"you only know the words and not the meaning!"

[Karl]

Yes, that is the problem.  I hold to the Big Bang theory.  I am also a Materialist.

 

Therefore, in my mind, this universe did not exist until Singularity banged.

 

If my understanding of the concepts of reversion and cycles are valid then there were previous universes and there will be future universes.

 

But, we can talk only of this one.

 

There may well have been a Big Bang, but it occured within the universe, in whatever extent the universe existed. Something -the singularity-existed.

 

This is what you have been arguing MH. That existence exists. That it doesn't require consciousness of its existence. Either something exists or it doesn't. That was the logic of your argument, so now, if you are to remain consistent to your reasoning, then you must see that this conflicts. Either your premise that existence exists is incorrect, or your premise about an origin of the universe is incorrect. Apply the litmus and banish self doubt. If you fall back on ' I can't be sure, no one can be sure of anything' then I will be mightily disappointed because you have been such an advocate of the positive case for existence.

 

 

[Marblehead]

There may well have been a Big Bang, but it occured within the universe, in whatever extent the universe existed. Something -the singularity-existed. This is what you have been arguing MH. That existence exists. That it doesn't require consciousness of its existence. Either something exists or it doesn't. That was the logic of your argument, so now, if you are to remain consistent to your reasoning, then you must see that this conflicts. Either your premise that existence exists is incorrect, or your premise about an origin of the universe is incorrect. Apply the litmus and banish self doubt. If you fall back on ' I can't be sure, no one can be sure of anything' then I will be mightily disappointed because you have been such an advocate of the positive case for existence.

You almost have me on a tight-wire.  But only almost.

 

I differentiate between existence and potential.  In the state of Singularity there was only potential, no existence.  The Big Bang is what caused Singularity to become Duality.  Duality is the difference between this and that - items of existence, the Manifest.

 

I understand what you are saying.  Many feel as you do.  And its actually very Buddhist.

 

But I'm a Taoist.  Oh well.  And a Materialist which sometimes presents conflicts within my understandings.  But that's okay.

[Karl]

You almost have me on a tight-wire.  But only almost.

 

I differentiate between existence and potential.  In the state of Singularity there was only potential, no existence.  The Big Bang is what caused Singularity to become Duality.  Duality is the difference between this and that - items of existence, the Manifest.

 

I understand what you are saying.  Many feel as you do.  And its actually very Buddhist.

 

But I'm a Taoist.  Oh well.  And a Materialist which sometimes presents conflicts within my understandings.  But that's okay.

 

What do you know about potentials without existence :-) that is the primacy of consciousness-that things manifest into existence within the light of consciousness. This is something you have strenuously denied time and time again.

 

I'm amazed at your bravery in being consciously aware of holding on to two clearly conflicting concepts. Doesnt it concern you that you put your integrity and honesty at risk-that one thing will lead inevitably to another 'cause and effect'. ?

[C T]

To me it always seems a contradiction when two Buddhists get into a disagreement.

 

You both are right.

Chi Force has not demonstrated with much conviction his practical and basic understanding of the Buddha's teachings. If he did there would be no conflict. 

[ChiForce]

Chi Force has not demonstrated with much conviction his practical and basic understanding of the Buddha's teachings. If he did there would be no conflict. 

LOL LOL...enough to have precognitive visions about the future suffering of mankind.  That's enough for me, son.  Maybe I should share one of my visions of Israel and, somehow, my engagement in the political discourse in Israeli politics with others....has influenced the Israeli govt.  It could be just co-incidence  of course.      

Edited June 7, 2016 by ChiForce

[ChiForce]

I still have argument with this understanding.  I find it impossible to believe that the Buddha actually said that nothing is real.  That nothing is permanent, yes, absolutely.  But not real?  No.  I can't buy that.  Why would he have spent so much time teaching other how to become liberated from suffering if their suffering wasn't real?

 

So perhaps you could shorten yours even further by simply stating:  Nothing is permanent.

Don't take my words for it.  Read the Heart Sutra.  Is called the two truths...real and not real at the same time.   

 

Let me add more.  Is not really that complicated.  When your conscious thought resides in the state of duality, everything you see, feel, and sense is real.  When your conscious thought resides in the state of non-duality.....(ie in sleep, maybe even in dreams, or in the samadhi), what is real becomes not real.  It has no ability to grasp your 6 six senses. 

 

This is a realization which is made possible only when you have realized certain non-duality state. 

Edited June 7, 2016 by ChiForce

[ChiForce]

Oh CT, since my realization has been self actualized without a teacher or hearing the sutra, I have already taken my vows in my previous life.    Since you are trapped in your own time, you can never conceptualize events happened before you.  There goes again, you are trying to define what is Dharma in your own time...think outside of your own time...for once.... 

[C T]

Oh CT, since my realization has been self actualized without a teacher or hearing the sutra, I have already taken my vows in my previous life.    Since you are trapped in your own time, you can never conceptualize events happened before you.  There goes again, you are trying to define what is Dharma in your own time...think outside of your own time...for once.... 

I wouldn't put it past you to come up with such preposterous claims. 

[ChiForce]

I wouldn't put it past you to come up with such preposterous claims. 

Is irrelevant what you think because there are those who are just starting out in this path in this life time.  There are those who are living the last stage of their realization because they have been cultivating eons and ages ago.    

[Karl]

Is irrelevant what you think because there are those who are just starting out in this path in this life time.  There are those who are living the last stage of their realization because they have been cultivating eons and ages ago.    

 

You should ask them for some tips :-)

[ChiForce]

You should ask them for some tips :-)

Hehehe..not needed because I receive guidance in my dreams.....  Others seek words, texts, and sutra for guidance and affirmation.  Otherwise, they rely on their own mind, the Buddha mind. 

[Karl]

Hehehe..not needed because I receive guidance in my dreams.....  Others seek words, texts, and sutra for guidance and affirmation.  Otherwise, they rely on their own mind, the Buddha mind. 

 

You spelt it incorrectly it's B...u....d....w......e.......i........s..........e...........r

[Marblehead]

What do you know about potentials without existence :-) that is the primacy of consciousness-that things manifest into existence within the light of consciousness. This is something you have strenuously denied time and time again.

And will likely continue to do so.  Potentials do not exist.  Only after potential has been manifested is there existence.

 

The pretty lady down the street.  There is potential that she will attend to you.  But she never does.  No existence.

 

I'm amazed at your bravery in being consciously aware of holding on to two clearly conflicting concepts. Doesnt it concern you that you put your integrity and honesty at risk-that one thing will lead inevitably to another 'cause and effect'. ?

No fear here.  I speak to different concepts differently.  That is because my personal philosophy is a combination of many sources, many of which are at various levels contradictory.

 

But I still hold to cause and effect.  Big Bang caused manifestation.

[Marblehead]

Chi Force has not demonstrated with much conviction his practical and basic understanding of the Buddha's teachings. If he did there would be no conflict. 

 

Yeah, different schools have different understandings.  It still could be that you both are right.

[Marblehead]

  It could be just co-incidence  of course.      

 

Yeah, let's pretend that's all it is.

[Marblehead]

Don't take my words for it.  Read the Heart Sutra.  Is called the two truths...real and not real at the same time.

I tried that but gave it up as a lost cause.

 

Let me add more.  Is not really that complicated.  When your conscious thought resides in the state of duality, everything you see, feel, and sense is real.  When your conscious thought resides in the state of non-duality.....(ie in sleep, maybe even in dreams, or in the samadhi), what is real becomes not real.  It has no ability to grasp your 6 six senses. 

That's not the way Taoist singularity/duality works.  Buddhists do special things Taoists can't do.

 

This is a realization which is made possible only when you have realized certain non-duality state. 

I'm not going to hit on that.  Hehehe.

[Marblehead]

Hehehe..not needed because I receive guidance in my dreams.....   Others seek words, texts, and sutra for guidance and affirmation.  Otherwise, they rely on their own mind, the Buddha mind. 

 

I don't dream.  I guess I know everything I am supposed to know.

[Karl]

And will likely continue to do so.  Potentials do not exist.  Only after potential has been manifested is there existence.

 

The pretty lady down the street.  There is potential that she will attend to you.  But she never does.  No existence.

 

 

No fear here.  I speak to different concepts differently.  That is because my personal philosophy is a combination of many sources, many of which are at various levels contradictory.

 

But I still hold to cause and effect.  Big Bang caused manifestation.

 

The lady does exist. Sexual acts do exist. You do exist. History is full of instances of men and women having sexual congress. What you are talking about is actuality, not existence.

 

Potential has basis in fact and reality. It is based first on some-thing and not no-thing.

 

Why hold the contradiction when you know it to be one ? What do you get out of it MH ? I can understand someone who is ignorant taking that line, but you must be aware of the impact such a thing has when you are aware of the evasion ?

 

 

[Miffymog]

I've been thinking about how to approach this discussion. What I'm writing does not answer any particular question, rather it is my slant on this interesting debate.

 

1. Foundational approach. Nothing to do with this discussion I'm afraid, but this is one of the 'foundational' approaches I take in debates like this.

 

Two of the most primary statements that overlap Physics and Buddhism are a) everything changes and b ) everything is interconnected. I mention this as these are two deep/profound/important … umm … facts. Now, they don't really help in this thread, but I thought there were worth mentioning as they occurred in my train of thought.

 

 

2. Extremes. I'm now slowly going to tip toe towards the current thread. If you want to measure something, like the size of a table, it's fairly straight forward. You get your ruler, you measure, and the result is usually accurate enough to be of some further use.

 

But, if you want to measure extreme distances, you have to start involving things like space/time and take into account it's warping due to gravitational objects and the like. It also gets very difficult to accurately take the measurement.

 

If you go to minuscule distances, you get to a point when the particles no longer act like solid objects and become wave like with their position 'smudged' over a length.

 

So, there tends to be a comfort / Goldilocks zone where measurements, as we know them, can be easily made to a satisfactory level.

 

3 Our evolved mind. The reason my first two statements don't really apply this thread is because the essence of this thread is, I think, a prior, or before we even get to them. … so …

 

Our minds have evolved to work in such a way that we can find food, find shelter, find a mate and bring up another generation to carry on doing the same. Our minds don't need to understand massive or micro distances, so it does not come naturally to us. When things are taken out of their comfort zone, things get a bit flaky.

 

And that is how I see this thread.

 

(why use 5 words when 356 will do the job just as well !!!)

Edited June 7, 2016 by Miffymog

[Karl]

Our minds aren't like that at all. We are born blank slates and then must choose every value beginning with our own lives as the primary value-we can choose and must choose to live or die.

 

Measurement is relational. Accurate measurement is only required when we need to concretise a concept.

[ChiForce]

I tried that but gave it up as a lost cause.

 

That's not the way Taoist singularity/duality works.  Buddhists do special things Taoists can't do.

 

I'm not going to hit on that.  Hehehe.

This is an interesting read...

http://www.kagyu.org/kagyulineage/buddhism/cul/cul03.php

 

It conforms to the whole notion of "form is emptiness, emptiness is form."  Yes, your mind can reside and live in these two states of duality and non-duality...realizing the inherent emptiness of all phenomena and yet they aren't empty.  

 

There are degrees of realization that would define what is emptiness to you...

 

  http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pratyekabuddha

 

 

"The shravakas accumulate merit for up to sixteen lifetimes, whereas pratyekabuddhas accumulate merit for a hundred kalpas. In their accumulation of wisdom, shravakas only realise one type of selflessness – the selflessness of the individual – whereas pratyekabuddhas also realise half of the selflessness of phenomena. For the same reasons, the pratyekabuddhas' realization is considered inferior to the full enlightenment of those following the bodhisattva path. A bodhisattva accumulates merit for three countless aeons and fully realises both types of selflessness."

 

Again, this isn't about some word play or mind thought manipulations.  It is about the ability of the realized mind to see the world around him or her. 

[steve]

When your conscious thought resides in the state of duality, everything you see, feel, and sense is real.  When your conscious thought resides in the state of non-duality.....(ie in sleep, maybe even in dreams, or in the samadhi), what is real becomes not real.  It has no ability to grasp your 6 six senses. 

I'd like to add a caution here - when we dream, we are in a state of duality. The dream consciousness identifies with a self and distinguishes that self from the dream environment. In fact, we generally are not even aware we are asleep. Even in lucid dreaming, there is an awareness of self and other in the dream, hence a state of duality. In sleep we are unconscious, not in a non-dual state, unless of course we have studied and mastered sleep yoga - the sleep of clear light. At least this is my understanding and experience.

[ChiForce]

I'd like to add a caution here - when we dream, we are in a state of duality. The dream consciousness identifies with a self and distinguishes that self from the dream environment. In fact, we generally are not even aware we are asleep. Even in lucid dreaming, there is an awareness of self and other in the dream, hence a state of duality. In sleep we are unconscious, not in a non-dual state, unless of course we have studied and mastered sleep yoga - the sleep of clear light. At least this is my understanding and experience.

Yes, of course...it depends on your realization to realize rigpa....  If not rigpa, at least, in the realm of "dream of clarity" in which objective information about the world or yourself is being revealed and conveyed to you. 

[Marblehead]

The lady does exist. Sexual acts do exist. You do exist. History is full of instances of men and women having sexual congress. What you are talking about is actuality, not existence. Potential has basis in fact and reality. It is based first on some-thing and not no-thing. Why hold the contradiction when you know it to be one ? What do you get out of it MH ? I can understand someone who is ignorant taking that line, but you must be aware of the impact such a thing has when you are aware of the evasion ?

Funny.  I have forgotten what my contradictions are and I'm not going back through this thread to find out.

 

My life most times runs smoother than a greased pig.  I'm an optimist but also a realist.  How contradictory is that?

 

Don't let my contradictions bother you too much.  They don't bother me at all.

[Marblehead]

It conforms to the whole notion of "form is emptiness, emptiness is form."  Yes, your mind can reside and live in these two states of duality and non-duality...realizing the inherent emptiness of all phenomena and yet they aren't empty.  

 

There are degrees of realization that would define what is emptiness to you...

I've been through all this before.  There is nor significant disagreement.  Although I use the word "fullness" as opposed to "emptiness".  Therefore, "form is fullness, fullness is form." 

 

Again, this isn't about some word play or mind thought manipulations.  It is about the ability of the realized mind to see the world around him or her. 

Agree.  But all things will pass.