Dear Prof. van Norden, I thank you for your lecture, but I humbly disagree with some things you say. As you know better than I do, Fazang is identifying „li“ to emptiness, which he compares to formless empty space. But the pattern of all things is certainly not totally formless as empty space. I guess it is rather like this: Emptiness or „li“ is like newtonian space, because everything sort of exists within it. In fact, Mahayana thinkers often times also claim, that from one perspective there is no diffrence between empty space and the stuff within it. But from another perspective there is. I guess the same paradox is true for „li“ and the pattern. The two are neither identical nor diffrent So, you can translate li as pattern but to me that sounds like a paradoxical expression of the paradoxical unity of Li and the pattern. However, maybe I am wrong, since I am german and therefore just some weird philosopher 🤣🤣🤣
what would i be without "things" to see, hear, taste, feel, touch, etc. we are ALWAYS seeing, for instance. Close your eyes and you see the eyelids..... what else?
Buddhists would acknowledge that there are transient physical and mental states, and they would acknowledge that it is conventionally useful to label some collections of states "things," but they would deny that there is any plausible sense in which there are persistent, independent "things."
![[UNCUT] บอสพอล แผลงฤทธิ์ บอสพระ-นักร้อง ก. โดนแฉยับ! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 21 ต.ค. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XKf6HeftoPI/mqdefault.jpg)
Many thanks. Your lectures are all so clear and engaging!
Thanks for this Bryan
Dear Prof. van Norden, I thank you for your lecture, but I humbly disagree with some things you say. As you know better than I do, Fazang is identifying „li“ to emptiness, which he compares to formless empty space. But the pattern of all things is certainly not totally formless as empty space. I guess it is rather like this: Emptiness or „li“ is like newtonian space, because everything sort of exists within it. In fact, Mahayana thinkers often times also claim, that from one perspective there is no diffrence between empty space and the stuff within it. But from another perspective there is. I guess the same paradox is true for „li“ and the pattern. The two are neither identical nor diffrent So, you can translate li as pattern but to me that sounds like a paradoxical expression of the paradoxical unity of Li and the pattern. However, maybe I am wrong, since I am german and therefore just some weird philosopher 🤣🤣🤣
what would i be without "things" to see, hear, taste, feel, touch, etc. we are ALWAYS seeing, for instance. Close your eyes and you see the eyelids..... what else?
Buddhists would acknowledge that there are transient physical and mental states, and they would acknowledge that it is conventionally useful to label some collections of states "things," but they would deny that there is any plausible sense in which there are persistent, independent "things."
中文真是不可翻译的语言，只少不能被现有的任何语言所翻译。
我不同意。
@@BryanVanNordenPhilosophy 尊重您的异见 :) 中文诗词的音律节奏之美和语意双关之意境您如何用英语翻译体现？ 将中文，尤其是文言文翻译成现代英语就像是将绫罗绸缎的服装改成用粗麻线来缝制，虽都可遮体保暖， 但感觉和品味的差距只有亲身体验才能感受到。