No, he should eliminate this statement: "The Absolute, the whole of reality, is one and eternal, always the same and omnipresent."Queequeg wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:14 amYeah, those guys don't get it.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:01 pmhttps://jaygarfield.files.wordpress.com ... iporyn.pdf
What I get from that is, Ziporyn should probably try and work with another word besides "identify". He goes and coins a few odd terms - local coherence, global incoherence, for instance.
This is a completely nonbuddhist POV. There is no "absolute," "no whole of reality," no "one," and there is nothing that is eternal.
"...each of these three—sense organ, object, this moment of consciousness—is itself the Absolute."
This statement is also faulty, for obvious reasons that I should not have to explain.
The "Buddhism" of this Ziporyn fellow is totally wrong view, 100%.