ultimate and conventional, really there and not really there.
things arnt really there, thats why they are dreamlike, like mist blown before wind.
things arnt really not there either, thats why we taste the ice cream and enjoy the heat of a hot coffee.
they neither are, nor are not. if i say they are not i become frustrated because i have just enjoyed them. if i say they are... where have they gone, dust blown before the wind. dreamlike. so 'are' just will not do and 'are not' just will not do. this is on the level of experience.
i think there is really no separation between ultimate and conventional once one has seen the emptiness of all things. nonetheless, one probably should not focus to much on this emptiness, nor on its thisness, one should encounter these things when one encounters them and not seek to see them too often?
to often seek emptiness or thisness is to attach to emptiness or thisness.
when the masters have said... 'this' is it, or 'emptiness' is it they would warn about becomeing attached to these perceptions?
in the smaller prajna paramita sutra we are told to 'take your stand in emptiness' and that 'the buddha took his stand in no thing whatsoever'. emptiness is no thing whatsoever, do we make a stand in it? if we do, it becomes like an anchor and we surely loose our freedom? i just dont know. but am not taking a stand in emptiness, nor in thisness. emptiness is this, this is emptiness. not to attach to anything. to be free.
best wishes, White Lotus.seeing emptiness,
sometimes i have to turn away from it.
why practice mindfulness.
not to be attached to anything.