A Modern Yogācāran?

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
srivijaya
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: UK

A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by srivijaya » Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:44 am

Anil Seth seems to be very close to a Yogācāran view. Any thoughts?

User avatar
PuerAzaelis
Posts: 803
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by PuerAzaelis » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:50 pm

Neuroscience depends on the assumption of Kantian constructivism. I.e. we assemble our knowledge from our experience.

This in turn still depends on Descartes' distinction of inside-outside, i.e. certain things are "in the mind".

I don't think this is the Yogacara view:

When I touch something soft, say the fur of a puppy - that touch itself is mind.
And nobody in all of Oz. No Wizard that there is or was.

User avatar
srivijaya
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by srivijaya » Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:38 pm

I can almost sense he's heading towards a Buddhist conclusion, though he stops short.

Tolya M
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by Tolya M » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:02 am

What he says and writes has the same relation to yogacara as to sarvastivada-vaibhasika or sautrantika or theravada. Not even approximately.

User avatar
srivijaya
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by srivijaya » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:33 pm

GIven he probably has never heard of Yogacara, you've got a point, but I found some of the things he said were drifting that way - minus terminology etc.

The proposition that mind creates the experience and (as he terms it) mass hallucination upon which we all agree constitutes "reality". This indicates a shift away from an external focus to an internal / interdependent one, with reality not being a 'fixed absolute' rather what each being (or group of beings) makes it.

Obviously no mention of the Ālayavijñāna, but we wouldn't expect him to posit that.

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by aflatun » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:39 pm

PuerAzaelis wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:50 pm
Neuroscience depends on the assumption of Kantian constructivism. I.e. we assemble our knowledge from our experience.

This in turn still depends on Descartes' distinction of inside-outside, i.e. certain things are "in the mind".

I don't think this is the Yogacara view:

When I touch something soft, say the fur of a puppy - that touch itself is mind.
:good:

:bow: :bow: :bow:
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

Tolya M
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by Tolya M » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:06 pm

srivijaya wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:33 pm
GIven he probably has never heard of Yogacara, you've got a point, but I found some of the things he said were drifting that way - minus terminology etc.

The proposition that mind creates the experience and (as he terms it) mass hallucination upon which we all agree constitutes "reality". This indicates a shift away from an external focus to an internal / interdependent one, with reality not being a 'fixed absolute' rather what each being (or group of beings) makes it.

Obviously no mention of the Ālayavijñāna, but we wouldn't expect him to posit that.
Yogacara is about ten topics recognized by bodhisattva Mahayanasuprapratipanna in the speech of the Buddha and it is adressed to bodhisattvas in order to know in an abstract way all (innumerable) non-buddhist teachings issuing from alaya-vijnana speech impregnations. Notion of external world rests in epoche. It is not sufficient to some how assert it (Sautrantika) or find this question irrelevant (yogacara) as Dharmakirti states. In the very beginning buddhism was a very special and profound kind of idealism. Mano pubbangama dhamma... etc. It is not entirely parikalpita hallucination because this level is merged with defiled paratantra and have a potentiality of becoming pure (parispanna). This man is as a yogacarin not more he is a theravadin. There is nothing remotedly like buddhism apart from "mind creates" etc. Just similar words.

He has footnotes on David Chalmers. From the difficult problem of consciousness he passes to a real problem.
But there is an alternative, which I like to call the real problem: how to account for the various properties of consciousness in terms of biological mechanisms; without pretending it doesn’t exist (easy problem) and without worrying too much about explaining its existence in the first place (hard problem).
It looks like the carvaka view... It is very very far away from epistemic notion of vijnaptimatra.

I don't read all of his site. Maybe I'm mistaken in some observations.

User avatar
srivijaya
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: A Modern Yogācāran?

Post by srivijaya » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:25 pm

Tolya M wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:06 pm
This man is as a yogacarin not more he is a theravadin. There is nothing remotedly like buddhism apart from "mind creates" etc. Just similar words.
Thanks for the information Tolya, obviously what you write is correct. It was the similarity of the words and proposition which I found intriguing. Who knows, give science a bit longer and it might get there.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 30 guests