Images

taiyaki

I just wrote this and I am wonder what you guys think of it.

All senses correspond with an image we think of. We have three things operating in our present reality. The image produced by what is happening in front of us. The memory image occurring in our minds. And the grasping of that image as a personal identity. This is what is happening most of the time.

So we see a couple and we create new associations based on either our prior associations or some culturally embedded associations. Then we see how we relate to that new association based on our memories. Then we create a narrative based on that association.

They are in love (images seen). Love is like what I see in movies (cultural association). I broke up with the one I love (memory). They are going to break up eventually (new association based on prior memory and image seen).

This is going on for most of us without even knowing. Well we might be a little bit conscious, but usually we aren't. Though associations aren't bad on their own, we grasp at them and create a personal narrative around them. This personal narrative being a total construct from our minds. Because in this moment there is just the pure experience what is right in front of us. In this experience there is no substantial self or person who is experiencing. There is just the experience. This experience inherently lacks all associations we overlay on top of it.

So reality is objective. It has no narrative placed on top of it. It has no subjectivity. We overlay our narrative/subjectivity on top of the object reality. This is why pluralism can exist. This is why there can be multiple perspectives.

So when we drop our personal narrative, we find that there is no narrative. Yet we become all the narratives. Thus being both objective and subjective.

SherabDorje

Yet we become all the narratives. Thus being both objective and subjective.

Why this part? Why not just drop it right before that? How do we become all the narratives?

taiyaki

form is emptiness, emptiness is form.

SherabDorje

This is the point at which the distinction between "conventional" and "absolute" and/or "mundane" and "supramundane" needs to be made. On a conventional level, what you say may be true. But on an absolute or ultimate level, the Heart Sutra attempts to make the point that form and emptiness are both dependently-arisen phenomena. Maybe on the conventional level "we become all the narratives. Thus being both objective and subjective", but on the ultimate level, there is only what remains after form and emptiness are done away with. That's why the mantra of the Heart Sutra is "Beyond, beyond, completely beyond, gone to the other shore. Clarity. So it is."

taiyaki

Yes that makes complete sense. I suppose anything we say conceptually is conventional truth. Absolute truth is beyond all that. Thanks for the input.

SherabDorje

Think "nothing" of it LOL!!!

Roger

Forgive me but when you say, for example, "reality is objective," I become TOTALLY lost. Seriously. Not trying to be an [insert favorite expletive here].

I'm just an amateur so whenever I write something I pretend this guy is going to review it:

It's always a good time for a re-write. Good luck!

MindGate

form is emptiness, emptiness is form.

And form is form and emptiness is emptiness.