Is a constantly changing object an object?
-
ok pal i try to help have a slight idea wat is emptiness abtOriginally posted by casino_king:Thanks
Emptyness really means 'empty of inherent existence'.
ok do u noe wat it mean by 'empty of inherent existence'. -
That things exist only in relation to something else?Originally posted by neutral_onliner:ok pal i try to help have a slight idea wat is emptiness abt
Emptyness really means 'empty of inherent existence'.
ok do u noe wat it mean by 'empty of inherent existence'. -
yesOriginally posted by casino_king:That things exist only in relation to something else?
wat buddha is trying to tell us is tat we see thing thru our perception and give them label rather than see thing as they truly are.
Everything we see thru our eyes seem so real as if it truly exist as a single entity.Whereas in reality this is not so
in our ordinary view, things appear to have some true of inherent nature, as if they were really there, as if we could find these real, independent entities if we searched for them. They appear to be there, independent of the causes and conditions that created them, independent of the parts of which they are made, and independent of the mind which conceives and gives them a name. This is the appearance of true or inherent existence and our mind grasps it as real. Actually they exist depending on causes and conditions, parts -
or maybe that things exists in the human brain? Like if nobody in this world ever thought of it, it doesn't exists?Originally posted by neutral_onliner:ok pal i try to help have a slight idea wat is emptiness abt
Emptyness really means 'empty of inherent existence'.
ok do u noe wat it mean by 'empty of inherent existence'. -
u can read more abt the heart sutra to learn abt emptiness..
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/heart_s2.pdf -
wat buddha is trying to tell us is tat we see thing thru our perception and give them label rather than see thing as they truly are.Originally posted by casino_king:or maybe that things exists in the human brain? Like if nobody in this world ever thought of it, it doesn't exists?
Everything we see thru our eyes seem so real as if it truly exist as a single entity.Whereas in reality this is not so
in our ordinary view, things appear to have some true of inherent nature, as if they were really there, as if we could find these real, independent entities if we searched for them. They appear to be there, independent of the causes and conditions that created them, independent of the parts of which they are made, and independent of the mind which conceives and gives them a name. This is the appearance of true or inherent existence and our mind grasps it as real. Actually they exist depending on causes and conditions, parts
so far so good ? -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
Let's says someone tells you that a troup of monkeys exists in a certain place and you go and see it for yourself, lo and behold, the troup of monkeys are there! If the troup of monkeys are not "real" then they would not be there?
yes
wat buddha is trying to tell us is tat we see thing thru our perception and give them label rather than see thing as they truly are.
Everything we see thru our eyes seem so real as if it truly exist as a single entity.Whereas in reality this is not so
in our ordinary view, things appear to have some true of inherent nature, as if they were really there, as if we could find these real, independent entities if we searched for them. They appear to be there, independent of the causes and conditions that created them, independent of the parts of which they are made, and independent of the mind which conceives and gives them a name. [b]This is the appearance of true or inherent existence and our mind grasps it as real. Actually they exist depending on causes and conditions, parts
[/b] -
Thanks, but since neutral_onliner is so kind...Originally posted by geforce:u can read more abt the heart sutra to learn abt emptiness..
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/heart_s2.pdf -
wait wait relax...Originally posted by casino_king:Let's says someone tells you that a troup of monkeys exists in a certain place and you go and see it for yourself, lo and behold, the troup of monkeys are there! If the troup of monkeys are not "real" then they would not be there?
ok take alook at this pic
ok so in conventional term this bicycle exist no doubt but if u look carefully (let say for example the bicycle is made up of three part :
-The metal structure
-front wheel
-rear wheel
now pls tell me where is the bicycle ? which part can be really considered a bicycle?
is The metal structure the bicycle?
or
is it the front wheel?
or
rear wheel? -
more useful links and texts, read it when u have time..
http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/sutras.html -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
Let's say we look at a car, it is made up of parts... engine, doors, windows, and we call it a car. If we look deeper, then they are metal, glass, plastics. And even deeper, molecules of carbon, hydrogen, iron. And even deeper, atoms and even deeper electrons and protons and even deeper, energy waves... ?
wat buddha is trying to tell us is tat we see thing thru our perception and give them label rather than see thing as they truly are.
Everything we see thru our eyes seem so real as if it truly exist as a single entity.Whereas in reality this is not so
in our ordinary view, things appear to have some true of inherent nature, as if they were really there, as if we could find these real, independent entities if we searched for them. They appear to be there, independent of the causes and conditions that created them, independent of the parts of which they are made, and independent of the mind which conceives and gives them a name. [b]This is the appearance of true or inherent existence and our mind grasps it as real. Actually they exist depending on causes and conditions, parts
so far so good ?[/b] -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
OK the parts sum up to make the bicycle. Individually they are bicycle parts and not bicycle and so on.
wait wait relax...
ok take alook at this pic
ok so in [b]conventional term this bicycle exist no doubt but if u look carefully (let say for example the bicycle is made up of three part :
-The metal structure
-front wheel
-rear wheel
now pls tell me where is the bicycle ? which part can be really considered a bicycle?
is The metal structure the bicycle?
or
is it the front wheel?
or
rear wheel?[/b] -
wait wait relax...Originally posted by casino_king:Let's say we look at a car, it is made up of parts... engine, doors, windows, and we call it a car. If we look deeper, then they are metal, glass, plastics. And even deeper, molecules of carbon, hydrogen, iron. And even deeper, atoms and even deeper electrons and protons and even deeper, energy waves... ?
ok take alook at this pic
ok so in conventional term this bicycle exist no doubt but if u look carefully (let say for example the bicycle is made up of three part :
-The metal structure
-front wheel
-rear wheel
now pls tell me where is the bicycle ? which part can be really considered a bicycle?
is The metal structure the bicycle?
or
is it the front wheel?
or
rear wheel? -
yes correct so u see actually everything u see does not exist as a single entity.It is alway depended on other enity and condition.As for this example when all entities(wheel,metal structure) and all necessary conditons are met it will produced an effect when u eyes project on it. And ur mind will give a label called"bicycle" to it.To ur perception the bicycle seem so real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.BUT in actual fact in reality what the natural 'see' it just a wheel ,a metal structure and two wheels.There no bicycle in the 1st place.Originally posted by casino_king:OK the parts sum up to make the bicycle. Individually they are bicycle parts and not bicycle and so on.
try dismentle it part by part ..hey where is the bicycle now.
So u see we see thing thru the label we gave rather than see thing as they truly are
ok why not u go observe ur environment and see for yourself.Everything be it a car, a computer , a chair and photocopy machine , they DO NOT exist as a single entity.It is alway depended on other enity and condition.To put it simple it alway something plus something to give u something.however u mind will project them as if they are real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.And start giving labels.In actual fact they r compounded -
indeed, remind me of :
Where Is The Cracker?
Ven: (Holding a cracker) A cracker appears to be a real cracker as there is some "cracker-ness" about it - it seems to exists "out there," independent of our Mind. If it really exists like that, then when we analyze and search for just what the cracker is, we should be able to find it. (The cracker is broken and a piece is held up) Is this piece a cracker?
Aud: Yes.
Ven: (Holding up the other piece) is this a cracker?
Aud: Yes.
Ven: (Crumbles the cracker pieces) what is this now?
Aud: Crumbs - a mess!
Ven: There is no cracker now? What happened to the real cracker we saw before? If it had some cracker-ness quality to it, where is it now? What we have now are the same atoms and molecules as before - but we call it crumbs and not a cracker!
Aud: The cracker is the collection of atoms and molecules. It is all the parts together!
Ven: But a collection is just a group of parts. If none of the parts by themselves are a cracker, then how can many parts together be an independent cracker with some cracker-ness quality? If you put many non-butterflies, such as grasshoppers together, does that make a butterfly? How can a group of non-crackers or crumbs make a real cracker?
Aud: Then there is no cracker at all? What am I eating?
Ven: What we are searching for is something that is a cracker independent of its parts. That real independent cracker can't be found because it doesn't exists. But a dependently existent cracker is there! What you are eating is still a cracker!
The cracker exists as a group of atoms and molecules put together in a certain pattern. Our Mind looks at it and conceives it to be a thing and calls it a cracker - it becomes a cracker because all of us together have conceived it in a similar way and agreed, by the force of social convention, to call it a cracker.
That cracker exists dependent on its causes and conditions - the flour, water and baker and so on. It depends on our minds conceiving it to be a thing and labeling it "cracker." Apart from this dependently existent cracker, there is no other cracker. It is empty of being a cracker inherently and independently with some cracker-ness quality to it. It exists - but not in the same way it appears to us to exist. It appears to be independent when it isn't.
http://www.buddhistinformation.com/be_a_lamp_upon_yourself.htm
/\ -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
Everybody knows that right? If a person dies, then he is no longer with us. If he loses one leg, he is still with us.
yes correct so u see actually everything u see [b]does not exist as a single entity.It is alway depended on other enity and condition.As for this example when all entities(wheel,metal structure) and all necessary conditons are met it will produced an effect when u eyes project on it. And ur mind will give a label called"bicycle" to it.To ur perception the bicycle seem so real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.BUT in actual fact in reality what the natural 'see' it just a wheel ,a metal structure and two wheels.There no bicycle in the 1st place.
try dismentle it part by part ..hey where is the bicycle now.
So u see we see thing thru the label we gave rather than see thing as they truly are
ok why not u go observe ur environment and see for yourself.Everything be it a car, a computer , a chair and photocopy machine , they DO NOT exist as a single entity.It is alway depended on other enity and condition.To put it simple it alway something plus something to give u something.however u mind will project them as if they are real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.And start giving labels.In actual fact they r compounded [/b]
We already know that man and bicycle are made up of energy waves and are in fact the same thing and it is how these energy waves combine so that we become man or bicycle.
At the lowest common denominator, we are all energy waves. The combination is the reality? -
wait wait...slowlyOriginally posted by casino_king:Everybody knows that right? If a person dies, then he is no longer with us. If he loses one leg, he is still with us.
We already know that man and bicycle are made up of energy waves and are in fact the same thing and it is how these energy waves combine so that we become man or bicycle.
At the lowest common denominator, we are all energy waves. The combination is the reality?
don talk abt human first.
ok back to the bicycle.u see the problem we see the object we labelled it as if it have a TRUE SELF so real so permanent.The 'bicycle' is the TRUE SELF is FIXED.However everything is constantly changing.Every min every sec.Up the matter level eg molecules
For example no matter how u maintained the bicycle after a period of time it will not look the same as the first time u bought it.Just place it with the brand new one (just out from the factory) u will noe .Becos of such constanly changes there is oso changing of a new SELF -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
OK we know that it will remain as a bicycle only for a period of time. It will last longer if you don't use it and keep it in a vacumn. It will disappear if you dismantle it immediately. If you dismantle, you can re combine it and it becomes a bicycle again.
wait wait...slowly
don talk abt human first.
ok back to the bicycle.u see the problem we see the object we labelled it as if it have a [b]TRUE SELF so real so permanent.The 'bicycle' is the TRUE SELF is FIXED.However everything is constantly changing.Every min every sec.Up the matter level eg molecules
For example no matter how u maintained the bicycle after a period of time it will not look the same as the first time u bought it.Just place it with the brand new one (just out from the factory) u will noe [/b] -
err...well in CONVENTIONAL SENSE there is a bicycle (as i have explained when all entities(wheel,metal structure) and all necessary conditons are met it will produced an effect when u eyes project on it. And ur mind will give a label called"bicycle" to it.To ur perception the bicycle seem so real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.BUT in actual fact in reality what the NATURE 'see' is just a wheel ,a metal structure and two wheels.There was NEVER a bicycle in the 1st place.Originally posted by casino_king:OK we know that it will remain as a bicycle only for a period of time. It will last longer if you don't use it and keep it in a vacumn. It will disappear if you dismantle it immediately. If you dismantle, you can re combine it and it becomes a bicycle again.
So far so good?
IF good mi got question 4 you -
Very interesting!
It will be also very interesting to look at objects from the IT Object Oriented view. And I've realised that Buddhism view of object blends very will with it.
Actually whatever that is in the Dharma is a reflection of everything, everywhere. Amazing! -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
I see a bicycle, I climb on it and I ride it. The bicycle brings me to where I want to go. Who is nature? Why should I care how nature sees it? If I behave like nature and not see the bicycle that is clearly there, I have to walk.
err...well in [b]CONVENTIONAL SENSE there is a bicycle (as i have explained when all entities(wheel,metal structure) and all necessary conditons are met it will produced an effect when u eyes project on it. And ur mind will give a label called"bicycle" to it.To ur perception the bicycle seem so real so permanent as if it a single entity ,a one WHOLE item.BUT in actual fact in reality what the NATURE 'see' is just a wheel ,a metal structure and two wheels.There was NEVER a bicycle in the 1st place.
So far so good?
IF good mi got question 4 you [/b] -
Yah now i noe why historians love to 'verify' the historical events of BibleOriginally posted by concerned_man:Very interesting!
It will be also very interesting to look at objects from the IT Object Oriented view. And I've realised that Buddhism view of object blends very will with it.
Actually whatever that is in the Dharma is a reflection of everything, everywhere. Amazing!
while scientist love to 'study' the essence of dharma -
no..no..my pal as i have said the bicycle (in conventional sense)exist no doubt.Originally posted by casino_king:I see a bicycle, I climb on it and I ride it. The bicycle brings me to where I want to go. Who is nature? Why should I care how nature sees it? If I behave like nature and not see the bicycle that is clearly there, I have to walk.
but the label(bicycle) we give is not the TRUE SELF.There is no such thing as a bicycle.Yes u can ride on it , sit on it (why walk
)But the object tat u sit on ride on it,is just a mental structure,2 wheels
so far so good?
if good , mi got question 4 you -
CasinoKing..cannot keep dicking the dead corner.Originally posted by king108: Please treated as my reply..
3 laughters does not mean I am no serious.
Just that how to bring you to the shore on the east when you refused to go aboard the ship.
"Ben Shi Wu Yi Wou, He Chu Ri Chen Ai" really depended how you look at the object. -
A metal structuree that we call the bicycle! The chinese call it something else. The malays call it something else.Originally posted by neutral_onliner:no..no..my pal as i have said the bicycle (in conventional sense)exist no doubt.
but the label(bicycle) we give is not the TRUE SELF.There is no such thing as a bicycle.Yes u can ride on it , sit on it (why walk )But the object tat u sit on ride on it,is just a mental structure,2 wheels
so far so good?
if good , mi got question 4 you
Why is the bicycle not "true?" When the parts combine, it is truely a bicycle. If you dismantle the parts, it is no longer a bicycle.
How do I know? I ride it and it goes!