Author Topic: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus  (Read 1620 times)

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5276
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #15 on: August 23, 2018, 01:13:27 am »
Historically it has controlled the mechanism of insight generation, and, if insight does come about, has tightly controlled the subsequent interpretation of any insight experiences.

I used to do "silent worship" with the Quakers.   They tended to assume that the experience of stillness ( whatever ) was evidence of God's presence, whereas I assumed it was just stillness.   :wink1:
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline stillpointdancer

  • Enlightenment through insight
  • Member
  • Posts: 482
  • Dancing at the Still Point describes my meditation
    • View Profile
    • Enlightenment for Grown Ups
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #16 on: August 23, 2018, 02:47:57 am »
Historically it has controlled the mechanism of insight generation, and, if insight does come about, has tightly controlled the subsequent interpretation of any insight experiences.

I used to do "silent worship" with the Quakers.   They tended to assume that the experience of stillness ( whatever ) was evidence of God's presence, whereas I assumed it was just stillness.   :wink1:
Big Quaker presence where I used to live. If I was ever forced to be Christian again, it would be Quakers all the way for me. Mind you, on reflection I quite liked some of the masonic stuff when I was invited to the lodge.
“You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. Do not even listen, simply wait, be quiet, still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in ecstasy at your feet.” Franz Kafka

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2018, 04:59:10 pm »
As for "Ultimate Truth", it's basically a meaningless expression.  Is "Ultimate Truth" more true than "Truth"?  And is "Truth" more true than plain old "truth"?
It's the kind of vague cliche that New-agers thrive on.

Agreed. A so-called “ultimate truth” implies another supposed “truth” which is not ultimate, and therefore a falsity, or no truth at all.

Offline paracelsus

  • Member
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2018, 05:20:19 pm »
As for "Ultimate Truth", it's basically a meaningless expression.  Is "Ultimate Truth" more true than "Truth"?  And is "Truth" more true than plain old "truth"?
It's the kind of vague cliche that New-agers thrive on.

Agreed. A so-called “ultimate truth” implies another supposed “truth” which is not ultimate, and therefore a falsity, or no truth at all.

You mean we are all enlightened already?

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2018, 06:04:51 pm »
Quote
Quote
Agreed. A so-called “ultimate truth” implies another supposed “truth” which is not ultimate, and therefore a falsity, or no truth at all.
You mean we are all enlightened already?

That a falsity is not a truth does not mean that it does not exist. A falsity cannot be false if it does not exist in the first place.

Offline paracelsus

  • Member
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2018, 07:27:31 pm »
Quote
Quote
Agreed. A so-called “ultimate truth” implies another supposed “truth” which is not ultimate, and therefore a falsity, or no truth at all.
You mean we are all enlightened already?

That a falsity is not a truth does not mean that it does not exist. A falsity cannot be false if it does not exist in the first place.


I agree, if a falsity exists it must have a true existence as a falsity. This means it is a true existence as in: “look, here is a falsity, turn it over and have a look at it". It exists as a wrong understanding.

There can be many falsities existent, so why not many truths? And if there are many truths (i.e. right understandings relating to the functioning of samsara and our entrapment in it) then these could be called "relative" truths in that they are true in this samsaric case but don't relate to the enlightenment mind which transcends the relative. (So it is said)
 
So then if we need to express something relating to enlightenment mind or Buddha Nature etc ,then perhaps for the sake of communication we can enjoy the term "ultimate truth" to distinguish it from the "relative" concepts we have to struggle with down here on our path to understanding.

The coffee I'm drinking is cold. Is this ultimate truth? 

:teehee:


 

Offline paracelsus

  • Member
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2018, 09:05:53 pm »
Quote
Quote
Agreed. A so-called “ultimate truth” implies another supposed “truth” which is not ultimate, and therefore a falsity, or no truth at all.
You mean we are all enlightened already?

That a falsity is not a truth does not mean that it does not exist. A falsity cannot be false if it does not exist in the first place.

So a falsity is a truth then, as in; a real existence? Is that why we're not all enlightened? Because if a falsity wasn't ultimately a truth (a real existence) then we couldn't exist as samsaric beings?

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2018, 10:48:45 pm »
Quote
I agree, if a falsity exists it must have a true existence as a falsity.

A falsity does not need to “truly” exist in order to exist. Besides, if it “truly” existed, it would be a truth, not a falsity.

Also, if a falsity exists, then it falsely exists; otherwise it would not be false.

Quote
This means it is a true existence as in: “look, here is a falsity, turn it over and have a look at it".

This merely means that the falsity exists, not that it is true. Truth is not a requirement of existence.

Quote
It exists as a wrong understanding.

If so, it would not be correctly called a “falsity” as in your sentence, but rather would be wrongly called a “truth”. A falsity remains a falsity, even if correctly understood as such.

Apart from this, the wrong understanding of a falsity is not the same as the falsity which is wrongly understood.

Quote
There can be many falsities existent, so why not many truths?

No problem with many truths. Still, none of them falsities.

Quote
And if there are many truths (i.e. right understandings relating to the functioning of samsara and our entrapment in it)

If a truth were a right understanding, a lack of right understanding would entail a lack of truth, and in the lack of a truth to be understood, how could the right understanding of a truth ever arise?

Quote
then these could be called "relative" truths in that they are true in this samsaric case

Since both truths and falsities depend on understanding, how could either be non-relative?

Quote
but don't relate to the enlightenment mind which transcends the relative.

Since that which supposedly transcends the relative must relate by the way of transcendence to such relative, how could it possibly “transcend” the relative?

Quote
(So it is said)

Thoughtlessly said, as above shown.

Quote
So then if we need to express something relating to enlightenment mind or Buddha Nature etc ,then perhaps for the sake of communication we can enjoy the term "ultimate truth" to distinguish it from the "relative" concepts we have to struggle with down here on our path to understanding.

Since both truths and falsities are necessarily relative, you are enjoying a wrong distinction.

Besides, since there is no distinction among truths in terms of being more or less “ultimate”, and since falsities do not qualify as any kind of truth, the phrase “ultimate truth” is just useless.

Quote
The coffee I'm drinking is cold. Is this ultimate truth?

Hot or cold, it's no truth anyway.

Offline Chaz

  • Super Anti-Hero
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Facts have no moral judgment.
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2018, 05:43:25 am »
Quote
I agree, if a falsity exists it must have a true existence as a falsity.

A falsity does not need to “truly” exist in order to exist. Besides, if it “truly” existed, it would be a truth, not a falsity.

Also, if a falsity exists, then it falsely exists; otherwise it would not be false.

Quote
This means it is a true existence as in: “look, here is a falsity, turn it over and have a look at it".

This merely means that the falsity exists, not that it is true. Truth is not a requirement of existence.

Quote
It exists as a wrong understanding.

If so, it would not be correctly called a “falsity” as in your sentence, but rather would be wrongly called a “truth”. A falsity remains a falsity, even if correctly understood as such.

Apart from this, the wrong understanding of a falsity is not the same as the falsity which is wrongly understood.

Quote
There can be many falsities existent, so why not many truths?

No problem with many truths. Still, none of them falsities.

Quote
And if there are many truths (i.e. right understandings relating to the functioning of samsara and our entrapment in it)

If a truth were a right understanding, a lack of right understanding would entail a lack of truth, and in the lack of a truth to be understood, how could the right understanding of a truth ever arise?

Quote
then these could be called "relative" truths in that they are true in this samsaric case

Since both truths and falsities depend on understanding, how could either be non-relative?

Quote
but don't relate to the enlightenment mind which transcends the relative.

Since that which supposedly transcends the relative must relate by the way of transcendence to such relative, how could it possibly “transcend” the relative?

Quote
(So it is said)

Thoughtlessly said, as above shown.

Quote
So then if we need to express something relating to enlightenment mind or Buddha Nature etc ,then perhaps for the sake of communication we can enjoy the term "ultimate truth" to distinguish it from the "relative" concepts we have to struggle with down here on our path to understanding.

Since both truths and falsities are necessarily relative, you are enjoying a wrong distinction.

Besides, since there is no distinction among truths in terms of being more or less “ultimate”, and since falsities do not qualify as any kind of truth, the phrase “ultimate truth” is just useless.

Quote
The coffee I'm drinking is cold. Is this ultimate truth?

Hot or cold, it's no truth anyway.

In your view, how does something truly exist?

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2018, 10:14:06 am »
Quote
Quote
[Matibhadra:] That a falsity is not a truth does not mean that it does not exist. A falsity cannot be false if it does not exist in the first place.

[Paracelsus:] So a falsity is a truth then, as in; a real existence?

A falsity has to exist, or to be real in the first place, in order to be a falsity. Just what a falsity is not is a truth. Indeed, as its name suggests, it is false. Existing, or being real, does not mean being a truth.

Quote
[Paracelsus:] Is that why we're not all enlightened?

We are not all enlightened not because falsities exist, or are real, but because we imagine them to be what they are not, or because they are false.

Of course, that which is false in relation to sentient beings is not false in relation to an enlightened person, but none the less existent, or a reality.

Quote
[Paracelsus:] Because if a falsity wasn't ultimately a truth (a real existence) then we couldn't exist as samsaric beings?

While a falsity has to exist, and has to be real in the first place, in order to be a falsity, it is not a truth, because it is imagined to be what it is not. Existing, or being real, and being a truth are not the same.

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2018, 10:22:06 am »
Quote
[Chaz:] In your view, how does something truly exist?

Nothing truly exists, because nothing exists the way it is imagined to.


Offline Chaz

  • Super Anti-Hero
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Facts have no moral judgment.
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2018, 10:24:06 am »

The coffee I'm drinking is cold. Is this ultimate truth? 

No.  That is relative truth.  It's relative because cold coffee arises dependeant on causes and conditions (sitting out, lack of heat, etc)

Ultimate truth is that it is empty of self or inherent essence/characteristics.  So, it is empty of "cold".  It's also empty of "hot".

Being relative truth does not mean that it doesn't exist.  Super-hot coffee can give you serious burn that will hurt like hell.  Just the same, the coffee has no inherent hotness because it required heat to raise the temperature.  Plus the temperature will change.  The pain will subside.  The wound will heal.  That's what relative. 

If the coffee had always been hot and would remain hot forever, unchanging, all by itself, then it would have that as inherent essence.  We all know it doesn't.

Offline Chaz

  • Super Anti-Hero
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Facts have no moral judgment.
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2018, 10:26:48 am »
Quote
[Chaz:] In your view, how does something truly exist?

Nothing truly exists, because nothing exists the way it is imagined to.

But, something can't exist inherently, apart from the imagined?

If something is imagined, isn't that a product of the sense consciousnesses and the Nidanas?  Doesn't that suggest there is something on which the imagination is based- something that the senses contact and the mind forumulates?  Or are these imagined things simply conjured out of nothing?
« Last Edit: December 19, 2018, 10:30:28 am by Chaz »

Offline Matibhadra

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #28 on: December 19, 2018, 04:00:59 pm »
Quote
[Chaz:] In your view, how does something truly exist?
Quote
[Matibhadra:] Nothing truly exists, because nothing exists the way it is imagined to.
Quote
[Chaz:] But, something can't exist inherently, apart from the imagined?

To inherently exist means not to be designated by a name. Since nothing exists which is not designated by a name, nothing inherently exists.

Quote
[Chaz:] If something is imagined, isn't that a product of the sense consciousnesses and the Nidanas?

The image of something's inherent existence exists, and is a product of the mind, but something's imagined inherent existence does not exist, and is never produced even by the mind.

Quote
[Chaz:] Doesn't that suggest there is something on which the imagination is based- something that the senses contact and the mind forumulates?

Sure. A falsity, or that which is wrongly imagined to exist in a way it does not, does exist, is a reality, and has to exist or to be a reality in the first place, in order to be a falsity. What does not exist is merely the falsity's imagined true and inherent existence.

Quote
[Chaz:] Or are these imagined things simply conjured out of nothing?

Again, falsities are not just imagined; rather, as above, they are realities, but still they are not truths, because as opposed to truths they are imagined to be what they are not.

To sum up,
  • a chair
    • exists, or is a reality,
    • is a falsity, because it is imagined to inherently exist, and
    • does not need to be destroyed;
  • the image of the chair's inherent existence
    • exists, or is a reality,
    • is a falsity, and that which makes a reality become a falsity,
    • needs to bee destroyed;
  • the chair's imagined inherent existence
    • does not exist, or is not a reality,
    • is neither a truth nor a falsity, and
    • does not need to, and could not anyway, be destroyed;
  • the chair's lack of inherent existence
    • exists, or is a reality,
    • is a truth, because it is not imagined to inherently exist,
    • is that whose realization destroys the existent image of the existent chair's non-existent, merely imagined, inherent existence.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2018, 04:11:55 pm by Matibhadra »

Offline paracelsus

  • Member
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Amida Buddha & The Book of Exodus
« Reply #29 on: December 19, 2018, 06:15:20 pm »
Quote
[Chaz:] In your view, how does something truly exist?

Nothing truly exists, because nothing exists the way it is imagined to.

You presume to know how I imagine something to exist.

I discerned perfectly clearly that my coffee was cold. This was straight out immediate Zen experience of ultimate truth. You can't go breaking bits off "One Mind" saying that this characteristic is real and this one isn't.

This particular perfect experience is not repeatable and can't be simulated by anyone, even if they wanted to try.

It is not repeatable because existence is a concatenation and nothing but, and the coffee in question is not existent, it has been drunk and is broken down into its component chemicals etc. There is no going back.

If you wish for experience of One Mind the best thing is to avoid over-intellection and quibble about meanings which will bind you up like a tangling vine. Take direct experience as a guide. Have a cup of tea.



 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal