Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:57 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 715
Location: Athens - GR
Sönam wrote:
LastLegend wrote:

Ok. A table is broken and found at the dumpster, and over time it will become rotten, it will no longer be the table is it?


It has never been a table ... it always have been just a name.

Sönam


I guess you are talking here about the conceptualization which is definitely a relative mental structure in the vast spectrum of interdependence.
However, the total denial of any manifestation is not the right path.
Since in Dzogchen the Base has 3 aspects which are always inseparable: Essence, Nature and Energy.

_________________
"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour"
~ Padmasambhava ~


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Posts: 1999
Location: France
what do you call a table? a conglomerate of atoms? made of what, with what form?

Sönam

Image

_________________
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 715
Location: Athens - GR
Sönam wrote:
what do you call a table? a conglomerate of atoms? made of what, with what form?

Sönam

Image


Yes, I already said that conceptualization has no inherent existence, and it is always interdependent.
But we cannot totally deny the manifestations, for example of the picture you just posted here, whatever you may call it.... ;)

_________________
"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour"
~ Padmasambhava ~


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 1444
LastLegend wrote:
Sönam wrote:
LastLegend wrote:

Ok. A table is broken and found at the dumpster, and over time it will become rotten, it will no longer be the table is it?


It has never been a table ... it always have been just a name.

Sönam


Yes and the name is table. And apparently it is here because you are here.


It is here because you are here. The Buddha's essential exegesis of pratītyasamutpāda is; "this arises, that becomes". Because the "I"(subject) is conceived, immediately that which is not-I(object) arises. And from there the objective field is cut up and fragmented into all sorts of names, concepts and forms... one of them being a "table". However, in this timeless moment each "field" of sensory perception is unbroken and complete and that which you posit to be your "body" appears just the same as that which you label a "table", both arise in vision and are equal in that respect. It is only when conceptualization arises that we cut this field up and fragment it into the self/other dichotomy. If you take a step back and just witness each sensory field in it suchness there is no separation to be found, the experience itself suggests no edges, borders, location, dividing lines or anything of the sort... those designations are merely imputed upon seamless experience via conceptualization. The problem is that we habitually identify with a certain and very specific cluster of sensations within these unbroken sensory fields, and that certain cluster of sensation is labeled a "body" and that body belongs to "me".. the "I". From there, the "I" believes it spans time and is subject to all sorts of happenings both good and bad, but the concept "I" is itself only a presently arising thought or concept. Just another appearance in seamless experience, the thought "I" has nothing whatsoever to do with the "body". The concept and the appearance are not connected in any way. So the body is truly just a visual appearance which arises the same as any other color or shape in the field of vision. The body also has tactile and kinesthetic sensations attributed to it, but these sensations also just arise in experience and do not constitute a "body" (or belong to the thought "I"). Now we don't take the table to be "I", and if the table isn't "I" then the body also certainly isn't "I", because they both arise in exactly the same manner. So "I" can be detached from these sensory perceptions and seen for what it is(an arising thought/concept). However, since time is seen as empty, and it is understood that the "I" who would witness the thought "I" is the thought itself, and the moment that thought arises it self liberates... the duality collapses into a nondual and timeless non-arising perfection.

So the table isn't a table, it IS vision. In 'seeing' one doesn't see objects or appearances, what appears as objects or appearances is 'seeing' itself. The act of observing and what is observed are not two separate things, what is seen, is the act of 'seeing' itself. What appears in the field of vision, is vision itself. And this applies to every sensory perception. So no objects are experienced anywhere or at anytime.

Sönam is right, table is just a name, it's just a two syllable sound which arises which sounds like ta-ble. The sound "ta-ble" has nothing to do with the, (for example;) brownish color rectangular shape we associate it with. And further, there is no bordering line or separation between the shape/colors and vision itself, and since the "you" who would "see" this is merely a thought/concept(which is another non-witnessed expression of experience)... vision no longer needs to be imputed as a 'sensory perception' and objects which are seen are also absent... so experience is only the natural state, seamless, borderless, edgeless, nonlocal, complete, unobscured, oceanic, perfect.

As for the broken decaying table: in the timeless moment it appears as such, as a conventional appearance it has never appeared as anything(or any way) other than the condition it's presently in. There was no time prior to now, and will be no time following now... but then again there is no table to begin with, the table is hair on a tortoise, an abstraction which is a figment of imagination... only the natural state IS.


Last edited by asunthatneversets on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 1444
Sönam wrote:
what do you call a table? a conglomerate of atoms? made of what, with what form?

Sönam

Image



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc3H4UkkZgk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm
Posts: 2755
:rolling: Freaking hilarious! How can someone talk about loving and getting loved back while using Mexicans as furniture?!
Even if this was Paula being left in a hard situation, I take it as a satire to some "humanitarian causes" we see around promoted by dubious institutions and governments.
I'm glad she left, although she shouldn't even have sit to start with. In real some real cases they just keep doing babbling about humanitarian causes while using "people as furniture", metaphorically speaking.

Sorry for the off topic comment. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:33 am
Posts: 473
wisdomfire wrote:
I have been pondering on this for a long time. Time is supposed to be an illusion, so is space. Can someone explain what is the term 'timelessness' like in actual experience? And how is time created as an illusion? Thank you. :anjali:


Time is created in the mind. When one abides in the non-dual present there is no time, but rather just a timeless expanse of infinite space. There is no way to really explain it in "actual experience" other than that when you experience it you will understand the difference between experiencing time and abiding in timelessness.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:09 am
Posts: 432
The Nature of Time as a Temporal Interval


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Posts: 2845
What creates the illusion of time?
Clocks.

_________________
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 6:18 am
Posts: 82
catmoon wrote:
The illusion of time is created by our inability to perceive all of reality at once.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:57 am
Posts: 74
Time, space and everything else is LIKE and illusion, spinning firebrand, gandharva city, rope snake, dream, bubble, etc.
Time is as real as anything else. Your question can be applied as rightly to a cup of morning tea or your loved ones.
Please don't fall into thinking "time is an illusion." Things happen, and the ignorant can gain knowledge. Causality is a fact of life, despite it having no concrete substance to back it up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:38 pm
Posts: 1500
Clocks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 1444
Yontan wrote:
Time is as real as anything else....


Which means it isn't real at all.


"If the present and future exist presupposing the past,
The present and future will exist in the past.

If the present and future did not exist there [in the past],
How could the present and future exist presupposing that past?

Without presupposing the past the two things [the present and future] cannot be proved to exist.
Therefore neither present nor future time exist.

In this way the remaining two [times] can be inverted.
Thus one would regard highest, lowest and middle, etc., as oneness and difference. (or after, before and middle, or right, left and middle)

A non-stationary time cannot be grasped; and a stationary time which can be grasped does not exist.
How, then, can one perceive time if it is not grasped?

Since time is dependent on a thing (bhāva), how can time [exist] without a thing?
There is not any thing which exists; how, then, will time become [something]?"

- Nāgārjuna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 3:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:57 am
Posts: 74
That's the point. We can't sit in a world of things and wonder how "time isn't real."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 6:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 1444
Yontan wrote:
That's the point. We can't sit in a world of things and wonder how "time isn't real."


Since time is dependent on a thing (bhāva), how can time [exist] without a thing?
There is not any thing which exists; how, then, will time become [something]?"

- Nāgārjuna



Nāgārjuna is saying that for time to exist; an entity(subject) with the means to legitimately grasp and measure other persons, places and things(object) must also exist. Since no such entity can be found upon investigation, said entity is unreal. Likewise contrasting persons, places and things are equally unreal. Therefore time does not exist.

There is no one sitting in relation to any thing, in any world, these imputed notions are merely symptoms of ignorance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 8:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am
Posts: 3043
wisdomfire wrote:
I have been pondering on this for a long time. Time is supposed to be an illusion, so is space. Can someone explain what is the term 'timelessness' like in actual experience? And how is time created as an illusion? Thank you. :anjali:


Time is concept by wandering clinging mind. Time is created as an illusion since illusion is creating concepts; same deluded quality. Nature/dzogchen is conceptualised like only by conceptual understanding of breath we can breath right now.
Life opportunity is right *now*, we should not waste it, since now is a soapbell, already dissolved.

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG_lNuNUVd4


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2012 9:04 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Posts: 2445
Location: Washington DC
^ Thank you

_________________
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)

Linjii
―Listen! Those of you who devote yourselves to the Dharma
must not be afraid of losing your bodies and your lives―


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group