YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality - Page 4 - Dhamma Wheel

Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Vepacitta
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: Somewhere on the slopes of Mt. Meru

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby Vepacitta » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:27 pm

This arises in dependence of this. That arises in dependence of that.

And that's the long and short of it.

Grok that and you'll be Buddho (the one who knows [the way it is]).


With love from Mt. Meru,

V.
I'm your friendly, neighbourhood Asura

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:40 am

“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

alan
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby alan » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:51 am

What did PeterB say that was incorrect?
Proposing an objective realty outside our sensory experience has been shown to be a pointless quest.
Sitting for the sake of sitting, or practicing without a reference to the Buddha seems to be similarly useless.

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:52 am

Ok well thanks to those who had a sincere motivation to contribute. Thinking about this i think that one of the things that spurred the original debate between modus, a few others and myself is that over the years in various buddhist chats i seemed to run into more theravadans with objectivist leanings than mahayanans with objectivist leanings.

In light of this thread, im starting to think that maybe its specific mahayana ideas that lead one away from the objectivist view than theravadan ideas that lead one to it.

So for those who do beleive in an objective reality, i have a couple of questions, if you would indulge me:

1.How do you square the idea of an objective reality with anatta? if there is no self how can there be an other than self?

2. Where does the "self" (such as it may be in your view) stop and the other begin?
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:54 am

“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:57 am


alan
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby alan » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:13 am

You're tangled in the weeds, but keep thrashing.
No one has taken the position that there is an objective reality taught by any school of Buddhism. Why do you insist on asking the same question over and over again?

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby ground » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:22 am


alan
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby alan » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:28 am


chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby chownah » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:34 am


Pārasamgate
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:57 pm

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby Pārasamgate » Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:05 am


Akuma
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 4:56 pm
Location: NRW, Germany

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby Akuma » Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:01 am


User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:34 pm

Apropos of the thread subject:



Note that in the telephone experiments distance had no effect on the results.
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:40 pm

“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

Pārasamgate
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:57 pm

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby Pārasamgate » Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:10 pm


otherright
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:38 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby otherright » Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:38 am

I currently don't have the hour and a half to watch this video, but I watched a few minutes or so. Hammeroff would say that the result of this phenomenon in which he is discussing is related to the collapse of the superposition within the wave function.

Because of entanglement, your consciousness is both inside and outside the brain. The observable (and by consequence the observer) is the particle. It acts more like an anchor. The extension of the consciousness is the wave function, as they suffer from entanglement and the ability for the superposition to collapse. What is really interesting is what is being said about the genome and the role it plays. Without getting into the details, the summary of which has an end result that says:

When you die, YOU die. But your consciousness, awareness, and intiuition (the egoless self) live on, and are subject to the laws of thermodynamics. The genome helped produce the anchor and the personality that was anchored in the mind through the Penrose-Hameroff Orch-OR model. But as the anchor died, the personality is dead as well.

Its some really neat stuff. I could explain it, and would be happy to, but
A) I've gotten in trouble once for scientific inquiry :)
B) it would be a very long post, but I guarantee you at the end, you'd get it.

User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby daverupa » Sat Jun 11, 2011 4:16 pm

Image

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby m0rl0ck » Sat Jun 11, 2011 11:55 pm

“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig

User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby christopher::: » Sun Jun 12, 2011 1:43 am

I dunno about objective and subjective from a Mahayana vs Theravada view, but i see it this way... Subjective is what our minds and senses construct, how we experience the world. Objective is what is happening of itself, Dharma, Nature, Science... Subjective is important because this is the realm of suffering for sentient beings. Objective reality is important because it also plays a big factor in that suffering, as in tsunamis, war, pollution, poverty, cancer and such...

The Zen koan "if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" gets at this nicely, which could be paired with "if a nuclear reactor releases radiation and no one is there to measure it can it still cause cancer?"....

:sage:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Theravdan vs Mahayana view of objective reality

Postby Ben » Sun Jun 12, 2011 1:53 am

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

(Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • •

e: [email protected]..


Return to “Connections to Other Paths”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine

cron