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.
Independence
seeker242
ZenFlorida, USA Veteran
in Philosophy
For whatever reason I happened to be contemplating the idea of "Independence" earlier as I lay down to sleep. It occurred to me that who we really are, at the base, root level, is actually independent of all internal and external things. Independent of this body, independent of this mind, independent of these thoughts, these feelings, this life, these situations. Independent of any society, country or government. Independent of any food, water, earth, solar system or universe. Independent of any hell realm, animal realm, human realm or deva realm. Independent of all any and all components of the five skandhas. Independent of anything that one can conceive of. Whatever it is, there is independence from that.
Does this concur with "right view"? Seems to me that if you were to posit some thing that can be independent of all this other stuff, then it would not concur with anatta. But at the same time, the idea of independence from all these things does appear to concur with anatta. AKA "This is not myself, etc, etc" So which is right? Perhaps independence without some thing being independent? If so, then how can there be independence without some thing to be independent of other things to begin with? However, If there is no thing that can be independent of other things then how can one say "this is not myself, etc."
Does this concur with "right view"? Seems to me that if you were to posit some thing that can be independent of all this other stuff, then it would not concur with anatta. But at the same time, the idea of independence from all these things does appear to concur with anatta. AKA "This is not myself, etc, etc" So which is right? Perhaps independence without some thing being independent? If so, then how can there be independence without some thing to be independent of other things to begin with? However, If there is no thing that can be independent of other things then how can one say "this is not myself, etc."
0
Comments
All forms of self-view are a source of stress, but they don't have to be dropped until you've developed the sensitivity to see that stress. Right view changes depending on the stress you're able to apprehend at the moment.
To be is to interbe. --TNH (Zen)
No mention of the me part. Trying to separate or create the 'me' might
be feeding/confirming the me concept to your mind. There is no you....
bec everything is interdependant. Your made of non-you parts.
There's no 'it'. ...Only the processes, that your form, surroundings, and
other conditions are taking part in....and will continue to take part
in after you die. There is a process 'beyond' the things you describe...
but it's not a you......as a separate entity. No base.
The beyond/mind/citta/nature/buddha will be made of non parts.
Doesn't mean it processes the same as before....but that's how the
changing happened.
That's my understanding of it, anyway.....
Because of that there is the teachings which deny that specific assertion.
And then those teachings which deny the specific assertion is denied.
X is. X isn't. X isn't, isn't.
So Buddhadharma categorically ends the proliferation of is or isn't which both form on the basis of independent existence.
And in some sense it isn't the variable itself that matters but the underlying momentum's of clinging and the kind of THIS IS IT attitude.
Anything that claims a sense of objectivity should be questioned and investigated thoroughly.
In my opinion right view is an understanding of dependent origination. When this is, that is. When this isn't, that isn't.
The implication of that is that when I am, then everything is. When I am not, everything else isn't.
Or if there is a here, there is a there. Vice versa.
The ignorant view that sentient beings uphold is the view of X. Or independent existence.
The contrast right view is X is dependent upon other than X.
To even have this as an intellectual basis can be very freeing. Hope this helps.
Our ignorance that we unquestioningly hold is that there is something wholly independent. So I think keep asking yourself what is this thing and where is it to see if you can find it.
So which is right?
one is conventional right view and the other is Noble Right View
you have come to the very very subtle point
and
you are on the right track
Buddha says 'the whole world is within our six feet long body'
so
contemplation should go on six sense bases and five skandhas and six elements