Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Dgj
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 10:34 pm

Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Dgj »

Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven? Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
Don't assume my words are correct. Do your research.
Malcolm
Posts: 38382
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Malcolm »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven?
Nope. I mean, I can conceive that someone might have this mistaken idea.
Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
Yup.
"Death stands before all who are born."
— Ācārya Aśvaghoṣa
ManiThePainter
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2020 3:04 pm
Location: British Columbia

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by ManiThePainter »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
Nothing to feel, you can try it yourself.

Just put any philosophical view through Nagarjuna’s meatgrinder and see if it can stand up to analysis.
zerwe
Posts: 605
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:25 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by zerwe »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven? Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
Nope.

Irrefutable and true.

Shaun :namaste:
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7785
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

I cannot image an object that is permanent, so no.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 38382
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Malcolm »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:30 pm I cannot image an object that is permanent, so no.
How about a permanent subject?
"Death stands before all who are born."
— Ācārya Aśvaghoṣa
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 6077
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven? Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
Hypothetically, yeah. It’s called Abrahamism: A hypothetical scenario is that everything is created by a god.

Realistically, however, no.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook develops outward insight.
undefineable
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by undefineable »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pm Can you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven?
You might not end up with that broad a range of views here 😉

Perhaps you're asking the wrong question, since many mystical traditions, along with Atheism imho, wouldn't necessarily reject the gist of anatman and (probably) sunyata *with regard to the phenomenal world taken in isolation*. They merely make some claim along the lines that those phenomena are guided from a transcendent source, like Brahman or matter/energy.

I gather it's fairly straightforward (albeit something of a mission) to prove sunyata/Nagarjuna analytically - The basic logic (at least of sunyata) isn't hard to follow if you're being honest with yourself. Any obvious demonstration that there can be no aspect of reality that isn't "covered" by sunyata would be interesting, since the only objection I can think of is that sunyata leaves no room for a prime mover.

In the absence of any obvious demonstration of the need for a First Cause that has at least some bearing on what comes after it, the whole "all will become clear {with practice[/learning]}" thing has a certain appeal...
you wore out your welcome with random precision {Pink Floyd}
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8379
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Astus »

Dgj wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 5:22 pmCan you conceive of, or agree that someone else could conceive of a hypothetical scenario where dependent origination, emptiness, etc. are entirely false and disproven?
It is false for every ordinary being who assume a self.
Or, do you feel that Nagarjuna's teaching, and the teaching in general that everything is empty, impermanent, etc. is irrefutable, and incontrovertibly true?
It is not grasped as true by noble beings.
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"
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7785
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 7:05 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:30 pm I cannot image an object that is permanent, so no.
How about a permanent subject?
Nope. A fairly large dosage of LSD (which I do not recommend!) in my early adolescence made certain about that long before I met Dharma.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3418
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Aemilius »

Chandrakirti says somewhere that Niravana is a conventional truth. Humanity is a population, and a society. Language and knowledge exist in a society, in a population. There are socities which say that "nothing comes from nothing", and this is regarded an absolute and infallible truth. Suppose you lived in Jemen, Pakistan or SaudiArabia, or some where else where you cannot formulate any such ideas as "emptiness". If you live in a place like North Korea, you or your companions do not have access to any false or wrong ideas. These ideas were deemed wrong and false by the society and by the leading individuals of the population long ago, and they do not exist anymore even as concepts. How could you then come across such strange ideas?
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 13005
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Queequeg »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:31 pm
Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 7:05 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:30 pm I cannot image an object that is permanent, so no.
How about a permanent subject?
Nope. A fairly large dosage of LSD (which I do not recommend!) in my early adolescence made certain about that long before I met Dharma.
That lesson is called the Gospel of St. Owsley.

OP: Nope. Nagarjuna didn't mess with scenarios. He just dismantled them.

Personally, scenarios are boring. Better to just get real.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Upaya Chapter

純一実相。実相外。更無別法。法性寂然名止。寂而常渉照名観。
There is only reality; there is nothing separate from reality. The naturally tranquil nature of dharmas is shamatha. The abiding luminosity of tranquility is vipashyana.

-From Guanding's Introduction to Zhiyi's Great Shamatha and Vipashyana
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7785
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Queequeg wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 1:37 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:31 pm
Malcolm wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 7:05 pm

How about a permanent subject?
Nope. A fairly large dosage of LSD (which I do not recommend!) in my early adolescence made certain about that long before I met Dharma.
That lesson is called the Gospel of St. Owsley.
:good:

(…and St. Jerry.)
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 13005
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Queequeg »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 1:40 pm
Queequeg wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 1:37 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 9:31 pm

Nope. A fairly large dosage of LSD (which I do not recommend!) in my early adolescence made certain about that long before I met Dharma.
That lesson is called the Gospel of St. Owsley.
:good:

(…and St. Jerry.)
Have you seen this one?
https://relix.com/articles/detail/q-a-w ... a-tripper/
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Upaya Chapter

純一実相。実相外。更無別法。法性寂然名止。寂而常渉照名観。
There is only reality; there is nothing separate from reality. The naturally tranquil nature of dharmas is shamatha. The abiding luminosity of tranquility is vipashyana.

-From Guanding's Introduction to Zhiyi's Great Shamatha and Vipashyana
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7785
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

:thanks:

I’m going to file away the phrase “Gospel of St. Owsley” for use at some future time. When that may be is questionable, but it’s too cool to just let fade from memory.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 13005
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Queequeg »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 3:44 pm
:thanks:

I’m going to file away the phrase “Gospel of St. Owsley” for use at some future time. When that may be is questionable, but it’s too cool to just let fade from memory.
:twothumbsup:

Can't say I put much thought into it... one of those spontaneous DW quips. Who says this place isn't good for anything? LOL It is good, though. :D
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Upaya Chapter

純一実相。実相外。更無別法。法性寂然名止。寂而常渉照名観。
There is only reality; there is nothing separate from reality. The naturally tranquil nature of dharmas is shamatha. The abiding luminosity of tranquility is vipashyana.

-From Guanding's Introduction to Zhiyi's Great Shamatha and Vipashyana
Malcolm
Posts: 38382
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Malcolm »

Aemilius wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 9:58 am Chandrakirti says somewhere that Niravana is a conventional truth. Humanity is a population, and a society. Language and knowledge exist in a society, in a population.
"Convention" (vyavahāra) refer to the appearances of ordinary life, not the designations of those appearances. This is a poorly understood point of Madhyamaka. If it were true that "convention" referred to designations, then polka-dotted elephants would appear simply by named.
"Death stands before all who are born."
— Ācārya Aśvaghoṣa
Miorita
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:37 pm

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Miorita »

Scientists have worked out the Sun is about 4,500 million years old. It was made from part of a giant cloud of gas and dust. The pull from the cloud's gravity caused it to clump together and collapse inwards. As the gas and dust fell to the centre of the cloud, the temperature and pressure increased. When the temperature got as high as 1 million degrees Celsius, the Sun began to shine. - https://www.schoolsobservatory.org/lear ... solsys/sun
On a relative level, the Sun is a permanent object/being who shines. Even the corona reminds of it. From here, we have burning with love or burning of love.

If you were to eliminate the Sun because you find it empty,
The Sun will carry on shining for another 5,000 million years. This period of time is called its main sequence. It will then begin run out of the nuclear fuel which powers its core and expand to a red giant star. Some stars explode once they run out of fuel. The Sun is not big enough to explode. Instead, it will lose its outer layers over a long time - we call this a planetary nebula. The central mass of the Sun will shrink to a dense white dwarf. Finally, it will dim, stop shining, and become a brown dwarf.- https://www.schoolsobservatory.org/lear ... solsys/sun
there will still be corona to remind us to burn with love or of love.

Nagarjuna: 150 AD - 250 AD

I don't know if he looked at the Sun as existing or non-existing and what he thought of it. And I'm not willing to experiment anything. I'm just fine the way I am or am not.

A see-through Ganesha flying in the sunset is one elephant with one polka-dot. :lol:
Malcolm
Posts: 38382
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Malcolm »

Miorita wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:53 pm
On a relative level, the Sun is a permanent object/being who shines.
There are no permanent objects on the relative level, the sun included.
"Death stands before all who are born."
— Ācārya Aśvaghoṣa
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7785
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Can you conceive of a scenario where it turns out Nagarjuna was wrong (ex: not all things are empty, or otherwise)?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 12:40 am
Miorita wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:53 pm
On a relative level, the Sun is a permanent object/being who shines.
There are no permanent objects on the relative level, the sun included.
The thought occurred to me that black holes don’t seem to have an endgame. But then someone said something about Hawking Radiation. I’m not sure I’m convinced.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”