Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
[N.B. This is the forum that was called ‘Exploring Buddhism’. The new name simply describes it better.]
User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Vasana » Tue May 08, 2018 12:37 pm

Rick wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:18 pm
I'm a fan of the three-truths flavor of the two truths:

Conventional: Things are what they seem.
Conventional-Ultimate: Things are neither what they seem nor other than what they seem.
Ultimate: <no-thing = nonduality>

These are my words, my way of grokking the 2-3 truths, they are not meant to be taken as an alternative to the dharma teachings.


You will like this. I think it may provide a useful reference for Krodha and Sherab's discussion too.

Teaching the Relative and Ultimate Truths
Saṃvṛti­paramārtha­satya­nirdeśa


http://read.84000.co/translation/UT22084-060-008.html

  • 1.17
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, what is the ultimate truth?”
    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, if, on the ultimate level, ultimate truth becomes an object of body, speech, or mind, that is not ‘ultimate truth’ but relative truth itself. Rather, divine son, on the ultimate level, ultimate truth transcends all conventions.

    It is without specific instances; it does not arise, does not cease, and is free from something to be expressed, an expression, something to be known, and knowledge. Divine son, the ultimate truth transcends everything up through the domain of omniscient wisdom that is endowed with the supreme of all aspects. Divine son, it has no engagement with, nor any turning back of, concepts and thoughts. Ultimately, there is no ‘far shore,’ there is no ‘this shore,’ nor is there a middle.

    Divine son, although one indeed makes the exaggerated claim, ‘This is ultimate truth,’ that is not the same as saying, ‘Ultimate truth is like this.’ Divine son, ultimately, reality is unborn; thus, no conventions apply to it. That to which, on the ultimate level, no conventions apply, divine son, is ultimate truth. Thus, that is not like saying, ‘Ultimate truth is like this.’ [F.247.b] Divine son, the Thus-gone, worthy, perfect Buddha also says that ultimately all phenomena and all terms are false and deceptive phenomena.”

    1.18
    The god said, “How is it then, Mañjuśrī, that the Dharma taught by the Thus-gone One is not false?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, on the ultimate level, the Thus-gone One does not speak falsely. Nor does he speak truly. And why is that? Ultimately, divine son, the Thus-gone One has not arisen. And so, ultimately he speaks neither falsely nor truly. Divine son, what do you think? Are explanations given by magical creations of the Thus-gone One true or false?”

    1.19
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, explanations given by magical creations of the Thus-gone One are not true, nor are they false. Why is that? Mañjuśrī, ultimately there is nothing truly established in that which is emanated by the Thus-gone One.”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, so it is. The Thus-gone One knows that all phenomena are unestablished in the ultimate sense. Whatever is unestablished in the ultimate sense should not be called true nor should it be called false in the context of the ultimate. Why is that? Because ultimately all phenomena are unborn.”

'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Vasana » Tue May 08, 2018 12:46 pm

More highlights:
  • 1.73
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, what is the gateway to all dharmas?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, the relative truth, which employs all forms of statements, speech, cognition, objects of cognition, activities, conventions, and acts, is a gateway to all dharmas. The ultimate truth, which is so because it is the opposite of all forms of speech, statements, cognition, objects of cognition, activities, conventions, and acts, is a gateway to all dharmas.

    1.74
    “Moreover, divine son, on the relative level, the incorrect conceptual workings of the mind are a gateway to saṃsāra. On the relative level, the correct conceptual workings of the mind are a gateway to nirvāṇa.

    “On the relative level, doubt is a gateway to obscuration. On the relative level, liberation is a gateway to the absence of obscuration.

    1.75
    “On the relative level, conceptuality is a gateway to disturbing emotions. On the relative level, non-conceptuality is a gateway to the absence of disturbing emotions.

    “On the relative level, distraction is a gateway to thought. On the relative level, tranquility is a gateway to peace.

    1.76
    “On the relative level, holding views is a gateway to pride. On the relative level, emptiness is a gateway to the absence of pride.

    “On the relative level, relying on evil company is a gateway to all roots of non-virtue. On the relative level, relying on a virtuous spiritual friend is the gateway to all roots of virtue.

    1.77
    “On the relative level, wrong view is a gateway to all suffering. [F.255.b] On the relative level, correct view is a gateway to all happiness.

    “On the relative level, miserliness is a gateway to poverty. On the relative level, generosity is a gateway to great wealth.

    1.78
    “On the relative level, a bad character is a gateway to all lower realms. On the relative level, discipline is a gateway to all human and divine births.

    “On the relative level, ill will is a gateway to an ugly appearance. On the relative level, patience is a gateway to a beautiful appearance.

    1.79
    “On the relative level, laziness is a gateway to a lack of realization. On the relative level, diligence is a gateway to realization.

    “On the relative level, thought is a gateway to agitation. On the relative level, concentration is a gateway to pliability of mind.

    1.80
    “On the relative level, faulty knowledge is a gateway to a lack of understanding. On the relative level, knowledge is a gateway to the thirty-seven factors of awakening.

    “On the relative level, love is a gateway to not becoming angry. On the relative level, great compassion is a gateway to an altruistic mind. On the relative level, an altruistic mind is a gateway to the absence of deceit. On the relative level, joy is a gateway to conviction in the Dharma. On the relative level, equanimity is a gateway to being free from all faults.

    1.81
    “On the relative level, the applications of mindfulness are a gateway to not letting any roots of virtue diminish. On the relative level, the thorough relinquishments are a gateway to genuine perseverance. On the relative level, the bases of miraculous power are a gateway to pliancy of body and mind. On the relative level, the faculties are a gateway to attaining faith. On the relative level, the powers are a gateway to conquering all disturbing emotions. On the relative level, the branches of awakening are a gateway to realizing omniscience. On the relative level, the eightfold path of the noble ones is a gateway to transcending all unwholesome paths.

    1.82
    “Moreover, divine son, on the relative level, the mind set on awakening is a gateway to all buddha qualities. On the relative level, upholding the sacred Dharma is a gateway to becoming a lord of all dharmas. On the relative level, ripening beings is a gateway to upholding the sacred Dharma. On the relative level, method is a gateway to becoming learned regarding the correct and the incorrect. [F.256.a] On the relative level, the perfection of knowledge is a gateway to nirvāṇa.

    “On the ultimate level, the unarisen is a gateway to all dharmas.” [B2]

    1.83
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, what is the gateway to the utterly unborn?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, on the ultimate level, the utterly unarisen is a gateway in every way.”

    1.84
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, what is the nature of the utterly unarisen?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, on the ultimate level, the utterly unreal is the nature of the utterly unarisen.”

    1.85
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, does the utterly unarisen have any divisions?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, what do you think? Does the sky have any divisions?”

    The god answered, “No, Mañjuśrī, it does not.”

    1.86
    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, in the same way, just as the sky does not have any divisions, so, divine son, does the utterly unborn also not have any divisions.”

    1.87
    The god said, “Mañjuśrī, do you comprehend the utterly unarisen on the ultimate level?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, the utterly unarisen does not comprehend the utterly unarisen. And why? Because, divine son, all phenomena are utterly unborn, utterly unarisen, and utterly unreal.”

    1.88
    The god asked, “Mañjuśrī, are you this eloquent because you know and understand any phenomenon whatsoever?”

    Mañjuśrī said, “Divine son, what do you think? Does an echo make a sound because it knows phenomena?”

    The god replied, “Mañjuśrī, of course an echo does not know any phenomena. Instead, on the relative level, the sound appears from circumstances.”
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Rick
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Rick » Tue May 08, 2018 4:49 pm

Vasana, thanks.

This seems like a useful text to work through.

I especially like how it explains the non-inherence of ultimate truth as meaning that "ultimately things are neither inherently born, nor do they inherently end" and how this makes ultimate truth devoid of attributes/conditions ... and utterly unfathomable/inexpressible. I have often heard Buddhists speak about ultimate truth as if it were an intellectually grokable thing, a kind of extension of relative truth. But that never really sat well with me, hence my three truths: relative (grokable), ultimate (ungrokable), and a kind of hybrid in-between.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Vasana » Tue May 08, 2018 9:02 pm

Rick wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 4:49 pm
Vasana, thanks.

This seems like a useful text to work through.

I especially like how it explains the non-inherence of ultimate truth as meaning that "ultimately things are neither inherently born, nor do they inherently end" and how this makes ultimate truth devoid of attributes/conditions ... and utterly unfathomable/inexpressible. I have often heard Buddhists speak about ultimate truth as if it were an intellectually grokable thing, a kind of extension of relative truth. But that never really sat well with me, hence my three truths: relative (grokable), ultimate (ungrokable), and a kind of hybrid in-between.
Inexpresible doesn't mean completely unknowable. This is where the language of valid and inferential cognition can make things more precise.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Wayfarer » Tue May 08, 2018 10:00 pm

However, one thing that strikes me is the importance of not knowing. This is made explicit in some Zen schools - Kwan Um Zen has a book, and a principle, called 'only don't know', which is exactly about this. But the reason this is not 'monism' is that there is no 'one' of which it is true. It is a dialectic between the poles of 'being' and 'not being' but there is no underlying 'one'.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1217
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Sherab » Tue May 08, 2018 11:58 pm

Rick wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 4:49 pm
I especially like how it explains the non-inherence of ultimate truth as meaning that "ultimately things are neither inherently born, nor do they inherently end" ....
Something that is inherently born is static. This is understood to refer to the idea of eternalism where no change of any sort is possible. Something that inherently end is nihilistic. This is understood to refer to the idea that there is no possibility of any continuum. So what this points to is that the ultimate is neither eternalistic (i.e. static) nor nihilistic (i.e. no continuum of any sort). This is another way of saying that the ultimate avoids the two extremes.

Note also that "...it does not arise, does not cease..." This implies that it simply is.

I think it is better to understand the ultimate as above then to say it is non-inherent. Being simply is can imply non-inherence but non-inherence does not imply being simply is.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Vasana » Wed May 09, 2018 8:33 am

Wayfarer wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 10:00 pm
However, one thing that strikes me is the importance of not knowing. This is made explicit in some Zen schools - Kwan Um Zen has a book, and a principle, called 'only don't know', which is exactly about this. But the reason this is not 'monism' is that there is no 'one' of which it is true. It is a dialectic between the poles of 'being' and 'not being' but there is no underlying 'one'.

Well it depends how you're defining the word 'knowing'. 'Not knowing ' could easily be confused with ignorance or avidya which is also a kind of not knowing. But I gree with your later statement of there being no underlying one between the poles of existence/non-existence. 'Like a piece of string set alight from both ends.'

Atisha:
  • If the middle is completely released from extremes, Since there are no extremes, there is also no middle. The view without middle and extremes. Is the perfect view.
Shantideva:
  • When neither existence nor nonexistence is present in the mind, then, because there is no other possibility, the mind without support becomes tranquil.
More on the importance of valid cognitions and the culmination of non-conceptual, yogic direct-perception.

The Sword of Wisdom For Thoroughly Ascertaining Reality by Mipham Rinpoche
  • '4. If one is to apply an unerring and certain mind
    To the nature of these two truths,
    One must cultivate the excellent vision
    Of the two flawless valid cognitions.

    [...]17. How things appear or how they ultimately abide,
    Can be known through perceiving their nature directly,
    Or it can be inferred unerringly based on
    Something else which is clearly apparent.

    18. Direct perception itself is of four kinds:
    Unmistaken sensory, mental, self-awareness
    And yogic; all of which are non-conceptual,
    Since their objects appear with specific characteristics.

    19. Without these direct perceptions
    There would be no evidence and hence no inference,
    And any perception of things arising from causes
    And then ceasing would become impossible.

    20. If that were the case, how could we ever
    Understand them to be empty and so on?
    Without relying upon the conventional,
    There can be no realization of the ultimate.[5]

    21. Cognitions brought about by the five senses
    Clearly experience their own objects.
    Without this direct sensory perception,
    Like blind folk, we would fail to see.

    22. Mental direct perception arises from the faculty of mind,
    And clearly determines both outer and inner objects.
    Without it, there would be no aspect of consciousness
    Capable of perceiving all types of phenomena.

    23. Yogic direct perception is the culmination of meditation
    Practised properly and according to the instructions.
    It clearly experiences its own objects, and without it
    There would be no vision of objects beyond the ordinary.

    24. Just as this direct experience can eliminate
    Misperceptions about outer forms and the like,
    This is also how it is within the mind itself,
    If there were some other knower, there would be no end to them.

    25. A mind that is cognizant and aware
    Naturally knows its objects, but at the same time
    Is also aware of itself, without relying upon something else,
    And this is what is termed ‘self-awareness’.

    26. Any experience of the other direct perceptions
    Is only determined to be actual direct perception
    By means of self-awareness; without this
    There would be no way of establishing it.

    27. The root of inference lies in direct perception,
    And direct perception is determined by self-awareness.
    It all comes down to the experience of an undeluded mind;
    There are no other means of establishment beyond this.

    28. Therefore, it is based on direct perceptions,
    Which are non-conceptual and undeluded,
    That misperceptions of apparent phenomena
    Can be decisively eliminated.'


http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-mas ... -of-wisdom

Shantideva again!
  • When neither existence nor nonexistence is present in the mind, then, because there is no other possibility, the mind without support becomes tranquil.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Wayfarer » Wed May 09, 2018 11:15 am

Vasana wrote:Not knowing ' could easily be confused with ignorance or avidya which is also a kind of not knowing.
In that Zen school I mentioned, ‘only don’t know’ is the main teaching. It’s not talking about avidya. It’s one of those sayings that is easy to misinterpret, so perhaps have a look at some of these references.

But the idea of ‘un-knowing’ is also found in other traditions, like the Christian ‘Cloud of Un-knowing’, and the Tao ‘he that knows it, knows it not.’ The ‘Un-‘ in ‘unknowing’ is the same as the A- in the Prajñāpāramitā in One Letter which I wrote about here.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

krodha
Posts: 2416
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by krodha » Wed May 09, 2018 1:22 pm

Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:58 pm
Note also that "...it does not arise, does not cease..." This implies that it simply is.

I think it is better to understand the ultimate as above then to say it is non-inherent.
This is because you have an Advaita Vedanta type view.
Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:58 pm
Being simply is can imply non-inherence but non-inherence does not imply being simply is.
If something "simply is" it has arisen and has an ontological status.

krodha
Posts: 2416
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by krodha » Wed May 09, 2018 1:35 pm

Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 10:43 am
When it is asserted that an ultimate truth is merely a conventional truth, it necessarily implies that there is only the conventional truth.

And it all went down into a logical rabbit hole when combined with the definition that "An ultimate truth is the veridical perception of a given entity, a relative truth is the non-veridical perception of a given entity" because it follows that the relative/conventional truth is now both veridical and non-veridical.
So-called ultimate truth is nothing more than an absence of arising and absence of characteristics that is intended to be recognized by afflicted sentient beings. Ultimate truth in name, and as a principle in itself, is equally conventional because said truth is nothing more than a solution to your current samsaric predicament.

Afflicted sentient beings posit an ultimate truth to be realized from the standpoint of their ignorance, which is again, only the non-arising of the figments of their own delusion. Tathāgatas likewise only posit an ultimate truth for the sake of afflicted sentient beings.

In the same vein, only afflicted sentient beings perceive tathāgatas. Tathāgatas do not perceive sentient beings or other tathāgatas, nor do they perceive or conceive of relative or ultimate truths. The two truths are a relative model employed to help you find a way out of your afflicted situation.

The misperception of conditioned phenomena manifests as a result of ignorance, and said misperception is undone with the cessation of ignorance. There is no other "ultimate truth" to recognize, and said ultimate nature is nothing more than the absence of arising and absence of characteristics in allegedly conditioned phenomena. Hence there is nothing to identify as "ultimate" beyond said absence, and when that non-arising is realized there is no more ultimate truth to be apprehended.

The Pitāputrasamāgamana Sūtra states:

  • Great king, the dharmadhātu cannot be explained apart from being just a name, just a symbol, just a convention [just relative], just an expression and just a designation.

And this goes for both truths, as the Mahāsiddha Virupa communicates:

  • The two truths don’t exist in the dharmadhātu, the dharmadhātu does not exist.

Therefore those who say the ultimate is unfindable, are also saying the relative is unfindable.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Wayfarer » Wed May 09, 2018 10:07 pm

'No wisdom can we get hold of
No highest perfection
No Bodhisattva, no thought of enlightenment either
When told of this, if not bewildered and in no way anxious
A Bodhisattva courses in the Tathagatha’s wisdom.'

Prajñāpāramitā

***

However the expression:
ultimate truth is nothing more....
Does make me a bit uneasy because it seems reductionist. I noticed in the early Buddhist texts how often it will be said, when the Buddha explains a point, that the hearer will exclaim something like: how marvellous! You have set upright what had fallen, made clear what had been obscured! Often this is said in respect of something which seems pretty simple and straightforward. So I think we should maintain that attitude of reverence for truth. Even if the cessation of affliction might indeed amount to liberation from something which has no real being to begin with, it is still marvellous to realise.

Again, I think what we have to understand is that there is nothing to get. Yet we have to constantly strive to get it.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

krodha
Posts: 2416
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by krodha » Wed May 09, 2018 10:57 pm

Wayfarer wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 10:07 pm
...the expression:
ultimate truth is nothing more....
Does make me a bit uneasy because it seems reductionist.
Non-arising is non-reductive.
Wayfarer wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 10:07 pm
Again, I think what we have to understand is that there is nothing to get. Yet we have to constantly strive to get it.
The nature of phenomena is something to recognize. That nature is always already the case, and so in that sense there is nothing to "get" in terms of acquiring something new. However, given that we do not possess a working knowledge of said nature, that knowledge must be acquired through awakening.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4076
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Wayfarer » Thu May 10, 2018 12:26 am

Thank you, that is how I understand it also.

:namaste:
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1217
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Sherab » Thu May 10, 2018 6:07 am

krodha wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 1:22 pm
Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:58 pm
Note also that "...it does not arise, does not cease..." This implies that it simply is.

I think it is better to understand the ultimate as above then to say it is non-inherent.
This is because you have an Advaita Vedanta type view.
Only because you could not really see what I am saying, so what else but to wrap a sheep in wolf clothing and hang him?
krodha wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 1:22 pm
Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 11:58 pm
Being simply is can imply non-inherence but non-inherence does not imply being simply is.
If something "simply is" it has arisen and has an ontological status.
I posted " "...it does not arise, does not cease..." This implies that it simply is." ....Yet, you chose to assert "If something "simply is" it has arisen ..."
This is just a strawman.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1217
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by Sherab » Thu May 10, 2018 6:13 am

krodha wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 1:35 pm
Sherab wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 10:43 am
When it is asserted that an ultimate truth is merely a conventional truth, it necessarily implies that there is only the conventional truth.

And it all went down into a logical rabbit hole when combined with the definition that "An ultimate truth is the veridical perception of a given entity, a relative truth is the non-veridical perception of a given entity" because it follows that the relative/conventional truth is now both veridical and non-veridical.
So-called ultimate truth is nothing more than an absence of arising and absence of characteristics that is intended to be recognized by afflicted sentient beings. Ultimate truth in name, and as a principle in itself, is equally conventional because said truth is nothing more than a solution to your current samsaric predicament.

Afflicted sentient beings posit an ultimate truth to be realized from the standpoint of their ignorance, which is again, only the non-arising of the figments of their own delusion. Tathāgatas likewise only posit an ultimate truth for the sake of afflicted sentient beings.

In the same vein, only afflicted sentient beings perceive tathāgatas. Tathāgatas do not perceive sentient beings or other tathāgatas, nor do they perceive or conceive of relative or ultimate truths. The two truths are a relative model employed to help you find a way out of your afflicted situation.

The misperception of conditioned phenomena manifests as a result of ignorance, and said misperception is undone with the cessation of ignorance. There is no other "ultimate truth" to recognize, and said ultimate nature is nothing more than the absence of arising and absence of characteristics in allegedly conditioned phenomena. Hence there is nothing to identify as "ultimate" beyond said absence, and when that non-arising is realized there is no more ultimate truth to be apprehended.

The Pitāputrasamāgamana Sūtra states:

  • Great king, the dharmadhātu cannot be explained apart from being just a name, just a symbol, just a convention [just relative], just an expression and just a designation.

And this goes for both truths, as the Mahāsiddha Virupa communicates:

  • The two truths don’t exist in the dharmadhātu, the dharmadhātu does not exist.

Therefore those who say the ultimate is unfindable, are also saying the relative is unfindable.
When you are unable to remove a fly from the soup you serve, how reasonable is it for you expect your guest to consume your soup?

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by tomschwarz » Mon May 14, 2018 1:58 pm

Sherab wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 6:13 am
So-called ultimate truth is nothing more than an absence of arising and absence of characteristics that is intended to be recognized by afflicted sentient beings. Ultimate truth in name, and as a principle in itself, is equally conventional because said truth is nothing more than a solution to your current samsaric predicament.

Afflicted sentient beings posit an ultimate truth to be realized from the standpoint of their ignorance, which is again, only the non-arising of the figments of their own delusion. Tathāgatas likewise only posit an ultimate truth for the sake of afflicted sentient beings.

In the same vein, only afflicted sentient beings perceive tathāgatas. Tathāgatas do not perceive sentient beings or other tathāgatas, nor do they perceive or conceive of relative or ultimate truths. The two truths are a relative model employed to help you find a way out of your afflicted situation.

The misperception of conditioned phenomena manifests as a result of ignorance, and said misperception is undone with the cessation of ignorance. There is no other "ultimate truth" to recognize, and said ultimate nature is nothing more than the absence of arising and absence of characteristics in allegedly conditioned phenomena.
good points, well said. your ideas are impressive, they remind me of longchen rabjampa, "basic space of phenomena" and help me to move from this more self centered mental state, to selflessness.
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by tomschwarz » Tue May 15, 2018 8:57 pm

Sherab wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 6:13 am
Tathāgatas do not perceive sentient beings or other tathāgatas, nor do they perceive or conceive of relative or ultimate truths.
...why do you think that the tathagatas do not perceive or conceive?
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Dialectical Monism / Emptiness

Post by tomschwarz » Wed May 16, 2018 1:22 pm

krodha wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 10:57 pm
....
oppse, that was krodha that wrote those things.... krodha?
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rick and 39 guests