/lit/ - Literature

>>20331225
Nagarjuna is not that important to Mahayana in my opinion.

>>20331225
Elaborate? Have never heard of this fella.

>>20331225
He got refuted by some college philosophy professor

>>20331253
>refuted

he self-destructed my dude, learn to read

>>20331225
He used Explosion, does more damage than Self-Destruct to the target

>>20331225
>Self-destructs
There was no self to destroy.

>>20331225
anyone has some good intro to madhyamaka philosophy to recommend?

>>20331400
Is there a /lit/ chart for this?

>>20331400
Yeah, the Siderits translation of the book in OP's pic.

>>20331225
>Mabajugandra harabvighotti vishunarakakotti barungabunga

>>20331400
Well the Upanishads of course.

>>20331617
Yes, why not just translate the term?
Do they expect us to remember muhahamamamamramdingdong with no inclination of the etymology?

The very fact that all the fractious Buddhist bullshit is still fraught with the oriental terminology and imagery is proof
it’s just as petty and attached to the world as every other dogma.

>>20331645
>>20331617
Plenty of translations refer to it as the Fundamental Verses of the Middle Way.

>>20331645
>still fraught with the oriental terminology
Yes you might have to learn some Sanskrit or Pali vocabulary to understand Buddhism. You'd pick up some Greek or Latin if you were studying Christian theology I'm sure

>>20331225
>>20331298
What did he do to refute himself, again? Didn't he just say something like "my doctrine of emptiness is itself empty" and "no dogma is true" or there is no true dhamma or whatever? Is that what you mean by he "refuted" himself?

>>20331635
>the upanishads
>madhyamaka
No, the doctrine of the enduring, underlying, self-like, eternal Atman-Brahman is diametrically opposed to the essentials of Buddhism in general, and madhyamaka in particular. To say that all phenomena are empty, and that emptiness itself is empty, is incompatible with Atman-Brahman. It's disingenuous to say that emptiness is the same thing as Brahman. That misses the entire point of emptiness. The whole point of Nagarjuna telling us that emptiness is itself empty is to prevent people from ascribing qualities to it, and saying that it magically becomes the underlying Absolute of all reality or something. Stop spreading this meme that "ackshually the Buddhists were heckin advaita vedantists!!!! And all the ink they spilled on defeating (or distancing themselves from) the Atman-Brahman concept is irrelevant because they secretly believed in it and just used all this secret language as a code for an enduring self!!!" Nagarjuna is NOT compatible with the Upanishads in any way.

>>20331225
>there is no truth all is empty
the liberal of the past

>>20332065
Stay in your bible thread

>>20332054
>Buddhists were heckin advaita vedantists
Other way round

>>20331225
Nagarjuna was a sophist, his ‘logic’ was shoddy and everything he says is laughable, his arguments have been debunked multiple times using modern analytic logic that thoroughly exposes all the fallacies he uses. He mainly popular today because limp-wristed low-testosterone cucks see him as compatible with materialism, so promoting him allows them to put on a facade of ‘I have le wise eastern teachings’ while still being basic-bitch materialists and worshippers of scientism

>>20332443
>basic-bitch materialists and worshippers of scientism
This position would be entirely at odds with Nagarjuna's. Keep seething

here's the final pill

>>20331996
Note how I didn’t use the word “refute”.

A real lack of reading ability in this thread

>>20332443
>rants without having read

I jej

>>20332778
Explain it to me like I'm three

>>20331598
>Siderits
based, I am reading pic related right now. Not too far along but this guy's writing is crystal clear.. which I guess I should expect from an academic philosopher. though I can't help but think he could be missing the point a little (since he's a westerner.. he's an academic philosophy, etc). Part of me thinks I should have read the Pali Canon itself before reading Siderits, but oh well.

>>20334589
>read the Pali Canon itself
The Pali Canon is a literary canon the Pali language, you do not "read" it in the sense of "sit down and go from page 1 to page whatever ". The Theravadans don't do that, and never have.

Secondly, reading the Pali Canon wouldn't help much for Nagarjuna as there was almost 1,000 years of intellectual development in between the Buddha and Nagarjuna. A better starting place would be the Heart Sutra.

>>20335172
Thank you. my goal was to at least try to read things in historic/chronological order.. i.e. start with whatever it was that the Buddha himself said, and so read parts of the Sutta Pitaka (e.g. the Middle Length Discourses, the Connected Discourses..etc) and then move onto Mahayana stuff possibly beginning with Nagarjuna. I am reading the Siderits as a way to ground the whole endeavor. again, it may not be the best way but I like to start at a very high level and then dig in. and so according to your point I would probably go .. Siderits -> some of the Sutta Pitaka -> ??? (Fill in the blank for me) -> Nagarjuna. pic related

>>20331240
Who is more important in your esteeem?

>>20331225
Are you going to explain your reasoning, or this just another low-effort thread?