[Buddha-l] As Swami goes, so goes the nation? (Dan Lusthaus and Richard P. Hayes)

[Richard Hayes]

On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Mitchell Ginsberg wrote:

> Would there be a basic rendering and explanation/gloss of the two terms here (parikalpita and parinispanna), to stay focused on the substantive distinction here?

Things are dependent. That is their paratantra nature. Things are presented in our awareness in a way that feels as though they are objects being apprehended by a subject, but that subject-object split is imagined (parikalpita). When it is understood that what the putative objects of experience are actually dependent on is consciousness itself, that is apprehension of their consummate (pariniṣpanna) nature.

> Also, I marvel at how two people I respect and whose knowledge I appreciate can have such a long-standing jousting interaction. There is a friendliness and simultaneously an in-your-face-ness about it (as I read these postings); I can't tell how harsh it really is, and I do not know the history behind it, if there is one. 

It is an entirely friendly form of interaction. As I see it, Dan and I agree on very little in matters of importance to us both, but there is absolutely no edge or animosity in either one of us. Our agreements are completely amicable. We are both, however, furnished with a fondness for irony and sardony (if that is the noun form of the adjective "sardonic"). The main difference between out temperaments that I love to feign hostility and contempt for those who disagree with me, while Dan really is hostile and contemptuous. I trust that clarifies matters.

Richard