0

I was reading the SEP article on the two truths

According to the abhidharmakosa:

An entity, the cognition of which does not arise when it is destroyed and, mentally divided, is conventionally existent like a pot and water. Ultimate existence is otherwise

The article adds that:

For a thing to be ultimately real is for that thing to be “foundationally existent” (dravya-sat / rdzas yod)

Does any Buddhist school claim that what arises when it is divided or destroyed, whether or not that exists etc., is the self?

2

According to Tibetan system of tenets, the Vaibhāṣikas so-called 'Hinayana school of tenets' defines an ultimte truth as:

A phenomenon such that an awareness apprehending it is not cancelled if it is broken up or mentally separated into its individual parts.

Illustrations of ultimate truths are:

directionally partless particles, temporally partless [moments of] consciousness, uncompounded phenomena, any of the five aggregates.


Mahayana tenets assert that Vaïbashikas do not posit selflessness of phenomena, but merely [a grosser] selflessness of persons. Jetsün Chökyi Gyaltsen writes:

A selflessness of phenomena is not accepted because it is accepted that if it is an established base it is necessarily a self of phenomena.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy