[Buddha-l] Fsat Mnifdlunses?

[Dan Lusthaus]

> "Why would you think there is "reality" beyond your cognitive
> apprehension? How would you even know about it?"
>
> It is a 'reality' that my mind is hazy and ignorant at the moment. But I
> speak of 'reality' from the perspective of a clear and knowing mind. And
> that is 'out there' because I am separated from it by mental constructs.

What is this "it" that you believe you are separated from? Have you seen it, 
touched it, had clearer mental moments when it danced naked in front of you? 
Or is this all just based on nasty rumors?


> And I would know about it through education - which is knowing something
> that was previously not known.

Is this reality you don't yet know something to be learned, or something 
you've already learned? If the former, then at most it's a hypothesis, not 
yet a "reality." If already learned, then your current confusion is 
puzzling.

>For example, if the results of my actions
> do not turn out as I planned, I say something is missing - something not
> taken into account. I say that is 'out there' because of my ignorance.

That's called scapegoating. Your whole plan might have been misconceived 
from the beginning, not because some missing ingredient failed to be 
included, but for any number of reasons.

> I said:
> "You seem to be saying that apprehension is the separating agent:"
>
> You said:
> "No, you are saying that, only attributing that to me."
>
> You quoted Vasubandhu as saying, "By the apprehending of citta-matra,
> there is the nonapprehension of cognized artha. By nonapprehending
> cognized artha, citta also is nonapprehended." And you went on to say,
> "In other words, not only is the object, the artha, negated, but that
> which noetically constitutes it (vijnapti-matra, citta-matra) is also
> negated."

Where in that do the words "separating" or "agent" appear?


> Has the word 'apprehension' been used consistently here?

Yes. It is a faithful rendering of upalabdhi.

vijñapti-mātra-UPALABDHIm niśrityārthān-UPALABDHIr-jayate. arthānUPALABDHIm
niśritya vijñapti-mātrasyāpi-anUAPALABDHIr-jayate. (Madhyāntavibhāga-bhāṣya
I.7)

---
[Now you can try to find upalabdhi in the parallel quote]

citta-mātra-upalambhena jñeyārthārthānupalambhatā. jñeyārtha anupalambhena
syāc-cittānupalambhatā. (Trisvabhāvanirdeśa 36)

[bonus points to whoever can offer a cogent reason, based on the wording, 
for why the first passage is authentic Vasubandhu, and the second is not 
(and its not the substitution of citta for vijnapti).]

Dan