DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - The Law of Contradiction, Otherness and Excluded Middle

**anatmob** · 06-07-2011, 03:56 PM

@stuka - The article written provides only a very brief outline of one of the aspect of Buddhist logic.

ROFLMAO!

That's not Buddhist logic! The Buddha had Buddhist logic WAY back when he was alive, long before the Brahmins invented Brahmannical "Buddhist logic"!

In this case, how we perceive the external world. The Law of Contradiction talk about is just a small potion used in the exposition of Buddhist logic. Buddhist logic is a system of epistemology created between the 6 and 7 century AD. By Brahmins! It's Brahmin Logic! Infused and informed by superstition, not what one can see and know for themselves here and now, like the Buddha's logic!

It starts with the simple statement that 'All successful human action is preceded by right knowledge.'; An absurdity! It is easy to be successful by accident! I do it all the time!

And then when on to investigate the sources, limits and the validity of knowledge itself. Irrelevant papanca! The Buddha did not concern himself with epistemology, he was concerned with something immeasurably more important: suffering and its cure!

Sense perception is considered as one of the valid source of knowledge and the Law of Contradiction is one of the methods used to explain how we perceive the external world. Blue is still a million different hues by itself! There is no such thing as "either blue or not-blue"! The Buddha had his own method to explain how we perceive and react to the world both internal and external as it presents to us! There was never any need to improve upon it, and it was not an epistemology, it was a teaching device to break unskillful mental habits and lead us out of suffering!

A bigger picture of what Buddhist Logic is can be obtained from the work of Dharmakirti - 'A Short Treatise of Logic'. That is Brahmin Logic! Dharmakirti was a Brahmin!

WIKI:

History

Born around the turn of the 7th century, Dharmakirti was a South Indian Brahmin and became a teacher at the famed Nalanda University, as well as a poet. He built on and reinterpreted the work of Dignaga, the pioneer of Buddhist Logic, and was very influential among Brahman logicians as well as Buddhists. His theories became normative in Tibet and are studied to this day as a part of the basic monastic curriculum.
Heard of the Majjhima Nikaya and Samyutta Nikaya? The answer is yes. Own a copy of them, no. It is SO funny how no one I have asked that has answered in the affirmative! E-Sangha administrators? NO! Editors of major "Buddhist" Magazines? NO! Monks and Geshes and priests? NO! ---"We are not into that boring 'Buddha' shit! We have the literary works of Brahmins and imposters and poets and outsiders that we pay attention to", they say!

I am not into the Suttas.... What you are telling me is: "I am not into the teachings of the Buddha, I am into the works of Brahmin imposters, poets, outsiders!"

But that is fine, my friend -- just admit that you are a Brahmin, put on the red dot and be done with it!

....but do occasionally refer to the Visuddhimagga, the Dhammapada and the Abdhidhamma which I do have in my possession. -- the literary works of Brahmin imposters like Dharmakirti and Buddhaghosa, of poets and outsiders!

The only Sutta which I am familiar with and used in my prayer everyday is the Metta Sutta. That does not surprise me in the least!

Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1]

"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

--Ani Sutta, SN 20.7

06-07-2011, 03:56 PM	#30
anatmob Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 598 Senior Member	@stuka - The article written provides only a very brief outline of one of the aspect of Buddhist logic. ROFLMAO! That's not Buddhist logic! The Buddha had Buddhist logic WAY back when he was alive, long before the Brahmins invented Brahmannical "Buddhist logic"! In this case, how we perceive the external world. The Law of Contradiction talk about is just a small potion used in the exposition of Buddhist logic. Buddhist logic is a system of epistemology created between the 6 and 7 century AD. By Brahmins! It's Brahmin Logic! Infused and informed by superstition, not what one can see and know for themselves here and now, like the Buddha's logic! It starts with the simple statement that 'All successful human action is preceded by right knowledge.'; An absurdity! It is easy to be successful by accident! I do it all the time! And then when on to investigate the sources, limits and the validity of knowledge itself. Irrelevant papanca! The Buddha did not concern himself with epistemology, he was concerned with something immeasurably more important: suffering and its cure! Sense perception is considered as one of the valid source of knowledge and the Law of Contradiction is one of the methods used to explain how we perceive the external world. Blue is still a million different hues by itself! There is no such thing as "either blue or not-blue"! The Buddha had his own method to explain how we perceive and react to the world both internal and external as it presents to us! There was never any need to improve upon it, and it was not an epistemology, it was a teaching device to break unskillful mental habits and lead us out of suffering! A bigger picture of what Buddhist Logic is can be obtained from the work of Dharmakirti - 'A Short Treatise of Logic'. That is Brahmin Logic! Dharmakirti was a Brahmin! WIKI: History Born around the turn of the 7th century, Dharmakirti was a South Indian Brahmin and became a teacher at the famed Nalanda University, as well as a poet. He built on and reinterpreted the work of Dignaga, the pioneer of Buddhist Logic, and was very influential among Brahman logicians as well as Buddhists. His theories became normative in Tibet and are studied to this day as a part of the basic monastic curriculum. Heard of the Majjhima Nikaya and Samyutta Nikaya? The answer is yes. Own a copy of them, no. It is SO funny how no one I have asked that has answered in the affirmative! E-Sangha administrators? NO! Editors of major "Buddhist" Magazines? NO! Monks and Geshes and priests? NO! ---"We are not into that boring 'Buddha' shit! We have the literary works of Brahmins and imposters and poets and outsiders that we pay attention to", they say! I am not into the Suttas.... What you are telling me is: "I am not into the teachings of the Buddha, I am into the works of Brahmin imposters, poets, outsiders!" But that is fine, my friend -- just admit that you are a Brahmin, put on the red dot and be done with it! ....but do occasionally refer to the Visuddhimagga, the Dhammapada and the Abdhidhamma which I do have in my possession. -- the literary works of Brahmin imposters like Dharmakirti and Buddhaghosa, of poets and outsiders! The only Sutta which I am familiar with and used in my prayer everyday is the Metta Sutta. That does not surprise me in the least! Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1] "In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves." --Ani Sutta, SN 20.7
	Quote