Dzogchen, karma and ultimate truth
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:20 am
A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
Huseng wrote:I'm glad a lot more people attend talks by HHDL.
It also looks like it is translated as "nihilist". Would that be accurate?Lhug-Pa wrote:By the way:
Murthugpa = Barhaspatya
Jnana wrote:A decent talk if one is into that sort of cerebral Western revisionism. Although, quoting Monier Monier-Williams as an example of how the West misunderstands Buddhism is a bit dated. At present, thousands of Westerners have thoroughly trained under the guidance of the best Asian teachers of each tradition, and many have also learned the language(s) of their tradition and work at translation. So things have changed considerably since the days of Monier-Williams.
Batchelor and Peacock's aversion towards the word "religion" is also kinda funny. If John Cleese would have appeared from the audience it could have made for a hilarious skit.
Where is your source for this?Lhug-Pa wrote:By the way:
Murthugpa = Barhaspatya
I agree. While I am extremely doubtful of certain aspects of Buddhist Teachings without regard to whether or not the historical Buddha actually taught them as such (for example, I tend to doubt and not cling to very detailed descriptions of the workings of rebirth, and believe that the Buddha as a man of his day and society may have been mistaken in such a claim even if he said it) and do not find such aspects of the Buddhist Teachings either necessary or relevant to my Practice, nonetheless I remain not completely closed off to the possibility that such may be so, could be true (and honor the right of anyone else to believe so) ... an open minded skeptic though thinking such things unlikely ... and therefor would term myself an "agnostic" on such issues. I would also describe myself as agnostic on many other things that people claim in the world, from space aliens having built the pyramids to that other holy man having actually walked on water and turned loaves into fishes (Each might be, could have been true, so let's not completely close off the possibility of the space aliens as ancient Egyptians, although I believe there is little evidence besides peoples' claims). This is certainly neither "nihilism" nor "eternalism" as I see it, for one is not bound by such philosophical views and each is tossed into the wonderful flowing dance of Emptiness. I feel that I am Practicing at the Heart of the Teachings, without regard to particular claimed doctrines.Lhug-Pa wrote: ...
However if "atheists" want to be perceived as holding no position at all, then they ought to just admit that they don't know, and refer to themselves as Agnostics instead (or perhaps as Gnostics, that is if they fully embrace the Madhyamaka view and are actually on the Path).
A little peacock once said, "one is not bound by such philosophical views and each is tossed into the wonderful flowing dance of Emptiness."jundo cohen wrote:EVERYONE here at Dharma Wheel, whether they care to admit it or not, is either a "Buddhist Agnostic" or "Buddhist Atheist" in their own way, with regard to some of the Buddha's Teachings.
Sourcefor Batchelor emptiness of inherent existence—shunyata—is “just a conceptual and linguistic abstraction…. The aim of meditation for Dharmakirti [or at least for Batchelor] was not to gain mystical insight into emptiness, but to arrive at an unfiltered experience of the fluctuating, contingent, and suffering world.”
Although Batchelor denies neither anatta nor shunyata, the explanations he offers (with reference to his own experiences) are pale versions of two of the most basic Buddhist concepts, which are crucial for understanding the personal transformation that is the aim of Buddhist practice. Any Buddhism that minimizes their importance is open to the charge of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I think what is actually happening, in effect, is that Bachelor is a kind of trojan horse for the 'new atheism' to smuggle its way into Western Buddhism. There will be many takers for his approach, because, again, it puts the analytical intellect at the centre of the whole story.
But even without going into philosophical depths, one can question Bachelor's depiction of Buddhism purely on technical and scholarly grounds.
Hi Jeeprs,jeeprs wrote: I wouldn't have any problem with Bachelor saying 'here is a humanist secular philosophy based on Buddhism, that is especially suitable for Western audiences'. What I (and many others) have a major problem is him saying 'Look, this is what Buddhism really means once I have rescued it from superstitious beliefs such as rebirth'. Sorry, not buying that.