddha (as presented in this sutra) seems to have presented ālayavijn̄āna to just a consciousness that apprehends emptiness, but it is not so clearly stated. All the Buddha really says there is that "know that only emptiness is indicated by the [the term] ālayavijñāna".


I find all this very interesting. It is novel (to me), intriguing and, as long as we are not positing the old eighth storehouse consciouness, satisfying.

Namdrol wrote:
I am sorry but I will have to spend some serious amount of time with these things before I really can respond any further. But I will. Jayananda has an exhaustive presentation of his perspective on Yogacara that fills his commentary.


Well, we will look forward to it.

It will be a different world when more of the classical Indian texts get translated.
I personally find it bizarre that no-one has translated Prasannapada or the Avatarabhyasya or the Catuhsatakatika. I suppose patience is the order of the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
cloudburst wrote:
I personally find it bizarre that no-one has translated Prasannapada or the Avatarabhyasya or the Catuhsatakatika. I suppose patience is the order of the day.


Yes, I agree and it is my personal bitch with Buddhist studies of Madhyamaka, as you know. There is no base line by which we can judge what all these Tibetans are gossiping about in their treatises unless one reads Tibetan and Sanskrit.

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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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