[MD] Conventional truth

[118]

It is difficult to say what the author means by "conventional truth"
from the paragraphs below, and a complete reading of the text would be
required.  However, based on the rhetoric below and the specific words
that the author uses in his analogy, I can provide the following
(personal) interpretation:

The analogy of conventional truths to a mirage implies that such
truths are mirages.  A mirage is something that presents an actual
entity which is "misplaced".  For example, water is something that is
real, but its apparition in certain cases may not be a real seeing of
such water.  This analogy is not meant to go into what "reality" is,
but is simply an analogy based on our agreement of what water is and
when it is "not real water".

One must ask what conventional truths are mirages of.  My guess would
be that the author is suggesting that such mirages are apparitions of
Absolute Truth.  That is, the conventional truths are Absolute Truth
which are misplaced.  Plato was a learned reader, and it is possible
that his Absolute Truth borrowed from translations of other
philosophies such as Buddhism.  As such, we may be in conflict with
MoQ here.

It is my understanding that MoQ seeks to replace such Absolute Truth
with Quality.  To remain consistent within MoQ, we could speak of
"conventional qualities", as "misplaced Quality".  This would provide
an understanding as to how sq is somehow "misplaced" and a mirage.

In my opinion, MoQ presents Quality more in the Brahman tradition.
Within such thought there is the Devine Illusion, or Maya.  With MoQ
we could say that such Maya is the "world of qualities", or the world
of appearances.  However, in that Hindu tradition, Truth is also
brought in (at least in Western translations), so we must be careful
to phrase MoQ with the intention of making Truth a result of Quality.

Using Hindu metaphysics also brings in the concept of Atman (or soul).
 One's Atman exists as one of the "many eyes" of Brahman.  In such
metaphysics, Brahman exists in the same way as Quality, and is not
required to fulfill any codependent arisings as a rule.  Its
subsidiaries or Atman's therefore do not need to subscribe to
codependency either since they are simply parts of Brahman.

It is therefore my suggestion that we try to stay away from
"conventional truths" since they seem to imply the domination of
Truth.  Instead we should speak of "conventional qualities" in order
to stay true to MoQ.  The concept of conventional qualities points
more to the intent of MoQ in its presentation of Quality.
Conventional qualities could be said to be mirages of Quality.  This
would differentiate MoQ from the vast body of work known as Buddhism,
and tend more towards Zen which is an outgrowth of Taoism as much as
Mahayana Buddhism (maybe more).  The Tao is not a Truth, but "A Way".
Quality is also "A Way" which is why we can bring in concepts such as
Morality.

Just as Alice has "authority" in the example below, there is a sense
of "Wisdom" within MoQ.  This is no different from wisdom in Buddhism,
and must be arrived at through practice.  Practice comes from honest
and open-minded discussion on the topics of MoQ, IMO.  All agendas
should be left at the door.

For what it is worth,
Mark

On 3/15/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> "Among the many similes for conventional truth that litter Madhyamaka texts,
> the most fruitful is that of the mirage. Conventional truth is false,
> Candrakirti tells us, because it is deceptive.  Candrakirti spells this out
> in terms of a mirage. A mirage appears to be water, but is in fact empty of
> water—it is deceptive, and in that sense, a false appearance. On the other
> hand, a mirage is not nothing: it is a real mirage, just not real water.
>
> "The analogy must be spelled out with care to avoid the extreme of nihilism.
> A mirage appears to be water, but is only a mirage; the inexperienced
> highway traveler mistakes it for water, and for him it is deceptive, a false
> appearance of water; the experienced traveler sees it for what it is—a real
> mirage, empty of water. Just so, conventional phenomena appear to ordinary,
> deluded beings to be inherently existent, whereas in fact they are merely
> conventionally real, empty of that inherent existence; to the åryas, on the
> other hand, they appear to be merely conventionally true, hence to be empty.
> For us, they are deceptive, false appearances; for them, they are simply
> real conventional truths.
>
> "We can update the analogy to make the point more plainly. Imagine three
> travelers along a hot desert highway. Alice is an experienced desert
> traveler; Bill is a neophyte; Charlie is wearing polarizing sunglasses. Bill
> points to a mirage up ahead and warns against a puddle on the road; Alice
> sees the mirage as a mirage and assures him that there is no danger. Charlie
> sees nothing at all, and wonders what they are talking about. If the mirage
> were entirely false—if there were no truth about it at all, Charlie would be
> the most authoritative of the three (and Buddhas would know nothing of the
> real world). But that is wrong. Just as Bill is deceived in believing that
> there is water on the road, Charlie is incapable of seeing the mirage at
> all, and so fails to know what Alice knows—that there is a real mirage on
> the road, which appears to some to be water, but which is not. There is a
> truth about the mirage, despite the fact that it is deceptive, and Alice is
> authoritative with respect to it precisely because she sees it as it is, not
> as it appears to the uninitiated."
>
>
>   (Garfield, Jay L., 'MOONSHADOWS: Taking Conventional Truth Seriously', pp.
> 29-30)
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>