Nāgārjuna saw the Buddhism he inherited (early Buddhism to us) as *hugely* problematic both philosophically and pragmatically.
-
-
Replying to @Jayarava
Vasubandhu saw the Buddhism he inherited (early Buddhism + Nāgārjuna) as *hugely* problematic both philosophically and pragmatically.
1 reply 4 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Jayarava
So if the finest minds in mid-period Indian Buddhism rejected it, why is early Buddhist philosophy & practice seen as saviour of Buddhism?
4 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Jayarava Buddhism too has always had the “original version MUST be correct and complete” trope. It’s invented tradition all the way down.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Jayarava This move arises when a culture tries to rationalize itself and fails. From at least the abhidharma era, Buddhism was doing that.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Jayarava I mostly am just incredulous that otherwise intelligent Buddhists (Stephen Batchelor eg) are still doing this. Obvious nonsense.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness I've also pointed out that it's implicit in NeoDarwian models of evolution - the unity of the past is a universal trope.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Jayarava
@Meaningness The tree as central metaphor is central to this wrong view - unidirection, binary branches, no recombination, simple past.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Jayarava
@Meaningness Evolution is a reticulated network. Omnidirectional, recombination equally important, complex past.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness The underlying metaphors and non-reflective beliefs make the wrong views seem intuitively right. Turns out everyone is deluded.0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.