[Buddha-l] Fsat Mnifdlunses?

[Dan Lusthaus]

> I'm unwilling to call either idealism or nāstikavāda either malicious
> or pernicious views until I see some evidence that 1) holding such
> views does anyone any harm, and 2) the intent behind promoting those
> views is to do harm.
>
> Richard

I wasn't suggesting that idealism or nihilism (I'm not really sure what the 
referent of nāstikavāda is supposed to be, except that Nyaya Sutra, 
Caraka-samhita, and others found it appalling) themselves are necessarily 
malicious or pernicious. Rather, I was suggesting that *mis-labeling* 
Yogacara or Madhyamaka with those terms is malicious or pernicious. Since it 
is usually done in the classical sources to demean, undermine, and 
ultimately disregard the teachings of those schools, "malicious and 
pernicious" may be apt.

But let's not get caught up arguing about how to label mis-labelers. More 
useful would be to determine what such schools actually promoted, rather 
than how effectively one can squeeze them into clothes that don't fit 
properly.

Dan