NargarjunaÂ’s Sixty Verses of Arguments (spinoff)
-
I have read the posts and most of you have "working" knowledge but have not "transcended" (this is a hint)
"Samsara and Nivarda" "Not 2 not one"
Verse 2 : The real nature of the duality samsara vs. Nirvana The duality being vs. non-being
Verse 3 : Liberation is gained by transcending this duality
Verse 4 : Liberation is gained by seeing through this duality
Verse 5 : Those who do not see reality believe in samsara and nirvana, but those who see reality believe in neither.
If you belive in neither then what do you belive in? -
Believe still lies in conceptual realm, therefore seeing reality is not a matter of believing but really seeing it.
-
Verse 5 : Those who do not see reality believe in samsara and nirvana, but those who see reality believe in neither.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Believe still lies in conceptual realm, therefore seeing reality is not a matter of believing but really seeing it.
Believe in neither. Believe in what? See what? -
See = awaken to realityOriginally posted by casino_king:Verse 5 : Those who do not see reality believe in samsara and nirvana, but those who see reality believe in neither.
Believe in neither. Believe in what? See what?
Believe in neither = not believing -
Awaken to WHAT? What is REALITY? Is it Samsara? Is it Nirvana?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:See = awaken to reality
Believe in neither = not believing -
No "what?".Originally posted by casino_king:Verse 5 : Those who do not see reality believe in samsara and nirvana, but those who see reality believe in neither.
Believe in neither. Believe in what? See what?
"What?" is questioning... trying to verify...=> conceptual thinking.
No "what?", just is. No up, no down, no front, no back... naked openness. -
No lah... you say that because you do not know...Originally posted by longchen:No "what?".
"What?" is questioning... trying to verify...=> conceptual thinking.
No "what?", just is. No up, no down, no front, no back... naked openness.
edited to add... by saying no up no down, you are already trying to say something... what you are saying is not "the answer" because you do not know... -
.Originally posted by casino_king:No lah... you say that because you do not know...
edited to add... by saying no up no down, you are already trying to say something... what you are saying is not "the answer" because you do not know... -
Originally posted by casino_king:Awaken to WHAT? What is REALITY? Is it Samsara? Is it Nirvana?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Page 135, Buddhism Plain and Simple:
We've seen that the abiding self or soul we commonly assume we are is an illusion, a figment of the imagination. Perhaps we've also begun to understand that we conceive all the innumerable aspects of the world in the same manner. Rather than see the wind, or waves - or a stream or a cup or a book - as the constant flux that each is, we imagine them to be solid, persisting, separate, unchanging things.
We attribute this "thingness" to them in the same way we attribute selfhood to human beings. Instead of seeing the thoroughgoing motion, flux, and flow of experience, we imagine a vast proliferation of innumerable, separated things. In short, we grant selfhood to whatever we find "out there."
Then we make another error. Just as we conceive of a self and counter this notion with a non-self, so also are we taken in by another set of opposing concepts - existence and non-existence. We get repeatedly caught in this duality, unwilling to see that, like self and not-self, both are phantoms created by consciousness. These concepts (like any concept) simply don't capture Reality.
The Buddha expressed this situation eloquently:
The world...is generally inclined towards two [views]: existence and non-existence. To them who perceives with right wisdom the uprising of the world as it has come to be, the notion of non-existence in the world does not occur... To them who perceive with right wisdom the ceasing of the world as it has come to be, the notion of existence in the world does not occur. -
Correct, because reality cannot be known by fragmented conceptual perceptions.Originally posted by casino_king:No lah... you say that because you do not know...
It can only be seen.Originally posted by Thusness:Be the big question mark and ride on the cloud of unknowing, without arbitary thought, experience the immediate! At that moment whatever it is, it is entire.
-
Be the Big question mark, therefore no "what?"Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Be the big question mark and ride on the cloud of unknowing, without arbitary thought, experience the immediate! At that moment whatever it is, it is entire.
It can only be seen.
-
Let me discuss the basic meaning of "Buddhism" or "Buddhist" by refering to a famous parable about five blind men who attempt to define an elephant. The first blind man touches the tail of an elephant and says, "Now I know what the elephant is. It is like a rope." The second blind man touches its leg and declares that it is like a tree. The third, fourth, and fifth blind men respectively touch its body, nose, and ear and declares that it is like a wall, a hose, and a fan. These five blind men are firmly convinced that they are absolutely right in their understanding. So they start to fight among themselves.
Then what does it mean to become a "Buddhist' in this context? Here., we must talk about a another sixth, blind man. Then who is the sixth blind man? He is a person who has touched all those five parts of the animal. He is well aware that the elephant has all kinds of parts. He knows that all those five blind men are both right and wrong. He knows that all of them are right, partially right, because they are touching a part of an elephant. But at the same time he knows that all of them are wrong in their view that they have an absolutely correct understanding. The "Buddhist," the sixth blind man, can identify with all those five blind men, but, at the same time, he cannot agree with them when they say that their own respective views are the only truth. Those five blind men have their fixed positions and they cannot help fighting, whereas the sixth blind man has no position with which he can fight with others. A "Buddhist" is a person who can identify with all human assertions in some way or other, but cannot consider any one assertion the absolute truth. -
indeed...Originally posted by longchen:Be the Big question mark, therefore no "what?" 
All views are perverted views. No view is the right view.
-Prajna-paramita Sutra -
If you say that you cannot say anything about it, what it means simply is that you are confused! You are confused because you do not know.
If you say, it cannot be explained in entirety but this is a parable to somewhat explain what it is. That is acceptable.
In the parable of the blind man and the elephant; the sixth blind man will be able to have a more accurate explanation than the first 5 blind man.
If the 6th blind man comes along and say... you are all wrong; let me explain to you what is closer to the truth even though I do not have the whole truth... we all know that the 6th blind man had touched every part of the elephant, but has not seen the elephant and do not know what is inside the elephant...
If the 6th blind man says, you are all wrong and don't ask me, I do not know what the truth is, I only know that you are all wrong. That only shows that the 6th blind man is worse off than the first 5! -
The Truth we're talking about is beyond the dualism of Right and Wrong. Pls note that I'm not even saying that those first 5 people are wrong, they are just, not whole. Not absolute. Right and Wrong are all relative viewpoints and therefore CANNOT be the absolute, which means when you say "this is absolutely Right and that is absolutely Wrong", you're already fragmented. All relative truths are fragmented. Therefore there's nothing much to talk about.Originally posted by casino_king:If you say that you cannot say anything about it, what it means simply is that you are confused! You are confused because you do not know.
If you say, it cannot be explained in entirety but this is a parable to somewhat explain what it is. That is acceptable.
In the parable of the blind man and the elephant; the sixth blind man will be able to have a more accurate explanation than the first 5 blind man.
If the 6th blind man comes along and say... you are all wrong; let me explain to you what is closer to the truth even though I do not have the whole truth... we all know that the 6th blind man had touched every part of the elephant, but has not seen the elephant and do not know what is inside the elephant...
If the 6th blind man says, you are all wrong and don't ask me, I do not know what the truth is, I only know that you are all wrong. That only shows that the 6th blind man is worse off than the first 5!Originally posted by Thusness:Be the big question mark and ride on the cloud of unknowing, without arbitary thought, experience the immediate! At that moment whatever it is, it is entire. -
There might never be a right view but there is always a more accurate view. The more accurate view will accord the most benefits.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:indeed...
All views are perverted views. No view is the right view.
-Prajna-paramita Sutra
It is like gravity. Newtonian's gravity was very useful. Once that view on gravity came into being, it explained a lot about the world and mankind benefitted.
Then Einstein came along and proposed a more accurate view of gravity... sure, it did not replace Newtonian gravity theory but with Einstein's proposal, we have a more accurate view.
Just because Einstein knows that his gravity is not complete; he does not say... GRAVITY IS OUT THERE: NO POINT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND COMING OUT WITH A BETTER VIEW."
Which is what you people are saying. -
You are seriously one confused person. Right and wrong. Not one not 2.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
You have not grasp it have you? What does not one, not 2 describe? -
Classical physics is still working on the level of relativity. Now as I explained earlier, Buddhism is not asking you to avoid relative truths. I also said that the first 5 people who touched part of the elephant are NOT WRONG. But neither are these truths absolute. On the level of form we have to work on relative truths, that's where we have our scientific facts, technological advancements, all these comes from worldly knowledge but cannot capture Reality. We work on these knowledge but when we take one view as absolute we miss the essence already. We can never KNOW through conceptuality what is Reality. Thoughts and words can never capture them. The true nature of relative truths IS the ultimate truth is Emptiness (which is beyond the four extremes: existence, nonexistence, both, neither).Originally posted by casino_king:There might never be a right view but there is always a more accurate view. The more accurate view will accord the most benefits.
It is like gravity. Newtonian's gravity was very useful. Once that view on gravity came into being, it explained a lot about the world and mankind benefitted.
Then Einstein came along and proposed a more accurate view of gravity... sure, it did not replace Newtonian gravity theory but with Einstein's proposal, we have a more accurate view.
Just because Einstein knows that his gravity is not complete; he does not say... GRAVITY IS OUT THERE: NO POINT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND COMING OUT WITH A BETTER VIEW."
Which is what you people are saying. -
What not one not two? Pls quote properly.Originally posted by casino_king:You are seriously one confused person. Right and wrong. Not one not 2.
You have not grasp it have you? What does not one, not 2 describe? -
People who have touched reality, knows more about reality than others. They can describe their encounters with reality. They do not tell you: "REALITY is something, yes something and yes it is more of something... that is what reality is, something."Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Classical physics is still working on the level of relativity. Now as I explained earlier, Buddhism is not asking you to avoid relative truths. On the level of form we have to work on relative truths, that's where we have our scientific facts, technological advancements, all these comes from worldly knowledge but cannot capture Reality. We work on these knowledge but when we take one view as absolute we miss the essence already. We can never KNOW through conceptuality what is Reality. Thoughts and words can never capture them.
These people have not touched reality.... that is why they are so confused.
Emptiness describes what?
Unless you understand that clearly you will never begin to touch reality. -
Right and wrong is also not one, not 2... what does it describe? What is by nature not one not 2?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:What not one not two? Pls quote properly. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
That's what I'm telling you.
People who have touched reality, knows more about reality than others. They can describe their encounters with reality. They do not tell you: "REALITY is something, yes something and yes it is more of something... that is what reality is, something."
These people have not touched reality.... that is why they are so confused.Emptiness describes what?
Again it is not about 'what'.
Unless you understand that clearly you will never begin to touch reality. -
All is by nature not one and 2.Originally posted by casino_king:Right and wrong is also not one, not 2... what does it describe? What is by nature not one not 2? -
Emptiness describes what and you do not know? Please read the 60 verses again and tell me emptiness describes what.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Again it is not about 'what'. -
What is by nature not one not 2? What?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:All is by nature not one and 2.