All buddhist tenets (Sautrantika on up) apart from Sarvastivada, subscribe to Anya-apoha theory, which is the Buddhist refutation of truly existent universals.
On Buddhism and Nominalism
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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.
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.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Yeah set theory is not Platonic, its based completely on the empty set.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:38 amA 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.
0 = {}
1 = {0}
2 = {1,0}
It doesn't conflict with the definition you gave and in the end reduces to shunya.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Anyway on the OP, read Almogi's paper on Rongzom for an argument on why a Buddha's jñana is also unreal.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Russell Peters on the invention of zero:MiphamFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:43 amYeah set theory is not Platonic, its based completely on the empty set.Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:38 amA 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.
0 = {}
1 = {0}
2 = {1,0}
It doesn't conflict with the definition you gave and in the end reduces to shunya.
http://dai.ly/x394wew
Virgo...
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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"
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"
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
That dies not make Dharmas universals. A universal is cowness, for example.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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"
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"
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Son you in fact agree, Dharmas are particulars, not universals.
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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
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)
"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)
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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.
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
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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)
"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)
-
- Posts: 7885
- Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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.
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)
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)
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
here.
It seems an obvious analogy to spiritual illumination, although what Plato understood by that, seems very different to the Buddhist understanding.smcj wrote:There’s a story where the previous Kalu Rinpoche was told about Plato’s cave...
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
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)
"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)
Re: On Buddhism and Nominalism
Thank you for the correction.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi