FW: [Buddha-l] Mereological nihilism

[jkirk]

Hi Chris,
You've convinced me :) 

Last night I read through one of the chapters in Thakchoe's book
("Language, Concepts, and Ultimate Truth") without flinching, but
had to re-read a few times. Problem is that the ideas of
Tsongkhapa and Gorampa are graspable from this book's rendition
of them--but as it's a scholarly study, it goes on and on,
offering this example and that one, this commentator and that
one, and so occasionally becomes redundant, for my purposes. So
some skipping of text will happen. 

Since I recently read about Gendun Chophel (Lopez's study), while
reading Thakchoe I kept thinking, Hmmm, sounds like Chophel was a
partisan of Gorampa. All I knew from that study was that he
angrily took on the Gelugpa establishment and so Tsongkhapa's
views. But if Gorampa was there somewhere, I missed it . 

Thakchoe helpfully sorts out some sources: "Dreyfus also notes
that 'for the Sa-gya tradition in general and Go-ram-ba in
particular, the key concept in Madhyamaka philosophy is not the
absence of real existence, but freedom from elaboration
(prapanca, spros pa). Ultimate truth is utterly beyond the reach
of elaboration.' On this matter, as on others, Gorampa
exemplifies a more widely  held view--one that is shared, notably
by Shakya Chogden, Taktsang Lotsawa, Mipham Rimpoche, Gendun
Chophel, and Khenpo Khunsang Palden. Interestingly, however, some
of his usual allies, such as Longchen Rabjam, Sakya Pandita, and
Rongton Shakya Gyaltsen are more sympathetic to Tsongkhapa's view
on this account. Like Tsongkhapa, this latter group argues that
logical inference paves the way to the direct realization of
ultimate reality."  

This bit is just a bit from the book--it's not the whole thing,
but it helps the sorting out process.

Joanna




 

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Fynn [mailto:cfynn at gmx.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:56 AM
To: Buddhist discussion forum; jkirk
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Mereological nihilism

Hi Joanna

English language books on Buddhist philosophy usually put me to
sleep as well - quite literally. They are more often than not so
opaque they numb the brain. However I can think of a handful that
I've found so interesting and readable that I couldn't put them
down and read all at once from cover to cover.

While not quite that good, Karma Phuntsho's book is very
readable. Though fairly technical it is understandable.
I was up late for two nights reading it without falling asleep.


Karma is a Bhutanese scholar who studied both at a traditional
monastic college (shedra) and at Oxford.
<http://www.loden.org/people/karma.html>

- Chris


kirk wrote:

 > One reason I found this book interesting (Thakchoe's book) is
> that it is written so clearly that even I felt like I could  >
understand it.  This is a rare occurrence for me trying to read
> books on Tibetan  Buddhist philosophy.
 > JK
 > ===========================================
 >
 >
 > Joanna
 >
 > If you found that book interesting you must also read:
 > Mipham's Dialectics and the Debates on Emptiness by Karma  >
Phuntso. Curzon Press. 2005  >  > with all good wishes  >  > -
Chris  >  > jkirk wrote:
 >> Instead of Wikipedia, suggest you take a look at _The Two  >
Truths  >> Debate : Tsongkhapa and Gorampa on the Middle Way_, by
Sonam  > Thakchoe.
 >> Wisdom Pubs, 2007.
 >> The term nihilism is probably over as a useful concept with
> respect to  >> Buddhism. It tends to be used pejoratively. It's
a label.
 >>
 >> Best,
 >> Joanna

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1389 - Release Date:
4/21/2008 8:34 AM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1389 - Release Date:
4/21/2008 8:34 AM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1389 - Release Date:
4/21/2008 8:34 AM