Buddhism, Perennial Philosophy And Scientism

[Xangsamhua]

Thinking about the Madhyamika position that "emptiness" itself has no intrinsic existence (svabhava), it seemed to me that, if this is so, that there is no "form" of "emptiness" - if emptiness both is and is not and all is process (causation) - then there really isn't any emptiness to which one could point and, therefore, all dharma/phenomena are one, as in Parmenides' teaching (Monism). So I went to the net to check out the similarities and differences between the Buddha's teaching and that of Parmenides (a near contemporary of Gautama, and we know there was contact between Greek and Indian thought at the time).

I found a very interesting article written 46 years ago by Edward Conze on the similarities and differences between Buddhist thought and the Greeks, the Christian mystics, the followers of "perennial philosophy", and modern thinkers like Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzche and Bradley (with some negative allusion to "sciential" thinking, the logical positivists and the linguistic school).

For those who are interested in that sort of thing the article ("Buddhist Philosophy and its European Parallels") is at http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/conze2.htm

[Samuian]

Share this point of view!

The historic Buddha or better the resulting Buddhism was a reform movement, introducing Pali, replacing Sanskrit,

even much, if not all Pali Word have sanskrit roots.

Replacing complicated rituals with very simplified form of Vipassana and recitations.

Deeper meaning of life, cause of all suffering, birth inescapable death and what this life is all about has since ever moved

the thoughts of thinkers, philosophers, scientists.

Some however have been more successful then others.....but I think it is, if so secondary.

Still it will forever remain the fact, that whatever one does practice, the importance should be paid to practice, then on to intellectual search of some eternal, omniscient truth!

As percieved thruths appear in many differing varieties and shades, the present and reality is only one undisputable phenomena of appaerence and always now!

True wisdom (Panna) can't be learned, read or studied, it can only be attained, everything else might just be a result of learning, repeating, the learned.

Krishnamurti had the following to say about this problem:

. Krishnamurti - Book of Life - October 27

Change outside of the field of thought...

You have changed your ideas, you have changed your thought, but thought is always conditioned. Whether it is the thought of Jesus, Buddha, X, Y, or Z, it is still thought, and therefore one thought can be in opposition to another thought; and when there is opposition, a conflict between two thoughts, the result is a modified continuity of thought. In other words, the change is still within the field of thought, and change within the field of thought is no change at all. One idea or set of ideas has merely been substituted for another.

Seeing this whole process, is it possible to leave thought and bring about a change outside the field of thought? All consciousness, surely, whether it is of the past, the present, or the future, is within the field of thought; and any change within that field, which sets the boundaries of the mind, is no real change. A radical change can take place only outside the field of thought, not within it, and the mind can leave the field only when it sees the confines, the boundaries of the field, and realizes that any change within the field is no change at all.

This is real meditation.

Source:

....leaving the mind behind....

edited to add source of quoted article..