Ardha wrote: ↑Fri Nov 04, 2022 8:58 pm
If it were true then I would be able to know it was true, if it weren't then I wouldn't be able to know that it was.
just because something is true is no guarantee that one knows it is true.
I wouldn't be able to know if something was true or not if it didn't reflect reality, which it does.
That makes no sense, because if you
know something, you can’t be
ignorant of it.
I gave examples of this being the case, how knowing how something works robs the enjoyment of it like a magic show. once you know how the trick works it defeats the point
it’s true that there are many things whose enjoyment depends on it being a mystery. But that certainly doesn’t include most things.
same with knowing in a movie that all the folks are just actors and it's not real.
so, you are saying that don’t enjoy movies, TV shows, fiction of any kind? Certainly you must know they are all made up.
The entire point of movies and similar media is that we forget that.
But this is precisely what you are objecting to with regards to the two-truths. In a sense, we are talking about suspending knowledge of the true nature of things.
You can understand the true nature of everything, that phenomena are empty of self-essence, but still enjoy it as though it is permanent. You can know that there is no essential “car-ness” in a car, that it is simply an assembly of parts, but still regard it as ‘car’.
This is what the two truths is about. Understanding that the true nature of phenomena is that they lack any intrinsic, self-arising essence, but acknowledging the fact that our experience revolves around treating phenomena as though it does.
You ask, ‘how can you be happy knowing the ultimate truth and pretending via relative truth?’ But that’s precisely what you do watching a magic show. You know the lady isn’t really being cut in half.
So feelings aren't like this then?
Don’t confuse the valid
experience of an emotion with the fact that it is temporary and ultimately in it there is nothing to hold onto.
I just read and hear and talk about this from different sources and it's hard to figure who's right or who's getting it wrong.
I don’t find much contradiction in most Buddhist teachings regarding the two truths. Rather, there are different applications and contexts.
It's hard for me to say no to Buddhism because it feels like I have no choice but to listen or essentially live a lie and part of me is terribly upset at living a lie.
…even though you also say that not knowing the truth about something is bliss? How is that not ‘living a lie’?
You have a very distorted understanding of Buddhism. This is why you are uncomfortable with it.
At this time, you have ignorance about what Buddhism really teaches. Strangely however, by your own reasoning, this should result in your feeling perfectly happy with it.
So it's more like I'm listening out of fear I might be wrong.
I don’t understand that.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.