Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I think Advaita and Buddhism have a whole lot in common. As a Buddhist, Shankara doesn't turn me off. The only real separation between the two is when Buddhists insist that the âtman is bunk.
The good news is Buddhist scholars are not convinced that the Buddha was a Brahmin hater or an âtman hater. But some old sectarian prejudices never die.
Back to emptiness, unfortunately, it has become the new absolute for some western Buddhists. It's more like a black hole. It is totally negative without anything positive to offer.
Fwiw, I don't disagree with anything you said. I think Taoism has at least a few things in common with Advaita and elements of Buddhism. There's that cross-pollination again.
I don't know how true it is, and I can't remember where I read it, but Shankara himself was called a "hidden Buddhist". He is said to have been influenced by Mahayana Buddhism. How true, who knows?
Back to emptiness, unfortunately, it has become the new absolute for some western Buddhists. It's more like a black hole. It is totally negative without anything positive to offer.
The Madhyamika Prasangika view of emptiness propounded by Nagarjuna rejects all positive metaphysical positions and argues emptiness in terms of negating all views, that includes the view of nihilism. Things neither are, are not, both or neither.
So this view of emptiness via negation isn't a new phenomena, its quite old.
This negative view of emptiness can be classified as rangtong which is opposed to shengtong which is a more positivist view of emptiness. I like what Dudjom Rinpoche had to say on the subject:
"The Madhyamaka of the Prasangika and the Svatantrika is the coarse, Outer Madhyamaka. It should indeed be expressed by those who profess well-informed intelligence during debates with extremist Outsiders, during the composition of great treatises, and while establishing texts which concern supreme reasoning. However, when the subtle, inner Madhyamaka is experientially cultivated, one should meditate on the nature of Yogacara- Madhyamaka."
Back to emptiness, unfortunately, it has become the new absolute for some western Buddhists. It's more like a black hole. It is totally negative without anything positive to offer.
The Madhyamika Prasangika view of emptiness propounded by Nagarjuna rejects all positive metaphysical positions and argues emptiness in terms of negating all views, that includes the view of nihilism. Things neither are, are not, both or neither.
So this view of emptiness via negation isn't a new phenomena, its quite old.
This negative view of emptiness can be classified as rangtong which is opposed to shengtong which is a more positivist view of emptiness. I like what Dudjom Rinpoche had to say on the subject:
"The Madhyamaka of the Prasangika and the Svatantrika is the coarse, Outer Madhyamaka. It should indeed be expressed by those who profess well-informed intelligence during debates with extremist Outsiders, during the composition of great treatises, and while establishing texts which concern supreme reasoning. However, when the subtle, inner Madhyamaka is experientially cultivated, one should meditate on the nature of Yogacara- Madhyamaka."
Are you kind of suggesting that Nagarjuna rejects all views, including his own? I have read that Nagarjuna asserts nothing. Incidentally, this sounds rather nihilistic.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@Blondel My understanding of Nagarjuna is that he doesn't take a metaphysical stance of his own. It can sound nihilistic but nihilism is a metaphysical assertion and is rejected.
my thinking says: self, no-self, atman, no-atman, God, no-God - where there is or is not, makes no difference for a lay-person like me because there is still a bill to pay, a rent to pay, needs to go to market to bring stuff to make me and my family-members happy, has to save money for myself and my family for future. no matter how much we think about no past and no future - there is past in which i was married and had a daughter and there is present in which i have to take care of changing the diaper of my 2 year old daughter when she pees in it and there is a future for which i need to take care, so that i have some money left with me to take care of my family in case i lose my job in future or if i get old and retired to save some money for future.
for a monk, it is easy to talk about sunyata, non-self, no holding onto past, no planning for future - as for a monk it is like just get up everyday morning with a free mood, take your begging bowl, go on alms round, get whatever others give in alms, come back to your hut, have your meal, keep on meditating, then sleep at night and then next day morning the same routine gets started again - so obviously no need to think anything about the past and no need to think anything about the future. just chill out every moment by being in present moment.
but for a lay-person like me, i have to think how to save money for my future, i have a daughter so i am attached to her as i want her to be with me or near me, have to save money for the education of my daughter and to fulfill the demands of my wife, etc. also need to think about past as how i performed a work activity last time in my work for doing a similar work activity now, have to hear the allegations or sarcastic comments of my parents in which they allege that i do not care for my parents now, rather i care for my wife only - then i have to think what i did in the past wrongly as per them. as for planning for future - always have to see the clock to think by when should i start doing or complete doing some activity, even while sitting for meditation i have to see what time i sat and need to set a clock timer so that i can get at the planned time after meditation, need to plan what to do today, tomorrow etc.
i think that for a lay-person like me with a family, these concepts even if either of them or all of them or none of them are true, do not have any practical daily life significance, though theoretically these concepts either of them, all of them or none of them may seem so interesting and convincing - as still i will have to take care of my wife and my daughter and my parents.
Emptiness is very easy to understand: Whatever goes in one ear and does not come out the other is emptiness. Whatever comes out of one ear, without having gone in, is emptiness. Between these two events is a total lack of understanding anything . . . :buck:
That is why emptiness is presented as also form in the heart sutra. In some teachings there are two truths. Form etc and appearances is one and emptiness the other. The emptiness comes in that your 2 year old daughter will one day be grown (for example). Emptiness is made up of finely structured mandalas, your family being one. When the value of family is lacking then mandala messengers notify you by making you feel something alerting you to the problem. There is also a practice mandala where we make an effort to understand the deeper teachings of Buddhism (only if we choose to align with the dharma mandala).
That is why emptiness is presented as also form in the heart sutra. In some teachings there are two truths. Form etc and appearances is one and emptiness the other. The emptiness comes in that your 2 year old daughter will one day be grown (for example). Emptiness is made up of finely structured mandalas, your family being one. When the value of family is lacking then mandala messengers notify you by making you feel something alerting you to the problem. There is also a practice mandala where we make an effort to understand the deeper teachings of Buddhism (only if we choose to align with the dharma mandala).
As I read the HS it is basically saying the five aggregates that make up our personality are nothing since they have no inherent existence of their own. Maybe Nagarjuna is trying to say that all things that exist and cease are like a dream. They're just empty or hollow.
It could be a sphere that is hollow or it could be a center and the outside hollow. Rangtong versus Shentong perhaps?
My view is Rangtong means things are not real, they are empty of true nature. Rangtong offers conceivable mundane truth. Shentong means our true nature is totally empty of defilements. This is inconceivable ultimate truth.
Maia has another meaning: one star in da Pleiades Star Cluster; my past life was in Pleione, of da Pleiades Star Cluster. in buddhist astral chart; it is called devanamanarati.
~anagami PadmaPhala
@PadmaPhala: so, are you an anagami? have you seen your past life? please tell.
Comments
I don't know how true it is, and I can't remember where I read it, but Shankara himself was called a "hidden Buddhist". He is said to have been influenced by Mahayana Buddhism. How true, who knows?
I found this awhile ago while having the same sort of discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas#Buddhism
So this view of emptiness via negation isn't a new phenomena, its quite old.
This negative view of emptiness can be classified as rangtong which is opposed to shengtong which is a more positivist view of emptiness. I like what Dudjom Rinpoche had to say on the subject:
for a monk, it is easy to talk about sunyata, non-self, no holding onto past, no planning for future - as for a monk it is like just get up everyday morning with a free mood, take your begging bowl, go on alms round, get whatever others give in alms, come back to your hut, have your meal, keep on meditating, then sleep at night and then next day morning the same routine gets started again - so obviously no need to think anything about the past and no need to think anything about the future. just chill out every moment by being in present moment.
but for a lay-person like me, i have to think how to save money for my future, i have a daughter so i am attached to her as i want her to be with me or near me, have to save money for the education of my daughter and to fulfill the demands of my wife, etc. also need to think about past as how i performed a work activity last time in my work for doing a similar work activity now, have to hear the allegations or sarcastic comments of my parents in which they allege that i do not care for my parents now, rather i care for my wife only - then i have to think what i did in the past wrongly as per them. as for planning for future - always have to see the clock to think by when should i start doing or complete doing some activity, even while sitting for meditation i have to see what time i sat and need to set a clock timer so that i can get at the planned time after meditation, need to plan what to do today, tomorrow etc.
i think that for a lay-person like me with a family, these concepts even if either of them or all of them or none of them are true, do not have any practical daily life significance, though theoretically these concepts either of them, all of them or none of them may seem so interesting and convincing - as still i will have to take care of my wife and my daughter and my parents.
Whatever goes in one ear and does not come out the other is emptiness.
Whatever comes out of one ear, without having gone in, is emptiness.
Between these two events is a total lack of understanding anything . . . :buck:
That is why emptiness is presented as also form in the heart sutra. In some teachings there are two truths. Form etc and appearances is one and emptiness the other. The emptiness comes in that your 2 year old daughter will one day be grown (for example). Emptiness is made up of finely structured mandalas, your family being one. When the value of family is lacking then mandala messengers notify you by making you feel something alerting you to the problem. There is also a practice mandala where we make an effort to understand the deeper teachings of Buddhism (only if we choose to align with the dharma mandala).