On Buddhism and Nominalism

A forum for those wishing to discuss Buddhist history and teachings in the Western academic manner, referencing appropriate sources.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Malcolm »

Astus wrote: Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:52 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:03 pm Only in Sarvastivada.
How so? Who says that conventional phenomena are not based on dharmas?
All buddhist tenets (Sautrantika on up) apart from Sarvastivada, subscribe to Anya-apoha theory, which is the Buddhist refutation of truly existent universals.
MiphamFan
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by MiphamFan »

What exactly is a "real" number?

I'm still studying discrete mathematics in the context of computer science but I find things such as the set-theoretic definition of numbers strikingly reminiscent and compatible with Buddhism.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Malcolm »

MiphamFan wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:35 am What exactly is a "real" number?

I'm still studying discrete mathematics in the context of computer science but I find things such as the set-theoretic definition of numbers strikingly reminiscent and compatible with Buddhism.
A real number is by definition something that must be defined on the basis of that fact that it excludes any other quantity. 2 can never be 4, 4 can never be two, or any other number. This accounts for numbers much better than sort platonic absolute number idea.
MiphamFan
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by MiphamFan »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:38 am
MiphamFan wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:35 am What exactly is a "real" number?

I'm still studying discrete mathematics in the context of computer science but I find things such as the set-theoretic definition of numbers strikingly reminiscent and compatible with Buddhism.
A real number is by definition something that must be defined on the basis of that fact that it excludes any other quantity. 2 can never be 4, 4 can never be two, or any other number. This accounts for numbers much better than sort platonic absolute number idea.
Yeah set theory is not Platonic, its based completely on the empty set.

0 = {}
1 = {0}
2 = {1,0}

It doesn't conflict with the definition you gave and in the end reduces to shunya.
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Wayfarer »

'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
MiphamFan
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by MiphamFan »

Anyway on the OP, read Almogi's paper on Rongzom for an argument on why a Buddha's jñana is also unreal.
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 4844
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Virgo »

MiphamFan wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:43 am
Malcolm wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:38 am
MiphamFan wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:35 am What exactly is a "real" number?

I'm still studying discrete mathematics in the context of computer science but I find things such as the set-theoretic definition of numbers strikingly reminiscent and compatible with Buddhism.
A real number is by definition something that must be defined on the basis of that fact that it excludes any other quantity. 2 can never be 4, 4 can never be two, or any other number. This accounts for numbers much better than sort platonic absolute number idea.
Yeah set theory is not Platonic, its based completely on the empty set.

0 = {}
1 = {0}
2 = {1,0}

It doesn't conflict with the definition you gave and in the end reduces to shunya.
Russell Peters on the invention of zero:

http://dai.ly/x394wew

Virgo...
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8881
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Astus »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:20 pm All buddhist tenets (Sautrantika on up) apart from Sarvastivada, subscribe to Anya-apoha theory, which is the Buddhist refutation of truly existent universals.
It's not a question if they take those dharmas as empty or not, but whether they are conceived as elements behind conventional appearances. They are considered a background layer, even if there are other layers beyond.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Malcolm »

Astus wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:27 am
Malcolm wrote: Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:20 pm All buddhist tenets (Sautrantika on up) apart from Sarvastivada, subscribe to Anya-apoha theory, which is the Buddhist refutation of truly existent universals.
It's not a question if they take those dharmas as empty or not, but whether they are conceived as elements behind conventional appearances. They are considered a background layer, even if there are other layers beyond.
That dies not make Dharmas universals. A universal is cowness, for example.
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 8881
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Astus »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:17 amThat dies not make Dharmas universals. A universal is cowness, for example.
But the dharmas could be called universals for actual instances of experience, however, I don't know of anyone who conceived a theoretical list of dharmas existing separately from dharmas as experience, hence they are not universals.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Malcolm »

Astus wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:52 am
Malcolm wrote: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:17 amThat dies not make Dharmas universals. A universal is cowness, for example.
But the dharmas could be called universals for actual instances of experience, however, I don't know of anyone who conceived a theoretical list of dharmas existing separately from dharmas as experience, hence they are not universals.
Son you in fact agree, Dharmas are particulars, not universals.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Aemilius »

Mark Siderits writes that it is easy to see that the universal corresponds to the parikalpita of yogacara, and the particular corresponds to the paratantra.
I.e. they corresponds to imaginary nature and the dependent nature.

In Apoha: Buddhist Nominalism and the Human Condition, by Mark Siderits
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Wayfarer »

Thanks for the tip.

For anyone reading:

parikalpita (Sanskrit). The ‘imagined’, one of the three natures (tri-svabhāva) according to Yogācāra philosophy. It denotes the unreal (parikalpita) duality of a perceiving subject and perceived objects that has been projected onto reality by the dependent nature (paratantra), resulting in the existence of an individual in saṃsāra.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Aemilius »

Where do you get that definition from? It sounds like parinispanna & parikalpita combined, it is not what mere parikalpita is.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

There’s a story where the previous Kalu Rinpoche was told about Plato’s cave. He immediately related to it and said something to the effect of, “Yes, and I am the one who stood up, turned around, and saw things as they really are.”

Can’t source it, but thought I’d share anyway.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Wayfarer »

Aemilius wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:06 pm Where do you get that definition from?
here.
smcj wrote:There’s a story where the previous Kalu Rinpoche was told about Plato’s cave...
It seems an obvious analogy to spiritual illumination, although what Plato understood by that, seems very different to the Buddhist understanding.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Aemilius »

Wayfarer wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 11:50 pm
Aemilius wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 3:06 pm Where do you get that definition from?
here.
I think the explanation is wrong when it claims that the dependent nature does the projecting, which is an astonishing idea!

Here is what the Bhagavan says in the Lankavatara sutra, in the translation of D.T. Suzuki. Here parikalpita is called false discrimination:

"Further, Mahamati, let the Bodhisattva-Mahasattva be well acquainted with the three kinds of Svabhava (self-nature). [What are the three? They are (1) false discrimination, (2) knowledge of relativity, and (3) perfect knowledge.] Now, Mahamati, false discrimination rises from form (nimitta). How, Mahamati, does it rise from form? In [the consideration of] the relativity aspect of Svabhava, realities appear in various ways, as having forms, signs, and shapes; when, Mahamati, these objects, forms, and signs are adhered to [as real], this adherence takes place in two ways. The Tathagatas, Arhats, and Fully-Enlightened Ones thus declare false discrimination to consist in attachment to names and attachment to objects. By the attachment to objects is meant, Mahamati, to get attached to inner and external things [as realities]. By the attachment to names is meant to recognise in these inner and external things the characteristic marks of individuality and generality and to regard them as definitely belonging to the objects. These two modes of attachment, Mahamati, constitute false discrimination."

(Lankavatara sutra XXIII, The Three Forms Of Svabhava)
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism

Post by Wayfarer »

Thank you for the correction.

:namaste:
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Post Reply

Return to “Academic Discussion”