"True existence" vs "conventional existence"
 

Things have a "conventional existence" ("how they appear to the ordinary person," per Geshe Sonam Rinchen)
 
but there is a "true existence" which is "not phenomenal" (Hejinian, summarizing a Buddhist teaching) -- or, rather, that phenomenal things do not have a true existence?
 
Rinchen again: "all phenomena are dependent on other causes and conditions for their existence, so it is said that they are devoic of inherent existence or true existence or self-existence"
 
Hejinian again: "What we (humans) can perceive and cognize, then, is 'non-inherent existence,' which comprises all the things to which such terms as 'arising' and 'occurring,' as well as 'changing' and 'disintegrating' and so forth, can apply" (142)

> from Lyn Hejinian's Allegorical Moments: Call to the Everyday (2023)

> tagged with #buddhism, #objects, #reality

> created Feb 2, 2025 at 2:13:59 PM


> part of unfinished everything


search unfinished everything


unfinished everything is an original work / ongoing project (1997-present) by jeremy p. bushnell

selection, arrangement, and original text available for creative reuse under this licensing arrangement

authors' quoted words are their own.


home |@jpb.bsky.social