What Tsongkhapa said

Kenneth Chan
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:35 am

Re: What Tsongkhapa said

Post by Kenneth Chan » Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:04 am

We seem to be arguing merely over semantics again. Before we continue with this semantics argument, it would be helpful if both Malcolm and Conebeckham state clearly whether or not they accept this statement by Cloudburst (which was made in response to Malcolm):
cloudburst wrote: For us, followers of Je Tsongkhapa, 'appear and function' is what is denoted by the english word 'exists,' and that which you denote with the term 'exists' is called 'inherent existence.'
For me, following the texts of Lama Tsongkhapa, what Cloudburst says here is evidently correct. But do you, Malcolm and Conebeckham, agree with it or not? I am asking this for the purpose of clarification.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests