[MD] Conventional truth

[118]

Marsha,
I have already figured it out for myself, I do not need more quotes.
My post stands alone and does not require any response.

But thank you for the offer.  Happy readings in the text book, I hope
it tells you what you are supposed to know.

Cheers,
Mark

On 3/16/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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
>