six elements
upekka
Veteran
there are six elements, namely earth element, water element, fire element, air element, space and consciousness
any form (form, sound, smell, taste, tactile sensation) consists of four basic elements and they are on space
forms change naturally on space but consciousness can make such changes fast, using the air element
changing of air element make/increase the power (making energy using the fire element)
so we can say consciousness using the air element make the energy to move things (earth element and water element)
i would like to get feed back from members who know how these things exactly work according to their gained knowledge of science
engineers, mechanics, doctors are welcome to give their perspective with their expertise
and
people who meditate on elements are welcome too
please do not ask, 'why you need these?'
if you have nothing to say just ignore
thanks
Comments
The elements represent different states of being associated with body, emotions, will, thoughts and Buddha nature. Not really applicable in science as alchemy has been superseded in these areas with more updated divisions. Maybe still relevant in Jungian psychology, not sure. As a healing or revelatory practice these divisions are perhaps more useful than meditations on the periodic table . . .
http://yinyana.tumblr.com/post/31454196568/elements
Sorry, but your sciences is centuries behind the times. And yes, I have 2 degrees in the natural sciences.
...I have 2 degrees in the natural sciences.
Yeah, so you keep telling us.
This model was popular in the ancient world and though simplistic it's remarkably elegant in capturing how we experience the world. It's very intuitive.
By the way, consciousness here has it's usual meaning and is distinct from the other five elements. In the suttas the six elements are descriptive of a person, so it's an alternative to the usual five aggregate classification ( though much "heavier" on form ). I've used it as a mindfulness practice, and it's a very effective way of understanding natural processes.
This might be of interest: http://www.wildmind.org/six-elements
As a healing or revelatory practice these divisions are perhaps more useful than meditations on the periodic table . . .
Yes indeed. Looking at the periodic table is a useful cure for insomnia though.
http://www.rsc.org/periodic-table/
thank you @lobser, this is where i seem to be heading, thank you again
thank you @SpinyNorman i have been practising this and that is why i wrote OP, thank you again
never mind, no matter, thank you @vinlyn
Have you read MN140?
See here, beginning about 1/3 down: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html
The distinction between internal and external elements is interesting, and relates to our recent discussion on "The world", where external form ( that outside the body ) is the basis for the sense objects. The aim though seems to be to reducing clinging and identification with self.
The old Buddhist elemental model of the world is fascinating more for what it tells us about the human mind than wondering how accurate it is compared to today's model. Don't forget that these people at the same time believed firmly in magic and spirits and such. Observation and deduction can get you to amazing places, but the eyes and mind can be fooled since they're so limited.
It fascinates me that space and consciousness are thought of as basic building blocks of reality in this case. I know there's people that see "consciousness" and immediate yell out "quantum!" and that causes physicists to grit their teeth. But there were some very intelligent people back then doing some deep thinking.
Yeah, and a good thing too. I'd almost forgotten.
But there were some very intelligent people back then doing some deep thinking.
Oh definitely. The star maps I use for astronomy go back thousands of years.
Yes, SpinyNorman and Chaz, because it seems that it's important to remind people -- when science comes up in this forum -- that Buddhism and science are, most often, not congruent. That there isn't a Buddhist mountain in the earth's core, for example, and that mixing Buddhism and science is no more valid than mixing the Old Testament and science.
Yep, and we're all glad your always ready to remind us of that, too!
Thanx!
@vinlyn: I think you've missed the point of the discussion. Have you ever worked with the 6 elements?
I still don't understand why you keep telling us you have 2 science degrees - so what?
Early thinkers, who looked at things like alchemy, were basic to what was seen at the time as scientific thought. You might look at the earth element, water element, fire element, air element, space, and consciousness as being somewhat aligned with the states of matter. But science has come so much further than that over the decades that it's about as relevant to science today as the history of the Akkadian Empire is to world politics today. Not irrelevant, but pretty far down on the scale of things.
I am failing to see how the the four Great Elements of historic Buddhism have much impact on one's practice. I suppose if one farts loudly during meditation sessions that it might disturb his own meditation and that of others. Otherwise, I'll pretty much dismiss wind (air element) as being an important part of my daily life as a Buddhist. I would much rather focus on things such as right speech.
I mentioned my background because the original poster said: "i would like to get feed back from members who know how these things exactly work according to their gained knowledge of science.
As I have indicated before, you are welcome to skip right over my posts.
Clearly.
Just watch out for those farts that are the fire element!
(I think we have reached an elevated level of sophistication)
Instead of making a snide remark, it would be more helpful to me (and the discussion) if you could explain how the concept affects one's daily practice. I'd love to learn.
this is a very good point to start
here it is said 'if'
yes, if twenty people in a small closed room fart (without loud) in one point of time (the same time) what will happen to the air?
does it come to your nose?
how does it come to your nose?
what do you call it?
what feeling you get from it?
do you like it or don't?
what would you do then?
do you raise your hand to close your nose?
how do you raise your hand?
is their anything to do with consciousness here?
if you do not do anything (ignore the smell) how could you do that?, do not you need to be mindful that this is a just the change of four basic elements within the space and be aware not to react to it?
if you react without mindful how fast your hand comes to your nose?
does not that act affect/change the earth, fire, water, and air around you?
does not that change basic elements on the space?
do not you think that the mindfully close the nose with your hand and closing the nose without mindfulness is the same?
yes, i have very basic scientific knowledge and i would like to know how modern science describes the changes of basic elements within the space with or without consciousness taken into consideration
The information is in the thread if you read it properly. A less dismissive attitude might help.
Here's one example: http://www.wildmind.org/six-elements
And see below.
yes, i have very basic scientific knowledge and i would like to know how modern science describes the changes of basic elements within the space with or without consciousness taken into consideration
The advantage of the 4 or 6 elements model is it's simplicity, which is of great benefit from a practice point of view. Mostly we're working with consciousness of form. So for example if you go out for a walk in the park you have the ground under your feet ( earth ), you have the wind in your face ( wind ), you have the sun on your face ( fire ) and let's say there is a pond ( water ) or maybe it's raining! And of course there is space all around you.
It's about the direct experience rather than a theoretical construct. Also in your body you have solid tissue, breath, internal heat and lots of bodily fluids; some of these you can sense, others you can visualise. And so on. All these are dependently arising, transient and not-self. And internal form is the same as external form, it's the same stuff.
Other Buddhist models of experience are the five aggregates and the six sense bases. I think these are all in the Satipatthana Sutta, foundations of mindfulness. Being mindful of bodily posture and action is also mentioned.
Doesn't the element model relate to yoga more rather than a study of matter such as chemistry?
@upekka, here's where I'm not seeing the relevance to one's daily practice.
Today I was down in my family room. I have 3 aquariums there along with 6 jugs of water. Every day, every minute the water is slowly evaporating.
I often visit my elderly neighbor. She's kind of a plant nut. Whenever I visit her many plants are undergoing evapotranspiration from their leaves.
Yesterday I was at a social event at a friend's house. There was cooking (fire on the stove), wind (wafting of aromas), a real Christmas tree (more wafting of aromas), and so forth.
In these 3 examples, how do the "elements" affect my practice of Buddhism.
Now, if you want to say that concentrating on such occurrences can help you meditate. Okay. I'll buy that. But it seems like a merely human construct. Just like when I used to have some deep thinking to do (not meditation, but deep thinking), I used to go down to the Jefferson Memorial at night. Or when I go to a place of great natural beauty I often sit, clear my mind, and focus on the beauty. Again, okay. But, also again, a very human construct...in fact, I would almost say a gimmick (even though I use it myself).
I guess I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a French teacher years ago. At our school, the enrollment in French was dropping, and it looked like she would have to go from full to part time. Her response was, "But with French, students can learn to think." And I responded, "Oh, well if that is the goal, we might better have a chess club to teaching thinking skills, and I won't even have to hire a full time teacher." Now, I wasn't serious, but it seems to me that we have all these favored techniques that are minor tools for our inability to focus and meditate otherwise. And by the way, another tool I used to use for meditation when I was living in Bangkok was to visit at least one temple daily and meditate while gazing at some giant Buddha statue. Nothing wrong with that. But again, it's just a human gimmick, in my view.
But share with me where I am not seeing your POV. Please.
What is it you think was being dismissive? The fart analogy? Because actually that was an ear-witness experience I had at Wat Thepsarin in Bangkok during evening meditations with more than 2 dozen monks. I didn't just make it up.
No, dismissive of a Buddhist practice about which you know nothing.
In Buddhism it's very much a practice tool. As I observed earlier this model was popular in the ancient world and though simplistic it's remarkably elegant in capturing how we experience the world. It's very intuitive.
last night i didn't have enough time to go through above link, and i went through it today
it is very interesting and eye opening, thank your @SpinyNorman
yes, this is the most important way to look at those and that is how we should practise the Buddha's Teaching (sutta's explanation)
even though you used the words 'merely human construct, a gimmick' if you can think 'putting them' within the frame work of the Buddha's Teaching' we can call it 'wise attention (yoniso manasikara)' and at a later stage we can call it 'investigating of Dhamma (investigating of things/beings-Dhamma vicaya that is one of the factor for awakening)
it seems ( i am not sure) you think you were right than that teacher
how can you say learning another language doesn't an advantage for people to think better
can you read Pali? i can not
if someone didn't translate suttas into my language or english i wouldn't be able to come this far in Buddhist practice
at the beginning i did the same
this technique help to calm the mind (tranquil meditation)
but if i couldn't read (in my language or in english) i wouldn't be able to understand the Buddha's Teaching that i have understood so far,
because i am just a lay person so far and only monks who have monastic life would be lucky to listen to more profound Buddhist talks given by learned/practised/wise monks live in monasteries
so ability read another language is help one to think better
i say this because some pali words translated into english give poor explanation than the same pali words translated to my language
i say this because some pali words translated into english give poor explanation than the same pali words translated to my language
Yes, the meaning of Pali words is something we debate quite a lot!
Among other things.... Jeesh, @SpinyNorman and @vinlyn, you guys cannot resist sniping at each other, can you?
Do you want to give it a rest, or would you like me to give you a rest? Feel free to let me know one way or the other. I await reply. Really. I am giving you the choice. Which is it to be?
@SpinyNorman did you notice that my last post was at 10:04 and your post was at 10:14
do you know anything about numbers?
can you provide any link if you (anyone) know?
because this is very relevant to elements
as far as i understand colours, shapes, drawings, letters and number are related to four elements on space and meanings we give to them relate to consciousness
Where is the popcorn? (metta to all beings.. metta to all beings... metta to all beings...)
I'm tempted to link to the "Let it Go" song, but what I'd really like to do is discuss how these philosophers came up with the idea of space as an element. To me, it's sort of like the concept of "0" in mathematics, the concept of nothing as a number. It's only obvious when you've had it explained to you.
As far as we know, there were no Buddhist alchemists conducting experiments, although maybe lost somewhere in the past is a genius monk playing with glass beakers and such. I wouldn't think that sort of thing would be approved of as proper behavior for a monk.
So if all you had was your senses, you can see the things of the world are either solid or liquid or gas or on fire. Heat can turn solid into gas, gas forms into liquid in the morning dew, etc. But space itself. I suppose that came from contemplating why things have different shapes. You can transform a thing by manipulating space. Compress earth (take away space) and you get a brick. With the use of fire, a person's body can have the liquid removed and the ashes take up much smaller space. That sort of thing.
I think maybe the genius would lie in figuring out how to describe such an abstract thing without mathematics. The monk who thought it up must have had a bunch of other monks rolling their eyes at the geek and his nonsense prattling.
does it come to your nose?
how does it come to your nose?
what do you call it?
what feeling you get from it?
My feeling would be that the discussion is getting to a stinky point, without my getting further enlightened by it.
Otherwise, the theory of the Six Elements sounds interesting
Do you feel there is space when you walk across a room? What about if you are claustrophobic in a tight tunnel in a cave?
There is always space.
At least as a conventional fiction, in Buddhist terms, space would be what separates the subject who perceives from the object perceived.
Even if both are transient, unsatisfactory and without substance.
Is space transient?
We are. Us as perceivers of space are.
I think the experience of space is changing, but it doesn't disappear. Maybe when we die. There is motion and manifestation/returning of arisings.
Space in the Buddhist sense is interesting to me too.
To my knowledge there are two classifications, there is the relative space that depends on relating distances, like the amount of space in a room or the space it takes to travel between Atlanta and Boston.
Then there is the more absolute sense of space, (I could be remembering this wrongly, but) I think the old metaphysics is that space always exists without limit and universes contract and expand within it like we move about in it, it has no properties. Like @Cinorjer said its like the concept of 0. The modern view sees space as having characteristics of its own that it warps and curves and is bound up with time and didn't actually exist before the Big Bang.
but if i couldn't read (in my language or in english) i wouldn't be able to understand the Buddha's Teaching that i have understood so far, because i am just a lay person so far and only monks who have monastic life would be lucky to listen to more profound Buddhist talks given by learned/practised/wise monks live in monasteries. so ability read another language is help one to think better i say this because some pali words translated into english give poor explanation than the same pali words translated to my language"
Good points, @upekka.
To begin with, my original comment related only to my perception that you were mixing a Buddhist perspective (earth, wind, fire, etc.) on meditation with science.
Using tools such as what you are describing, or particular breathing practices, or walking meditation, or other such techniques to improve meditation or mindfulness is appropriate and works well. Some folks will use one technique. Someone else will use another technique. I think that's good.
In regard to the language issue, I think misunderstood my point, perhaps because I didn't explain it well. The teacher was justifying hiring a teacher full time, even though there weren't enough classes to do so by saying that only French can help students learn to think. And my point was that many activities can help teach students to think critically -- chess, German, higher level mathematics, comparative religion, and on and on. The larger point I was making, and clearly not doing well, was that we each have perspectives that we cling to. It doesn't necessarily make them bad perspectives, but it does tend to limit our thinking to only what we personally enjoy or favor.
Good discussion!
There is a long tradition of alchemy in dharma, where it is sometimes known as rasayana.
http://www.tealchemy.org/what/alchemists/
As a practicing speculative alchemist, I do not find alchemy has anything to do with modern science, except as an experiental way to insights about ones psychological make up. That is what is being asked about by the OP. Elemental practice has tremendous value for meditators so inclined, pragmatic inner journeyers and the evidentially orientated . . . It is specialised.
We could rather than elements, focus on mathematics and explore ideas of:
1 = unity
2 = duality, yin/yang, samsara/nirvana, mundane/transcendent etc
3 = triads, trinity, three jewels etc
4 = four Noble truths, 4 Brahma Viharas etc
However we do not use symbolic contemplation of numbers or numerology as the basis of programming. They are using similar starting points in very different ways. Neither being too relevant to the other, unless explored in a complementary manner. For example a famous programmer once set a competition for 'a program that was poetry'. I was the only person who created a poem that would not compute but that is another story for another time . . .
The value of focus around a reminder of a principle, is the same as guru devotion in Tantra. Elements are representations of archetypal principles that widen our self understanding.
or as a mathematical philosopher once said:
@lobster thanks for the link. Live and learn. Now I have a vision of a mad Buddhist monk who animates a body stitched together from body parts, and the monster sits up and starts debating the meaning of no-self.
Some observations:
1. The idea of space as an element wasn't "thought up" by a monk, it was around a long time before Buddhism developed.
2. Mathematics has been around for a very long time indeed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_mathematics
Yes, in the sense that it can always be filled by something. Even intergalactic space has content and structure which is continually shifting. I guess in the human world we tend to notice the presence of objects rather than their absence.
>
What on earth are you talking about? What the heck is a 'practising speculative alchemist'?
The online dictionary states this:
Full Definition of ALCHEMY. 1 : a medieval chemical science and speculative philosophy aiming to achieve the transmutation of the base metals into gold, the discovery of a universal cure for disease, and the discovery of a means of indefinitely prolonging life."
Are you focusing on all three? Just one? Or maybe a couple? Heavens lobster, sometimes, I DO worry about you....
A speculative alchemist does not engage in making mundane gold (science can now transform lead into gold but it is an expensive procedure) just as a speculate mason does not use his symbolic trowel for brick laying . . .
These alchemical practices are for internal transformation from tarnished to pure untarnished 'gold'. Similar explanations of the cessation of suffering/disease and reaching the unborn or eternal are nothing to worry about. You might even be going that way yourself . . .
Here are two cushions both result in gold. Just add alchemist . . .
Here are my pages on alchemy which as is traditional describe inner processes and hence sound like gibberish in the main . . . unless familiar with their unfoldment . . .
http://web.archive.org/web/20060718135255/http://pages.britishlibrary.net/edjason/green/key.html
and now back to other elements . . .
I can only echo Shirley Valentine's "to camera " comment when Costas kisses her stretchmarks...
discovery of universal disease= greed, hate, delusion
discovery of .........prolonging life= Dependent co-arising
medicine = Four Noble Truth
to cure the disease one has to drink drink the medicine = practice Noble Eightfold Path
transmutation of the base metal into gold = Full Enlightenment
one can use six elements (form and consciousness) to understand the above
once one get the power to control six elements, levitation, changing metal into gold, etc. wouldn't be a big deal, i suppose
It's all a bit too pseudo-exotic and pretentious to me. Frankly, I am quite contented to plod oh-ever-so-slowly along the 8Fold Path without pausing to consider the distractions of such sideshows. Sorry, but I find it just more pointless baggage. I'd rather keep the backpack light and the raft less laden.... It sails better that way. Why burden yourself with just more "stuff" when the point is to let go?
but, please do not hinder the others investigating of dhamma (asking help from other members and trying to help by other members) just because you are not on the same page
thanks
How or why would I do that? What others decide to do is entirely up to them. I am merely giving you my viewpoint and opinion. If others feel the same way, that is their choice. If others don't, then their method of practice is not for me to interrupt....