no such thing as emptiness

[3bob]

there is no such a thing as emptiness

[RongzomFan]

emptiness means nonarisal / illusion

[RongzomFan]

Read "Center of the Sunlit Sky"

[3bob]

[Vmarco]

there is no such a thing as emptiness

 

From an absolute point of view, that is correct. Emptiness implies that there is something that is not empty. Form is empty, and empty is form,...which does suggest that empty is "around" form,...but that form itself is empty. As form is illusion,...so to is the emptiness of form.

 

However,...what about the "Other Empty"....the Emptiness beyond Yin/Yang,...the Empty beyond One.

 

Too bad that literature of the Other Empty, such as The Mountain Doctrine, or Prajnaparamita is virtually unknown to most.

[RongzomFan]

Too bad that literature of the Other Empty, such as The Mountain Doctrine, or Prajnaparamita is virtually unknown to most.

 

Other emptiness is a Tibetan invention. There was no such thing in India.

 

In India, you had Madhyamaka and Yogacara. Read "Center of the Sunlit Sky".

[idiot_stimpy]

Emptiness destroys itself.

[Cheshire Cat]

ON a practical level, what is emptiness?

Is it just an empty mind? Yet, perception is there.

 

Is it possible to have a mind without thoughts and without perception?

That would be something that I can call "emptiness".

 

Who can do this?

[Vmarco]

Other emptiness is a Tibetan invention. There was no such thing in India.

 

In India, you had Madhyamaka and Yogacara. Read "Center of the Sunlit Sky".

 

Did not Buddha go beyond Indian thought?

 

For example:

 

There’s a story in the Buddhist scriptures of a talented monk who wanted to find out the answer to the question, "Where do the four elements cease without remainder?" Through meditation he reached the Heaven of the Four Great Kings, who did not know the answer. Next he went to the thirty three gods in a higher Desire Realm heaven, but none of these rulers knew either. He then asked King Sakka (Indra), the king of these gods, but Sakka did not know the answer. Up and up he went asking all sorts of gods at each and every higher level. Finally he came to Great Brahma, the Creator, Uncreated, Knower of All.

 

When the monk finally achieved an audience with Great Brahma, Brahma appeared in all his majesty and glory announcing, "I am Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Ruler, Appointer and Orderer, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be." The monk then humbly and respectfully asked his question, but all Great Brahma did was repeat, "I am Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Ruler, Appointer and Orderer, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be."

 

The monk eventually got frustrated and said, "I know you are "Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Ruler, Appointer and Orderer, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be," but I asked you a question about where the four elements cease without remainder. The Great Brahma replied, "Listen little monk, don’t embarrass me. All these other gods are listening and think I know everything. If you want to know the answer to a question like that, don’t ask me. I don’t know the answer. For a question like that, you have to go ask the Buddha."

[idiot_stimpy]

That which is never born, can never die.

[Stosh]

And that which ever lives ,will always have lived

[C T]

Emptiness as potential. Its impossible to deny the existence of potential, yes?

 

Without emptiness, we can never hope to stack spoons one atop the other. Or build anything worthwhile. Or even brush one's hair. Trees would not grow, and babies wont have the capacity to cry.

 

Its the space between things, and gaps which allow non-things, like thoughts, to manifest.

 

But since its not a 'thing', i guess the opening statement is absolutely correct. So, well done, everyone!

[Flolfolil]

Is it possible to have a mind without thoughts and without perception?

That would be something that I can call "emptiness".

 

Who can do this?

i can do this. i call it, "passing out"

[三江源]

there is no such a thing as emptiness

emptiness OF.. specific somethings.

[Jeff]

Emptiness as potential. Its impossible to deny the existence of potential, yes?

 

Maybe beyond potential... Pure desire with no attachments.

[idiot_stimpy]

Emptiness as potential. Its impossible to deny the existence of potential, yes?

 

Without emptiness, we can never hope to stack spoons one atop the other. Or build anything worthwhile. Or even brush one's hair. Trees would not grow, and babies wont have the capacity to cry.

 

Its the space between things, and gaps which allow non-things, like thoughts, to manifest.

 

But since its not a 'thing', i guess the opening statement is absolutely correct. So, well done, everyone!

 

I did hold this view once.

[C T]

I did hold this view once.

thankfully, its more than just 'a view'.

[Vmarco]

Emptiness as potential. Its impossible to deny the existence of potential, yes?

 

Without emptiness, we can never hope to stack spoons one atop the other. Or build anything worthwhile. Or even brush one's hair. Trees would not grow, and babies wont have the capacity to cry.

 

Its the space between things, and gaps which allow non-things, like thoughts, to manifest.

 

But since its not a 'thing', i guess the opening statement is absolutely correct. So, well done, everyone!

 

I like the line on emptiness as potential,....however, the words "Its the space between things" can be tricky,...because it's really the space of the thing. In other words,...empty and the thing are one and the same,...space doesn't end at two things,...space is the two things, between which is, from a relative point of view, perceived space. When observing as a Tathagata, there are no things through which relative space is perceived.

 

Another way to say this,....if you removed all things, you would not be left with space,...because there is no space, or relative emptiness, without things or form. Form is empty, and empty is form. Relatively speaking,...there is no form without empty, and no empty without form.

 

However, once the perception of Yin/Yang is transcended, there is the Other Empty,...the Empty beyond One and Many,...beyond Here and There,...beyond Time and Space. Theravada hardly mentions it,...Mahayana barely mentions it,...however, prajnaparamita embodies it.

[konchog uma]

emptiness isn't the absence of perceptions. the concept is specifically buddhist and carries a particular meaning which doesnt mean the absence of phenomena.

 

philosophically, its the inherent suchness of reality which needs no mental elaboration or conceptual designation. So in that way, it could be the absence of thought, but thats a rigid definition if you ask me. If you look at discursive thoughts with the view of emptiness, they are empty too, and a display of emptiness in and of themselves.

 

whether one says "there is no emptiness" or "there is only emptiness" is just semantic. if a person thinks that reality needs to be elaborated upon conceptually, i think they are wrong, but it doesn't really matter. things are what they are regardless.

[RongzomFan]

However, once the perception of Yin/Yang is transcended, there is the Other Empty,...the Empty beyond One and Many,...beyond Here and There,...beyond Time and Space. Theravada hardly mentions it,...Mahayana barely mentions it,...however, prajnaparamita embodies it.

 

I think you are greatly confused. The prajnaparamita sutras are basic indian Mahayana.

 

Other emptiness is a tibetan invention. Its not in the prajnaparamita sutras, although I'm sure you can interpret any text the way you want.

[Vmarco]

emptiness isn't the absence of perceptions. the concept is specifically buddhist and carries a particular meaning which doesnt mean the absence of phenomena.

 

philosophically, its the inherent suchness of reality which needs no mental elaboration or conceptual designation. So in that way, it could be the absence of thought, but thats a rigid definition if you ask me. If you look at discursive thoughts with the view of emptiness, they are empty too, and a display of emptiness in and of themselves.

 

Perception cannot observe emptiness, only the consciousness beyond the 6 senses can,...and until emptiness can be consciously observed, the way things are cannot be understood.

 

Remember,....dukkha is a consequence of the desire for things to be other than they are,...the 6 senses cannot observe the way things are,...only the way things are not.

 

Emptiness cannot be perceived. Perception only perceives the illusion of motion,...that is, form. But form is empty, and empty is form. Perception only perceives within time,...there is no Present in time. All perception is the past,...even expectations of a future arises from the past.

[RongzomFan]

Emptiness is an english word. sunyata literally means "voidness" and relates to mathematical concept of zero. But you can't just go by literal sanskrit meaning.

[Vmarco]

I think you are greatly confused. The prajnaparamita sutras are basic indian Mahayana.

 

Other emptiness is a tibetan invention. Its not in the prajnaparamita sutras, although I'm sure you can interpret any text the way you want.

 

Sure,...prajnaparamita is used by Mahayana,...yet can not be fully understood through Mahayana,...but through Vajrayana. It is if Theravada is about How we are,...Mahayana about is similar to Where we are,...however, to realize Who you are, one must understand When we are.

 

"Other Emptiness" (Jonangpa) has only recently been recognized by the Dalai Lama,...thus labeling it a Tibetan invention is deceptive. Although the Mountain Doctrine was written by a Tibetan,...it draws from all known Buddhist sources of the time,...not as an invention,...but a scholarly review.

[Vmarco]

Emptiness is an english word. sunyata literally means "voidness" and relates to mathematical concept of zero. But you can't just go by literal sanskrit meaning.

 

Ah,...zero,...a study of mine since 1974. After exhausting all known works on the subject, I spent 2 years in mesoamerica studying the Mayan conch in the 90's,...even wrote two books focused on the subject. Look forward to your Zero thread.

[manitou]

philosophically, its the inherent suchness of reality which needs no mental elaboration or conceptual designation.

 

Now, there's a word. Suchness. I've read this word more than a few times in metaphysical literature, and I am still guessing at what it actually means.

 

My mind gets involved in catch-22 mode when I think about Suchness.