[Buddha-l] Buddhism and Psychology research

[Dan Lusthaus]

Yes, Tim

>My view is that it has no place in this dialog unless one wants a certain 
>dog to whip.

That's precisely the sort of thinking that has kept Shimano, et al. up and 
running. Thanks for the reminder. And thanks for reminding us that the 
modern secularists are as locked into dogmatic sectarianism as Richard is 
accusing the Abhidharmists of being.

Note that Vasubandhu, one of the premier abhidharmists, produced a work that 
is a unique genre unto itself, esp. in the Indian context. The 
Abhidharmakosa-bhasya consists of verses more or less espousing the 
Vaibhasika doctrinal line. The commentary on those verses, by the same 
author, deconstructs and rejects many of those positions, offering reasoned 
arguments for preferring positions closer to Sautrantika, Yogacara, and 
other non-Vaibhasikas. I don't know of a single other classical Indian text 
where an author deconstructs and refutes his own verses with his own 
commentary. That is the antithesis of being dogmatic.

Dan