Madhyamaka: Jan Westerhoff

from Madhyamaka & Methodology A Symposium on Buddhist Theory and Method
featuring Jan Westerhoff (University of Durham)
Watch the entire symposium here: www.smith.edu/b...
==============================
Introduction to Madhyamaka Buddhism
==============================
Arnold, D. "Madhyamaka Buddhism", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Dec 31, 2005).
www.iep.utm.edu...
Berger, B. "Nagarjuna", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (May 4, 2005).
www.iep.utm.edu...
Hayes, R. "Madhyamaka", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Nov 6, 2010).
plato.stanford....
Westerhoff, J. "Nagarjuna", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Feb 10, 2010).
plato.stanford....
-----------
The Yuktisastika says:
50. The magnanimous have neither thesis nor contention. How can there be an opposing thesis to those who have no thesis?
51. By taking any standpoint whatsoever one is attacked by the twisting snakes of the klesas. But whose minds have no standpoint are not caught.
------------
"Over the past half-century the doctrine of Madhyamaka school, and in particular that of Nagarjuna, has been variously described as nihilism, monism, irrationalism, misology, agnosticism, scepticism, criticism, dialectic, mysticism, acosmism, absolutism, relativism, nominalism, and linguistic analysis with therapeutic value. With the exception of the first five which are hardly appropriate in any context and become quite misleading when taken in their usual senses, such descriptions no doubt correspond to some aspect of Madhyamaka thought."
-- David Seyfort Ruegg, The literature of the Madhyamaka school of philosophy in India, Page 2
------------
The Mulamadhyamaka karika 24:10 says:
Without relying on conventions, the sublime meaning cannot be taught. Without understanding the sublime meaning, one will not attain nirvana.
------------
The Cittavajrastava says:
I bow to my own mind
That dispels mind's ignorance
By eliminating the mind-sprung web
Through this very mind itself.
Sentient beings with their various inclinations
Picture different kinds of gods,
But our precious mind cannot be established
As any other god than complete liberation.
------------

[@FearlessWisdom]

LOL Dreyfus is loving this shit I'd say that Jan has it nailed, Nagarjuna does use reason to put forth arguments and so on, however, it is a mere therapeutic tactic, a medicine to philosophical views which keep one bound. A similarity is obvious here between Nagarjuna and Sextus Empiricus and Wittgenstein.

[@anonymousprivate116]

Practicing this Mahayana Wisdom with Shoryu Bradley :)

[@laapasakuna]

"The middle way, where.....outside or inside ??" *not* outside; *not* inside; *not* both outside and inside; *not* neither outside nor inside.

[@deanmiller4806]

All minds are inherently liberated into the "wholism" of nirvana. This is the elemental foundation of consciousness called "Buddha Nature." The whole or "nirvana" (emptiness) is non conceptual. We identify with the conceptual mind and so do not recognize who exactly we are. Reason is simply the radiant nature of the mind expressed as concept. But the Buddha Nature of the mind is not only radiant, it is also stable, vast and "static" which is its non conceptual aspect. The third aspect is blissful compassion which is expressed as emotion. These three aspects are who we are fundamentally. Reason can only take you so far. Reason is necessary yes, as are meditation (shamatha) and compassionate (unselfish) action (sila). But you cant reason your way to enlightenment. My heartfelt advise is to meditate, be compassionate, and of coarse study.

[@Vajrabrother]

Ahhh,...wonderful new age mumbo advice. I am nice . YOu seem to have a nice smile. How many humans seem to display a nice smile when the harbor negative or self centered thoughts ? If I love myself am I then being self centered ? Thrashing against illusions seems to be quick analysis or a misplaced term when you do not seem to know me or have asked any questions. If humans are "lightened up" are the not mostly superficial ? Heheheheh...my laughter is endless !!

[@Vajrabrother]

Sounds good but a little funny: What do the two last negations really mean. Please explain or elaborate. If everything is not, then what is our existence ? If everything is not then what is ? If only our perception is not but the world is, then what is really ? Superficial statements without explanations are like gangsters pointing a gun to your head. Are you humans or do you live in another realm ? What reality is predominant in that realm and why do humans like to lie to themselves or others?

[@Vajrabrother]

Oh and one more thing: have you meditated or studied buddhism ? Is your comment on my comment just or proper ? Please elaborate, I have all the time in the world. What do you do during the day ? which nationality are you ? Are you environmentally conscious or do you do sports ? How far does your understanding pertain to what and why should I bother listening to you ? What is mutual in this world ? I like to discuss with Rinpoches, tulkus or khenpos and if not I work in the garden. No beef.