Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Beautiful Breath » Wed May 15, 2013 11:44 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
Beautiful Breath wrote:But the mādhyamikas have 'proved' their case....haven't they? I see nothing anywhere that contradicts or refutes them. If there is, let me know - would help with my Theravadain/Mādhyamikas Nerosis!

I think Madhyamaka can be useful, and doesn't contradict anything in the Pāli Nikāyas. And as Tilt suggests, there's no need to posit dhammas as "ultimate realities" in the first place.

As for whether or not mādhyamikas have made their case: they have if you accept mādhyamika reasoning. Of course, not everyone does accept mādhyamika reasoning, and that's fine too.



I have yet to find a logical refutation of the mādhyamika reasoning myself...seems pretty water tight to me....(imho - of course).
User avatar
Beautiful Breath
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 10:25 am
Location: South West England, UK

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Nyana » Wed May 15, 2013 5:55 pm

Beautiful Breath wrote:So would it be fair to say mādhyamika can sit comfortabley in a Theravadin context?

Sure.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 6:56 pm

David J. Kalupahana's Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nagarjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way might be of interest in that it is a translation of and a look at the Mulamadhyamakakarika from a stand point of the Pali Canon andthe Agamas. While Western Tibetan Buddhists tend to hate it because it does not conform to the usual Tibetan understanding of things (but we need to keep in mind that the Tibetans did not get everything correct, such as the Yogachara). While Kaluphahana's translation and discussion may not be perfect, it is a worthwhile read. Also, Kalupahana uses a very old Chinese commentary that approaches things a bit differently from the usual Tibetan manner.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 8:41 pm

Beautiful Breath wrote:I have yet to find a logical refutation of the mādhyamika reasoning myself...seems pretty water tight to me....(imho - of course).


How about BUDDHIST ILLOGIC: A Critical Analysis of Nagarjuna’s Arguments
The present essay demonstrates the many sophistries involved in Nagarjuna’s arguments. He uses double standards, applying or ignoring the laws of thought and other norms as convenient to his goals; he manipulates his readers, by giving seemingly logical form (like the dilemma) to his discourse, while in fact engaged in non-sequiturs or appealing to doubtful premises; he plays with words, relying on unclear terminology, misleading equivocations and unfair fixations of meaning; and he ‘steals concepts’, using them to deny the very percepts on which they are based.link
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 9:20 pm

Alex123 wrote:
Beautiful Breath wrote:I have yet to find a logical refutation of the mādhyamika reasoning myself...seems pretty water tight to me....(imho - of course).


How about BUDDHIST ILLOGIC: A Critical Analysis of Nagarjuna’s Arguments
The present essay demonstrates the many sophistries involved in Nagarjuna’s arguments. He uses double standards, applying or ignoring the laws of thought and other norms as convenient to his goals; he manipulates his readers, by giving seemingly logical form (like the dilemma) to his discourse, while in fact engaged in non-sequiturs or appealing to doubtful premises; he plays with words, relying on unclear terminology, misleading equivocations and unfair fixations of meaning; and he ‘steals concepts’, using them to deny the very percepts on which they are based.link
Probably not.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 9:23 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Probably not.


Have you read his book? I am just saying that some people don't consider Nagarjunas arguments to be as compelling as some claim they are.
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 9:27 pm

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Probably not.


Have you read his book? I am just saying that some people don't consider Nagarjunas arguments to be as compelling as some claim they are.
If one is going to critcize Nagarjuna, it would help to really look at what Nagarjuna is saying and in the context of what he saying. This book is self-published drivel by someone who knows little of Buddhism and even less of Nagarjuna.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 9:29 pm

tiltbillings wrote:This book is self-published drivel by someone who knows little of Buddhism and even less of Nagarjuna.


It examines the logic that Nagarjuna is using. Prove it that it is "drivel". It just sounds like baseless accusations.
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 9:37 pm

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:If one is going to critcize Nagarjuna, it would help to really look at what Nagarjuna is saying and in the context of what he saying.


He is criticizing logic that Nagarjuna is using.

tiltbillings wrote:This book is self-published drivel by someone who knows little of Buddhism and even less of Nagarjuna.


It examines the logic that Nagarjuna is using. Prove it that it is "drivel".
No. I am not going waste my time with another tedious and fruitless debate with you over something you know little about. If you want a discussion of Nagarjuna, go to Dharma Wheel. And you might actually read a carefully done analysis of and commentary on Nagarjuna by someone who knows of what they are speaking. This stupid book is not it, but I see why it would appeal to you.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 9:48 pm

tiltbillings wrote:No. I am not going waste my time with another tedious and fruitless debate with you over something you know little about. If you want a discussion of Nagarjuna, go to Dharma Wheel. And you might actually read a carefully done analysis of and commentary on Nagarjuna by someone who knows of what they are speaking. This stupid book is not it, but I see why it would appeal to you.



Can you actually refute his arguments (or show link that refutes them) or are you just using "that book is stupid" as your argument?
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 9:57 pm

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:No. I am not going waste my time with another tedious and fruitless debate with you over something you know little about. If you want a discussion of Nagarjuna, go to Dharma Wheel. And you might actually read a carefully done analysis of and commentary on Nagarjuna by someone who knows of what they are speaking. This stupid book is not it, but I see why it would appeal to you.



Can you actually refute his arguments (or show link that refutes them) or are you just using "that book is stupid" as your argument?
And you are well enough versed in Nagarjuna to say that this book does an accurate and objective job of presenting Nagarjuna? This is a poorly resourced and researched book by someone who knows next to nothing of Buddhism, as the footnotes make so abundantly clear. Present this book on Dharma Wheel. Start an argument there. That would be interesting.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 10:09 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
Alex123 wrote:Can you actually refute his arguments (or show link that refutes them) or are you just using "that book is stupid" as your argument?
And you are well enough versed in Nagarjuna to say that this book does an accurate and objective job of presenting Nagarjuna? This is a poorly resourced and researched book by someone who knows next to nothing of Buddhism, as the footnotes make so abundantly clear. Present this book on Dharma Wheel. Start an argument there. That would be interesting.


It presents Nagarjuna's arguments. It doesn't critique Buddhism. It just analyzes the logic that Nagarjuna is using. You are free to rebuke those arguments point by point, or cut-and-paste rebuttals here.
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 10:16 pm

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Alex123 wrote:Can you actually refute his arguments (or show link that refutes them) or are you just using "that book is stupid" as your argument?
And you are well enough versed in Nagarjuna to say that this book does an accurate and objective job of presenting Nagarjuna? This is a poorly resourced and researched book by someone who knows next to nothing of Buddhism, as the footnotes make so abundantly clear. Present this book on Dharma Wheel. Start an argument there. That would be interesting.


It presents Nagarjuna's arguments. It doesn't critique Buddhism. It just analyzes the logic that Nagarjuna is using. You are free to rebuke those arguments point by point, or cut-and-paste rebuttals here.
I am not wasting my time on a useless book. And this is the end of this conversation.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Aloka » Wed May 15, 2013 10:18 pm

Alex123 wrote:It presents Nagarjuna's arguments. It doesn't critique Buddhism. It just analyzes the logic that Nagarjuna is using. You are free to rebuke those arguments point by point, or cut-and-paste rebuttals here.


I'm sorry but I'm getting rather lost trying to follow this thread. What has this got to do with Sujin Boriharnwanaket?


.
User avatar
Aloka
 
Posts: 3720
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Alex123 » Wed May 15, 2013 10:28 pm

Aloka wrote:
Alex123 wrote:It presents Nagarjuna's arguments. It doesn't critique Buddhism. It just analyzes the logic that Nagarjuna is using. You are free to rebuke those arguments point by point, or cut-and-paste rebuttals here.

I'm sorry but I'm getting rather lost trying to follow this thread. What has this got to do with Sujin Boriharnwanaket?


It was reply to post viewtopic.php?f=16&t=17120&p=245740#p245688
"dust to dust...."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2906
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby tiltbillings » Wed May 15, 2013 10:29 pm

Aloka wrote:
Alex123 wrote:It presents Nagarjuna's arguments. It doesn't critique Buddhism. It just analyzes the logic that Nagarjuna is using. You are free to rebuke those arguments point by point, or cut-and-paste rebuttals here.


I'm sorry but I'm getting rather lost trying to follow this thread. What has this got to do with Sujin Boriharnwanaket?


.
Read the first few msg in this thread and you will see where Nagarjuna enters into it. Alex, on the other hand, wants to push the disussion in a different direction not really compatible with the OP.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19763
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Beautiful Breath » Thu May 16, 2013 6:12 am

Yeah, let's keep it real eh?

To clarify, my philosophical basis up to now has been the Mādhyamika, mostly via Nargajuna. I spoke at length with Sujin Boriharnwanaket in Thailand earlier this year and am intrigued in her stance and how it may differ from my view.

So be nice gentlemen and maybe we can get back on track...?

:anjali:
User avatar
Beautiful Breath
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 10:25 am
Location: South West England, UK

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby retrofuturist » Thu May 16, 2013 6:15 am

Greetings,

Beautiful Breath wrote:Yeah, let's keep it real eh?

To clarify, my philosophical basis up to now has been the Mādhyamika, mostly via Nargajuna. I spoke at length with Sujin Boriharnwanaket in Thailand earlier this year and am intrigued in her stance and how it may differ from my view.

So be nice gentlemen and maybe we can get back on track...?

In that case, substitute "Sujin Boriharnwanaket" into where it says "the Theravāda commentaries" in Nana's post here - viewtopic.php?f=16&t=17120#p245522 .

That sums it up neatly.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14726
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby binocular » Thu May 16, 2013 7:14 am

Alex123 wrote:Prove it that it is "drivel".

Lol!
binocular
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Sujin Boriharnwanaket discussion...

Postby Nyana » Thu May 16, 2013 8:07 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Beautiful Breath wrote:
To clarify, my philosophical basis up to now has been the Mādhyamika, mostly via Nargajuna. I spoke at length with Sujin Boriharnwanaket in Thailand earlier this year and am intrigued in her stance and how it may differ from my view.

In that case, substitute "Sujin Boriharnwanaket" into where it says "the Theravāda commentaries" in Nana's post here - viewtopic.php?f=16&t=17120#p245522 .

Yes, that's what was being implied.
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests