Not Everything is Impermanent

Anything goes (almost).

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:07 pm

That which is permament must be present in every experience.

Correct, as per the teachings on Buddha Nature. The contents of mind change. The nature of mind does not.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby oushi » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:13 pm

smcj wrote:
That which is permament must be present in every experience.

Correct, as per the teachings on Buddha Nature. The contents of mind change. The nature of mind does not.

So, how can it rely on knowing which seems to come and go?
User avatar
oushi
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Chrząszczyrzewoszyce

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby Nothing » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:15 pm

oushi wrote:To be able to get ride of "not knowing" you would have to know something. But no matter how hard you try, you will not find even one thing that you know for sure. Everything hang on uncertainty. This is very easy to prove, by pointing out the paradox of knowing. We know causality, and interdependence of all things. Thus, to know something fully, you need to know everything. Since you cannot know everything, you cannot truly know even this one thing. This way, because we never knew anything, we don't even know what it means to know something. Not knowing, which I call mystery, creates and manifests everything. "I know!" is the source of all wars this world saw, all anger and hatred. But when love hits you, you have no idea what is happening to you, and you don't care to know.
In one thing all things manifests whithout you knowing them all. Everything, one by one, arises without relying on knowing. In one action, everything is involved without knowing. That which we call "knowing" in pure unknowing.

Interesting perspective.....but it is only temporary.....hence not permanent as we are only here temporary.
As you already know, everything is cause and effect.....so what we see are the effects but the effects cannot happen without the causes.....yet we cannot see the causes. All we do is react to the effects, either it is love or war.

Maybe the requirement to know everything that needs to be known isn't a necessary thing because what matters more would be to escape samsara.....would it not?

Even though we do not know, it doesn't mean it cannot be known later!
User avatar
Nothing
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:24 pm

oushi wrote:
smcj wrote:
That which is permament must be present in every experience.

Correct, as per the teachings on Buddha Nature. The contents of mind change. The nature of mind does not.

So, how can it rely on knowing which seems to come and go?

Having experienced its own true nature, full enlightenment sees things from the perspective of Ultimate Truth. Knowing its own nature, it also know the ultimate nature of everything else. It knows both how things appear and how they really are with complete clarity, therefore it is said to be "omniscient".

Part of mind's own nature is complete freedom and openness. The nature of mind allows for any experience, from the lowest hells to the god's realms. The unenlightened experience life as the contents of mind. The enlightened experience life as the nature of mind, and sees the contents of mind for what they actually are.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby undefineable » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:36 pm

oushi wrote:
smcj wrote:you have begun to become aware of your own unawareness. That is a huge accomplishment. The unawareness of most people is such that they have no idea they are unaware.

You seem to treat permanence very materialistically. You miss the fact that if something is permanent it cannot come and go, because it would be completelly impermanent on the level of experience. There is no ethernal pearl to be found somewhere underneath the ocean... That which is permament must be present in every experierce.
So one day you'll no longer be aware that you're unaware :tongue:
oushi wrote:ps. Let me be honest here, I have no idea what "being" is, how could I know what extension of it means?
Just the sense that what you're experiencing is a tiny piece of is reality reaching beyond description and beyond one's mind - rather than the belief that reality is characterised by such-and-such here and so-and-so there. I think most people experience this on an unenlightened level atleast, but I used the description to try and suss out what you mean when you start on about 'not knowing', as it sounds misleading to blame all wars on the intellectual mind _

I wasn't trying to get all Heidegger or anything :)
Last edited by undefineable on Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}
undefineable
 
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby oushi » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:36 pm

Nothing wrote:Even though we do not know, it doesn't mean it cannot be known later!

Yes, we cannot know that.
smcj wrote:Having experienced its own true nature, full enlightenment sees things from the perspective of Ultimate Truth. It knows both how things appear and how they really are with complete clarity, therefore it is said to be "omniscient".

It knows only not knowing, which is emptiness. Because knowledge is illusion, it's not needed for omniscience.
"Without knowing and without being affected by anything, this is the awareness of the buddhas." - Mahāprajñāpāramitā Mañjuśrīparivarta Sūtra
smcj wrote:Part of mind's own nature is complete freedom and openness.

This introduces duality. :smile:
User avatar
oushi
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Chrząszczyrzewoszyce

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby undefineable » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:45 pm

oushi wrote:
smcj wrote:Part of mind's own nature is complete freedom and openness.
This introduces duality. :smile:
Maybe what is meant by this kind of teaching expression -which is (after all) hardly unorthodox- is that mind is like a bird flying aimlessly in the sky. Once it realises that this is the situation, different parts of sky start to look less threatening or enticing. This doesn't seem to call for 'two natures' :shrug:
"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}
undefineable
 
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:51 pm

oushi wrote:
Nothing wrote:Even though we do not know, it doesn't mean it cannot be known later!

Yes, we cannot know that.
smcj wrote:Having experienced its own true nature, full enlightenment sees things from the perspective of Ultimate Truth. It knows both how things appear and how they really are with complete clarity, therefore it is said to be "omniscient".

It knows only not knowing, which is emptiness. Because knowledge is illusion, it's not needed for omniscience.
"Without knowing and without being affected by anything, this is the awareness of the buddhas." - Mahāprajñāpāramitā Mañjuśrīparivarta Sūtra
smcj wrote:Part of mind's own nature is complete freedom and openness.

This introduces duality. :smile:

No, actually it introduces non-duality.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby oushi » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:53 pm

undefineable wrote:So one day you'll no longer be aware that you're unaware

Awareness of awareness does not exist as something more then an idea for me.
undefineable wrote:Just the sense that what you're experiencing is a tiny piece of is reality reaching beyond description and beyond one's mind

This is also just and idea.
undefineable wrote:as it sounds misleading to blame all wars on the intellectual mind

That would be misleading indeed. It's the desire to know which is the cause, not the knowing. As I said before, there is only "not knowing".
What causes the desire to know? Idea that there is true knowledge and it is worth having. It reminds me of Nirvana. People are look for it eventhough they never saw it before. Story itself sound so cool that it triggers the chase. :shock:
undefineable wrote: Maybe what is meant by this kind of teaching expression -which is (after all) hardly unorthodox- is that mind is like a bird flying aimlessly in the sky.

Meaninglessness. Very effective practicing tool.
smcj wrote:No, actually it introduces non-duality.

"Part of" and non-duality does not go together, don't you think?
User avatar
oushi
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Chrząszczyrzewoszyce

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby Astus » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:04 pm

smcj wrote:The experience of your own Buddha Nature after the adventitious defilements are removed. Retroactively it is then seen as having always been present, therefore permanent.


Yes, I asked about the experience of enlightenment you mentioned. Is the answer that it is always present? Because then I can only conclude that it simply does not exist. Unless you mean something nominal, like for instance although the water itself changes we call it the same river every day. But then it is not really an experience.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4125
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:09 pm

No, actually it introduces non-duality.

"Part of" and non-duality does not go together, don't you think?

No. The nature of mind as Dharmakaya is formless, but this formless aspect is the basis for all samsara and nirvana. The enlightened sees phenomena as the form kayas. They are not dual.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:11 pm

Astus wrote:
smcj wrote:The experience of your own Buddha Nature after the adventitious defilements are removed. Retroactively it is then seen as having always been present, therefore permanent.


Yes, I asked about the experience of enlightenment you mentioned. Is the answer that it is always present? Because then I can only conclude that it simply does not exist.

Or you can conclude that you are presently unaware of it, that it is something beyond your imagination, as the teachings suggest.

The basis for Dharma is that the Buddha has a great awareness and understanding that we do not, that we are unaware. The problem with unawareness it that it thinks it is aware, and therefore tries to squeeze the teachings of unlimited awareness into its own limited understanding. That is why the constant reminder that enlightenment is beyond imagination is always important to keep in mind. Beyond imagination--but not beyond experiencing for oneself.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby oushi » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:18 pm

smcj wrote:
No, actually it introduces non-duality.

"Part of" and non-duality does not go together, don't you think?

No. The nature of mind as Dharmakaya is formless, but this formless aspect is the basis for all samsara and nirvana.

I wouldn't say it is the basis because again we would create duality. They are not separate at any time. Dharmakaya is not the basis but the body of all.
User avatar
oushi
 
Posts: 1344
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Location: Chrząszczyrzewoszyce

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby Astus » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:18 pm

smcj wrote:Or you can conclude that you are presently unaware of it, that it is something beyond your imagination, as the teachings suggest.


If I am unaware of it now but can become aware of it later it cannot be permanent. If something is permanent either one is always aware of it or never, otherwise there is change and so impermanence.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4125
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:27 pm

Astus wrote:
smcj wrote:Or you can conclude that you are presently unaware of it, that it is something beyond your imagination, as the teachings suggest.


If I am unaware of it now but can become aware of it later it cannot be permanent. If something is permanent either one is always aware of it or never, otherwise there is change and so impermanence.

So the world is flat until it is discovered to be round? What changes? Does the world change or does the unawareness become aware to what actually is?
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby Astus » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:42 pm

smcj wrote:So the world is flat until it is discovered to be round? What changes? Does the world change or does the unawareness become aware to what actually is?


Your argument stands only when you presume there are objects independent of the mind, and you claim that buddha-nature is an external independent object to be discovered. But then, the idea that there are independent objects is only an inference and not experience. Is not enlightenment an experience?
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4125
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:58 pm

Astus wrote:
smcj wrote:So the world is flat until it is discovered to be round? What changes? Does the world change or does the unawareness become aware to what actually is?


Your argument stands only when you presume there are objects independent of the mind, and you claim that buddha-nature is an external independent object to be discovered.

No, Buddha Nature is the essence of mind, before subject and object. It can never be taken as an object of consciousness anymore than the retina of your eye can see itself.

I think "uncovered" is better than "discovered". The Uttaratantra is full of analogies to that effect. I particularly like the sun obscured by clouds simile.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby Astus » Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:18 pm

smcj wrote:No, Buddha Nature is the essence of mind, before subject and object. It can never be taken as an object of consciousness anymore than the retina of your eye can see itself.


Experience that is not divided into subject and object is simply just experience itself, and it is always changing. But if I consider you likening it to the eye, it sounds more like an ultimate subject rather than lack of duality.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4125
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby smcj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:31 pm

Experience that is not divided into subject and object is simply just experience itself, and it is always changing.

That is the kind of thing you need to discuss with a meditation instructor.

But if I consider you likening it to the eye, it sounds more like an ultimate subject rather than lack of duality.

There's a reason Yogacara is called the "Mind Only" school.
smcj
 
Posts: 1417
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Not Everything is Impermanent

Postby undefineable » Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:53 am

oushi wrote:
undefineable wrote:Just the sense that what you're experiencing is a tiny piece of is reality reaching beyond description and beyond one's mind
This is also just and idea.
Well in the case of love it's often hard to tell whether it's just imagination. How is it otherwise with 'realisation', come to that? :thinking:
oushi wrote:
undefineable wrote:as it sounds misleading to blame all wars on the intellectual mind

_ _ It's the desire to know which is the cause
Whaaat?!

Well, have fun proving that in a History thesis :tongue: Seriously though, Buddhist (rather than -say- Socratic) teachings or commentaries on / summaries of Buddhist teachings that just say "well we can't know anything, so let's just leave it" have got to be rare to nonexistent. You've quoted sutra passages on other threads that describe not-knowing, but there are also sutra passages which describe how each of us has a 'tathagatagarbha' (as if this were some kind of soul :alien: ). The point is that all these explanations get set down in context, to illustrate a certain aspect of dharma from a certain angle, in a certain light, for a certain audience, at a certain time, and in a certain place. However, if your interpretation of one scripture flatly contradicts most of the other scriptures out there, then it's logical to question whether that interpretation was intended to be the definitive, universally applicable one, or one that applies provisionally to your own particular mind. I still suspect that your 'without knowing' quote means that the mind without knowing is the mind that becomes enlightened; beyond this, who knows? :tongue:

In any case, how would a truth simple enough to be put into a few words -e.g. 'there can be no knowledge'- be a final Truth about such a complex Reality? I don't understand how mind changes with 'realisation', but at some point a 'realised' person is bound to know that something's changed, and at some further point such a person is [*]supposed[*] to know that their perspectives generally come nearer to truth than they did before. And yes, this is bound to be an over-simplification :quoteunquote:
Astus wrote:Yes, I asked about the experience of enlightenment you mentioned. Is the answer that it is always present? Because then I can only conclude that it simply does not exist. Unless you mean something nominal, like for instance although the water itself changes we call it the same river every day. But then it is not really an experience.
One idea that's probably commonplace around these parts is that sentient beings experience some kind of awareness -the 'mind without knowing' that I mentioned above- between and even within each minute churning of ignorance, without knowing what to make of it - without knowing that it as the basis for their own existence, and certainly without knowing that it as the basis for the contrasting state of full enlightenment. In this 'model', enlightenment is just the clear seeing of ever-present experience, a bit like gaining the abilty to clearly see one's own retina _ _
"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}
undefineable
 
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

PreviousNext

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gwenn Dana and 9 guests

>