/lit/ - Literature

>>14572658
>there is no transcendental reality beyond this phenomenal world
Yeah because the phenomenal world is the transcendental reality invalidly cognized.

>>14572658
> The classical Madhyamaka-teachings are complemented with postmodern philosophy, critical sociology, and social constructionism.
Yes this is true that the people who gravitate towards Madhyamaka are often the sort of limp-wristed soi-boys who have some sort of dissociative complex which makes them want to abandon and flee anything denoting truth, meaning, harmony, the infinite etc and instead disassociate themselves from their lives and seek meaningless oblivion in post-modern deconstruction or in this case "emptiness", it's basically just a cope, "uuhh none of this matters that I'm an incel or short/ugly/bad social skills etc because everything IS ACTUALLY EMPTY!!! HAHAHAHA"

Unfortunately none of it's real and they are just turning themselves for no good reason into NPCs by trying to dissolve themselves into emptiness. Madhyamaka teachings aren't actually true and are based on completely garbage logic as the great Buddhist scholar Richard Robinson demonstrated in pic related.

>>14572826
that pic was already refuted here
>>14572615
>>14572841

>the great Buddhist scholar Richard Robinson
yes the Mahayana Buddhist Scholar who still accepted Nagarjuna, the most influential Mahayana Buddhist, as his lord and savior after all that somehow invalidated his teachings......

Advaitin IQ folks

>>14572875
>that pic was already refuted here
No you didn't lol, all you did was say Hayes was wrong about something and then claimed this was prove that Robinson was wrong without actually addressing any of Robinson's points or explaining why they are wrong. You are coping so hard that it's embarrassing to watch

>>14572956
Robinson literally used Hayes' argument in his first conclusion, while his second conclusion was refuted by someone who even agreed with his analysis.

Keep crying Rajesh.

>>14573018
Robinson doesn't claim Nagarjuna was equivocating you moron, he says that Nagarjuna used flawed logic and relies on axioms not accepted by his opponents, Hayes was influenced by Robinson's arguments (which were made before Hayes' critique of Nagarjuna) but advanced a slightly different argument, Hayes being wrong has no bearing upon Robinson's points. You still have not responded to or addressed any of the points Robinson makes about Nagarjuna's shitty logic.
>Robinson's criticisms miss the point
How so? Nagarjuna presumed to expose the contradictions in his opponents views using their own logic and Robinson shows how he completely failed to do so

>>14572658
>postmodern philosophy, critical sociology, and social constructionism
Oh so it’s utter crap. Thanks for saving me the time.

>>14573018
based

>>14573078
Just a friendly reminder that the supposed opponents of Nagarjuna(such as Advaitins, Dvaitins or Vishishtadvaita) didn't exist yet when Nagarjuna was writing his books.

>>14573110
Yep. Advaitins resorted to hindsight to construct their system. They had to wait for Nagarjuna and madhyamaka authors to do the heavy lifting for them and went into hiding until Buddhism was driven out of India by Muslims invaders and subsequently decommissioned by the state. Only then did they come out of the woodwork and claimed that Advaita was their all along (despite no record prior Godapada), that they were refuting monks by the day (in their own dogmatic writings) and that they totally did not plagiarize from Nagarjuna (despite virtually every scholar and Hindu philosopher saying otherwise).

Advaita Vedanta is the literal definition of 'Retroactive Plagiarism'.

>>14573110
Yes but the Upanishads and Bhagavad-Gita in which their views are found had long proliferated across India by Nagarjuna's time. In fact, it's from here that Nagarjuna probably got his idea of absolute truth, as this was mentioned in the Mundaka Upanishad verse 1.1.4. hundreds of years before Nagarjuna, and also Nagarjuna probably got from Hindu writings the notion that that the real never changes and that the transient is unreal, which the Bhagavad-Gita (which most scholars including renowned experts like J.A.B. Butienen date to around 200 BC, several hundred years before Nagarjuna) describes in verse 2.16 " Of the transient there is no endurance, and of the eternal there is no cessation". That Nagarjuna took ideas from Hindu writings is confirmed by the Buddhist tradition themselves, Richard Robinson notes in his 'Early Madhyamika in India and China' that the structure of Nagarjuna's verses confirms a statement in the Chinese biography of Nagarjuna which says that he adopted methods of formal reasoning from the Tirthikas (non-Buddhists) and utilised them to expound the Dharma.

>>14573174
I see you are still coping because you are unable to refute any of Robinson's BTFOing of Nagarjuna