Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Tags:

Seperate each tag by a comma
Message icon:

Attach:
(Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: apk, doc, docx, gif, jpg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, xls, 3gpp, mp2, mp3, wav, odt, ods, html, mp4, amr, apk, m4a, jpeg, aac
Restrictions: 50 per post, maximum total size 150000KB, maximum individual size 150000KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Anti-spam: complete the task

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Dhammañāṇa
« on: February 27, 2014, 03:36:47 PM »

I am very grateful that Venerable Vira Avalokita, an outstanding Humanist and dear and respected Dhammafriend of mine has generously shared his works and views with me within certain works.

I have to say - and this should be not regarded as disrespect - that I am not much into certain views which does not mean that it might be not beneficial for others. Many of them, not all, are strong against the refection which is found in the heritage of the Tipitaka and also not easy to argue in a Dhammic way. So it's generally a very secular approach.

Since he is a person who does neither found raising nor promote his work much aside of own hard work and deeds, I am sure it would be from benefit if somebody feels inspired to help in works like reformatting and all other technical stuff aside, reading and study the Dharma-Dana and maybe finding interest to investigate some similar roots of certain Mahayana-schools and Theravada. It might be also form interest of those who see their benefits in the "Bodhisattva" path and in certain Zen aspects. There are also a lot of philosophical anchors to bring worldly science and Dhamma on a graspable level, if one does not like to let go of one. 

Although he had neither wished, directly suggested nor answered a request in regard of further contribution of his work directly, I trust that it is proper to share it further and leave it up to its good course.

Quote
Sarvastivada School of Realism

 I.   Sarvastivada Teachings:
 
A.   Basic Claim:  The ultimate constituents that make up interdependent arising are real; otherwise nothing could possibly exist.
 
B. Ultimate constituents of reality = Dharmas.
 
1.   Dharmas are held to be “self-existing.” 
The existence of dharmas is not dependent on anything else.

2. Dharmas have their own nature
    – each has a unique and defining characteristic.
 
C. Analysis is analogous to contemporary scientific theory: 
           ordinary perception versus scientific analysis.
 
II.    Foundations of Theories:

           Sarvastivadin theory is based on Scientific Inquire, which contains classification of objects (dharmas) based on experience.
 
A.  Sarvastivadain Theoretical Reasoning
 
1.   Basic Objective: 
To show, that the Dharmas are the ultimately real and self-existing.  All other reality is constructed from them.
 
2.   Establishing Reality:
The reality of a person comes from the reality of the person’s constitutive processes.  But persons are real only if the constituents are real. 

3.   Identity:
 The ultimate constituents determine identity.  Without identity there could be no Buddha, no-one on the Eightfold Path, etc.
 
4.   Continuity:
The dharmas must have sufficient duration to support successive moments of existence.  Otherwise, the person who experience dukkha is not the same person who later practices the path.  Then there would be no point in practice.
 
5.   Knowablity: unless the dharmas are fundamentally real, knowledge is impossible.  We believed that the momentary duration of the existence of dharmas makes them knowable as unique objects.
 
6.   Types of Ultimate Constituents:  In addition to the traditional Theory lists, Sarvastivadins added other dharmas to explain know ability, continuity, and identity.

 
III.      Arguments against Substance:

            Buddhists generally argue against existence as a substance common to Hindu thought (especially Nyaya and Vaisheshika). Basic Argument: Either the substance view of existence is true or interdependent arising is true. The substance view is untenable.  Therefore, interdependent arising is true.
 
A.      The Concept of Substance
 
1.  Permanence – essences are unchanging.
2.  Universality – essence is the same everywhere at all times.
3.   Identity – substances are identical to themselves despite change.
4.   Unity – the components or characteristics of a thing are unified by inherence in a substance.
 
B.       Arguments against Permanence
 
1.   The Upanishad’s assume that if something is ultimately real it must be changeless.  But whatever is unchanging cannot produce effects, since effects involve change.  Causes can be known only by effects.  If reality is changeless, it is therefore unknowable (reductio).

2.   Knowledge argument:  Coming to know something involves a change in the knower.  If the self cannot change, it cannot know.

3.   Causality argument: Change is fact of our experience.  But how can something unchanging bring about change.  Causation is either temporally extended or instantaneous.  It can’t be instantaneous; there could be further change.

4.   If the real causes instantaneously, either it continues to exist as a cause or it doesn’t.  If it does continue to exist as a cause, it would give rise to the very same effects (unless it changed, which it can’t).  If ceases to exist as cause, it has changed.

5.   Temporally extended causality: If R produces x, y, and z, then either [1] y or z could have been produced while x was produced or [2] R could not produce y and z while x was produced. [1] is absurd, because this amounts to instantaneous causation.  [2] is absurd because if at any time R cannot produce y or z, there is no time when R can produce them – unless there are other causal conditions, which would amount to a change in R.
 
C.   Arguments against Identity:
      Substance view of identity entails that a thing remains identical to itself through time unless it is destroyed or altered by outside forces.  The our argument is that unless the nature of an object were change and cessation, no outside force could alter it or bring about its demise.
 
D.   Arguments against Unity: 
The substance assumption is that while an object is composed of parts, we can know it as a whole.  We argue that perception only gives us parts.  There is no direct perceptual evidence of unity.  Instead, unity is a construction of mind onto our experience that has pragmatic value. Reality is no more than successive momentary elements – like the pictures that flow together to form a film.
 


E.   Arguments against Universality:  Universal essences are what unite particulars into a single category.  We argue:
 
1. Perception gives us only particular things.
2. By what mechanism do universals reside in particular things?
3. Why are universals unaffected by what happens to particulars?
4. How can universals be known?  One answer appears to be a kind of “double perception.”  One perceives not only the particular object, but also the universal, which is then applied to the object.  But how can we perceive timeless, space less universals?  We contend that universals are practical mental construction (abstractions) that we create for various useful purposes.

Our Views:

A.   Are Constant with the following:
   
1.   Broad-based Ethics and Humanism

a)   Free Thinking, Reason and Scientific
Commensurate with social structure of the times

2.   Uses current languages has not special language.

3.   there is no closed Canon

B.   The Buddha

1.   Was historical
2.   Not beyond infallibility
3.   Nothing extraordinary about him
4.   Not everything he said was a Law or perfect

C.   The Sangha
                             
1.   Is open to all
2.   Democratic
3.   Can change with the times
4.   All  Discipline is changeable

Dr.  Vira Avalokita, Dai Shi

The author of these various works is the Venerable Vira Avalokita, Sthera
A registered Left-Home Person (63 Showa) of Mt. Koyasan in Japan.

Sensei has practiced now for almost thirty years as Buddhist teacher in Cambodia, Japan and the United States. He is presently has a residence in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where he serves the sick
And the poor has been for fifteen years.

Now Sensei teaches about Scientific and Humanistic Buddhism
All his written works relate to this subject exclusively.
He writes from a Mulasarvastian perspective, a realistic school,
All of these Theories were first taught by Gautama Buddha,
And were expanded and explained by Saint Kōbō Daishi (9th century)
Founder of Mt. Kōysan, Shingon Shu, Japan

For detail questions, you may contact Bhante Vira Avalokita him directly.



HUMANITY
AWAKE
新義真言宗
Koyasan MulaSarvāstivādan School
Japan
Volume I-IV
Vira Avalokita, Sthera

Volume I - Foundations and Theories

Volume II - Theory in Practice

Volume III - Ritual Practices

Volume IV - Ritual Practices


 *sgift*

Download: http://forum.sangham.net/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item140