Critique of Nāgārjuna

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by NotMe »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:30 pm
Spiny Norman wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 4:34 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:44 pm Denying the antecedent:

If X, then Y.
If not X, then not Y.

This is only true if you establish that "via X" is the only way that you can have a "Y." Otherwise, it's denying the antecedent. Do I have that correct?
Yes, that sounds right.
Does this relate to specific conditionality, as in DO?
I haven't read the section where is he accused of denying the antecedent yet, so I don't know what it is in reference to. I was also thinking of DO though.

I just came down with a rather nasty non-Covid cold, so maybe I'll have time to finish the second and first papers today while I'm not doing much of anything trying to recover for tomorrow.
If cold germs, then illness or at least an internal immunity fight.

If not cold germs, no illness from cold germs at least.

Just doing the math here. Best of luck with your battle take good care and castor oil is good for everything.

Metta

:anjali:
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10176
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Spiny Norman »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:26 pm From the Madhyamakaśāstra:
If someone is profoundly attached to the many dharmas, they attract views of existence; if intrinsic existence is broken, then relational existence; and if relational existence is broken, then existence; and if existence is broken, then nonexistence; and if nonexistence is broken, then bewilderment.
I think what Venerable Vimalākṣa outlines above is a common reaction to the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. A critic of Ven Nāgārjuna would likely say that he fails to dispel the bewilderment that he brings about.
I can certainly recall being bewildered!
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Coëmgenu »

mikenz66 wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 2:51 amThat's an interesting point. Can you elaborate on the difference between the Pāli usage, and that of other sects?
I missed this. The word AFAIK is more-or-less the same across Buddhist sects. In Pāli, the "sv-" cluster is simplified into a "s-." Cosmetic details aside, that the Theravādin Abhidhamma privileges the sense of "nature/quality/characteristic" over "being/existence" is something that I've noticed from exegetes of the Theravāda Abhidhamma, like Venerables Bodhi and Revata. I can make a larger post later where I quote them defining "sabhāva." They all define it, as far as I remember, as "its own nature" or something like that, and never or almost never "its own existence" or "its own being."

That being said, I am confident that Theravādin Abhidhammic or commentarial literature has an equivalent to the earlier quotation from Sphuṭārthābhidharmakośavyākhyā. The word is the same, and the doctrine is at its core largely congruent. From sect-to-sect, its ramifications differ. For instance, for the Sarvāstivādins, so-called tri-temporal realism was a consequence of svabhāva, and it was not so for the Theravādins and their direct ancestors.
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.
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by SteRo »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:42 pm For those interested, Richard P. Hayes has some interesting criticisms of Venerable Nāgārjuna's ideas
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less. And what may be an "interesting" criticisms in comparison with just a criticisms? Why should the writings of Nāgārjuna be "interesting" in the first place? If they are not interesting in the first place then why should any criticism be "interesting"?
Too many words have been produced about written sectarian nonsense from opposed sectarian nonsensical perspectives. Why bother? Nāgārjuna has written nonsense in response to nonsense and thus he has evoked much nonsense as replies. So what? :sage:
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10176
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Spiny Norman »

SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 5:50 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:42 pm For those interested, Richard P. Hayes has some interesting criticisms of Venerable Nāgārjuna's ideas
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less. And what may be an "interesting" criticisms in comparison with just a criticisms? Why should the writings of Nāgārjuna be "interesting" in the first place? If they are not interesting in the first place then why should any criticism be "interesting"?
Too many words have been produced about written sectarian nonsense from opposed sectarian nonsensical perspectives. Why bother? Nāgārjuna has written nonsense in response to nonsense and thus he has evoked much nonsense as replies. So what? :sage:
The fact we're still discussing his ideas seems significant. I don't think the ideas of SteRo and Spiny Norman will last that long.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by NotMe »

SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 5:50 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:42 pm For those interested, Richard P. Hayes has some interesting criticisms of Venerable Nāgārjuna's ideas
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less. And what may be an "interesting" criticisms in comparison with just a criticisms? Why should the writings of Nāgārjuna be "interesting" in the first place? If they are not interesting in the first place then why should any criticism be "interesting"?
Too many words have been produced about written sectarian nonsense from opposed sectarian nonsensical perspectives. Why bother? Nāgārjuna has written nonsense in response to nonsense and thus he has evoked much nonsense as replies. So what? :sage:
"And what may be an "interesting" criticisms" <- you added an "S". WRONG Ooops, cappuccino/mara just invaded my post.

"written nonsense in response to nonsense" -> In response to what nonsense do you prefer to refer to here in your post criticizing the critical criteria of the not worthy of critical criticisms made by the not "Venerable" Venerable Nāgārjuna?

(did i's sounded smart up der'' 'n dat one sentence? Intent is what mudders I guess.)

What nonsense do you refer to, sir?

Metta

:anjali:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Ceisiwr »

SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 5:50 pm
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less.
Because he was a member of the Sangha, a monk. The rest of your post is rambling nonsense.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by NotMe »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:07 pm
SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 5:50 pm
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less.
Because he was a member of the Sangha, a monk. The rest of your post is rambling nonsense.
OH! That rambling nonsense! You answered my post above yours! Clever!

Metta

:anjali:

edit to add: never mind both of my posts - I'm too lazy to delete.

edit to edit to add: I was asking steRo, but you hit the nail on the head for me. Thought since I quoted you too in that post, you might think I was criticizing you. Not my intent at all!!! Carry on ...
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by SteRo »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:07 pm
SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 5:50 pm
Why "Venerable" Nāgārjuna? Nāgārjuna was a scribe, not more not less.
Because he was a member of the Sangha, a monk.
A monk, really? On the other hand if he was a monk then his writings are not surprising.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Coëmgenu »

Venerables Buddhaghosa & Nāgārjuna:

Any thread discussing these great sages will be immediately invaded by trolls. This is an unwritten law of DhammaWheel.

I think Ven Buddhaghosa gets spit on worse by trolls on this forum, but look at any thread here on either figure, and you'll see the predictable trolls with either misinformation/misrepresentation, conspiracy theories about them, or just frivolous naysaying.
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.
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by SteRo »

Spiny Norman wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:01 pm The fact we're still discussing his ideas seems significant. I don't think the ideas of SteRo ... will last that long.
On one hand that's a big relief but on the other it's a pitty. Why the former? Because lasting ideas are instances of lasting ignorance. And why the latter? If old ignorances are not overwritten by new ignorances then evolution is stopped. :sage:
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by Ceisiwr »

SteRo wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:31 pm
Spiny Norman wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:01 pm The fact we're still discussing his ideas seems significant. I don't think the ideas of SteRo ... will last that long.
On one hand that's a big relief but on the other it's a pitty. Why the former? Because lasting ideas are instances of lasting ignorance. And why the latter? If old ignorances are not overwritten by new ignorances then evolution is stopped. :sage:
This is more of the same.

:focus:
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by mikenz66 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 3:00 pm ... that the Theravādin Abhidhamma privileges the sense of "nature/quality/characteristic" over "being/existence" is something that I've noticed from exegetes of the Theravāda Abhidhamma, like Venerables Bodhi and Revata. I can make a larger post later where I quote them defining "sabhāva." They all define it, as far as I remember, as "its own nature" or something like that, and never or almost never "its own existence" or "its own being."
Thanks. That's very helpful.

:heart:
Mike
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by asahi »

Sabhava as quality or characteristic is quite different from essences .
No bashing No gossiping
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Critique of Nāgārjuna

Post by SteRo »

asahi wrote: Thu Jun 30, 2022 1:59 pm Sabhava as quality or characteristic is quite different from essences .
Both concepts due to lacking any evidence turn out to be mere mental fabrications. Now this is the topic of all those nonsensical discussions among these dogmatists: mental fabrications. *lol
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
Post Reply