[Buddha-l] MMK 25.09 (was: as Swami goes...)

[Dan Lusthaus]

Richard wrote:

> I think my point is that one need to agree with Nagarjuna. He was a
> very confused cowboy.
> Richard

You mean one "needn't" agree with him? Yes. I don't find him confused, at 
least not about this. MMK 25.9 challenges realist and svabhavic ways of 
conceiving of nirvana.

Bhāva remains the key term -- to treat it as a stable locus is a symptom of 
svabhavic thinking. Which is why, I think, Candrakirti includes thie 
following in his discussion of this karika:

na ca apravṛtti-mātraṁ bhāvo'bhāvo veti parikalpitu pāryata iti | evaṁ na 
bhāvo nābhāvo nirvāṇam ||

Sprung translates:
"However, what is nothing more than a ceasing to function cannot be 
conceived of as either ontically existent nor ontically non-existent. Thus 
nirvana is neither ontically existent nor ontically non-existent." (p.255)

"Ontically existent" and "ontically non-existent" are bhāva and ābhāva, 
respectively. Nirvana is not a bhāva, a non-bhāva, a sva-bhāva, para-bhāva, 
etc.

Fellow Yogacaras might also take note of Candrakirti's use of parikalpitu (= 
parikalpita) here.

Dan