As we do every year, we had a little puja and meditation session before the dinner. It was here that Geshe-la spoke of compassion. For me, it was a timely reminder that one can go to no place nor engage in any normal activity and assume that advancement along the path is guaranteed. He pointed out that compassion cannot be purchased at the local Myer department store, as if it were some kind of external phenomena. One has to cultivate it for oneself, by oneself. Turning up to meditation classes once a week and paying your $5 or $10.00 is not good enough. Getting a PhD is not good enough. This hit home.

While that may sound obvious, for most of us, most of the time, we tend to externalize our problems. I have spoken of this previously here. But similarly, we also tend to externalize the kind of environment we need in order to develop qualities spoken of in the Buddhist canon. Compassion, wisdom, equanimity all sound cool and easy to develop when reading about them but, as long as they remain on the page this compassion is empty compassion, mere words.

Compassion, as Geshe-la rightly pointed out, can only be developed to its fullest as part of a daily meditation practice. This is true because meditation is nothing more than the focusing of the mind to an object (in this case compassion) thereby over time becoming more and more familiar with its “taste”. In the end you become so familiar with compassion that it becomes apart of you, an instinctual response. You can’t buy that! However, if we do not take the time out to sit with the experience of compassion, it will never flower.

As I have said before, it is my claim that the foundation of philosophy in both the Western and Eastern traditions is compassion. Even if it is not fully articulated as such in the Western tradition, this is true as all beings possessing sentience have a basic instinctual wish to increase our level of happiness, and avoid as many painful experiences as we can.

I think, although I do not know this for certain, many misunderstand the meaning of compassion as articulated in Buddhist literature, thinking it is the wish that only others were free from existential suffering. Thereby excluding oneself and thus see compassion as some kind of “religious” exercise (by using the term religious here, I am invoking a sense of “doing” without “thinking”) not relevant to everyday life. This is not correct. Compassion entails compassion for oneself, as compassion for oneself is the basis for wishing others to be free from whatever physical or psychological problems they face. How can you wish others to be free from the problems we face naturally, if you yourself don’t know what this entails?

So whether it be it a head ache, loneliness, stress of deadlines or simply physical pain, all of us experience problems. Look this simple truth in the face and learn to deal with it not by learning to live with it, but rather by transforming suffering. How? Develop compassion, right here, right now.

Well, as most of you know, I am back in Australia after my wonderful trip to India. What some of you will not know is that I have moved from the Tibetan Buddhist Society in Melbourne to Hobart to be apart of the philosophy community here at the University of Tasmania. The move went well, and most (although not all) people were happy.

I have been here a week and have settled in well. I am sharing a house with two others only 3 minutes from the Philosophy department. So I can go home at lunch to cook, or nick back to my office if I have left something behind. Its ideal really. the environment here is simply spectacular, and am I told it snowed last night (I will try and get photos of a snow-covered Mt. Wellington at some point).

I also wish to say a BIG thank you to those who made the move possible. You know who you are   THANK YOU

Here are a couple of photos from around the university.

I’m sorry for not blogging much while I was away but things were just too busy for doing anymore than uploading photos onto Facebook. However, I have good news by way of a youtube video of the trip. It is short and ends in what will be a day I will never forget.

I had a wonderful trip, made many new friends and got a lot of research done. Although not much writing. The Tibetan culture is a wonderful thing to experience first hand. Seeing ordinary people interacting within the context of compassion and Bodhichitta was fantastic. Even ordinary people, the man in the street so to speak, regard compassion as something to respect and cultivate. Of course this is a generalization but, in general it was true. We could learn a lot of this aspect of Tibetan culture.

I must apologize for the poor quality of the video. It looks great on my computer but not so great on YouTube for some reason.

If you can’t see the video in your email program or on this webpage go here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERuSrATggk8

Anyway, its good to be home.

Thesis Title:
Domain of the Illusory: Non-Egological Approach to Phenomenal Personhood.

Literature Review:
This study of the non-egological approach to personhood focuses on the five main philosophical works by the 14th CE Tibetan philosopher Tsong Khapa. The primary source material for this study is the following (Tibetan versions): (1) Special Insight section of “Great Exposition of the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment”, (2) An Ocean of Reasoning: A Thorough Exposition of Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, (3) Essence of Eloquence: A Treatise Distinguishing Between the Provisional and the Definitive Meanings, (4) Special Insight section of “Middle Exposition of the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment” and (5) Elucidation of the Intention: A Thorough Exposition of Madhyamakāvatarā.

In this study, I will claim that an implicit thread of a two-tiered non-egological exegesis of persons begins with Tsong Khapa, and ends in the Indian Madhyamaka philosophical tradition founded by Nāgārjuna in the 2nd CE. In his canonical Madhyamaka treatise Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Nāgārjuna lays out a formulation for the nature of reality that consists of all phenomena having two natures. This doctrine of the Two Truths (satyadvaya, bden gnyis) – a Conventional Truth (saṃvṛtisatya, kun rdzob bden pa) and an Ultimate Truth (paramārthasatya, don dam bden pa) – which are two natures of the same entity, is the conceptual framework for which Tsong Khapa lays out his approach to metaphysics. I too shall adopt this two-tiered approach in order to resolve the on-going tension between the egological and non-egological approaches to personal identity and first-person experience, by placing the discussion within the framework of a conventional discourse and an ultimate discourse, thereby making sense of the theory of anātman or non-self and obvious worldly first person experiences.

Tsong Khapa interests me as a philosopher because I think he understood Candrakīrti analysis of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā correctly, took the soteriological significance of first-person experience seriously, and paid particular attention to its articulation. While Tsong Khapa himself would say he put forward no new thesis of persons, his reading of Candrakīrti’s gloss of Nāgārjuna’s Two Truths doctrine is unique. I therefore hope to show the cogency of Tsong Khapa’s exegesis of persons by tracing his enterprise back into the Indian Madhyamaka tradition of Nāgārjuna via Candrakīrti. I will do this by investigating Candrakīrti’s Supplement to the ‘Middle Way’ (Madhyamakāvatāra) along with his Auto-Commentary on the Supplement to the ‘Middle Way’ (Madhyamakāvatārabhāṣya).

However, Tsong Khapa was not without his critics. Foremost on this list from a rival school of Tibetan Buddhism was another philosopher by the name of Gorampa bSod nams Seng ge (1429-1489). Gorampa had sharply apposed views to Tsong Khapa and I will therefore analyse his critique of Tsong Khapa’s hermeneutics by investigating his polemical philosophical work entitled Distinguishing between Views (lta ba’I shan ‘byed). I will also investigate another contemporary of Tsong Khapa from the same school of Tibetan Buddhism as Gorampa, namely Shakya Chokden shakya mchog ldan(1428-1507). Shakya Chokden‘s Madhyamaka texts included in this study will be: Drop of Nectar of Definitive Meaning: Entering the Gate to the Essential points of the Two Truths (bden pa gnyis kyi gnas la ‘jug pa nges don bdud rtsi things pa) and Great Ship of Discrimination that Sails into the Ocean of Definitive Meaning: A Treatise Differentiating the Systems of Prasañgika and Svātantrika Madhyamaka (dbu ma thal rang gi grub mtha’I rnam par dbye ba’I bstan bcos nges don gyi rgya mtshor ‘jug pa’i rnam dpyod kyi gru chen).

Moreover, this study will include analysis of the contemporary views both from Buddhologists and analytic philosophers. In particular I will look at the work of: Professor Mark Siderits: Personal Identity and Buddhist Philosophy. Dr. Miri Albahri’s Analytical Buddhism: The Two-Tiered Illusion of Self. As well as the work of the contemporary phenomenologists Dan Zahari and Evan Thompson.

Research Questions:

The objective of this study is to research the cogency of a non-egological approach to self and phenomenal personhood.

My claim is that “self” or “persons” do not possess any kind of absolute ontological status, that is, the appearance of an objective referent of a self, person or “I” are non-existent imaginaries. Moreover, any notion that an invariant property of any kind is that which binds diachronic and synchronic first-person experience is an incoherent thesis, and like-wise a non-existent imaginary.

However, I will claim that despite this it is still possible to posit self, persons and I, existing, in a sense truly, as mere contingent phenomena within the framework of a kind of dynamic system. I will do this by arguing that what is being rejected here is not the existence of self or persons, but rather the existence of (1) a non-fabricated objective agent of experience, (2) any notion of an invariant or variant property of any kind, at any level of discourse which is the “self” or is acting as a “self” and (3) intrinsic identity at any level. I will thereby show that from within the framework of conventional discourse, phenomena such as persons are merely contingent, and that this schema leaves intact functional first-person experience.

Thus the non-egological exegesis of personhood when couched in a Two Truths discourse as first laid out by Nāgārjuna 2nd CE, further clarified by Candrakīrti 7th CE and developed by Tsong Khapa 14th CE is cogent.

The walk is good for me as its flat but, more enjoyable than finding a flat area to walk, is the mix of the old and young people walking together. Old ladies in traditional garb, kids with sunglasses chasing each other. It is a wonderful sight, everyone was happy and relaxed.

The ray’s of the setting sun hit the snow-mountain above us, giving for the first time, a clear view of its size and beauty. The photos I took don’t do it justice.  I’m starting to see why people come here.

Tomorrow His Holiness is teaching in the main temple in MacLeod Guand. I believe he is teaching on the former lifes of the Buddha or the Jataka Tales. So, if I end up going, I will report back then. You can see more photo via facebook.

The room is good. I have my own bathroom, although there is no water today. I have a kettle for coffee, so the important stuff is done. India has very cheap cell phone rates, so I bought a sim card for calling home.

Just behind us is a large snow mountain. They are quite majestic and beautiful to look at, particularly for people for countries that are basically flat, like Australia. I hope to have photos once it clears up.

I’m writing this on the bus to Dharamsala but, only after a 4 1/2 hour wait in a Delhi bus station filled with beggers, more people in one location than you can imagine, and the smell of stale urine. To say that the "Indian culture shock" is a myth is just plain WRONG!

For instance, there was a group of Tibetans going to Dharamsala on an earlier bus than me. Although they spoke no English, I soon came to realise that just like me, they also had no idea which bus they were supposed to take.

It was sheer chaos as it seems Indian bus drivers have only one rule: toot your horn to warm others of your location and do so at every opportunity. At one point there were so many buses in the terminal that there was a massive traffic jam. Literally no bus could move. It was the most incredible sight you can imagine. And the noice. Oh my god! It was a symphony of sound like nothing I’ve experienced before. A chorus of tooting bus horns, guys with whistles directing traffic. Although it seemed to me, it was not so much about directing anything, but rather, they were there to make sure the buses didn’t hit anything or anyone.

I knew I was taking an AC Volvo bus to Dharamsala. So as the scheduled departure time approached. I asked a couple of these traffic whistle guys where the AC Volvo…Dharamsala  to which one guy pointed at one bus and another to a different bus.  Likely, a little while later I met a French monk who was also going to Dharamsala and so in the end it turned at well.

Walking out of Delhi airport into the waiting throng of Indians, wasn’t as bad as I had been led to believe. In fact, the Indians seem to be very kind. Having said that, my taxi driver had a bung eye which made him look shifty! I had a pre-paid ticket, but I wasn’t going to leave anything to chance so when he asked me where I wanted to go, I said to him while looking him in the eye: Centura Hotel, which I know is two minutes away from here. Needless to say the drive there was silent…was this my doing? I guess I will never know.

As I haven’t slept in 26 hours and it is still only 4.27 am I will probably leave this post here. Oh and I don’t have internet access until I get to Dharamsala, so you will probably end up reading this days later than the actual event.

I have meet some wonderful people already, including a number of other post-grad students, university Professors and of course my supervisor Sonam Thakchoe. I could get used to living here, in fact, I’ve already had a little bit of pressure by some who would like for me to live and work here at the university. My answer has been, well lets see.

While here I am staying with Sonam. He is a most generous host and has made me feel very welcomed. In fact, last night we stayed up late talking about Tsong khapa, philosophy in general, and whether there is any truth to the claim that ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.For cause I have a problem with this claim, but I wont go into it here.

This morning Sonam and I had another fruitful discussion about my thesis. In particular about the the aim or motivation (not in the Buddhist sense), scope and metholody as well as how to insert these into a literature review that will need up as the introductory chapter of my thesis. I can see now that Ihave alot to learn.

I’m here til Friday afternoon