Question about inherent existence

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
User avatar
Rick
Posts: 2629
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by Rick »

SilenceMonkey wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 6:16 am The stronger the projection of a thing’s reality, the stronger its hold over you and the more it will make you suffer.
From the HHtDL text that got this thread started for me:

"Ignorance of the emptiness of inherent existence is the root cause of all bad consciousnesses and their consequential suffering."

If taking a thing to be real = believing it exists inherently, then it stands to reason that the deeper the misbelief, the deeper the suffering.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
Rick
Posts: 2629
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by Rick »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:22 pm “…first came into existence…”

(Take all the time you need) :rolling:
Wait, how long is one complete universe expansion/contraction cycle?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
SilenceMonkey
Posts: 1448
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:54 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by SilenceMonkey »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 8:47 pm Indian incense is (or was) traditionally made from cow dung as a base. There’s your burning pile of shit.
Lol!
SilenceMonkey
Posts: 1448
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 9:54 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by SilenceMonkey »

Rick wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:13 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:05 pm Beginningless ignorance means this:
Do you know what is buried under Frankenstein’s Castle in Darmstadt, Germany?
If you don’t know, when was the beginning of your not knowing?
If you have always “not known” then your ignorance regarding Frankenstein’s Castle is beginningless.
Now, apply that to everything!
That which you didn't know when you first came into existence and still don't know now is your beginningless ignorance? If so, that would mean that pretty much all ignorance is beginningless ignorance, since you don't know much of anything when you come into existence.

Wait ... you mean I spent a week in Darmstadt and never saw a Frankenstein Castle? Ach du gruene Neune!!!
Beginningless ignorance actually means ignorance since beginningless time. ie. The ignorance we’ve had since our first birth in samsara. I think PVS was riffing a bit.

Since we’ve been taking rebirth since beginningless time, the very first birth is impossible to ascertain.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9441
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

SilenceMonkey wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 1:08 am
Rick wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:13 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 9:05 pm Beginningless ignorance means this:
Do you know what is buried under Frankenstein’s Castle in Darmstadt, Germany?
If you don’t know, when was the beginning of your not knowing?
If you have always “not known” then your ignorance regarding Frankenstein’s Castle is beginningless.
Now, apply that to everything!
That which you didn't know when you first came into existence and still don't know now is your beginningless ignorance? If so, that would mean that pretty much all ignorance is beginningless ignorance, since you don't know much of anything when you come into existence.

Wait ... you mean I spent a week in Darmstadt and never saw a Frankenstein Castle? Ach du gruene Neune!!!
Beginningless ignorance actually means ignorance since beginningless time. ie. The ignorance we’ve had since our first birth in samsara. I think PVS was riffing a bit.

Since we’ve been taking rebirth since beginningless time, the very first birth is impossible to ascertain.
What I mean is, if we think “beginning” in terms of linear time, we kind of miss the mark. Nothing happens or exists or occurs except in the constantly unfolding present nanosecond.

So, beginningless doesn’t just mean since before recorded time or whatever, but totally without past, i.e. without any notion of “beginning” whatsoever. It’s like a circle not having a beginning or end. Yeah, you can create a race track on a circle, or oval, with a starting point and finishing point, but the circle itself is beginningless and endless, because it’s beyond that.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Rick
Posts: 2629
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by Rick »

conebeckham wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 1:34 am EDIT: Just to clarify, "the object of negation" should be the phenomenon itself, and not some "inherent existence" of said phenomenon.
In HHtDL's The Key to the Middle Way, the phenomenon is the base of the negation and inherent existence is the object of negation.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
Rick
Posts: 2629
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:05 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by Rick »

SilenceMonkey wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 3:49 pm I’d actually be curious to hear some situations for people here that point to the (ignorance of) inherent reality of things.
Probably my most egregious (and compelling!) delusion of inherent reality is to believe, deeply, intuitively, even instinctually, that I am an autonomous individual who is working hard to attain a firework-y spiritual realization.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9441
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

SilenceMonkey wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 3:49 pm I’d actually be curious to hear some situations for people here that point to the (ignorance of) inherent reality of things.
I’m not sure if you mis-worded that or not.
There isn’t ignorance of the ‘inherent quality of things’ because things don’t have inherent quality.

That would be like saying “I did’t know the candle was lit” when in fact the candle had not been lit.

There is, however, ignorance regarding the true nature (dependent co-arising) of things.
That’s all over the place.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5712
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by conebeckham »

Rick wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:05 pm
conebeckham wrote: Thu Nov 18, 2021 1:34 am EDIT: Just to clarify, "the object of negation" should be the phenomenon itself, and not some "inherent existence" of said phenomenon.
In HHtDL's The Key to the Middle Way, the phenomenon is the base of the negation and inherent existence is the object of negation.
The existence of the phenomenon is the classic object of negation. Phenomena do not exist. Neither do they non-exist. They are appearances, dependent and illusory-but one cannot deny their appearance on the level of seeming, nor their function.

hHDL’s presentation is orthodox Gelukpa in this instance, and the designation of “inherent” creates an object that is not really an object for us.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
lhaksam.dorje
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by lhaksam.dorje »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 2:41 pm
lhaksam.dorje wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 2:17 pm I think inherent existence is a subtle trickster of a thing
No, it is taking things to exist just as they appear to us. That's the whole point, things do not exist as they appear.
Yes, quite right, although I find the link between 'how they appear' and 'how they are' is the subtle trickster. 'How they appear' is only what appears to you, 'how they are' implies that that is the way it IS regardless of the appearance to you....isn't that the inherent existence thing ?
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9441
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

lhaksam.dorje wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 3:01 pm 'how they are' implies that that is the way it IS regardless of the appearance to you....isn't that the inherent existence thing ?
I see what you are saying.
This is simply a mis-communication based on the use of the word “inherent”,
And in the fact that now we are talking about both, the true nature of the appearance of an object, and the true nature of the object itself.

Technically, you could say that “inherently” an object is really a composite, like a digital image, made of millions of pixels.

You could use the word “inherently” that way, but to convey what Buddhist theory is trying to express, that’s a confusing use of the word, “inherent”. The problem is, you can’t say “inherently, things have no inherent existence” because that’s a self-contradictory statement.

“Inherent existence” in the Buddhist context means not arising due to various causes or conditions, but rather, that an object (a chair, for example) would simply come into existence, out of nowhere, exactly as it appears, possessing some “inherent quality” of that appearance (in this case, some kind of essential chair-ness).

It’s this “—ness” appearance that we mistakenly cling to as “real”.

Since an object has no essential “—ness” quality to it, we say it has no “inherent” reality.

The other point is, if we say it is “inherently” a composite of other things, then we are suggesting that those “other things” from which it is composed possess some “—ness” quality as well. But they too have no inherent reality.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
lhaksam.dorje
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by lhaksam.dorje »

I think I'm really just coming from the perspective of 'identifying when one has a coarse clinging to the inherent existence of something', ie. at that particular moment not 'appreciating' the emptiness of the thing. If I find myself thinking something IS like that, then I usually regard that as a sign that I'm clinging.
I know my contribution is not particularly academic, or even based on sound logic or scriptural knowledge :shrug:
lhaksam.dorje
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by lhaksam.dorje »

And I probably am also coming from the perspective that, as this is a mahayana buddhist forum, that it's a given that things have no inherent existence, but we (I) sometimes still (often) act as if they do :-/
lhaksam.dorje
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: Question about inherent existence

Post by lhaksam.dorje »

And a really useful thing, once one has established at some point that things probably don't have an inherent existence, is to notice when we ARE acting/relating to them, as if they do
Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”