[MD] Conventional truth

Fri Mar 16 11:58:05 PDT 2012

Mark,

Maybe this quote will help you figure it out for yourself considering that the "conditioned" in Buddhism is "conventional truth" and a synonym for static quality. 

"‘Static quality’ refers to anything that can be conceptualised and is a synonym for the conditioned in Buddhist philosophy." (MoQ Textbook).   

Marsha 

On Mar 16, 2012, at 1:35 PM, 118 wrote:

> 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
>> 
> 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

___