Jax wrote:However you keep speaking from the perspective that there are some entities called individual beings.
Concerning Madhyamaka it is sometimes even necessary. Perhaps you need it. Let's look for example Shāntideva's Entrance to the Conduct of Bodhisattvas:All analyses depend
On simply what is renowned in the world. (9.108cd)
Karmapa Wangchug Dorje comments it:
....Followers of the Middle Way, therefore, do not affirm nonexistence through refuting existence. Nor do they affirm or accept “being neither” through refuting “being both.” The refutations of existence, being both, being neither, and so on are simply words used to undermine the wrong thinking of others. They are accepted merely as statements from the perspective of other, worldly beings. Relying on them as such, the Followers of the Middle Way reverse others’ misconceptions. They do not refute anything or affirm anything as their own system. They simply speak in accordance with the following (above) quotation.
(p.279) (Chandrakirti)The conventional truth is the method;
The ultimate truth is what arises from the method.
Those who do not know the distinctions between these two
Will, due to wrong thinking, follow inferior paths. (6.80)
Karmapa Wangchug Dorje: Granted that, ultimately, there are not two truths. Yet, conventionally, the relative truth is not just confusion but it is also a method for realizing the ultimate truth. Without analyzing whether relative phenomena arise from themselves or from something different than themselves, the Followers of the Middle Way accept from the perspective of others whatever is asserted by worldly people on the basis of worldly ways.