[Advaita-l] Advaita and Madhyamika Buddhism

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste.  Just a clarification from you. Are you referring to Nagarjuna as
denying existence/nonexistence to self only or for all else (other objects)
only ( other than self ). I am asking this question because there is a
difference between the two in budhism.

Regards

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Sri Chandramouli ji (resending to the group as I understand it
> wasn't copied earlier).
>
> Nagarjuna's description of emptiness is the negation of each of the four
> logical possibilities - it is not:
> 1) existent (this is the Buddhist view of existence as characterised by
> impermanence, suffering, non-self)
> 2) non-existent (ie characterised by the absence of an existent thing)
> 3) existent and non-existent (which is a logical impossibility in the same
> locus at the same time) and
> 4) neither existent nor non-existent. This is the problematic denial from
> the standpoint of classical logic. The negation of neither (p) nor not (p)
> is either (p) or not(p).
>
> But this has already been denied in 1 and 2. So how can Nagarjuna hold the
> negation of 4, 1 and 2 simultaneously? Chandrakirti, his commentator says
> that there are two ways a statement can be said to be not ultimately true.
> One is if it is ultimately false, the other is if the statement itself has
> no meaning. If p has no meaning, then p cannot be said to be ultimately
> true or ultimately false. Similarly not p. So what was being said in the
> negation of 1 and 2 was not that the statements were ultimately false, only
> that they were not ultimately true. Thus if 1) and 2) are not ultimately
> true, then the negation of their disjunction neither existent nor absent
> cannot be ultimately true.
>
> Where does this leave us? Essentially the sense I get of Nagarjuna's
> philosophy is not the denial of self as the ultimate reality, but the
> denial of any statements in relation to the self - as statements relating
> to the self have no meaning. ie refraining from saying it exists, it
> doesn't exist, it exists and does not, or it neither exist nor it doesn't.
>
> I am not sure whether this has been characterised correctly in advaita. It
> is possible that it is I who have misunderstood mAdhyamaka Buddhism.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On 17 Sep 2016 11:14 a.m., "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you Sri Chandramouli ji.
>>
>> Nagarjuna's description of emptiness is the negation of each of the four
>> logical possibilities - it is not:
>> 1) existent (this is the Buddhist view of existence as characterised by
>> impermanence, suffering, non-self)
>> 2) non-existent (ie characterised by the absence of an existent thing)
>> 3) existent and non-existent (which is a logical impossibility in the
>> same locus at the same time) and
>> 4) neither existent nor non-existent. This is the problematic denial from
>> the standpoint of classical logic. The negation of neither (p) nor not (p)
>> is either (p) or not(p).
>>
>> But this has already been denied in 1 and 2. So how can Nagarjuna hold
>> the negation of 4, 1 and 2 simultaneously? Chandrakirti, his commentator
>> says that there are two ways a statement can be said to be not ultimately
>> true. One is if it is ultimately false, the other is if the statement
>> itself has no meaning. If p has no meaning, then p cannot be said to be
>> ultimately true or ultimately false. Similarly not p. So what was being
>> said in the negation of 1 and 2 was not that the statements were ultimately
>> false, only that they were not ultimately true. Thus if 1) and 2) are not
>> ultimately true, then the negation of their disjunction neither existent
>> nor absent cannot be ultimately true.
>>
>> Where does this leave us? Essentially the sense I get of Nagarjuna's
>> philosophy is not the denial of self as the ultimate reality, but the
>> denial of any statements in relation to the self - as statements relating
>> to the self have no meaning. ie refraining from saying it exists, it
>> doesn't exist, it exists and does not, or it neither exist nor it doesn't.
>>
>> I am not sure whether this has been characterised correctly in advaita.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2016 11:14 a.m., "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reg  << Shunyata does not mean nonexistence or a void. Shunyata, as I
>>> understand
>>> it, simply signifies that things have no self-being or “essence” of their
>>> own. >>,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand this is the new doctrine proposed as a modification of the
>>> shUnyata concept proposed by Nagarjuna earlier which meant nihilism only. I
>>> also understand that with this modification it is difficult to explain any
>>> significant difference between it and advaita. Advaita concept being
>>> earlier to shUnyata concept, the shUnyata concept loses its separate and
>>> distinct identity itself.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ofcourse I only know of  this as a statement and really do not have an
>>> opinion one way or the other on the issue. Thought I would just bring it to
>>> your attention for whatever it is worth.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste,
>>>> In reading advaita works critical of Buddhism, it appears to me that the
>>>> concept of shUnyata or emptiness as postulated by Nagarjuna has not been
>>>> represented correctly in advaita.
>>>>
>>>> Shunyata does not mean nonexistence or a void. Shunyata, as I understand
>>>> it, simply signifies that things have no self-being or “essence” of
>>>> their
>>>> own. However in most advaita works it has only been briefly discussed
>>>> and
>>>> dismissed as nihilism. Nagarjuna himself is critical of nihilism, so it
>>>> does not appear that he had nihilism in mind when postulating shUnyata.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know why it has been represented as nihilism and cursorily
>>>> dismissed?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>>
>>>> For assistance, contact:
>>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>