Illusion and Emptiness

Where members are free to take ideas from the Theravāda Canon out of the Theravāda framework. Here you can question rebirth, kamma (and other contentious issues) as well as examine Theravāda's connection to other paths
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Illusion and Emptiness

Postby Prasadachitta » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:25 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
gabrielbranbury wrote:Hi Tilt,

You And I do not disagree. Because I have a certain amount of reverence for and confidence in the Sangha generally, I tend to take it for granted that the teachings of Abhidhamma are for the purpose of diminishing and ending suffering and not for establishing philosophical arguments. This conclusion does not arise out of intense study even though I do enjoy a good Dhamma book from time to time. Gabe
not for establishing philosophical arguments On the other hand it is worthwhile having some idea of what the teachings are actually saying, and it is worthwhile to respond to a gross misrepresentation of the Theravada idea of dhammas we are seeing in 5heap's msgs. The Mahayana/Madhyamaka critique of the ideas of dharmas as being ultimate partless particles with findable true existence does not really address what is found in the Theravadin texts.

The various Tibetan scholastic tenet systems developed by the various schools of Tibetan Buddhism serves a didactic purpose for those schools, but it is not a solid basis for understanding any extinct or extant school of Buddhism outside the one putting forth the tenet sustem.



Hi Tilt,

Again I agree with your statements. I am not a fan of that particular didactic paradigm even though it appears to me to have been quite effective for many.

Metta

Gabe
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

User avatar
catmoon
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:59 am

Re: Illusion and Emptiness

Postby catmoon » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:02 pm

not sure who said this but... wrote: The Mahayana/Madhyamaka critique of the ideas of dharmas as being ultimate partless particles with findable true existence does not really address what is found in the Theravadin texts.



Is Shantideva a valid Theravadin text? I may be reading him wrong, but he seems to shred the bolded concepts pretty thoroughly.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6205
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Illusion and Emptiness

Postby Cittasanto » Thu Jan 14, 2010 10:06 pm

catmoon wrote:
not sure who said this but... wrote: The Mahayana/Madhyamaka critique of the ideas of dharmas as being ultimate partless particles with findable true existence does not really address what is found in the Theravadin texts.



Is Shantideva a valid Theravadin text? I may be reading him wrong, but he seems to shred the bolded concepts pretty thoroughly.


Shantideva is a person, not a text so no :tongue:

but it would still be no, I believe he was mahasangha not Theravadin.
“Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.
(The mendicants asked) What are the two [types of persons]?
(The Lord Buddha responded) The malicious, or the inwardly angry, and the one with (blind) faith or the one who holds things incorrectly.
Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.”
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
"Others will misconstrue reality based on personal perspectives, firmly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our personal perspectives, nor firmly holding them, but easily discarded."

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 22443
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Illusion and Emptiness

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:59 pm

Manapa wrote:
catmoon wrote:
not sure who said this but... wrote: The Mahayana/Madhyamaka critique of the ideas of dharmas as being ultimate partless particles with findable true existence does not really address what is found in the Theravadin texts.



Is Shantideva a valid Theravadin text? I may be reading him wrong, but he seems to shred the bolded concepts pretty thoroughly.


Shantideva is a person, not a text so no :tongue:

but it would still be no, I believe he was mahasangha not Theravadin.

Shantideva was a Madhyamika and one of the first great systematizers of the Mahayana.

but he seems to shred the bolded concepts pretty thoroughly.
Sure, however, he is not addressing the Theravada.
.
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


Return to “Fringe Theravāda Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chownah and 6 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine