Yogacara: Understanding Consciousness and Reality in Mahayana Buddhism, Slides of Philosophy

Download Yogacara: Understanding Consciousness and Reality in Mahayana Buddhism and more Slides Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity! A brief comment on Yogacara and store consciousness Docsity.com Yogacara • Yogacara Buddhism is the second of the two central philosophical ‘schools’ of Mahayana Buddhism (Asian Philosophies, p.218). • Though a Mahayana Buddhist may be informed by the teachings of both Madhyamaka and Yogacara, it is possible to be a Mahayana Buddhist and informed by either one or the other (or none) of these schools of Buddhist philosophy. • Two of the key Yogacara philosophers in Buddhist literature are Vasubandhu and Asanga (who were in fact biological brothers [Asanga played a part in Vasubandhu’s ‘conversion’ to Yogacara Buddhism] (Asian Philosophies, p.218). Docsity.com Yogacara • But, the Yogacara add, this level of awareness IS, nevertheless, awareness, it IS experience, it consists of being consciousness. • The Yogacara suggest that, if this is right so far, That which Is, or That which Inter-exists, IS (in some important sense) awareness, IS (in some important sense) experience, consists (in some important sense) of being conscious. • But this is just to say that That which Is, or That which Inter-exists, is (in some important sense) (expressions of) Mind. Docsity.com Yogacara: Are they Metaphysical Idealists? • A person is a Metaphysical Idealist if they think that every-thing that exists is constructed out of ideas, or consciousness, or Mind. • A person is a Metaphysical Materialist if they think that every-thing that exists is constructed out of matter. • The Buddhist philosophers or works we have studied so far have advocated neither Metaphysical Idealism nor Materialism. • Traditionally, Yogacara have been regarded as Metaphysical Idealists. Docsity.com Yogacara: Are they Metaphysical Idealists? • Koller thinks that this is not quite right. • Instead Koller contends that the Yogacara would not admit speculation on a mind-independent Reality, choosing instead to restrict their reflections to what can be known through experience. This restriction inclined them to speak only of that which arises from experience, or the mind, rather than that which exists independently of any experience or mind. Given that, for the Yogacara, to claim knowledge of a mind-independent Reality makes no sense (any putative example, if it is to be intelligible or content- full, seems to require an appeal to that which is, at some point, experienced), a metaphysics of mind-independent Reality is ground-less (Asian Philosophies, pp.223-24). Docsity.com