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.
I have just ordered a new bathroom scale. Because if this is true then my old one just has to be wrong. Thats what I have been saying all the time btw.
@lobster said:
If you can sit for a few moments of contemplation and find some phenomena or state of being that exists independent of other conditions, we can all give up our cushion practice . . .
Keep us informed . . . :wave: .
The unbound, uncreated, unmade? Duh. That was a easy.
@SeaOfTranquility said:
This thread is covering a lot of ground. Not surprising as Dependent Origination is such a core truth and the basis for so many more advanced insights.
Insights such as - "No beings or phenomena exist independently of other beings and phenomena."
A basic principle of Dependent Origination is that when anything arises dependent on particular conditions, it ceases with the ceasing of those conditions. This insight is the foundation of most all Buddha teachings including The 4 Noble Truths.
By understanding the concept of Dependent Origination, the Buddha’s teachings become clear. By personally seeing Dependent Origination, the Buddha’s teachings become liberating.
Best Wishes
I cannot disagree with this analysis, but from a singular and possibly absurd perspective, what if the original conditions are UNCEASINGLY CONDITIONING? Just a thought?
0
SarahTTime ... space ... joySouth Coast, UKVeteran
@lobster said:
If you can sit for a few moments of contemplation and find some phenomena or state of being that exists independent of other conditions, we can all give up our cushion practice . . .
It's more than I don't (and don't think I can) know. That is what I discover when I meditate on this. I discover that it's something I can accept as an axiom - it leads to a model to which I have found no contradiction. But I am a mathematician - I consider all possible worlds when trying to prove a theorem. This is a theorem that I cannot deduce. Just as I cannot deduce the infinite from the finite. Just as I cannot deduce that the sun will rise tomorrow (although this is also a model that has served me so far).
Perhaps you will say I am being too intellectual. You wouldn't be the first! But it doesn't feel like that. It feels intuitive. Guess I'm rationalizing ... too many years of being accused of being irrational which led to my specialism in logic at Uni?
But I wonder at the insistence on the truth of this that I see in some posts on this thread. Yes, I know there are "right views" but, to me, this means helpful, healthy views rather than views that are of themselves unchallengeable. When I read in the Brahmajala Sutta that:
“This, bhikkhus, the Tathagata understands. And he understands: ‘These standpoints, thus assumed and thus misapprehended, lead to such a future destination, to such a state in the world beyond.’ He understands as well what transcends this, yet even that understanding he does not misapprehend. And because he is free from misapprehension, he has realized within himself the state of perfect peace. Having understood as they really are the origin and the passing away of feelings, their satisfaction, their unsatisfactoriness, and the escape from them, the Tathagata, bhikkhus, is emancipated through non-clinging.
“These are those dhammas, bhikkhus, that are deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful and sublime, beyond the sphere of reasoning, subtle, comprehensible only to the wise, which the Tathagata, having realized for himself with direct knowledge, propounds to others; and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathagata in accordance with reality would speak."
I find that my "state of [imperfect but sometimes apparently perfect] peace" comes from seeing Dependent Origination as a helpful view, a stepping stone which may someday wobble but which can be used until (if ever) it does.
Thank you, @lobster, for the prod to look deeper into this. I had decided to write no further on it:
The person who takes away the banal and ordinary and illuminates it in a new way can terrify. We do not want our ideas changed. We feel threatened by such demands. “I already know the important things!” we say. Then Changer comes and throws our old ideas away.
The person who takes away the banal and ordinary and illuminates it in a new way can terrify. We do not want our ideas changed. We feel threatened by such demands. “I already know the important things!” we say. Then Changer comes and throws our old ideas away.
Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune
Great quote - I used to love those books! Very apt though, it seems like Buddhist practice does continually challenge our assumptions. I think that's the point of it really. It can be both exciting and scary at the same time!
Comments
I have just ordered a new bathroom scale. Because if this is true then my old one just has to be wrong. Thats what I have been saying all the time btw.
/Victor
The unbound, uncreated, unmade? Duh. That was a easy.
EDIT: Why do I feel so Spiny all of a sudden?
.
I cannot disagree with this analysis, but from a singular and possibly absurd perspective, what if the original conditions are UNCEASINGLY CONDITIONING? Just a thought?
It's more than I don't (and don't think I can) know. That is what I discover when I meditate on this. I discover that it's something I can accept as an axiom - it leads to a model to which I have found no contradiction. But I am a mathematician - I consider all possible worlds when trying to prove a theorem. This is a theorem that I cannot deduce. Just as I cannot deduce the infinite from the finite. Just as I cannot deduce that the sun will rise tomorrow (although this is also a model that has served me so far).
Perhaps you will say I am being too intellectual. You wouldn't be the first! But it doesn't feel like that. It feels intuitive. Guess I'm rationalizing ... too many years of being accused of being irrational which led to my specialism in logic at Uni?
But I wonder at the insistence on the truth of this that I see in some posts on this thread. Yes, I know there are "right views" but, to me, this means helpful, healthy views rather than views that are of themselves unchallengeable. When I read in the Brahmajala Sutta that:
I find that my "state of [imperfect but sometimes apparently perfect] peace" comes from seeing Dependent Origination as a helpful view, a stepping stone which may someday wobble but which can be used until (if ever) it does.
Thank you, @lobster, for the prod to look deeper into this. I had decided to write no further on it:
In love - Sarah
The person who takes away the banal and ordinary and illuminates it in a new way can terrify. We do not want our ideas changed. We feel threatened by such demands. “I already know the important things!” we say. Then Changer comes and throws our old ideas away.
Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune
Great quote - I used to love those books! Very apt though, it seems like Buddhist practice does continually challenge our assumptions. I think that's the point of it really. It can be both exciting and scary at the same time!