Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
Locked
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

mikenz66 wrote: Since you've not addressed any of the sutta examples I gave http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 84#p155954" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I have no idea where we differ.
The because that he yet to give us his understanding/definition of the two truth notion. He is taking around it, but not at all addressing it directly.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?" (OP question)

“Truth is one and there is no second truth.” (Buddha, Sn 884)

So much for that "theory" then... well said, Buddha.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"What some say is true
— 'That's how it is' —
others say is 'falsehood, a lie.'
Thus quarreling, they dispute.
Why can't contemplatives
say one thing & the same?"

"The truth is one,[1]
there is no second
about which a person who knows it
would argue with one who knows.
Contemplatives promote
their various personal truths,
that's why they don't say
one thing & the same."
Seems to me to have little relevance to the OP, apart from the word "truth".

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:. . . .
. . . Seems to me to have little relevance to the OP, apart from the word "truth".
The problem is that we have no idea how retro understands the two truth notion.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:The problem is that we have no idea how retro understands the two truth notion.
As Daverupa did earlier when he said (the bolding is mine)...

"Of course, there is discussion [in the Sutta Pitaka] of the conventionality of language and such, but in every case the Buddha didn't see fit to explain things using these terms: this specific bifurcation is clearly absent from the Suttas."

Since the Buddha didn't teach it, and didn't see fit to explain the Dhamma in this bifurcated way... I don't really care to know it and I certainly don't intend to take it upon myself to artificially bifurcate the Buddha's teachings on his behalf. There's been too much of this needless scholastic papanca (i.e. classification, reclassification) throughout the evolution of Buddhism already. It's that kind of endeavour which led to the prevalence of so many divergent and schismatic sects in the first place.

Therefore "how retro understands the two truth notion" is irrelevent, because Retro discards it and sees absolutely no danger or loss in doing so. If it was important or relevant, the Buddha would have made the distinction himself - he didn't, so it's not. Retro does not want to create more sects - rather, Retro rejoices in the Blessed One's words.

(and to pre-empt the inevitable, "you've dodged the question", "you haven't answered the question", "you're being unclear" etc. let me make it as blunt as blunt could be...)

the two truth notion = papanca

:toast:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:. . .
Again, we really do not have idea of what you are actually criticizing, since refuse to spell it out. Knowing, however, how you understand the two truth notion is directly to the point of understanding your dismissal of it, and whether or not your dismissal is well grounded or not. Let me make this simple and ask two questions:

Are you saying that the two truth notion says there are two actual and distinct truths, as you seems to be saying? Yes or no?

And if they are two actual distinct truths, is one higher, more true than the other? Yes or no?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by ground »

retrofuturist wrote:the two truth notion = papanca
... although one may find expressions in the suttas that may give rise to this notion.

Kind regards
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
tmingyur wrote:.. although one may find expressions in the suttas that may give rise to this notion.
And the act of coming up with this notion would be conceptual proliferation.
tiltbillings wrote:we really do not have idea of what you are actually criticizing
I am criticising needless papanca, and the reification of that papanca.

See the anicca in all sankhara (incl. papanca), see the dukkha in that which is anicca, see anatta in that which is dukkha... abandonment, dispassion, cessation.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by ground »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
tmingyur wrote:.. although one may find expressions in the suttas that may give rise to this notion.
And the act of coming up with this notion would be conceptual proliferation.
Well yes. Every thinking about the suttas is conceptual proliferation.


Kind regards
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
tmingyur wrote:.. although one may find expressions in the suttas that may give rise to this notion.
And the act of coming up with this notion would be conceptual proliferation.
tiltbillings wrote:we really do not have idea of what you are actually criticizing
I am criticising needless papanca, and the reification of that papanca.

Metta,
Retro. :)
And so you claim again, papanca, but you have not actually made a reasoned, example argument for your claim, much less actually telling us what it is that you are actually objecting to. The latter you are simply avoiding doing. You were asked two simple "yes and no" questions that would have helped us understand your objections, but you ignored them, leaving us with no clearer of an idea of what it is you are calling papanca or why you think it is so.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Are you saying that the two truth notion says there are two actual and distinct truths, as you seems to be saying? Yes or no?
Image
"Retro discards it and sees absolutely no danger or loss in doing so."
And if they are two actual distinct truths, is one higher, more true than the other? Yes or no?
Image
"Retro discards it and sees absolutely no danger or loss in doing so."

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
Are you saying that the two truth notion says there are two actual and distinct truths, as you seems to be saying? Yes or no?
Image
"Retro discards it and sees absolutely no danger or loss in doing so."
And if they are two actual distinct truths, is one higher, more true than the other? Yes or no?
Image
"Retro discards it and sees absolutely no danger or loss in doing so."

Metta,
Retro. :)
[Editing this a bit] Basically, you are telling us with this response you cannot make a real argument here, and I think we can leave it there.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by ground »

Two truths theory may be a stepping stone when initially approaching the dhamma to somehow conceptually smoothen the felt inconsistencies due to habitual reification of terms and terminology. However if the two truths theory is not abandoned in a timely manner due to being reified itself then this is actually an instance of an intermediary remedy having become a poison.


Kind regards
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

For a discussion of the double truth as taught in classical Theravada:

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 22&start=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
TMingyur wrote:However if the two truths theory is not abandoned in a timely manner due to being reified itself then this is actually an instance of an intermediary remedy having become a poison.
Well said.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Two truths theory. Did Buddha teach it?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:However if the two truths theory is not abandoned in a timely manner due to being reified itself then this is actually an instance of an intermediary remedy having become a poison.
The double truth notion is like any Dhamma teaching. It can be a useful tool or a basis for spiritual materialism, and always the question, when to let go? But that really is answered by one's ongoing practice.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Locked