Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

Words

_BeautifulSpringtime_BeautifulSpringtime Veteran
edited July 2005 in Buddhism Today
0209%20-%20Angkor%20-%20Angkor%20Wat%20monk.JPG

I just thought it would be benefitial, to all, to see how other dharma travellers felt when returning to that which is beyond words.

At times I am reading your words and I feel that my words will only, potentially, confuse (me and you!) due to their incapability to express that which 'is'...

...hence:
"in not-seeing do we truly see"

A reverant bow to each and everyone.

Comments

  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited June 2005
    Sadhu!
  • wolfscalissiwolfscalissi
    edited June 2005
    The difficulty for the mind to realize that the words are not the object they point to is great indeed. I like to try and remember that just because I say "blue" I have no idea what that looks like in your or anyone else’s mind. You might actually see what I call red. You just call it that because some one pointed and gave you a word. The way your mind processes any of your six senses is uniquely yours. Yes, six: eye, ear, nose, mouth, touch and mind or perception. Now what words shall we use?? :banghead: :bowdown:

    ^gassho^
  • _BeautifulSpringtime_BeautifulSpringtime Veteran
    edited June 2005
    wolfscalissi wrote:
    Now what words shall we use??

    No words.
  • andreajmandreajm
    edited June 2005
    Wolfscalissi,
    I have been trying to prove that exact point for two years now. I try to explain to people that just because we both say orange does not mean that we are seeing the same thing, it is just that we were told it is “orange.” But we could be seeing to totally different colors.
    I am so glad that someone else thinks this way.
  • comicallyinsanecomicallyinsane Veteran
    edited June 2005
    I have always wondered that same thing with the colors. I think that is why people have the favorite color thing. I don't mean that's the only reason but itmight be a contributiing factor. :)
  • wolfscalissiwolfscalissi
    edited June 2005
    The scary part is if we have different ways of seeing color or sensing smell, can you imagine how many other things are completeley misconstued between people on a regular basis? our entire thought process and the way we perceive things is based on what someone pointed to and called.....

    thus the zen saying "don't mistake the finger pointing at the moon for the moon."

    ^gassho^
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited June 2005
    Fortunately, we can measure wave-lengths, etc. so that we can have a non-perception-based definition of colours, smalls and sounds, etc. The philosophical/psychological/physiological aspects of perception/interpretation have been debated since there has been debate. We can thank Dalton for working on his own colour-blindness: before him we had a very defective idea of its mechanisms.

    I am not sure what is 'scary' about the fact that each person's perceptions are simply distortions of that which really is. It seems to me a living parable for the delusion of samsara.

    Favourte colour, favourite taste, favourite sexual partner: all subjective, all conditioned, all empty.
  • _BeautifulSpringtime_BeautifulSpringtime Veteran
    edited June 2005
    Simonthepilgrim wrote:
    Fortunately, we can measure wave-lengths, etc. so that we can have a non-perception-based definition of colours, smalls and sounds, etc.

    Don't these measurements need to be percieved before they define anything?

    I would say that ALL definition is based in perception.
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited June 2005
    Everyone's a critic.....





    OM.....
  • thebatmanthebatman
    edited June 2005
    If everyone was blind then color would not exist. Could there be other characteristics we are unable to perceive? If we don't perceive them then they don't exist. If they don't exist then it doesn't matter. Perception is everything...until you meditate. Then nothing is everything and everything is nothing.
  • comicallyinsanecomicallyinsane Veteran
    edited June 2005
    I have always wondered if there are colors we have never seen before.
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited June 2005
    *BeautifulSpringtimeFist* wrote:
    Don't these measurements need to be percieved before they define anything?

    I would say that ALL definition is based in perception.


    Whilst all phenomena, being contingent, are empty, Buddhism is very careful to avoid a nihilistic attitude that says there is nothing there. Mathematical formulae such as Pythagoras's theorem do not depend on perception.

    As we grow in understanding and deepen our study, my own experience is best described as:

    First there was a tree,
    then it was more (and less) than a tree.
    Finally it is a tree.
  • dharmaguydharmaguy
    edited July 2005
    I have started this debate with a couple of my friends. "Is there such a thing as objective reality?" The end result was headaches all-around. There seems to be facts that are objective, like gravity, the pythagorean theorem, etc. However, these things are a continuous flux of conditions and are therefore empty. (Gravity requires the existense of mass, the pythagorean theorem needs a right triangle to be applicable). But the Zen thing, existing fully in the here and now, would be to accept the present set of conditions for what they are. I guess it goes back to Simon's metaphor about the tree.
Sign In or Register to comment.