Western Philosophy and emptiness

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 5:25 pm
That's why I specified about how emptiness is fully realized (i.e., at the end of the practice, not how it starts out). You're correct in that the practice does start out with contemplating the emptiness of objects like the village in the forest (where one has left the village and gone to the forest for renunciation), the earth in the forest, etc.* But when you get to the later stages, especially the seventh stage of signlessness, then emptiness is literally the absence of any characteristics that one could hold onto as an object, and by the final stage, not even the experience of emptiness itself is objectified: one just dwells in emptiness without any grasping. And, whereas some of these later stages were taught by pre-Buddhist teachers, it's that final non-grasping of emptiness as an object that leads to final liberation. So you finish by dwelling in emptiness that is independent of any object.
No, you abide in the presence of the objects of the six āyatanas and the body, all they are empty of is affliction, desire for rebirth, and [afflictive] ignorance.

Asanga of course uses this example of emptiness in the Bodhisattvabhumi (Engle, pp. 80-82) to castigate Madhyamakas, and thereby proving that he is a realist.

But this is not the profound Mahāyāna emptiness free of extremes.

So this is a core practice of the Buddha himself that he says clearly leads to final liberation through emptiness that doesn't fit within the Mādhyamaka-type understanding of emptiness popularized in Tibet.
Amazing, so you are declaring a "first turning sūtra" to be definitive. :rolleye:
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:10 pm
stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 5:25 pm It's also worth noting here that even these early stages aren't about the inherent emptiness of x (svabhāvaśūnyatā), but about the extrinsic emptiness of x as being empty of y (parabhāvaśūnyatā).
Why would the two be mutually exclusive?
I don't know about mutually exclusive, but they're different meditative practices, and this difference has to do roughly with debates on affirming vs. non-affirming negations. The followers of Cāndrakirti primarily practice svabhāvaśūnyatā, where you take an object and realize its emptiness through analysis, and then that's it. The object dissolves and so does its emptiness, there's nothing left to work with. The problem is that you can spend all day dissolving chariots and tables, sprouts and seeds, and it won't necessarily get you deeper than the superficial objects of conventional appearance because that's your starting point and your ending point. In contrast, with parabhāvaśūnyatā, you dissolve an object, but in doing so, realize a deeper level into which the object dissolved. In this way, you can pursue emptiness in progressively deeper levels, far beyond chariots and tables, until you get to the end-point into which all things dissolve, the ālāya-jñāna. The objects dissolve into a basic wisdom awareness that is itself empty of these objects, as described in the gzhanstong literature, and which this early sutta points towards. Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso's Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness does a nice job of explaining this process.
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:20 pm It’s like if a Buddha sits and perceives himself and everything directly and clearly as the vast space between atoms. There’s still emptiness built upon something. if there were nothing, what could one dwell in?
I think the above point kind of distinguishes between different ways that emptiness can be built upon something. This Sūtra below also knocks it out of the park in terms of explanation.
Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra wrote:Childish beings may think of hailstones as being gems and take them home, but then they see them melt and think, "Oh, they are empty." Likewise, through reflecting and meditating on utter emptiness, you, Mañjuśrī, see all phenomena dissolve. You even think that liberation, which is not empty, is empty. Just as some people may meditate on gems as being empty due to their mistaking hailstones for gems and seeing those hailstones melt away, you even think of nonempty phenomena as being empty. Seeing phenomena as empty, you also destroy nonempty phenomena as being empty. However, empty phenomena are different from nonempty phenomena. Just like hailstones, the billions of afflictions are empty. Just like hailstones, nonvirtuous phenomena swiftly perish. But the Buddha and liberation are permanent, like a beryl. As for space, buddhas have form, while all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas lack form. The liberation of a buddha is also form, while the liberations of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas lack form, so how can you say that the characteristic of liberation is to be empty? Do not entertain this notion of there being no [such] divisions.

If there are no people in a house, it is empty. If there is no water in a vase, it is empty. If no water flows in a river, it is empty. The house is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because there are no people in it. The vase is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because there is no water in it.The river is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because no water flows in it. Likewise, liberation is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because it is free from all flaws. The Buddha is not empty either—he is called empty because he is free from all flaws and lacks any human or divine existence entailing billions of afflictions. Alas, Mañjuśrī, you behave like a mosquito, not understanding the precise meaning of empty and nonempty. The Nirgranthas also meditate on everything’s being empty, so you Nirgrantha mosquito, say no more!


Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm No, you abide in the presence of the objects of the six āyatanas and the body, all they are empty of is affliction, desire for rebirth, and [afflictive] ignorance.
Not quite. I've studied Bhikkhu Bodhi and particularly Bhikkhu Ānālayo on this practice, and the full realization of emptiness is accomplished in the stage of recognizing even the emptiness of signlessness, which ends all grasping even onto the experience of emptiness. The next statement about the six sense bases is saying that what remains after fully realizing emptiness in meditation is the continuity of our lives as embodied beings, just now without any influxes. Nirvana with remainder.
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm Amazing, so you are declaring a "first turning sūtra" to be definitive. :rolleye:
Only the sūtras and tantras of the Kṛtayuga Dharma identified by the Omniscient Dölpopa are definitive. You should know that by now :heart:

But, for real, given the huge emphasis on anāpānasati and mindfulness in the (first turning) Buddhist world today, it's surprising how underappreciated this emptiness practice is, particularly as the Buddha said it was basically the definitive practice for Tathāgatas.
Cūḷasuññatasutta wrote:Ānanda, whatever Tathāgatas, free from attachment and completely awakened, there have been in the past, they all truly dwelled in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, whatever Tathāgatas, free from attachment and completely awakened, there will be in the future, they will all truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, I, who am the Tathāgata now, free from attachment and completely awakened, I also truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, you should train yourself like this: ‘I shall also truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.’ Ānanda, you should train yourself like this.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm No, you abide in the presence of the objects of the six āyatanas and the body, all they are empty of is affliction, desire for rebirth, and [afflictive] ignorance.
Not quite.
Quite:

They understand: ‘This field of perception is empty of the perception of the defilements of sensuality, desire to be reborn, and ignorance.There is only this that is not emptiness, namely that associated with the six sense fields dependent on this body and conditioned by life.’
Ānanda, you should train yourself like this: ‘I shall also truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.’ Ānanda, you should train yourself like this.

Correct, what is the mind unconditioned by? It is free from the condition of the afflictions and their effluents. That's all liberation is. Omniscience on the other hand, well, that requires a more profound realization of emptiness.
The Nirgranthas also meditate on everything’s being empty
This is a facially false statement. In any case, this sutra is not talking about definitive nature of emptiness. Angulimāla is talking only about "freedom from the condition of the afflictions and their effluents." His grasp of Jain siddhānta leaves much to be desired.
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:46 pm
stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm Not quite.
Quite:
Again, not quite! The texts literally say that liberation occurs upon realization of the emptiness of signlessness, which ends all grasping even onto the experience of emptiness, and resting here removes the influxes because there is nothing possible to grasp onto and nobody to grasp, as I already described. Only then does it talk about the six sense bases. Think about it. There is no experience of the six sense bases in the formless dhyānas being described at this stage of the practice. It's only after exiting the meditation that these six sense bases continue to function, but they function differently, without the influxes. This is nirvana with remainder.
Cūḷasuññatasutta wrote:One thinks: “My [experience] of the <signless> concentration of the mind is rooted – it is rooted in formations, it is rooted in intentions. What is rooted in formations, rooted in intentions, I do not delight in that, I do not seek that, I should not become established in that.”

Knowing in this way, seeing in this way, one’s mind is liberated from the influx of sensual desire, [one’s mind is liberated] from the influx of existence, and one’s mind is liberated from the influx of ignorance. Being liberated, one knows one is liberated. One knows as it really is that birth has been extinguished, the holy life has been established, what had to be done has been done, there will be no experiencing of further existence.

In this way one knows that this is empty of the influx of sensual desire, empty of the influx of existence, and empty of the influx of ignorance. Yet there is this non-emptiness: just this body of mine with its six sense-spheres and the life faculty.

[One knows]: “Whatever weariness because of the influx of sensual desire there might be – that is not present for me; whatever weariness because of the influx of existence [there might be – that is also not present for me; whatever weariness] because of the influx of ignorance there might be – that is also not present for me. There is only the weariness because of this body of mine with its six sensespheres and the life faculty.”
Ānālayo says the same thing.
Ānālayo wrote:With the eighth step in the gradual emptying of perception the practitioner becomes ready for the final touch of liberating insight. Central here is the recognition that the experience of signlessness is of a conditioned nature, therefore it is impermanent and one should avoid delighting in it. At this point, by giving up even the most subtle holding on to any experience of emptiness, the true realization of supreme emptiness dawns. For supreme emptiness, the preceding gradual emptying of perception formed the preparation.

Throughout this gradual progress, a crucial theme taken up at the present juncture – conditionality – was kept present in terms of the types of weariness overcome or still present because of one’s meditative experience. This recurrent directing of the meditator’s awareness to conditionality points to a close relationship between realization of emptiness and dependent arising. With the present final step, the conditioned nature of all stages in the gradual entry into emptiness is left behind through realization of the unconditioned. What remains, after this supreme accomplishment in emptiness, is simply the continuity of life, exemplified by the body and its senses together with the life faculty.
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm In any case, this sutra is not talking about definitive nature of emptiness.
Of course it is. It's a hugely important third-turning sūtra, and is definitive at least for the Jonang, and perhaps other gzhanstongpas. Brunnhölzl explains more below, which shows why svabhāvaśūnyatā-only practitioners miss something that those who also practice parabhāvaśūnyatā realize:
Brunnhölzl wrote:As one of its highlights, the sūtra contains a debate between the arhat Aṅgulimāla and Mañjuśrī (who defends the emptiness of the prajñāpāramitā sūtras) on the correct understanding of emptiness, nirvāṇa, tathāgatagarbha, and the dharmakāya, which clearly favors the superiority of emptiness as having the meaning of tathāgatagarbha and buddhahood’s being empty only of stains but not in every respect (of course, this is reminiscent of Tibetan debates about Rangtong and Shentong) ...

Prior to this debate, the Buddha answers the classical question why all sentient beings are not enlightened, if they all possess the tathāgata heart. He says that even if all buddhas searched with great effort, they would never find any stains in the tathāgata heart, and this stainless tathāgata heart adorned with infinite major and minor marks exists in all sentient beings. The tathāgata heart is covered by billions of afflictions and thus is invisible, like oil in a thorough mix of oil and lots of water. However, just like oil and water, there is no chance for the buddha element and these afflictions ever becoming blended into one. Though the former abides within the latter, it is like a lamp in a vase—once the vase is broken, the lamp shines brightly and beautifully ...

[T]he Aṅgulimālīyasūtra says that the inconceivable pure dharmadhātu is the ultimate single refuge that is unborn, unceasing, permanent, eternal, everlasting, and peaceful, that there is only a single yāna (the one that leads to the realization of the tathāgata heart), and that the tathāgata heart is nothing but the natural purity of the mind. The afflictions are said to arise from not knowing this natural purity of the mind (just as the Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta says that all wrong views, afflictions, and so on, arise from not knowing the single dhātu). The Aṅgulimālīyasūtra likewise identifies the dhātu (or basic element) of sentient beings with this single dhātu and, similar to the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra, moreover equates both with the "dhātu that is the self" (ātmadhātu), which is in turn closely related to the pāramitā of self as found in both the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra and the Śrīmālādevīsūtra. Also, the Aṅgulimālīyasūtra explicitly draws attention to the significance of the tathāgatagarbha sūtras and the need to appreciate them properly.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Kai lord »

So you disagree with Gelugpas, yet agree with them on their tenet that the Arhats fully realizing emptiness just like the Mahayanists when they reach arya state. :rolleye:
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

Kai lord wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 9:10 pm So you disagree
Gotta properly understand the text before agreeing or disagreeing with it even becomes possible! Properly understood, this text shows how one can dwell in emptiness in an abstract manner because emptiness is something affirmative that is other-empty of objects (parabhāvaśūnyatā), different from the self-emptiness of objects being a non-affirming negation (svabhāvaśūnyatā). That's significant. Also, although I don't have any opinion on the Geluk view of arhats, you don't lose your Jonang membership card if you agree with a Gelukpa about something. For instance, I think yellow hats look nice :lol:
krodha
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by krodha »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm
natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:10 pm
stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 5:25 pm It's also worth noting here that even these early stages aren't about the inherent emptiness of x (svabhāvaśūnyatā), but about the extrinsic emptiness of x as being empty of y (parabhāvaśūnyatā).
Why would the two be mutually exclusive?
I don't know about mutually exclusive, but they're different meditative practices, and this difference has to do roughly with debates on affirming vs. non-affirming negations. The followers of Cāndrakirti primarily practice svabhāvaśūnyatā, where you take an object and realize its emptiness through analysis, and then that's it. The object dissolves and so does its emptiness, there's nothing left to work with. The problem is that you can spend all day dissolving chariots and tables, sprouts and seeds, and it won't necessarily get you deeper than the superficial objects of conventional appearance because that's your starting point and your ending point. In contrast, with parabhāvaśūnyatā, you dissolve an object, but in doing so, realize a deeper level into which the object dissolved. In this way, you can pursue emptiness in progressively deeper levels, far beyond chariots and tables, until you get to the end-point into which all things dissolve, the ālāya-jñāna. The objects dissolve into a basic wisdom awareness that is itself empty of these objects, as described in the gzhanstong literature, and which this early sutta points towards. Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso's Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness does a nice job of explaining this process.
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:20 pm It’s like if a Buddha sits and perceives himself and everything directly and clearly as the vast space between atoms. There’s still emptiness built upon something. if there were nothing, what could one dwell in?
I think the above point kind of distinguishes between different ways that emptiness can be built upon something. This Sūtra below also knocks it out of the park in terms of explanation.
Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra wrote:Childish beings may think of hailstones as being gems and take them home, but then they see them melt and think, "Oh, they are empty." Likewise, through reflecting and meditating on utter emptiness, you, Mañjuśrī, see all phenomena dissolve. You even think that liberation, which is not empty, is empty. Just as some people may meditate on gems as being empty due to their mistaking hailstones for gems and seeing those hailstones melt away, you even think of nonempty phenomena as being empty. Seeing phenomena as empty, you also destroy nonempty phenomena as being empty. However, empty phenomena are different from nonempty phenomena. Just like hailstones, the billions of afflictions are empty. Just like hailstones, nonvirtuous phenomena swiftly perish. But the Buddha and liberation are permanent, like a beryl. As for space, buddhas have form, while all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas lack form. The liberation of a buddha is also form, while the liberations of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas lack form, so how can you say that the characteristic of liberation is to be empty? Do not entertain this notion of there being no [such] divisions.

If there are no people in a house, it is empty. If there is no water in a vase, it is empty. If no water flows in a river, it is empty. The house is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because there are no people in it. The vase is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because there is no water in it.The river is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because no water flows in it. Likewise, liberation is not empty in all respects—it is called "empty" because it is free from all flaws. The Buddha is not empty either—he is called empty because he is free from all flaws and lacks any human or divine existence entailing billions of afflictions. Alas, Mañjuśrī, you behave like a mosquito, not understanding the precise meaning of empty and nonempty. The Nirgranthas also meditate on everything’s being empty, so you Nirgrantha mosquito, say no more!


Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm No, you abide in the presence of the objects of the six āyatanas and the body, all they are empty of is affliction, desire for rebirth, and [afflictive] ignorance.
Not quite. I've studied Bhikkhu Bodhi and particularly Bhikkhu Ānālayo on this practice, and the full realization of emptiness is accomplished in the stage of recognizing even the emptiness of signlessness, which ends all grasping even onto the experience of emptiness. The next statement about the six sense bases is saying that what remains after fully realizing emptiness in meditation is the continuity of our lives as embodied beings, just now without any influxes. Nirvana with remainder.
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm Amazing, so you are declaring a "first turning sūtra" to be definitive. :rolleye:
Only the sūtras and tantras of the Kṛtayuga Dharma identified by the Omniscient Dölpopa are definitive. You should know that by now :heart:

But, for real, given the huge emphasis on anāpānasati and mindfulness in the (first turning) Buddhist world today, it's surprising how underappreciated this emptiness practice is, particularly as the Buddha said it was basically the definitive practice for Tathāgatas.
Cūḷasuññatasutta wrote:Ānanda, whatever Tathāgatas, free from attachment and completely awakened, there have been in the past, they all truly dwelled in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, whatever Tathāgatas, free from attachment and completely awakened, there will be in the future, they will all truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, I, who am the Tathāgata now, free from attachment and completely awakened, I also truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.

Ānanda, you should train yourself like this: ‘I shall also truly dwell in this emptiness, without distortion, namely in the eradication of the influxes, the influx-free and unconditioned liberation of the mind.’ Ānanda, you should train yourself like this.
This svabhāvaśūnyatā vs parabhāvaśūnyatā dichotomy with the former being misrepresented is nonsense.
natusake
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 8:20 pm

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by natusake »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm
natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:10 pm
stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 5:25 pm It's also worth noting here that even these early stages aren't about the inherent emptiness of x (svabhāvaśūnyatā), but about the extrinsic emptiness of x as being empty of y (parabhāvaśūnyatā).
Why would the two be mutually exclusive?
I don't know about mutually exclusive, but they're different meditative practices, and this difference has to do roughly with debates on affirming vs. non-affirming negations.
I thought that Shentong was a post-equipoise view, so how is there different practices associated with it?
The followers of Cāndrakirti primarily practice svabhāvaśūnyatā, where you take an object and realize its emptiness through analysis, and then that's it. The object dissolves and so does its emptiness, there's nothing left to work with. The problem is that you can spend all day dissolving chariots and tables, sprouts and seeds, and it won't necessarily get you deeper than the superficial objects of conventional appearance because that's your starting point and your ending point. In contrast, with parabhāvaśūnyatā, you dissolve an object, but in doing so, realize a deeper level into which the object dissolved. In this way, you can pursue emptiness in progressively deeper levels, far beyond chariots and tables, until you get to the end-point into which all things dissolve, the ālāya-jñāna. The objects dissolve into a basic wisdom awareness that is itself empty of these objects, as described in the gzhanstong literature, and which this early sutta points towards. Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso's Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness does a nice job of explaining this process.
What I'm getting at is this. If something is empty of self-existence, then it is naturally empty of anything else that could be imputed to it. If it is empty of other-existence, then it is naturally empty of itself as well, because once one has examined everything other than itself, there is nothing which remains to be called 'itself'. It seems to me that one could maintain a difference between emptiness of self-existence and emptiness of other-existence only if they had some kind of extreme in mind, such as a difference between self and other.

By "dissolve", what do you mean? If you say one thing dissolves into another, this seems to be simply changing the basis of designation. There is nothing special about changing the basis of designation, it's just forming new samskaras. But, if you say simply 'dissolves', that doesn't seem to have the same meaning as the first.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Kai lord »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm Not quite. I've studied Bhikkhu Bodhi and particularly Bhikkhu Ānālayo on this practice, and the full realization of emptiness is accomplished in the stage of recognizing even the emptiness of signlessness, which ends all grasping even onto the experience of emptiness.
Mipham:
one cannot say that just by having drunk one gulp, one has drunk the water of the entire ocean.
Meanwhile the Sarvastivadins taught individuals on how to end grasping and attain Nirvana with remainder without the need for Sunyata.
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 8:59 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:46 pm
stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 7:11 pm Not quite.
Quite:
Again, not quite! The texts literally say that liberation occurs upon realization of the emptiness of signlessness,
Yes, but that is not the final emptiness the text refers to.

Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 6:25 pm In any case, this sutra is not talking about definitive nature of emptiness.
Of course it is. It's a hugely important third-turning sūtra, and is definitive at least for the Jonang, and perhaps other gzhanstongpas. Brunnhölzl explains more below, which shows why svabhāvaśūnyatā-only practitioners miss something that those who also practice parabhāvaśūnyatā realize:

I dont agree with Brunnhölzl's analysis. All the text really doing is striking a balance against those who assert the Buddha only asserted the absence of self as an ontological commitment. But not even Nāgārjuna makes that claim, in fact he asserts the opposite, i.e., that the Buddha taught both self and not-self, depending on context. That is why the Buddha makes reference to the Middle Way in one passage, at the end of along a reply to Mañjuśrī, where he states that some do not understand the indirect (ldem po. saṃdhāya) meaning of liberation, self, and transcendence (lokottara).
Last edited by Malcolm on Wed May 24, 2023 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 9:54 pm If it is empty of other-existence, then it is naturally empty of itself as well
This is the exact error the Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra quote above is addressing. You've suggested that a house being empty of people means the house is also empty of its own structure, with its walls and roof, but it isn't. Analogously, the ālāya-jñāna can be empty of adventitious obscurations without being empty of its own buddha qualities. So, to use a common analogy, one can play the svabhāvaśūnyatā game all day long, finding a cloud and refuting its inherent existence because it breaks down into water molecules, changes over time, etc., without ever seeing the vastness of the sky. To that end, it helps to have instructions that help you rest in the vastness of the sky, which is always empty of clouds (parabhāvaśūnyatā), lest you get fixated on the habit of finding and refuting clouds. Again, Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness does a nice job of explaining this all and is a quick read.
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:30 pm I dont agree with Brunnhölzl's analysis.
Always happy to debate with you, even if it ends with agreeing to disagree! I find more convincing Ānālayo's understanding of the Cūḷasuññatasutta and Brunnhölzl's understanding of the Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra, as I shared above.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:31 pm
natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 9:54 pm If it is empty of other-existence, then it is naturally empty of itself as well
This is the exact error the Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra quote above is addressing.
No, that is not the error it is addressing at all. The error it addresses is not understanding the intentional meaning of words used by the Buddha. It is a sutra about use of language, not ontology.
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:34 pm No, that is not the error it is addressing at all. The error it addresses is not understanding the intentional meaning of words used by the Buddha. It is a sutra about use of language, not ontology.
When it describes people who see a hailstone melt and think that a gem will melt is exactly ontological. Not everything is empty in the same way. The problem of interpreting the Buddha's words that you mention is a compounding issue, as when people apply words meant to understand the hailstone onto the gem, conflating both with the term "empty" (rather than e.g., distinguishing between self- and other-emptiness, as I've been doing here). I think that's very clear from the text itself. But, like I said above, if you disagree with Brunnhölzl's take, we probably won't see eye to eye on this, and that's perfectly fine.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:38 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:34 pm No, that is not the error it is addressing at all. The error it addresses is not understanding the intentional meaning of words used by the Buddha. It is a sutra about use of language, not ontology.
When it describes people who see a hailstone melt and think that a gem will melt is exactly ontological.
No, that is a metaphor for mistake perception, which again, is not an ontological issue.

For example, the sūtra discusses not understanding the indirect meaning of tathāgatagarbha. If someone takes the idea of infinite, unfabricated, major and minor marks literally existing in sentient beings as ornaments...I have a bridge in Brooklyn.
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:59 pm I have a bridge in Brooklyn.
Agree to disagree on our hermeneutics here! Plus your bridges lack inherent existence, so I don't think they could handle the weight of my vehicle ;)
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Kai lord »

Ānālayo wrote:
With the eighth step in the gradual emptying of perception the practitioner becomes ready for the final touch of liberating insight. Central here is the recognition that the experience of signlessness is of a conditioned nature, therefore it is impermanent and one should avoid delighting in it. At this point, by giving up even the most subtle holding on to any experience of emptiness, the true realization of supreme emptiness dawns. For supreme emptiness, the preceding gradual emptying of perception formed the preparation.
To be honest, this is my first time reading about "supreme emptiness" but what he actually mean to say above is "emptiness of emptiness" (śūnyatāśūnyatā)
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

Kai lord wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 11:17 pm To be honest, this is my first time reading about "supreme emptiness" but what he actually mean to say above is "emptiness of emptiness" (śūnyatāśūnyatā)
I definitely recommend reading Bhante's writings on this topic if this intrigues you. This is probably the my favorite meditation-related sutta. What he's describing as dwelling in (supreme) emptiness is more precisely what happens after you recognize the emptiness of emptiness (i.e., let go of any subtle grasping after even the experience of signless concentration), which is an unconditioned state that emerges subsequently in which all influxes die down and eventually stop. Then, when you go about your everyday embodied existence with the six sense bases and life faculties operational after meditation, you never get caught up, as I've been mentioning in this thread.
Ānālayo wrote:The actual insight contemplation used for the breakthrough to full liberation in the Cūḷasuññata-sutta differs in so far as it involves directing attention to the conditioned and therefore impermanent nature of the signless concentration of the mind ...

The main point that emerges here is the realization that the experience of signlessness is still within the realm of what is conditioned. However much this experience is aloof from all involvement with any sign and free from any concepts, it nevertheless is still just something created by one’s own mind. It is a product fabricated by one’s own intentions.

This realization reveals that this experience is impermanent ... What is conditioned and impermanent is not really fit for being clung to with delight... The point ... could perhaps best be summarized with the term virāga. This term stands for “dispassion” (= absence of delight) as well as for “fading away” (= impermanence). From a practical perspective, impermanence and the absence of delight can be considered as two sides of the same coin.

Becoming dispassionate with what is impermanent and conditioned then enables the breakthrough to full liberation. At this point the only weariness left, if it can even be called such, is simply the continuity of life, symbolized by the body and the senses.

The Cūḷasuññata-sutta and its Tibetan parallel make a point of qualifying the destruction of the influxes as the “unsurpassable” manifestation of emptiness. This is what emptiness is really about, namely voiding the mind of all defilements. With such unsurpassable emptiness reached, the chirping of the crickets has been silenced for good. The mind has become truly silent.
natusake
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 8:20 pm

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by natusake »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:31 pm
natusake wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 9:54 pm If it is empty of other-existence, then it is naturally empty of itself as well
This is the exact error the Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra quote above is addressing. You've suggested that a house being empty of people means the house is also empty of its own structure, with its walls and roof, but it isn't.
No, I am suggesting a more exhaustive process than that. I am suggesting that things that are other than the house are not the house, and 'other than the house' is exhaustive. If we exhaustively list out things which are other than the house, we will find that there is nothing else which remains to refer to a 'house' with. The walls are not the house, nor the roof, nor the floor, nor the people, and so on. If we name everything that is other than the house... we have named everything. We find that there is no basis of designation for the word 'house'. Again, unless you cling to an extreme, for example, like putting everything into two buckets of "this is the same as the house" and "this is other than the house", and then claiming we can only say the house is empty of the latter, then this is not emptiness at all, this is just a re-articulation of what a house is, i.e. deluded seeing itself, since you have simply decided leave the former category unexamined. If we continue to examine whether the bucket of 'what is the same as the house" is the house or not, we will find that it is indeed not the house either.

If you follow what I'm saying, don't you see how the distinction of Shentong and Rangtong is completely based on a convention? I.e., it is only based on deciding whether to leave one or another bucket unexamined or not.

Also, you seem to have missed my two question: 1. If Shentong is a post-equipoise view, then how are there different practices? 2. What does 'dissolves' mean?
stong gzugs
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:58 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by stong gzugs »

natusake wrote: Thu May 25, 2023 12:02 am If you follow what I'm saying, don't you see how the distinction of Shentong and Rangtong is completely based on a convention? I.e., it is only based on deciding whether to leave one or another bucket unexamined or not.

Also, you seem to have missed my two question: 1. If Shentong is a post-equipoise view, then how are there different practices? 2. What does 'dissolves' mean?
From what I can glean, you've rediscovered Derrida's insight that words are only defined relative to each other, which is true. So what one word means depends on other words in the dictionary, and on and on in a big circle, so what word is empty of what depends on what word you start with. But that's not really relevant to meditative experience, and I think you may be taking the house analogy too seriously. The point of this sutta (and gzhanstong more generally) is that there is also a hierarchy, rather than only a circularity, where just because x can be empty of y doesn't mean that y can also be empty of x. You can experience space without a forest, but not a forest without space. You can perceive a floor without a forest, but not a forest without a floor. Etc. And this, again, is what Aṅgulimālīya is talking about: assuming that everything is empty in the same way (like words in a dictionary that are all inherently empty because they mutually depend on each other; svabhāvaśūnyatā) is a mistake, one should rather recognize the hierarchical nesting like the Buddha describes in this emptiness practice, where one thing can be empty of another (parabhāvaśūnyatā) so that following the path of hierarchical dependence progressively leads you to deeper and more fundamental insights into reality.

About your other questions, in this case, "dissolves" is what happens to the village when you switch attention to the forest, or to the forest when you switch attention to the floor, etc. in a parabhāvaśūnyatā mode. About your other question, I think you're interpolating a prior conversation about tantra methods onto this conversation about sutra methods. Ideally, tantra practices (starting with the third initiation) should be so experientially powerful that they eliminate the need for views. But, setting that aside, we can ask more generally: are different practices needed to recognize these different types of emptiness? Like I mentioned before, if your instructions are to refute clouds (per svabhāvaśūnyatā), you'll likely miss the sky, because you're stuck in a habit of looking for clouds to refute (this is covered in Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness!). But if you get the instructions to rest in the vast expanse of sky, you'll see both how the sky is (other)empty of clouds (parabhāvaśūnyatā) and how clouds therefore are (self)empty (svabhāvaśūnyatā). To your question, we don't bring this conceptual language to our practice (it's always nisprapañca), it's just frankly quite self-evident unless you're caught up in a habit of cloud-refutation. The problem happens when in post-equipoise you can't differentiate between the emptiness of the cloud and the emptiness of the sky, which is why this conceptual language matters. This is what Aṅgulimālīya says (per my above response to Malcolm about why different ontologies of emptiness require different vocabularies) and is part of the the more general argument that the third turning is about making precise distinctions. Things that aren't empty in the same way need different vocabularies. This is also why gzhanstongpas don't reject self-emptiness, we use it too for the appropriate phenomena (i.e., for hailstones, not gemstones): we just reject the fetishization and over-extension of self-emptiness, because it can become a habit that blinds people beyond the small conventional object of their refutation. This fetishization is what happened when Tsongkhapa and the later Gelukpas used their political power to thrust Cāndrakīrti's views above those of the Ratnagotravibhāga, Aṅgulimālīya, etc. as the way to understand Mādhyamaka.

Hope this helps clarify things, I have to run. Bye for now!
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Western Philosophy and emptiness

Post by Malcolm »

stong gzugs wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 11:07 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed May 24, 2023 10:59 pm I have a bridge in Brooklyn.
Agree to disagree on our hermeneutics here! Plus your bridges lack inherent existence, so I don't think they could handle the weight of my vehicle ;)
Since you drive a light weight vehicle, the bridge will be fine.
Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”