Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Emptiness
PremaSagar
Veteran
After reading a couple of books where emptiness is mentioned I finally pieced together that emptiness means emptiness of inherent self-existence. For example a book is composed of paper,ink, and a conglomeration of ideas. Emptiness means things are made up of other things and therefore lack self-existence.
Am I correct ?
Am I correct ?
1
Comments
I think I got this definition of emptiness from several of HHDL's books so that might be why it sounds like him.
This is a good resource.
Therefore, we say that all things are empty, lacking self-existence.
Basically, the teaching isn't just that certain attachments are bad, the deeper more hidden teaching is that all attachment is basically impossible, and we just are confused in thinking that we can grasp or attach to anything at all. {this 'confusion' is no simple matter; it's something deeep}
Now what happens when you realize the truth in all this, even for a moment... that;s where the path really starts. PS: it's not at all negative, although it may seem that way at first. It's really very very comfortable!
...alright thats the best I can do! help me out here guys!
Really I think for most of us emptiness starts out as this terrible, cold hole, an abstract nightmare. Later if we can put it into use, it becomes an 'exposer' of pure sweet essence, versatile tool, a friend, with a million different sweet flavors.
PS i know exposer is not a word, but i can't think of a better one.
It is also correct to say I am wrong.
It is correct to say nothing but that would be empty of everything except intent
It is far better to say everything, realise it is empty and have Nothing to say.
:scratch:
Taking an example of a chariot. A chariot does not inherently exist. An intelligent mind decided to put wheels, axles etc. together and called that collection a chariot.
Did the chariot exist before it was invented? I pods, planes, ships? The human mind is capable of forming ideas and concepts. From these ideas we invent things. What about the concept of nations, universities, electricity etc.
Ask yourself is there such a thing as a Siberian tiger? The tiger doesn't think it comes from Siberia.
The big delusion is the believe in a fixed, unchanging, self/soul which is really nothing more than a collection of everchanging parts or aggregates/khandas - body, feeling, perception, thoughts and consciousness.
'It is far better to say everything, realise it is empty and have Nothing to say. '
To add to your statement, I found a quote that might be useful. And then that you were and are not.
Our Job is to negate the Inherent existence of Self grasping that is the cause of Samsara once you know what you are doing and with continual effort accomplishment will not be far away.
I add (of), because in Buddhism consciousness is not a substance, nor does the cessation of consciousness equal death or unconsciousness, as in the material sense of the word.
One way is by experiencing it, seeing it on a non-verbal, experiential level.
One way is intellectually, through reading and figuring it out ... which is like reading about what an orgasm feels like. It doesn't really give you a strong comprehension of emptiness.
All of us ... we need to remember that true understanding of Buddhism is not an academic or intellectual pursuit. We find the understanding within us, through our meditation and mindfulness.
It is important not to try to hard to understand, but to work very hard at doing the actual practices. Understanding will dawn in its own good time. But to focus too hard on trying to intellectually grasp something ... that ties us up even more in the very elements that keep us bound in ignorance. We need to let go of our intellectual need for "certainty" and "understanding" and only then does wisdom start to slowly develop.