I have asked you any number of questions to elicit further understanding and further exploration of the topic, and this is your response. Your preaching here, not offering dialogue, not willing to have an actual exchange of ideas. Contrary to your unfounded dismissiveness, I can see what you are saying clearly enough. I have asked you questions and raised points in response to what you have said, and from you all I get in return is: “you just don’t recognize it.” That is not dialogue. That is just preaching..e. wrote:
Sorry buddy, you just don’t recognize it.
Let us see what you have here. Show us where in his major work, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, where he said samasara is an illusion. Show us where he states nirvana is a reality like atman/brahman. Show us, chapter and verse. And give us the argument Nagarjuna uses to make the equation of nirvana and samsara. And show us how Nagarjuna defines “reality.”Nagarjuna felt that Nirvana (Reality) is Samsara (Illusion).
Please quote chapter and verse.Parenthetically he also felt the essence of the Buddha (Reality) was identical to the essence of the world (Illusion).
You are making claims here that you know what it is that Nagarjuna said, so please back it up. Let us look at what Nagarjuna said that supports your claims.He did not say like, kinda or sort of.
Now you are entering in the realm of the ad hominem. You have no idea of what I have experienced.If you have experienced this, even a glimpse, you will re-cognize it in the literature of the religions of the world.
In ignoring an appeal to what the Buddha said, you have appealed very directly to what Nagarjuna said to support your position. So, we will look at Nagarjuna. I have no problem with that.It may not be postulated exactly in the way you have intellectually come to it but then Reality is Illusion is not an argued understanding.