Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

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.
Jnana
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by Jnana » Wed May 15, 2013 12:16 am

Will wrote:Another excellent, simpler (but not simple) commentary, much earlier than Je Rinpoche's 'Ocean', is the Ornament of Reason by Mabja Bodhisattva. Snow Lion published it some time back.

http://www.shambhala.com/the-ornament-of-reason.html
Yes, the Ornament of Reason is the best early Tibetan commentary.

Jnana
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by Jnana » Wed May 15, 2013 12:22 am

The earliest commentaries on the MMK by Indian authors (besides the Akutobhayā) are the following:

An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.1 by Brian Bocking.
An Annotated Translation of the Chung-Lun With Nāgārjuna's Middle Stanzas Vol.2 by Brian Bocking.
A Study of the Buddhapālita-Mūlamadhyamaka-vṛtti by Akira Saito.

:buddha1:

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by dzogchungpa » Wed May 15, 2013 2:48 am

I was just looking at an article by William L. Ames, and in one of the footnotes he says that the clearest introduction to Madhyamaka that he knows of is the translators’ introduction to this:
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Midd ... 1590300092
and that another excellent introduction to the basic ideas of Madhyamaka,
with an emphasis on their significance for the Buddhist path is this:
http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Wisdom-Teachi ... 1570629994.
I haven't read either, but I thought I would pass that along, since he seems to be a pretty good scholar, whose thesis, btw, is here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/120037318/Bha ... 5-17-23-26.
Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

User avatar
rachmiel
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by rachmiel » Wed May 15, 2013 4:06 am

From the Acknowledgments to Ames's thesis:

"This dissertation has no intrinsic nature of its own ..."

! ;-)
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

User avatar
Wayfarer
Posts: 3441
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by Wayfarer » Wed May 15, 2013 4:46 am

that's right! It is one of the implications of the 'emptiness of emptiness'. Nagarjuna says he has no thesis to defend. All he does is show how everyone else's theses basically contradict themselves. Whatever view you have is bound to be self-defeating in some respect.

Madhyamaka is an essentially skeptical philosophy. There are historical links between the ancient Greek Pyrrhonism - the original form of skepticism - and Madhyamaka - see for instance Flintof's Pyrrho and India, Adrian Kuzminski Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism and Jay Garfield's Epoche and Sunyata
In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities; in the expert's mind there are few ~ Suzuki-roshi

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by dzogchungpa » Wed May 15, 2013 5:16 am

Also, "The Shape of Ancient Thought" by McEvilley.
Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

Jnana
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by Jnana » Wed May 15, 2013 6:52 am

jeeprs wrote:Madhyamaka is an essentially skeptical philosophy. There are historical links between the ancient Greek Pyrrhonism - the original form of skepticism - and Madhyamaka - see for instance Flintof's Pyrrho and India, Adrian Kuzminski Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism and Jay Garfield's Epoche and Sunyata
There are differences. Pyrrhonian skeptics likely wouldn't accept karma and rebirth. Whereas mādhyamikas do.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Posts: 3441
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by Wayfarer » Wed May 15, 2013 7:25 am

Of course, I quite agree. One ought not to over-state the resemblances. But I always find it interesting to consider the meaning of 'skepticism' in regards to both the ancient Greek and Indian schools. Nowadays we think of 'skeptics' as being kind of anti-spiritual or at least basically 'naturalist' in their outlook. But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.

Anyway, I know that it is tangential to the main thread. Take it as a footnote. :smile:
In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities; in the expert's mind there are few ~ Suzuki-roshi

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by dzogchungpa » Wed May 15, 2013 6:17 pm

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

User avatar
oushi
Posts: 1596
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by oushi » Wed May 15, 2013 6:40 pm

Relative truth is an illusion, ultimate is free from any elaboration, thus there is no true existence in appearances.
Say what you think about me here.

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by dzogchungpa » Wed May 15, 2013 8:00 pm

jeeprs wrote:But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.
I know Trungpa is controversial, but maybe you will find this interesting:
http://chronicleproject.com/CTRlibrary/ ... armth.html
Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 8589
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by DGA » Wed May 15, 2013 9:11 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
jeeprs wrote:But a really deep skepticism is actually a sadhana. The same for the original 'cynics'. They too were basically like renunciates. But the meaning of 'cynic' has also changed over time.
I know Trungpa is controversial, but maybe you will find this interesting:
http://chronicleproject.com/CTRlibrary/ ... armth.html
:good:
Trungpa wrote:The whole approach here is that you have extremely adequate resources within yourself, whether you regard yourself as insane or sane. You have tremendous resources in any case. Whether you take advantage of your insanity or sanity is up to you.

zerwe
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 4:25 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Questions and Comments

Post by zerwe » Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:54 am

Tom wrote:This should be extremely good...

http://www.amazon.com/Nagarjunas-Middle ... =nagarjuna
Just cracking this one open. Ordered Fri. and surprisingly received it earlier today, considering the pub. date is tomorrow!
Yep, It is beginning to look invaluable.
Shaun :namaste:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kim O'Hara, Lobsang Chojor, nichiren-123, Nicholas Weeks and 63 guests