Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Exploring the Dhamma, as understood from the perspective of the ancient Pali commentaries.
User avatar
SamD
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 2:01 am

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by SamD »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:35 am Greetings Zan,
retrofuturist wrote: Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:32 am I would recommend reading "The Heretic Sage"... a short series of interviews with ven. Nanananda.
zan wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:04 pm Thanks! At a cursory glance it seems like the Venerable in the article agrees with Nagarjuna? Am I reading it wrong?
I'll be wary of what I say, mindful of the section we're in, but the key takeaway from ven. Nanananda's comments is that whilst Nagarjuna knew his stuff, Nanananda found that he didn't need to quote Nagarjuna or any other Mahayana resources in his Nibbana Sermons, because the relevant points which those resources might try to highlight, are already adequately and more appropriately covered in the Sutta Pitaka.

Metta,
Paul. :)
:twothumbsup:
Caodemarte
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Caodemarte »

Lankamed wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:27 am
retrofuturist wrote: Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:35 am Greetings Zan,
retrofuturist wrote: Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:32 am I would recommend reading "The Heretic Sage"... a short series of interviews with ven. Nanananda.
zan wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:04 pm Thanks! At a cursory glance it seems like the Venerable in the article agrees with Nagarjuna? Am I reading it wrong?
I'll be wary of what I say, mindful of the section we're in, but the key takeaway from ven. Nanananda's comments is that whilst Nagarjuna knew his stuff, Nanananda found that he didn't need to quote Nagarjuna or any other Mahayana resources in his Nibbana Sermons, because the relevant points which those resources might try to highlight, are already adequately and more appropriately covered in the Sutta Pitaka.

Metta,
Paul. :)
:twothumbsup:
Wonderful comment that would make Nagarjuna’s heart gladden. His philosophizing and many works had a soteriological purpose and were explicitly intended to show what was implicit in the Buddha’s teaching and its logical implications to those who trapped themselves with faulty assumptions, delusions, and endless attachments. To have people not need any such assistance can only make a true teacher thrilled.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by SDC »

Moderator Note: Nitpicking of one another's personal opinions and interpretations does not belong in the Classical Theravada Section. Please see the guidelines.

Off Topic Posts Removed
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

daveblack wrote: Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:48 pmMahayana first rejects Individual Liberation as impossible, i.e. you can't get to Nibbana by yourself, and it rejects it dogmatically with no sound reason to do so.

Then it brings in the theory of Corporate Liberation, that all beings must be liberated together or none are.
This is untrue. If Mahāyānists believed in corporate liberation, everyone would have been irreversibly liberated by Śākyamuni and he would have never taught the Dharma, it being unnecessary.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

This thread needs to get out of Classical Theravāda. It is a thread mostly about the OP's gripes with that which is not Classical Theravāda. It is largely about Ven Nāgārjuna and seriously addressing the OP would require an in-depth discussion of Madhyamaka Buddhism and not one of Classical Theravāda. Because of this, I submit that this is a "Connections to Other Paths" thread.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

zan wrote: Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:57 amIt proves nibbana and samsara are the same thing, which pretty much wrecks most of the dhamma since it is built around the two being different.
Since you've started what is objectively a thread concerning Madhyamaka, I don't feel out of bounds saying this is wrong. This is a very common Madhyamaka slogan, but it is just as wrong as "You are already enlightened," a tathagatagarbha slogan. Another famous slogan: "All dhammas are non-self." This mesmerizing slogan has the power to hypnotize individual Buddhists into thinking they don't believe in a self despite the fact that they obviously do. Such slogans let us turn our brain off by telling us what we believe, even if we don't truly believe in them at all.

In the MMK, what Ven Nagarjuna argues is that any sensation of samsara can be transformed into nibbana by the practitioner who is a true aryan saint. Because nibbana and samsara have no intrinsic essences, they can become each other.

But the section you are thinking about in the Nirvanapariksa just states that nibbana, the world, and the Buddha are fundamentally inconceivable by the uninstructed worldling's mind.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by robertk »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:10 pm This thread needs to get out of Classical Theravāda. It is a thread mostly about the OP's gripes with that which is not Classical Theravāda. It is largely about Ven Nāgārjuna and seriously addressing the OP would require an in-depth discussion of Madhyamaka Buddhism and not one of Classical Theravāda. Because of this, I submit that this is a "Connections to Other Paths" thread.
Mod note: If you wish to start a thread supporting Nagajuna dharmawheel.com might be more suitable
This topic will remain in Classical Theravada and all posts should follow the guidelines for this forum . If you see any new posts that are not following those guidelines please report them.

In future please do not post any meta discussion. See terms of service.
e. Disruptive meta-discussion (i.e. discussion about discussion, including in-topic complaints about the existence of discussions that don't suit your preferences
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

robertk wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 5:36 pm
Coemgenu wrote:I submit that this is a "Connections to Other Paths" thread.
[...] In future please do not post any meta discussion.
Submission overruled.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Basically, the people in this subforum want to discuss Ven Nagarjuna without allowing his own viewpoint to appear, as posts here must submit to and reference Classical Theravada. Any significant discussion doing any degree of in-depth concerning the OP is off-topic for the subforum.

What a pointless thread. Yes, this is meta-discussion.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 2168
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:19 pm ...
I find it completely unbelievable that Zan was taught Mahāyāna Buddhism by some alcoholic non-monk yet knows nothing about it.
...


Then, it implies that:
  • Mahāyāna Buddhism is eruditely teachable by an alcoholic non-monk.

... ?


:heart:
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
  • Iᴅᴇᴀ ᴏꜰ Sᴏᴜʟ ɪs Oᴜᴛᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴏꜰ ᴀɴ Uᴛᴛᴇʀʟʏ Fᴏᴏʟɪsʜ Vɪᴇᴡ
    V. Nanananda

𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
  • Nᴏ sᴜᴄʜ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴀs ᴀ Sᴇʟғ, Sᴏᴜʟ, Eɢᴏ, Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, ᴏʀ Āᴛᴍᴀɴ
    V. Buddhādasa
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

I think an alcoholic would perhaps have at least have made an effort and we would clearly see the fruits of some form of education.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
bodhifollower
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:37 am

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by bodhifollower »

Dependent origination is a basis for developing INSIGHT. INSIGHT is change in the minds perspective of the body and mind. It is not the same thing as a thought or concept of reality. Gaining insight into the repulsiveness of the body for example will cause the practitioner to perceive bodies as repulsive with his waking eyes. It is not something to ponder or argue about.

With that said, making an argument on a basis of INSIGHT is inherently nonsense. Insight is only gained through thinking about the subject and meditating. The shift in perspective comes when ones meditation is strong enough to handle the insight, as well if one character is suited for insight. Some people cannot develop insight but instead only develop jhana.

You cant make a deductive argument on something which is meant to be for insight oriented people to have an insight.

It's like making an argument as to whether the human body is really beautiful or disgusting. The insight into the disgusting aspect is only available to those who practice it. Then they can't prove to another person they are really respulsive or not because that repulsive insight in only perceivable in that practitioners mind.

In short the whole argument is invalid because some people don't understand the difference between insight and truth. Generosity is good action with good results, this is a truth. Dependent origination is a basis to develop INSIGHT. These are not even in the same realm of comparison.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Capitalizing "INSIGHT" does nothing for your appeals for others to abandon reason. Madhyamaka is a path followed via threefold training. It is not reducible to some deductions without complete bastardization. It is the direct product of the personally-realized fruits of the āryan saints.

It is unclear if your "INSIGHT" is vipassanā or paññā. Either way, it's not a cogent complaint.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 2168
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

Coëmgenu wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 1:21 pm ... Madhyamaka is a path followed via threefold training. It is not reducible to some deductions without complete bastardization. It is the direct product of the personally-realized fruits of the āryan saints.
...
To claim so, one needs to be at least a genuine āryan saint himself with personally-realized fruits.
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
  • Iᴅᴇᴀ ᴏꜰ Sᴏᴜʟ ɪs Oᴜᴛᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴏꜰ ᴀɴ Uᴛᴛᴇʀʟʏ Fᴏᴏʟɪsʜ Vɪᴇᴡ
    V. Nanananda

𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
  • Nᴏ sᴜᴄʜ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴀs ᴀ Sᴇʟғ, Sᴏᴜʟ, Eɢᴏ, Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, ᴏʀ Āᴛᴍᴀɴ
    V. Buddhādasa
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is classical Theravada mostly proven false by Nagarjuna?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 4:03 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 1:21 pm ... Madhyamaka is a path followed via threefold training. It is not reducible to some deductions without complete bastardization. It is the direct product of the personally-realized fruits of the āryan saints.
...
To claim so, one needs to be at least a genuine āryan saint himself with personally-realized fruits.
I suppose all the advocates of the doctrines of the Mahāvihāravāsin Theras are themselves Āryas?
:coffee:
Furthermore, to claim that "Madhyamaka is a path followed via threefold training" I do not need to be a genuine āryan saint. I just need to take the Madhyamakas at their word. That it is "the direct product of the personally-realized fruits of the āryan saints" is based in the marriage of faith, reason, and experience on my part, much like the assertion that the Theravādin Abhidhamma is the product of the realization of the fruits of the āryan saints/theras is similarly based upon faith, reason, and experience of those followers. The assertion that the Theravādin Abhidhamma is the word of the ascetic Gautama requires even greater faith, approaching the level of blind faith required to believe the Buddha Gautama spoke the Mahāyāna sūtras in their modern form verbatim.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Post Reply