Is a constantly changing object an object?
-
These are conventional words and it's perfectly OK to use conventional words - as long as we see the empty reality of these conventional words and not grasp on it. Like I said, even words are conditioned arising... labels.. perceptions.. etcOriginally posted by casino_king:ahh... not completely true. Changes, but knowledge and technology becomes better and better. If we don't use judgemental words like better or worse, we can say "more" or "faster" or "easier" or "more powerful" or "more efficient" or "healthier" or "more productive" ...... -
What you are saying is just like quantum theory; without the observer the universe is neither in existence or non existence.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:These are conventional words and it's perfectly OK to use conventional words - as long as we see the empty reality of these conventional words and not grasp on it. Like I said, even words are conditioned arising... labels.. perceptions.. etc
It is a very nice concept that nobody cares because as far as they are concern, as long as they are alive, the universe is in existence.
So what is the point of teaching that you can argue for the non existence of the universe? -
Chance on an article at http://www.serve.com/~cmtan/buddhism/Misc/noself.html
Do not believe just because someone have told you. Examine and investigate.
SELF AND NO-SELF
-Tan Chade Meng
(This article explores the very difficult question of "no-self". It is one of my favourites among all the articles I've written.)
I'm a Research Engineer by profession and the bulk of my work is in the areas of Neural networks and Computer vision. I have also recently developed an interest in Artificial Life (Alife). I approach the issue of "self" both from what little I've learned from my work and what little I've learned as a meditator.
In my line of research, I find it useful to think of "intelligence" as an "emergent" quality. Perhaps an example will illustrate this idea. Take the example of a flock of birds flying in one direction. The amazing thing about the flock is that it's always organized in a "V" shape, which can be proven to be the most energy-efficient formation (The bird in front generates air movements that lessens the load of the birds behind. When the front bird gets tired, some bird from behind takes over). Another amazing thing is that when the flock meets an obstacle, such as a tall building, it finds a perfect way to split apart and reform again once the obstacle is passed.
Flock behaviour can be described as an "intelligent" behaviour. One observing the flock might be tempted to conclude that there is an overall intelligence controlling the behaviour of individual birds. But then again, it's obvious that there is no bird in overall control.
Here's the fun part. It can be shown in simulations that all each bird does is to follow a simple algorithm. Each bird notes only the position of birds immediately surrounding it and puts itself in a position according to what its sees. From such simple behaviours of individual birds, an intelligent overall flock behaviour *emerges*!
This is what I mean when I say that "intelligence" is "emergent". There is no "central soul" of intelligence, and each element (bird) follows only simple behaviours. But working together, an intelligent behaviour emerges and becomes apparent. Similar emergence of intelligence can be observed in ant behaviour.
This model of intelligence is extremely attractive to me because I feel that it matches perfectly what I feel the Buddha taught about "self". Based on my knowledge as a AI researcher and my experience as a meditator, I see the "self" as an emergent quality.
The "self" emerges from the synergism (working together) of the 6 senses. The 6 senses, as defined by the Buddha, are the traditional 5 (sight, smell, touch, sound and taste) and the mind (there are also very practical reasons why the mind is classified as a "sense", but I'll leave this to another discussion). Each sense is formed by the aggregation of the 5 Aggregates. They are body (the sense organ itself), sensation (in my language, activation of sensual inputs), consciousness (the system responding to the presence of input activation), perception (processing of the input to give a symbolic output) and mental formations (post-processing of the output).
The 5 Aggregates interact to emerge a working sense, and the 6 senses interact to emerge a "self".
To me, it's a very beautiful idea. There is no "soul", no "essence of self that exists independently of and outside of the Aggregates", yet from this web of interaction, "self" emerges. And this "self" is very real, even though it isn't at all.
Perhaps it's useful to compare this to "team spirit". When a group of people come together to play basketball, the members interact to emerge the feeling of "team spirit". This quality can be felt by the members and is observable by other people. But there is no "central essence" of "team spirit". It's gone as soon as the team disbands.
It is therefore correct to say that "*I* feel this way", "*I* am responsible for this and this", "*I* achieved Sotapana-ship", "*I* love so and so", etc. It is also correct to say that "There is no *I*, no *self*. Just the Aggregates and the senses". To me, there are no contradictions, only a very beautiful realization that only a highly Enlightened one could have discovered.
To me, this is not just an intellectual idea. In my own meditations, I can identify very closely with what I described above. One who abides in Mindfulness and Concentration observes how each sense contributes to his feeling of "self-ness". He observes that he is not any of his senses. He obseves how his senses and aggregates makes him. He realizes self, and no-self. It's a very powerful discovery. -
This is the beauty of Buddhism, you are getting there.Originally posted by casino_king:What you are saying is just like quantum theory; without the observer the universe is neither in existence or non existence.
It is a very nice concept that nobody cares because as far as they are concern, as long as they are alive, the universe is in existence.
So what is the point of teaching that you can argue for the non existence of the universe? -
Let me tell you a story since I notice Buddhists always say "This reminds me of a story."
Say you are hungry. Now, your hunger can be in existence or non existence. The food before you can be in existence or non existence.
You can sit and observe your hunger and the food or you can eat the food.
Just because you can sit there and observe your hunger and food and contemplate on existence and lack thereof, so what? You still have to eat it.
This is reality. The non existence concept can be beautiful like you say. You still have to eat the food?
Unless you can tell me, study Buddhism and there is no need to eat the food and your hunger will also disappear. -
Amazing. Keep it up. Your mind is at work. Wonderful. Think harder.
Originally posted by casino_king:Let me tell you a story since I notice Buddhists always say "This reminds me of a story."
Say you are hungry. Now, your hunger can be in existence or non existence. The food before you can be in existence or non existence.
You can sit and observe your hunger and the food or you can eat the food.
Just because you can sit there and observe your hunger and food and contemplate on existence and lack thereof, so what? You still have to eat it.
This is reality. The non existence concept can be beautiful like you say. You still have to eat the food?
Unless you can tell me, study Buddhism and there is no need to eat the food and your hunger will also disappear. -
thanks for sharing. great article by tan chade meng.....Originally posted by concerned_man:"Flock behaviour can be described as an "intelligent" behaviour. One observing the flock might be tempted to conclude that there is an overall intelligence controlling the behaviour of individual birds. But then again, it's obvious that there is no bird in overall control."
this part is interesting.... very mind-tickling. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
i think emptiness is a bit miss presentated here. energy always under go a state of fluctuation, and doesn't just stay still. even when we look at the table or chair, the atoms are always in vibrations. it is due to this fluctuation and constant motion that we said that they are inherently 'empty'.
[b]Yes I already said that if you reduce something down to its very basic level, then you have the most basic of the basic and as far as science understand it now mass and ebergy are correlated. So what we percieve as mass is actually energy no different from light or radiation.
So now we come down all the way to "energy" as the most basic of the building blocks. You cannot say that "energy" is inherently empty because as far as we know, energy is not made up of other components. All the school children knows that energy cannot be created or destroyed but only changes from one form to another.
.
Buddha actually go further to explain that energy are in the form of abstract earth, abstract waters, abstract air and abstract heat. They are so tiny and so abstract, that they cannot be discerned by any human sense organs or scientific instruments. Only the Buddhas can discern them. The four basic abstract elements should not be mistken as the ordinary earth, water, heat and wind. They are energies.Basic Abstract Elements Characteristics
ref:
(1) Abstract earth (pathavi) To harden and to soften
(2) Abstract water (apo) To flow and to paste
(3) Abstract Air (vayo) To expand and to contract
(4) Abstract heat (tejo) To heat and to cool
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/articles/cosmos1.htm
furthermore the fluctuation are due to mental fabrication. As He said, there are 2 element that made up the universe/cosmo, one's Matter and the other is Mind.
we have science on it's way:
http://www.globaldialoguecenter.com/gallery/exhibits/wisdom_water/index.shtml
imho,
/\ -
No..no..no think u hav misunderstand the meaningOriginally posted by casino_king:Let me tell you a story since I notice Buddhists always say "This reminds me of a story."
Say you are hungry. Now, your hunger can be in existence or non existence. The food before you can be in existence or non existence.
You can sit and observe your hunger and the food or you can eat the food.
Just because you can sit there and observe your hunger and food and contemplate on existence and lack thereof, so what? You still have to eat it.
This is reality. The non existence concept can be beautiful like you say. You still have to eat the food?
Unless you can tell me, study Buddhism and there is no need to eat the food and your hunger will also disappear.
ok...i think u have enough examples by now so let go straight to the point...
"So what?" you may wonder. "Why should I be concerned about this?" We should be concerned because this tendency to perceive, believe in and grasp at things as truly existing or inherently existing lies at the root of all our problems. Fear, worry, frustration, dissatisfaction, loneliness, grief, pain, and all the other myriad problems and sufferings of mind and body that we experience are caused by this attitude, which in Buddhism is known as "self-grasping ignorance". We all have the potential to enjoy ever-lasting peace, bliss, wisdom and freedom from all suffering -- the state of enlightenment or Buddhahood -- but we are unable to attain this as long as our mind is caught up in ignorance, and does not understand the true nature of things.
Self-grasping ignorance pervades our view of everything. We see ourselves as inherently existing -- we cling tightly to an illusory image of a permanent, independently existing I or self. We hold on to self-limiting concepts about ourselves, believing that mistakes made in the past have become permanent aspects of our personality. These "permanent faults" become the basis of low self-esteem and even self-hatred, obscuring our potential to be pure, perfect and free -- an enlightened being. All this arises from ignorant misperception.
You see Mr Casino my pal...we tend to cherish our sense of self, as if it were the center of the universe. Out of this strong self-centeredness, we develop desire and attachment for people and things that make us happy and support our sense of I, we have aversion and fear towards people and things that disturb us or threaten our sense of I, and we are indifferent towards whoever or whatever neither helps nor harms us. Believing all these people and objects to also exist in a real, permanent, independent way further intensifies our attitudes of attachment and aversion. These attitudes disturb our mind and motivate us to create negative actions or karma, such as harming our enemies, and lying or stealing to benefit ourselves and our loved ones, and this karma is the cause of suffering and problems in the future. Self-grasping ignorance is also the main factor that keeps us circling in samsara, the cycle of death and rebirth.
That is why we should be concerned about our tendency to see things as truly or inherently existent, and why we should learn to perceive things in their correct way, as empty of inherent existence, or, as it says in the verse, as "illusory". Perhaps a simple way to understand this is by thinking of the analogy of a rainbow. Due to certain conditions in the atmosphere and the play of sunlight and moisture, a rainbow appears in the sky. Although it looks so real we would like to touch it, it is insubstantial, momentary and completely dependent on causes and conditions. It exists for a while and then disappears. Everything else, all conditioned phenomena -- animate and inanimate -- can be compared to a rainbow. Although most things last longer than a rainbow, the way they exist is similar: they arise due to the coming together of different causes and conditions, exist for a while, and then, again due to causes and conditions, they go out of existence. So, like a rainbow, they are illusory, empty of permanent, independent, substantial existence. -
My daily activities are not unusual,
I'm just naturally in harmony with them.
Grasping nothing, discarding nothing...
Supernatural power and marvelous activity -
Drawing water and carrying firewood.
Layman Pang-yun
---
Student: What is only practicing?
ZMSS: When you first start driving a car, you cannot give your attention to sights or sounds, or else you will crash. However, after some practice, you can talk, look at things and listen to the radio without any problem. Talking and sightseeing have become part of driving. Your seeing, hearing and speaking are non-attachment. It is the same with Zen. "Only Zen" contains walking, eating, sleeping, talking and watching television‹just do it! All of these have become non-attached thinking. This is only practicing.
(zen master seung sahn) -
simply speaking,Originally posted by casino_king:Let me tell you a story since I notice Buddhists always say "This reminds me of a story."
Say you are hungry. Now, your hunger can be in existence or non existence. The food before you can be in existence or non existence.
You can sit and observe your hunger and the food or you can eat the food.
Just because you can sit there and observe your hunger and food and contemplate on existence and lack thereof, so what? You still have to eat it.
This is reality. The non existence concept can be beautiful like you say. You still have to eat the food?
Unless you can tell me, study Buddhism and there is no need to eat the food and your hunger will also disappear.
Hunger is a feeling that signal you to eat.
Food replenish energy for your body.
Buddhist practise middle-way. We do not practise extreme practice like starving ourselves to death.
"Hunger is non-existance or existance".. mMm.. ????????????
it just does not make sense here...
N what does it has to do with ' emptiness' ?
N are u implying that it is impractical? -
I am simply asking what having the concept of inherent emptiness is for?Originally posted by Isis:Are u implying that it is impractical?
I can look at Quantum Theory to derive that the universe is non existing but why would I want to do that other than have a laugh?
I can reduce everything in the universe to energy waves and in that sense say man and trees are the same things, simply composite of light waves, but why would I want to do that other than have a laugh?
I might as well use the tree as a shade when the sun is hot rather than say, tree, you are nothing and stand in the hot sun.
So I need to know the purpose of having the concept of inherent emptiness.
In fact I would say that my example of everything is composite of energy waves is a better example of the technical basis of saying that everything is inherently empty. I can then say, if you have the ability, you can see that there is nothing in front of you other than light waves, tree (light waves); houses (light waves); fellow human beings (light waves.)
Why would I want to do that other than maybe write a best selling novel and someone make it into a hit movie? -
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
cos of the above
No..no..no think u hav misunderstand the meaning
ok...i think u have enough examples by now so let go [b]straight to the point...
"So what?" you may wonder. "Why should I be concerned about this?" We should be concerned because this tendency to perceive, believe in and grasp at things as truly existing or inherently existing lies at the root of all our problems. Fear, worry, frustration, dissatisfaction, loneliness, grief, pain, and all the other myriad problems and sufferings of mind and body that we experience are caused by this attitude, which in Buddhism is known as "self-grasping ignorance". We all have the potential to enjoy ever-lasting peace, bliss, wisdom and freedom from all suffering -- the state of enlightenment or Buddhahood -- but we are unable to attain this as long as our mind is caught up in ignorance, and does not understand the true nature of things.
Self-grasping ignorance pervades our view of everything. We see ourselves as inherently existing -- we cling tightly to an illusory image of a permanent, independently existing I or self. We hold on to self-limiting concepts about ourselves, believing that mistakes made in the past have become permanent aspects of our personality. These "permanent faults" become the basis of low self-esteem and even self-hatred, obscuring our potential to be pure, perfect and free -- an enlightened being. All this arises from ignorant misperception.
You see Mr Casino my pal...we tend to cherish our sense of self, as if it were the center of the universe. Out of this strong self-centeredness, we develop desire and attachment for people and things that make us happy and support our sense of I, we have aversion and fear towards people and things that disturb us or threaten our sense of I, and we are indifferent towards whoever or whatever neither helps nor harms us. Believing all these people and objects to also exist in a real, permanent, independent way further intensifies our attitudes of attachment and aversion. These attitudes disturb our mind and motivate us to create negative actions or karma, such as harming our enemies, and lying or stealing to benefit ourselves and our loved ones, and this karma is the cause of suffering and problems in the future. Self-grasping ignorance is also the main factor that keeps us circling in samsara, the cycle of death and rebirth.
That is why we should be concerned about our tendency to see things as truly or inherently existent, and why we should learn to perceive things in their correct way, as empty of inherent existence, or, as it says in the verse, as "illusory". Perhaps a simple way to understand this is by thinking of the analogy of a rainbow. Due to certain conditions in the atmosphere and the play of sunlight and moisture, a rainbow appears in the sky. Although it looks so real we would like to touch it, it is insubstantial, momentary and completely dependent on causes and conditions. It exists for a while and then disappears. Everything else, all conditioned phenomena -- animate and inanimate -- can be compared to a rainbow. Although most things last longer than a rainbow, the way they exist is similar: they arise due to the coming together of different causes and conditions, exist for a while, and then, again due to causes and conditions, they go out of existence. So, like a rainbow, they are illusory, empty of permanent, independent, substantial existence. [/b]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The concept of "emptiness" can be seen in daily life.
For example, you fulk an exam. You are then labelled as stupid/loser/failure etc in your report card. So are u really a failure? Do u see urself as one?
For A man: He think he is a failure and so he accepts his defeats.
For B man: He does not accept his defeat; work hard and finally pass his paper.
U think you are, you are. The nature of things at its most primitive state are actually 'empty'; depending on the way we perceive... sometime we act and create our reality from this perception.
Another example is some might think this guy is handsome but some might think he is so-so. So is he handsome or so-so?
To all other forumers, if my examples are not suitable, Feel free to correct me. -
I can read, I thought you had something new to sayOriginally posted by Isis:cos of this 
-
At least you are honest and quote neutral_onliner. Some people in sgforums take other people's ideas as their own shamlessly. Because the idea belongs to someone else, when they try to steal it, it only comes out stupid. Just take notice.Originally posted by Isis:cos of this 
-
Originally posted by Isis:
I doubt that anybody will correct you because Buddhism is "think for yourself and come up with your own examples." Good examples. I must say.
The concept of "emptiness" can be seen in daily life.
For example, you fulk an exam. You are then labelled as stupid/loser/failure etc in your report card. So are u really a failure? Do u see urself as one?
[b]For A man: He think he is a failure and so he accepts his defeats.
For B man: He does not accept his defeat; work hard and finally pass his paper.
U think you are, you are. The nature of things at its most primitive state are actually 'empty'; depending on the way we perceive... sometime we act and create our reality from this perception.
Another example is some might think this guy is handsome but some might think he is so-so. So is he handsome or so-so?
To all other forumers, if my examples are not suitable, Feel free to correct me.
[/b]
But how do you think the sentiments you expressed go from the head to the heart?
For example, in your brain you might say: "It is more important I find a good wife and not simply a beautiful wife because beauty is empty."
But still you fall for beautiful girls, at least those you think are beautiful. -
Anyone can give u advise but good or bad u have to see for urself right?Originally posted by casino_king:I doubt that anybody will correct you because Buddhism is "think for yourself and come up with your own examples." Good examples. I must say.
But how do you think the sentiments you expressed go from the head to the heart?
For example, in your brain you might say: "It is more important I find a good wife and not simply a beautiful wife because beauty is empty."
But still you fall for beautiful girls, at least those you think are beautiful.
I think this depends on the situations and individuals. Anyway beautiful girls can be good wives too. Not-so-pretty girls can be bad wives too..
Erm regarding ur questions on : sentiments in expressing from head to heart..
MmMm im not really sure how to answer this.. but i will take things as it is/comes. -
Maybe I should clarify myself. Many religions teach that one should not look at the obvious but look for the "truth" which to me is another way of saying form is emtpiness....Originally posted by Isis:Anyone can give u advise but good or bad u have to see for urself right?
I think this depends on the situations and individuals. Anyway beautiful girls can be good wives too. Not-so-pretty girls can be bad wives too..
Erm regarding ur questions on : sentiments in expressing from head to heart..
MmMm im not really sure how to answer this.. but i will take things as it is/comes.
I want to know how Buddhism teach its followers to apply it. I am asking this because I do not think that by just pointing something out to a person, he will be able to apply it in his life even if he accepts it.
Religious or not most people realise that they live for only some decades but they still live their lives as if they are going to live forever. They have head knowledge but no heart knowledge. -
Excellent inputs. You are beginning to ask the right question.Originally posted by casino_king:Maybe I should clarify myself. Many religions teach that one should not look at the obvious but look for the "truth" which to me is another way of saying form is emtpiness....
I want to know how Buddhism teach its followers to apply it. I am asking this because I do not think that by just pointing something out to a person, he will be able to apply it in his life even if he accepts it.
Religious or not most people realise that they live for only some decades but they still live their lives as if they are going to live forever. They have head knowledge but no heart knowledge. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
I want to know how Buddhism teach its followers to apply it. I am asking this because I do not think that by just pointing something out to a person, he will be able to apply it in his life even if he accepts it.[/quote]
Very good question. In Buddhism, Emptiness is so important because without realising emptiness we cannot be liberated from sufferings and vexations - the world of Samsara. By realising emptiness we can be liberated in this lifetime.
For example, by realising the empty nature of phenomena, our minds will be cleansed of its defilements and fetters. We will not be attached to greed and hatred, and our ignorance will be dispelled (i.e ignorance of the nature of existence, attachment to self).
If someone insults you, by seeing the empty nature of phenomena, you do not feel insulted because you are not attached to ego, and you do not feel 'threatened' - but sees this insult as 'conditioned arising' - 'empty'. That is why when the Buddha got insulted, he remained completely calm, seeing it merely as conditioned arising. He did not feel angry at the person at all, and the person left eventually, ashamed. This is just one example, in life I'm sure there are a lot of situations where the wisdom of emptiness will be put to good use, and in fact, we must be mindful every moment in our lives.
For example, say you're hit on the head by somebody wielding a stick. Instead of being angry with that person, you should think, "If I'm going to get angry I should get angry with the object that causes the pain. That means I should be angry with the stick. But the stick itself is not responsible for my pain; it's under the control of the person wielding it and has none of its own. However, the person hitting me with the stick also has no control; he's forced to do it by his deluded mind. How can I get angry with him?
Now, even the verse I quoted previously from Heart Sutra can have a direct impact on life -
O Shariputra, all dharmas are marked with emptiness. They do not appear nor disappear, are not tainted nor pure, do not increase nor decrease. - Heart Sutra
In life, many people are often caught up and attached to gain and loss. Just like gamblers. This cause a lot of sufferings, and if a person practise the dharma and sees phenomena as empty of inherent existence, he will not be caught up by gain and loss, as gain and loss is illusory and empty.Religious or not most people realise that they live for only some decades but they still live their lives as if they are going to live forever.
Buddhists are different for we emphasize on the impermanence of life, and practise mindfulness of every moment to a point whereby we are not even affected if our life is to go in an instant, for example in a Tsunami.
[quote]Originally posted by An Eternal Now:One day, Buddha questioned a number of his students,
"How long can a human life be certain?"
One of the students answered, "For a few days."
Buddha replied, "No, you have not yet understood life."
Buddha then repeated,
"How long can a human life be certain?"
Another student answered, "For a meal."
Again, Buddha replied, "No, you have not understood life either."
Buddha repeated one third time,
"How long can a human life be certain?"
A third student answered, "Only for a breath."
Buddha praised, "Great! You've started to understand life." -
How do you say to people who says that since everything is inherently empty, family is not important, life itself is not important let's just eat drink and be merry....Originally posted by An Eternal Now: -
A good question. I would say: such a person has not really understood Emptiness but thinks of Emptiness in terms of nihilism. Emptiness is not nihilism, it means that things are empty of inherent existence, and is conditioned arising. By 'eating, drinking and be merry and neglect family', he is escaping from reality. Even though the world is empty of inherent existence, but we cannot escape the laws of causality. Otherwise Buddha would not have taught about karma.Originally posted by casino_king:How do you say to people who says that since everything is inherently empty, family is not important, life itself is not important let's just eat drink and be merry....http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol8no3c.htm
'All phenomena arise by the aggregation of causes and conditions; all phenomena cease by the dispersion of causes and conditions.' How do we apply this Law of Causality?
Using the family to illustrate the Law of Causality, a family is established as a result of the aggregation of causes and conditions. Since the family has already been brought about by these various causes and conditions, we should therefore live peacefully and joyfully as a family. Fulfilling this positive causality for the family will leave us with no regrets in the future.
We shouldn't reckon presume that 'all forms are empty' (Buddhist philosophy that all things and phenomena are empty because they don't have an independent nature of their own.); you are 'empty', I am also 'empty' and we are all 'empty', and so we don't care about anything. This is wrong. Since all things result from aggregations of causes and conditions we must make good use of these causes and conditions.
As another example, it is only because I am here to give a Dharma talk that this bouquet of flowers has been prepared. Therefore, we should place these flowers nicely on the table so that people can appreciate them. If while we are admiring the flowers, a person comes by and declares, "Sigh, all phenomena arising from causes and conditions are empty. What use is there in having such a beautiful bouquet of flowers?" He then removes it and throws it away. This person may not be of sound mind, because by now you know about the Law of Causality, and you say that the flowers are empty. But, you are still physically here. You, as a 'person' have not emptied away! So how could you say that the flowers are empty? Therefore, you should diligently learn and practise what the Buddha taught, and cultivate. First of all empty the sentient being (i.e. the arising and ceasing of thoughts and feelings) within you, and then you will not find that things in the world are contradictory.
So from this, we see how that which is seemingly contradictory in the world, stems from failure to properly grasp the principles. Because when the principles have not been correctly understood, there cannot be coherence in their application to matters of the world. This leads to lack of roundedness and harmony in the way we deal with things. -
Wouldn't he then ask you why his actions that are empty would have any resultant effect? If it has resultant effects, wouldn't he be anxious about making the wrong moves; treating people the wrong way? Wouldn't that make something that is inherently empty be nonetheless inherently important?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:A good question. I would say: such a person has not really understood Emptiness but thinks of Emptiness in terms of nihilism. Emptiness is not nihilism, it means that things are empty of inherent existence, and is conditioned arising. By 'eating, drinking and be merry and neglect family', he is escaping from reality. Even though the world is empty of inherent existence, but we cannot escape the laws of causality. Otherwise Buddha would not have taught about karma. -
Your first question stems from the error of comprehending Emptiness: through nihilism.Originally posted by casino_king:Wouldn't he then ask you why his actions that are empty would have any resultant effect? If it has resultant effects, wouldn't he be anxious about making the wrong moves; treating people the wrong way? Wouldn't that make something that is inherently empty be nonetheless inherently important?
Your second question stems from not comprehending Emptiness. -
If not to say that we must not attach to anything because everything is inherently empty (unimportant,) can you then again tell me what the point of saying something is inherently empty again?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Your first question stems from the error of comprehending Emptiness: through nihilism.
Your second question stems from not comprehending Emptiness.