Fwd: Buddhist vows and nondualism.

[Guest guest]

NonDualPhil , " Greg Goode " <goode@D...> wrote:

 

NonDualPhil , Insight <insight@s...> wrote:

 

>

> G: I'm intrigued about the buddhist refuge vow and nonduality.

>

> J: People usually find the Bodhisattva Vow at odds with notions

> of non-duality.

 

===I believe the question was about the initial Buddhist

vow, not the Boddhisattva vow. The initial Buddhist vow

is to take refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha.

 

Joyce is right - if a person has certain notions of

non-duality, these notions can seem at odds with the

Buddhist vow - the initial vow and the Bodhisattva

vow as well. I think of this " at-odds " feeling is

more like a culture-clash between two different kinds

of teachings.

 

Not all notions of nonduality seem at odds with the

vows. Typically the advaitic-style notions seem

at odds, notions like

 

-consciousness is all there is

-there is no doer

-there is nothing to do

 

etc. But Buddhist notions of non-duality seem

much more harmonious with the Buddhist vows.

Sunyata, or the Buddhist-style avoidance of

duality, is worked into Buddhist teachings from

the get-go, so there is not as much seeming

tension. Buddhist-style nonduality is more like:

 

Nonduality = Not falling into nihilism, and

not falling into essentialism.

 

Nihilism = the view that nothing whatsoever exists.

Essentialism = the view that what exists, exists

by its nature.

 

Things are actually empty, that is, they

really do lack essence and absolute non-

existence. This is sunyata. Nothing

violates this.

 

But views can arise which include a claim

that things do have essence. The views

don't actually " violate " sunyata since they

themselves are empty. Rather, the views

entail a claim to the effect that things

aren't empty. This is counted by Buddhism

as a false view.

 

An example of an essentialist view would be the

belief in an Atman or Brahman, which is the

belief in a kind of essence or thing thing that

by its nature is existence or being. Or the belief

that the small self or even a teacup exist in

and of themselves, apart from conception, and

apart from all causes and conditions. The essence

of something is what would allow it to exist

apart from being conceived. Like Locke's

material substance. Or Kant's ding-an-sich.

Or various notions of sat-chit-ananda.

 

An example of the nihilist view would be the

following NV:

 

NV: there is no essence to anything,

therefore nothing exists.

 

It is curious to see where the nihilist view

NV actually entails a form of essentialism,

the cliam that for something to exist, it

would have to have some kind of essence.

 

So how does the Buddhist refuge vow escape

dualism, that is, escape nihilism and

essentialism? It escapes these by seeing

everything as a confluence of causes and

conditions, including the conception of

things. The self, the vows, the Buddhist

path, samsara, nirvana, liberation - all

dependent arisings, this is sunyata,

emptiness.

 

--Greg

--- End forwarded message ---