Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:04 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:01 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:56 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:40 pm
Who denied valid cognition or cause and effect? Not me! You assume wrongly. I merely point out that all of that is relative or conventional “truth “ which is the experience of sentient beings. These things are not established truly at all. Things appear, there are true and false seeming appearances to sentient beings depending on causes and conditions, but there is no need whatsoever to ascribe ANY ontological status to the seeming....in fact, it is prapanca in my view. Just let appearances be. No need to elaborate.
Okay, great. If we let appearances be, they appear to possess their own characteristics and nature which are reliably known by worldly people.
No one ever said otherwise. But once any assertion is made regarding ontological status of phenomena, worldly people cling to existing phenomena, and this is incorrect, and in fact, the mistake at which Madhyamaka takes aim. Not an “inherent existence” which is somehow parsed from the phenomenon itself, but the mere phenomenon.
Denying existence is once again denying the valid perceptions of worldly people. If something is established by valid cognition, it exists and functions.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:10 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:04 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:01 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:56 pm


Okay, great. If we let appearances be, they appear to possess their own characteristics and nature which are reliably known by worldly people.
No one ever said otherwise. But once any assertion is made regarding ontological status of phenomena, worldly people cling to existing phenomena, and this is incorrect, and in fact, the mistake at which Madhyamaka takes aim. Not an “inherent existence” which is somehow parsed from the phenomenon itself, but the mere phenomenon.
Denying existence is once again denying the valid perceptions of worldly people. If something is established by valid cognition, it exists and functions.
One does not negate the perceptions of ordinary people; one leads them, through analysis, to understand the things they imagine are real and inherent are illusory and dependent.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 4941
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by conebeckham » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:12 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:04 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:01 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:56 pm


Okay, great. If we let appearances be, they appear to possess their own characteristics and nature which are reliably known by worldly people.
No one ever said otherwise. But once any assertion is made regarding ontological status of phenomena, worldly people cling to existing phenomena, and this is incorrect, and in fact, the mistake at which Madhyamaka takes aim. Not an “inherent existence” which is somehow parsed from the phenomenon itself, but the mere phenomenon.
Denying existence is once again denying the valid perceptions of worldly people. If something is established by valid cognition, it exists and functions.
Denying existence is not equivalent to affirming nonexistence, first of all....let’s get that out of the way.

Worldly people assume existence. Analaysis is the remedy. Worldly people do not assume a category of “existence” which is conceptually elaborated by scholars. Perception does not prove existence, as you must know. It is the conceptual workings of mind which assumes ontological identity with regard to phenomena.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Mantrik » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:24 pm

Good folks, you will not persuade a person who will quote, sometimes verbatim, from a single source in response to every point and dare not do otherwise.

I guess I 'impute' that every time the plagiarisms of the mummified gyalpo worshipper are quoted, so I may be a little biased because appearance to mind, to me, is of no valid cogniser being present at all.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:42 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:24 pm
Good folks, you will not persuade a person who will quote, sometimes verbatim, from a single source in response to every point and dare not do otherwise.

I guess I 'impute' that every time the plagiarisms of the mummified gyalpo worshipper are quoted, so I may be a little biased because appearance to mind, to me, is of no valid cogniser being present at all.
Do you have any actual contribution to this discussion other than nasty sectarian bias?

Cheers! :cheers:

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:45 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:12 pm

Denying existence is not equivalent to affirming nonexistence, first of all....let’s get that out of the way.

Worldly people assume existence. Analaysis is the remedy. Worldly people do not assume a category of “existence” which is conceptually elaborated by scholars. Perception does not prove existence, as you must know. It is the conceptual workings of mind which assumes ontological identity with regard to phenomena.
So things exist in some kind of Twilight Zone between existence and non-existence.....um, right....that's conceptually elaborated by scholars and unrelated to the experiences of worldly people fo sho!

Inherent existence is how people see things. To put it more simply, they are the things that people normally see.

You're right that perception per se does not prove existence, but valid perception does.

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:48 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:10 pm

One does not negate the perceptions of ordinary people; one leads them, through analysis, to understand the things they imagine are real and inherent are illusory and dependent.
I totally agree.

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 4941
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by conebeckham » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:58 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:45 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:12 pm

Denying existence is not equivalent to affirming nonexistence, first of all....let’s get that out of the way.

Worldly people assume existence. Analaysis is the remedy. Worldly people do not assume a category of “existence” which is conceptually elaborated by scholars. Perception does not prove existence, as you must know. It is the conceptual workings of mind which assumes ontological identity with regard to phenomena.
So things exist in some kind of Twilight Zone between existence and non-existence.....um, right....that's conceptually elaborated by scholars and unrelated to the experiences of worldly people fo sho!

Inherent existence is how people see things. To put it more simply, they are the things that people normally see.

You're right that perception per se does not prove existence, but valid perception does.
Inherent existence is not the object of negation, no matter how you would like it to be.....it’s also not “how people see things,” and perception, whether valid or not, does not prove anything. It is the mental consciousness which elaborates perceptions and misconstrues existence.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:48 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:10 pm

One does not negate the perceptions of ordinary people; one leads them, through analysis, to understand the things they imagine are real and inherent are illusory and dependent.
I totally agree.
At least we agree on this much.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:58 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:45 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:12 pm

Denying existence is not equivalent to affirming nonexistence, first of all....let’s get that out of the way.

Worldly people assume existence. Analaysis is the remedy. Worldly people do not assume a category of “existence” which is conceptually elaborated by scholars. Perception does not prove existence, as you must know. It is the conceptual workings of mind which assumes ontological identity with regard to phenomena.
So things exist in some kind of Twilight Zone between existence and non-existence.....um, right....that's conceptually elaborated by scholars and unrelated to the experiences of worldly people fo sho!

Inherent existence is how people see things. To put it more simply, they are the things that people normally see.

You're right that perception per se does not prove existence, but valid perception does.
Inherent existence is not the object of negation, no matter how you would like it to be.....it’s also not “how people see things,” and perception, whether valid or not, does not prove anything. It is the mental consciousness which elaborates perceptions and misconstrues existence.
Okay, that's fine. This is a difference in our spiritual traditions so we simply agree to disagree.

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:36 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:48 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:10 pm

One does not negate the perceptions of ordinary people; one leads them, through analysis, to understand the things they imagine are real and inherent are illusory and dependent.
I totally agree.
At least we agree on this much.
I think we agree on many points, but not generally on the meaning of the profound path. However, that's normal because there is no real controversy concerning the method practices, only concerning the meaning of ultimate truth.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Malcolm » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:37 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:58 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:45 pm


So things exist in some kind of Twilight Zone between existence and non-existence.....um, right....that's conceptually elaborated by scholars and unrelated to the experiences of worldly people fo sho!

Inherent existence is how people see things. To put it more simply, they are the things that people normally see.

You're right that perception per se does not prove existence, but valid perception does.
Inherent existence is not the object of negation, no matter how you would like it to be.....it’s also not “how people see things,” and perception, whether valid or not, does not prove anything. It is the mental consciousness which elaborates perceptions and misconstrues existence.
Okay, that's fine. This is a difference in our spiritual traditions so we simply agree to disagree.
What cone is saying is that inherent existence is not an object that can be negated because it is like the son of a barren women, what is negated is the erroneous perception of inherent existence.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:14 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:37 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm
conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:58 pm


Inherent existence is not the object of negation, no matter how you would like it to be.....it’s also not “how people see things,” and perception, whether valid or not, does not prove anything. It is the mental consciousness which elaborates perceptions and misconstrues existence.
Okay, that's fine. This is a difference in our spiritual traditions so we simply agree to disagree.
What cone is saying is that inherent existence is not an object that can be negated because it is like the son of a barren women, what is negated is the erroneous perception of inherent existence.
I see, I didn't get that implication. I thought he was saying that the object of negation was existence not inherent existence.

For Gelugpas inherent existence is the perfect object of negation because it doesn't exist and negating it eliminates the ignorance erroneously grasping it, which is the root of samsara.

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Mantrik » Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:24 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:42 pm
Mantrik wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:24 pm
Good folks, you will not persuade a person who will quote, sometimes verbatim, from a single source in response to every point and dare not do otherwise.

I guess I 'impute' that every time the plagiarisms of the mummified gyalpo worshipper are quoted, so I may be a little biased because appearance to mind, to me, is of no valid cogniser being present at all.
Do you have any actual contribution to this discussion other than nasty sectarian bias?

Cheers! :cheers:
Sectarian? Nope. Anti-demon cult? Yes.
It is remarkable that the words of a cult leader banned from mention on DW are still allowed in debate.
No, I have nothing to offer you as an answer to your points as they originate with a harmful cult and should not be permitted to appear at all IMHO.
Irrespective of the debate, if we ban discussion of a cult leader we should ban his words, even if plagiarised from Tsongkhapa or supposedly 'his' translation work. We all know who really writes the books, but they are still part of an organisation banned from mention here on DW.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 4941
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by conebeckham » Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:26 pm

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:14 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:37 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm


Okay, that's fine. This is a difference in our spiritual traditions so we simply agree to disagree.
What cone is saying is that inherent existence is not an object that can be negated because it is like the son of a barren women, what is negated is the erroneous perception of inherent existence.
I see, I didn't get that implication. I thought he was saying that the object of negation was existence not inherent existence.

For Gelugpas inherent existence is the perfect object of negation because it doesn't exist and negating it eliminates the ignorance erroneously grasping it, which is the root of samsara.
All existence is inherent existence, really. I think you're missing this. Put another way, any sort of "qualified existence" is no existence--no ontological assertion can be made regarding phenomena.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")

User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1218
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Tsongkhapafan » Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:00 pm

conebeckham wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:26 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:14 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:37 pm


What cone is saying is that inherent existence is not an object that can be negated because it is like the son of a barren women, what is negated is the erroneous perception of inherent existence.
I see, I didn't get that implication. I thought he was saying that the object of negation was existence not inherent existence.

For Gelugpas inherent existence is the perfect object of negation because it doesn't exist and negating it eliminates the ignorance erroneously grasping it, which is the root of samsara.
All existence is inherent existence, really. I think you're missing this. Put another way, any sort of "qualified existence" is no existence--no ontological assertion can be made regarding phenomena.
No, not all existence is inherent existence. Buddhas experience the union of appearance and emptiness and this mere appearance is not inherently existent. You might argue that this mere appearance is not existent, but if it's not existent, what is it and why does it appear to the omniscient wisdom of a Buddha? It's form that is true.

It's a mistake to deny mere existence, an over negation.

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 4941
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by conebeckham » Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:38 pm

As to appearances and the Buddha, a Buddha experience pure appearances. You can’t really compare the way phenomena appear to us and the way they appear to Buddha. I’d love to see your sources in regard to your assertion, by the way. Mipham has a bit to say about this, but it’s tangential to the discussion.

There’s no such thing as “mere existence”—there is mere appearance. Ontology is mental activity, and not perception.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")

User avatar
Karma Dondrup Tashi
Posts: 1615
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:13 pm

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Karma Dondrup Tashi » Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:47 am

It was actually a very specific question: How to Gelugpas deal with Mipham? His arguments are very specific, I assume their responses are also very specific.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:48 am

Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:47 am
It was actually a very specific question: How to Gelugpas deal with Mipham? His arguments are very specific, I assume their responses are also very specific.
Just as they never mounted an effective defense against Gorampa, they never mounted an effective defense against Mipham.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

amanitamusc
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Mipham: Gelug = Svatantrika Madhyamaka

Post by amanitamusc » Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:27 am

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:36 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:33 pm
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:48 pm


I totally agree.
At least we agree on this much.
I think we agree on many points, but not generally on the meaning of the profound path. However, that's normal because there is no real controversy concerning the method practices, only concerning the meaning of ultimate truth.
Just on one of your method practices the "gyalpo worship" is a bit of a
road block being full of controversy.

'

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bandi, kadak dummy, Kilaya., Lobsang Chojor, Lukeinaz, Mantrik, Norwegian, Silent Bob1, smcj and 69 guests