Madhyamaka. Yogacara. The shastras.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 1:32 amPerhaps I am not clear on what you mean by “Buddhist philosophy”.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:10 pm I didn't say Buddhism is antiquated. I said Vajrayana is light years advanced, while Buddhist philosophy is antiquated and frankly stupid.
What are you referring to, exactly?
Question about inherent existence
Re: Question about inherent existence
Re: Question about inherent existence
Practiced like it was in India when it was widespread out to Indonesia with the kind of investment that could construct Borobodur.Damchö_Dorje wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:58 pmCan you elaborate on this? What would it mean in your view to "revive Vajrayana"?Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:43 amOnly India can revive Vajrayana, because only India has that fluid conscious which fixes nothing as true, except the mind.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9511
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Question about inherent existence
But why do you think they are they antiquated and stupid? Is it because they basically reflect specific debates that in many cases have been resolved by modern science? Things like that?Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:52 amMadhyamaka. Yogacara. The shastras.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 1:32 amPerhaps I am not clear on what you mean by “Buddhist philosophy”.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:10 pm I didn't say Buddhism is antiquated. I said Vajrayana is light years advanced, while Buddhist philosophy is antiquated and frankly stupid.
What are you referring to, exactly?
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Question about inherent existence
Wait. I was having a bad day. Actually, I just realized it's not logic. It's metaphysics. And as metaphysics it can be analyzed from a logical standpoint. What you end up with is nonconfirmability, because it's beyond logic. The Buddha who won't answer. But as metaphysics it's experiential and infinite. As experience it's aesthetic, joyful, beautiful. The problem is suffering. The path is joyful. The problem is not reality or truth.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:48 pmBut why do you think they are they antiquated and stupid? Is it because they basically reflect specific debates that in many cases have been resolved by modern science? Things like that?Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:52 amMadhyamaka. Yogacara. The shastras.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 1:32 am
Perhaps I am not clear on what you mean by “Buddhist philosophy”.
What are you referring to, exactly?
- Johnny Dangerous
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 17142
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
- Location: Olympia WA
- Contact:
Re: Question about inherent existence
Olympia, Washington. At least where I live, the main demographic for Buddhist stuff is as or more into study than practice. Vajrayana practice is not popular here at all. Sakya monatery in Seattle (to which my center is connected, we've even ate Super Buffet with Sakya Trizen 41 lol) though I think the public Pujas were well attended pre Covid.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:51 amThat's interesting. I would never have thought that. Where do you live?Johnny Dangerous wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 7:32 pmThe most popular groups at my center are book groups on Madhymaka and Yogcara texts.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:10 pm
Oh no. I have a complete Vajrayana education, lam rim, ngondro, empowerments, retreats, wandering, the works. You need to be clear about my argument. I didn't say Buddhism is antiquated. I said Vajrayana is light years advanced, while Buddhist philosophy is antiquated and frankly stupid
Now I defy you to show how Vasubandhu or Nagarjuna draws crowds at your center. I built a center. I paid for the whole center. It's Drikung Kagyu in San Francisco. I know what centers are.
They come for the bliss of mantras. Nothing else matters.
It’s kind of weird because the book group and the Vajrayana group are not the same people, but I can say that the book groups are consistently more popular at my center than Pujas, or anything related to Vajrayana. I think alot depends on local demographics.
I'm just saying, there are lots of Buddhist people into book-learnin in my circles.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Re: Question about inherent existence
The NItartha Institute offers advanced studies in the Seattle area. There are quite a few serious students, classes are well attended.
https://nitarthainstitute.org/
https://nitarthainstitute.org/
Re: Question about inherent existence
I have some questions about this passage (from the Encyclopedia of Buddhism):
1. What does 'designate' mean in "impermanent collections of causes and conditions are designated by mere conceptual labels?"Madhyamaka suggests that impermanent collections of causes and conditions are designated by mere conceptual labels, which also applies to the causes and conditions themselves and even the principle of causality itself since everything is dependently originated (i.e. empty). If unaware of this, things may seem to arise as existents, remain for a time and then subsequently perish.
2. Does this passage explain why there is no becoming, no transformation (from your quote above) ?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9511
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Question about inherent existence
The glass is either half empty or half full, depending on your concept of it.
Also, (with reference to the impermanent part) we tend to see phenomena as static objects, not as temporary… events, really.
An old barn is a good example of this, if you have ever seen one put in the country, no longer used, its roof sagging or fallen in.
We tend to think of structures as solid objects rather than as slowly occurring events. But that’s what they are. Lots of parts put together, slowly, gradually falling down.
No becoming and no transformation simply means that there is never a fixed point where something can truly be said to exist unchangingly. Everything is in motion…there’s not even that. There is just motion.
I think the Diamond (Cutter) Sutra is the best read on this.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Question about inherent existence
Current scientific understanding of the physical world says that ultimately everything comes from quantum fields.
This looks like a good description of quantum fields at a time when people had no knowledge of quantum fields :
This looks like a good description of quantum fields at a time when people had no knowledge of quantum fields :
Re: Question about inherent existence
Thanks!PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 8:20 pm I think the Diamond (Cutter) Sutra is the best read on this.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: Question about inherent existence
Where do quantum fields come from?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
- Johnny Dangerous
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 17142
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
- Location: Olympia WA
- Contact:
Re: Question about inherent existence
I think they are like Schrödinger’s cat, they neither exist nor don’t exist.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Re: Question about inherent existence
On the assumption that consciousness is not fundamental, then it can be said that the ground of all phenomena are quantum fields based on current science. Since quantum fields are the ground, they are just "there". They do not arise from anything. They do not become.
Re: Question about inherent existence
Schrodinger's cat is meant to point to an object (phenomenon) being in a state of supposition of possible states (dead or alive in the case of Schrodinger's cat) until it is measured.Johnny Dangerous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:55 pmI think they are like Schrödinger’s cat, they neither exist nor don’t exist.
- Johnny Dangerous
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 17142
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
- Location: Olympia WA
- Contact:
Re: Question about inherent existence
My layman’s understanding of a quantum field is pretty much that, so while I’m sure it might make someone in the sciences balk, it seems to be a decent analogy here.Sherab wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:18 amSchrodinger's cat is meant to point to an object (phenomenon) being in a state of supposition of possible states (dead or alive in the case of Schrodinger's cat) until it is measured.Johnny Dangerous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:55 pmI think they are like Schrödinger’s cat, they neither exist nor don’t exist.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Re: Question about inherent existence
A collection appears, it is then given a designation.
In order for there to be becoming and transformation, there should be an entity which comes into being and is transformed.
When the meaning of "arising through conditions" is understood, at that point, the meaning of dependent origination is understood, and at that point, emptiness is also understood.
Re: Question about inherent existence
Does giving it a designation impute existence to the collection? (I'm not familiar with the term 'designate' as used in dharma teachings.)
So Buddhism doesn't buy the notion of a 'pure' becoming/transformation *without* an entity that becomes/transforms.In order for there to be becoming and transformation, there should be an entity which comes into being and is transformed.
"Arising through conditions" means to me (in my own words):When the meaning of "arising through conditions" is understood, at that point, the meaning of dependent origination is understood, and at that point, emptiness is also understood.
Every swarm* of phenomena is both the result of a swarm of past phenomena (conditions) *and* the cause of a swarm of future phenomena (results). Conventionally speaking.
* Phenomena always come as aggregates (swarms), never as singletons.
What am I getting wrong?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: Question about inherent existence
That would mean quantum fields existed before (independently of) the Big Bang?Sherab wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:11 am On the assumption that consciousness is not fundamental, then it can be said that the ground of all phenomena are quantum fields based on current science. Since quantum fields are the ground, they are just "there". They do not arise from anything. They do not become.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: Question about inherent existence
"Designate" means "label." For example, "library" designates a collection of books. "Book" designates a collection of pages, and so on.
Correct, since there is no entity, an inherent existent, that comes into being or transforms. All things are simply dependent designations, which are empty.So Buddhism doesn't buy the notion of a 'pure' becoming/transformation *without* an entity that becomes/transforms.In order for there to be becoming and transformation, there should be an entity which comes into being and is transformed.
Re: Question about inherent existence
So to designate a set of parts as a table is an act of mere naming, like assigning a ID number to a person, no reification of the designated object is involved, yes?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...