Author Topic: Craving for Non-Existence  (Read 3095 times)

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Craving for Non-Existence
« Reply #120 on: August 02, 2017, 04:23:48 am »
Ground you are too much into semantics and logic.
I am into rationality exclusively. And since there are words which are empty of meaning from the outset but do cause the arising of a diversity of meanings in the many minds of readers semantics is key point in the context of rationality.

This might be appreciated in a university class of philosophy but not in a forum where people are looking for something insightful or practical.
Rationality that focuses on semantics is the basis for direct perception of emptiness. Why? Because people habitually confuse language with truth but language is just language and words are empty of meaning from the outset since meaning is synthesized by conditioned minds.

I guess everyone else would agree that we are here for knowledge sharing, which works best when we 'communicate'.
Perfect. I am expressing my valid knowledge.

... So either your intentions are not right, or the format of your message is not right.
Or you are just not suitable to be appropriately inspired. But that would not matter. My words can be read, ignored or rejected. Everybody is free.

You are applying emptiness selectively. It's not just the words, but rationality itself is empty, in the sense that it depends on a rational mind to arise. Everything that is perceived is characterized by emptiness.

But language is not that useless a tool as you are depicting. Words have specific accepted meaning and in the most common situations most of the people will be able to communicate to a good degree of precision, and that's how the whole society has been going on without falling apart. Putting too much emphasis on semantics and 'emptiness' of words sounds plain obsession. And do you think you or anyone can guarantee that your comments are not subject to diverse interpretations?

Plus it's amazing to see that somewhere you defy the notion of 'truth', and now you assert that you are expressing your 'valid knowledge'.

Anyways, I don't think our conversation would go any far with your obsession. But I'll keep an open mind with regards to your comments.


Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2026
    • View Profile
Re: Craving for Non-Existence
« Reply #121 on: August 02, 2017, 08:24:14 pm »
Ground you are too much into semantics and logic.
I am into rationality exclusively. And since there are words which are empty of meaning from the outset but do cause the arising of a diversity of meanings in the many minds of readers semantics is key point in the context of rationality.

This might be appreciated in a university class of philosophy but not in a forum where people are looking for something insightful or practical.
Rationality that focuses on semantics is the basis for direct perception of emptiness. Why? Because people habitually confuse language with truth but language is just language and words are empty of meaning from the outset since meaning is synthesized by conditioned minds.

I guess everyone else would agree that we are here for knowledge sharing, which works best when we 'communicate'.
Perfect. I am expressing my valid knowledge.

... So either your intentions are not right, or the format of your message is not right.
Or you are just not suitable to be appropriately inspired. But that would not matter. My words can be read, ignored or rejected. Everybody is free.

You are applying emptiness selectively. It's not just the words, but rationality itself is empty, in the sense that it depends on a rational mind to arise. Everything that is perceived is characterized by emptiness.
you have not understood my words appropriately. Since I am perceiving emptiness directly there is nothing perceptible that is not empty, be it words or thoughts or trees or self etc.

But language is not that useless a tool as you are depicting. Words have specific accepted meaning and in the most common situations most of the people will be able to communicate to a good degree of precision, and that's how the whole society has been going on without falling apart. Putting too much emphasis on semantics and 'emptiness' of words sounds plain obsession. And do you think you or anyone can guarantee that your comments are not subject to diverse interpretations?
you have not understood my words appropriately. I never said that what is empty would be useless. Everything is empty but many things are very useful nevertheless and so is empty language. E.g. there would be no science and scientific progress if there were no words, e.g. no internet or healing medicine.

And do you think you or anyone can guarantee that your comments are not subject to diverse interpretations?
All words are subject to diverse interpretations exactly because they are empty of meaning from the outset, i.e. meaning does not inhere in words.


Plus it's amazing to see that somewhere you defy the notion of 'truth', and now you assert that you are expressing your 'valid knowledge'.
Validity isn't truth. Validity can only refer to a linguistic expression because if there weren't verbal statements or assertions the talk of validity would have no basis. Validity is the correct application of conventional language in the context of the directly perceptible.
Truth however never has existed as anything. Why? Because everything is empty of true existence.

Anyways, I don't think our conversation would go any far with your obsession. But I'll keep an open mind with regards to your comments.
I can only authentically express liberation. Sometimes I use analytical language, the expression of rationality, and sometimes I use language that is metaphorical and/or composed of similies or the like, the approximate expression of the inexpressible.
Keeping an open mind is good since thus useful inspiration is not excluded.

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Craving for Non-Existence
« Reply #122 on: August 05, 2017, 02:09:42 pm »
The majority of people considering themselves or calling themselves Buddhist or influenced by things they called Buddhist rejected Non-Existence as Nirvana or PariNirvana and considered Nirvana to be a perpetual state of non-flux and wakefulness, devoid of death and ups and downs sleeping waking etc, so a stable state of solid ongoing perfection, not total Annhilation which can not be experienced, it was believed to be experiential reality an attainable experience.

There is writing which fully and explicitly rejects "craving non-existence" and for most of the generations of people associating with Buddhism, Non-Existence was never thought to be the goal, but ongoing Awakened goodness, peace, and tranquility which has gone beyond painful and disturbing flux.

Offline francis

  • Member
  • Posts: 1455
    • View Profile
Re: Craving for Non-Existence
« Reply #123 on: August 06, 2017, 07:40:53 am »
The majority of people considering themselves or calling themselves Buddhist or influenced by things they called Buddhist rejected Non-Existence as Nirvana or PariNirvana and considered Nirvana to be a perpetual state of non-flux and wakefulness, devoid of death and ups and downs sleeping waking etc, so a stable state of solid ongoing perfection, not total Annhilation which can not be experienced, it was believed to be experiential reality an attainable experience.

There is writing which fully and explicitly rejects "craving non-existence" and for most of the generations of people associating with Buddhism, Non-Existence was never thought to be the goal, but ongoing Awakened goodness, peace, and tranquility which has gone beyond painful and disturbing flux.

There are also writings which fully and explicitly reject "craving" for existence.
"Enlightenment, for a wave in the ocean, is the moment the wave realises it is water." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Craving for Non-Existence
« Reply #124 on: August 06, 2017, 12:03:38 pm »
The majority of people considering themselves or calling themselves Buddhist or influenced by things they called Buddhist rejected Non-Existence as Nirvana or PariNirvana and considered Nirvana to be a perpetual state of non-flux and wakefulness, devoid of death and ups and downs sleeping waking etc, so a stable state of solid ongoing perfection, not total Annhilation which can not be experienced, it was believed to be experiential reality an attainable experience.

There is writing which fully and explicitly rejects "craving non-existence" and for most of the generations of people associating with Buddhism, Non-Existence was never thought to be the goal, but ongoing Awakened goodness, peace, and tranquility which has gone beyond painful and disturbing flux.

There are also writings which fully and explicitly reject "craving" for existence.

Yes, very true. So what is in between those two? Neither existence in the sense of this existence of destructive flux and death and time, notions connected in the word Kal for example, and not total annhilation of all experience whatsoever which would be Non-Existence? What is in between those two extremes is the elimination of time sense, death fear, flux experience. What is in the middle is perpetuity, freedom from time, freedom from death, to be safe and fearless and not dying or running out of time or exhausting resources like karma calories.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal