07-17-2010, 12:04 AM
@Tiff -
I don't disagree with Nagarjuna. I cannot because in order to disagree with him, I would have to understand him. I do not. That has been the crux of my commentary.
I've tried again to read and to understand what was posted titled "What's Happening?" Perhaps the meaning is echoed in the following from "The Blue Cliff Record":
By the real truth we understand that it is not existent; by the conventional truth we understand that it is not nonexistent. That the real truth and the conventional truth are not two is the highest meaning of the holy truths.
(So...the following discourse)
"What is the highest meaning of the holy truths?"
"Empty, without holiness."
(Commentary)
If only you can penetrate 'Empty, without holiness', then you can return home and sit in peace.
(Final comment)
All this amounts to is creating complications.
I really appreciate that final sentence. However, as with Nagarjuna, I don't understand.
Elsewhere, this comment:
Tiff wrote:Nagarjuna's view is that (contrary to nihilism) there does exist a world of selves and things, namely, the world that appears before us (the phenomenal world), but that (contrary to essentialism) all such phenomenal entities are impermanent, continually changing, interdependent, insubstantial — in other words, "empty" (shunya) of essence."
How can a thing be empty of essence? Logically, that makes no sense. Either a thing is, or it is not. If it is, it has essence, which is the meaning of the word.
The last thing I want to ask, is, what does the pursuit of understanding through Nagarjuna's guidance provide you? Do you understand being in a different form? Is it a better way of being than before encountering his teachings?
I don't disagree with Nagarjuna. I cannot because in order to disagree with him, I would have to understand him. I do not. That has been the crux of my commentary.
I've tried again to read and to understand what was posted titled "What's Happening?" Perhaps the meaning is echoed in the following from "The Blue Cliff Record":
By the real truth we understand that it is not existent; by the conventional truth we understand that it is not nonexistent. That the real truth and the conventional truth are not two is the highest meaning of the holy truths.
(So...the following discourse)
"What is the highest meaning of the holy truths?"
"Empty, without holiness."
(Commentary)
If only you can penetrate 'Empty, without holiness', then you can return home and sit in peace.
(Final comment)
All this amounts to is creating complications.
I really appreciate that final sentence. However, as with Nagarjuna, I don't understand.
Elsewhere, this comment:
Tiff wrote:Nagarjuna's view is that (contrary to nihilism) there does exist a world of selves and things, namely, the world that appears before us (the phenomenal world), but that (contrary to essentialism) all such phenomenal entities are impermanent, continually changing, interdependent, insubstantial — in other words, "empty" (shunya) of essence."
How can a thing be empty of essence? Logically, that makes no sense. Either a thing is, or it is not. If it is, it has essence, which is the meaning of the word.
The last thing I want to ask, is, what does the pursuit of understanding through Nagarjuna's guidance provide you? Do you understand being in a different form? Is it a better way of being than before encountering his teachings?