Absolute Reality

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by jupiviv »

Cathy Preston wrote:
So what is the real dharma and what is the unreal dharma, and what is the distinction between them?
One is attempting to describe a dance, one is the actual dance.

But you've just described the difference between real and unreal dharma, and therefore preached the unreal dharma!
Would he have to distinguish between real and unreal dharma like you did, or understand that it is "transformation of mind" etc.? If so, he would have to form concepts and language.
Does a butterfly need language or concepts to transform from a pupa?

No, but that transformation is not the same as the transformation of ignorance to enlightenment is it? This is a red herring.
Do you imagine that we can't use the mind without language? How did we even conceive of a language in the first place?
By language I just mean definitions, and not necessarily the specific act of forming sounds and words and giving meaning to them.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

But you've just described the difference between real and unreal dharma, and therefore preached the unreal dharma!
yes of course whatever I say is only goes around the real dharma causing complexity to ensue

No, but that transformation is not the same as the transformation of ignorance to enlightenment is it? This is a red herring.
We are talking about transformation right? Ignorance to enlightenment (they being so close that the difference goes unnoticed) seems immensely less complicated than a pupa into a butterfly.
By language I just mean definitions, and not necessarily the specific act of forming sounds and words and giving meaning to them.
So if I call a cup on the table beside me a flutesa, or a skee or dipple it goes through a transformation every time I re-define it? Could I not look at the dipple beside me and deduce its function by its form or would I have to actually have someone come and correct me in the terminology and show me how to properly use a cup?
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by jupiviv »

Cathy Preston wrote:yes of course whatever I say is only goes around the real dharma causing complexity to ensue

Including this very statement. In fact, following your logic, it would be best not to say, do and write anything at all about the dharma and just get on with our lives! Nagarjuna and Huang Po must have been incredibly stupid people, since they spent their whole lives speaking about something that can't be spoken about. They would have been much better off applying their prodigious intellects to more profitable pursuits.
We are talking about transformation right? Ignorance to enlightenment (they being so close that the difference goes unnoticed) seems immensely less complicated than a pupa into a butterfly.
Simple/complicated isn't the issue. The fact that donkeys can run without using words or concepts doesn't mean that enlightenment can be attained without any concepts whatsoever.
By language I just mean definitions, and not necessarily the specific act of forming sounds and words and giving meaning to them.
Could I not look at the dipple beside me and deduce its function by its form
I just wrote that by language I meant any definitions whatsoever. You can't do any thinking without definitions, regardless of whether they have words or not, or whether they are used by others.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

jupiviv wrote:
Cathy Preston wrote:yes of course whatever I say is only goes around the real dharma causing complexity to ensue

Including this very statement. In fact, following your logic, it would be best not to say, do and write anything at all about the dharma and just get on with our lives! Nagarjuna and Huang Po must have been incredibly stupid people, since they spent their whole lives speaking about something that can't be spoken about. They would have been much better off applying their prodigious intellects to more profitable pursuits.
We are talking about transformation right? Ignorance to enlightenment (they being so close that the difference goes unnoticed) seems immensely less complicated than a pupa into a butterfly.
Simple/complicated isn't the issue. The fact that donkeys can run without using words or concepts doesn't mean that enlightenment can be attained without any concepts whatsoever.
By language I just mean definitions, and not necessarily the specific act of forming sounds and words and giving meaning to them.
Could I not look at the dipple beside me and deduce its function by its form
I just wrote that by language I meant any definitions whatsoever. You can't do any thinking without definitions, regardless of whether they have words or not, or whether they are used by others.

Huang Po and Nagarjuna would of been content not uttering a word about Dharma but any other pursuit would of been utterly meaningless.

It's your concepts that are blocking you from enlightenment, might it be better to be the ass?

So in the example of the cup or dipple you're saying I'd have to name it before I could figure out how to use it?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

gratitude Cathy.
conventionally, the penny dropped after years of questing?

I had stopped questing so to speak for a few years. Not to say I stopped exploring reality altogether since that would be impossible but there was no longer a sense of desperation about it.
Do you subscribe to the impeccably reasoned Nagajuna conclusion that ultimately,
it's empty and meaningless,
that it's empty and meaningless.

or,
it's empty that it's empty,
no philosophic assertion can be made.
It seems obvious to me that function and form go hand in hand even if its empty.

that has one authentically standing in 'don't know',
I don't see how anyone has any real authenticity but in the "don't know" there is an openness.
with the glorious effect that mind and world are opened up to wonder, astonishment and possibility.
I think this is misleading, I think looking to the sky and laughing is more appropriate.

that true wisdom opens up.
it seems to me more of a practicality opens up.

that the problem has been belief in the 'fitted' idea that phenomena exists from it's own side.
Basically yes.

edited to fix some quote issues
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Dennis Mahar »

It's, widely misunderstood I think, that Buddha wasn't talking about Absolute. He was pestered on the subject and left it be.
His concern and that of Nagajuna was the attainment and perfection of 'luminous mind'.
All the to do's and dont's are toward that end.
The recognition that, ultimately, all phenomena is empty, impermanent and selfless is foremost in the attainment.

From what you write Cathy, I believe you've tasted 'luminous mind'.
If that's the case, perhaps you can attest to the blessing it is.

A 'thicket of views' is not important.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by jupiviv »

Cathy Preston wrote:Huang Po and Nagarjuna would of been content not uttering a word about Dharma but any other pursuit would of been utterly meaningless.
But according to you even speaking about the dharma is utterly meaningless. So they wouldn't have done anything at all. It's pretty stupid for someone to hold that doing something is meaningless and then do it anyways for the reason that any other pursuit is also meaningless.
It's your concepts that are blocking you from enlightenment, might it be better to be the ass?
No they are not. Why do you think concepts block enlightenment?
So in the example of the cup or dipple you're saying I'd have to name it before I could figure out how to use it?
Didn't you read the post? I clearly said I meant definitions, and not necessarily words. You have to define a cup to understand what it is. Without definitions you can't think about anything at all.
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

an Ass wakes...momentarily.

Post by Talking Ass »

Cathy wrote: "...might it be better to be the ass?"
[*violent start*] Huh.. wuh?

*Yaaaaaaawwwwwnn*.

(Sorry, I've been sleeping soundly though all of this. You guys could silence an infinity of ducks!)

[*clears throat* and begins to sing in an afflicted soprano that sounds like scottish bagpipes]:
  • ♩ ♪ ♫ ♬ ♭ ♮"Better to be a mindful ass,
    than to sound like a flock of braying asses!
    Better a donkey in barnyard grass,
    Then children playing in mental molasses!"♩ ♪ ♫ ♬ ♭ ♮
[*burps*]

Now, keep it down, will ya! I'm tryyyyyyyiiiiiing to get some shut-eye!

(I vote for Cathy's 'enlightenment', btw. I've got a hundred dollars on her!)
fiat mihi
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

If that's the case, perhaps you can attest to the blessing it is.
I have to say this is the only question that gave me a short headache. Blessing, the only blessing is redemption. Anything other than that is a denial of the perfection that is.


As for Jupiviv, I never said speaking about the dharma is utterly meaningless, I said speaking the dharma wasn't the real dharma but rather a description.

Its your idea of how things are that keep you from seeing things as they really are.

The fact that form arises at all is the defining nothing else is needed.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy Preston: The fact that form arises at all is the defining nothing else is needed.
While needing is present, form and its defining arises. When needing is ceasing, form and its defining is ceasing. When needing ceases, form and its defining ceases.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Blessing, the only blessing is redemption
The buddha's import is soteriological (salvation).
devoted primarily to liberation from suffering, ignorance.
emancipation of mind through realising emptiness.
radiant mind.

'laughing at the sky' too is empty.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by jupiviv »

Cathy Preston wrote:As for Jupiviv, I never said speaking about the dharma is utterly meaningless, I said speaking the dharma wasn't the real dharma but rather a description.

Can you clarify what you mean by the dharma again? I may be misunderstanding you. Saying that the unreal dharma is a description of the real one doesn't say anything specific about the real dharma. Is the dharma a finite thing or not?
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Talking Ass »

Jupi, Cathy, [Dennis], One and All,

I became quite interested to disover precisely in what way I ran and indeed if my running required words or concepts. I have been running up and down the paddock since yesterday and I have kept notes. I found that, no, to run or to go over to nibble the barley or refresh myself with a drink from the trough required no words per se. However, I quickly discovered that any 'willed' activity most certainly required a prior conceptual model. I discovered that in some deeply mirrored sense, an action was preceded by the imago of the action. And indeed I noted a.kind of constant 'self-watching' which, I have to say, interested me very much. Finally (for I have been working on this for days now) I realized that I preimagine my whole existence! that I am so habituated to the world with its overarching horizon and the predictable ground under my feet that it is as if I 'second guess' it as I say, in a nearly.instantaneous 'mirroring'. If you wish to enquire about any specific aspect if my finding or.if you'd like to see my notes, please do not hesitate to contact me by 'pm'. Finally, I think Cathy is beginning.to stimulate me sexually. But 'enlightenment' seems always to have that effect on me.
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Talking Ass »

Cathy wrote: "The fact that form arises at all is the defining, nothing else is needed".
This is the kind of poetry I want to hear morning, noon and night! I want it whispered into my ears like a gentle cooing so that I float, as if lofted by balloons, up up into the cloud's moonlit cotton! [I did----literary rogue that I am---add a comma as I felt it was needed.

PS: It occurs to me, and I put it to the vote, if we create a separate and perhaps more poetical thread for 'attesting to the blessing'. I've got some hot ideas knocking around my skull and have been working on a rap version with the barnyard geese that is quite powerful. Please let me know if y'all'd like to hear what we got so far...

PPS: Cathy, is the dharma then our irreducible BEING? Is this what you are getting at? But clearly it is a 'special' being insofar as it stands quite above the common. I would thus signify it as 'conscious being and awareness of being at a profound level'. Am I on track, jack, or just run with the pack?
fiat mihi
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by jupiviv »

Talking Ass wrote:Finally, I think Cathy is beginning.to stimulate me sexually.
I can understand why. Her thoughts in general seem vague and confused, which is attractive to men, especially men like you who are themselves very vague thinkers.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

PPS: Cathy, is the dharma then our irreducible BEING? Is this what you are getting at? But clearly it is a 'special' being insofar as it stands quite above the common. I would thus signify it as 'conscious being and awareness of being at a profound level'. Am I on track, jack, or just run with the pack?

There is no awareness of being or conscious being or a profound level or any level. Nothing stands above the common. Exploring interdependent origination leads you to cause and effect and the interplay of all things. When subject and object snap into one even the interplay ceases, neither being or non-being, It neither originates, nor ceases, just this.
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Talking Ass »

And what you have written makes sense to you, eh? Sounds like high-faluting buddhese to me. What did you have for breakfast?
fiat mihi
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Cathy Preston »

Talking Ass wrote:And what you have written makes sense to you, eh? Sounds like high-faluting buddhese to me. What did you have for breakfast?

It makes sense but sounds clumsy to me. I had bran for breakfast.
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Talking Ass »

I am not equipped to understand how to use such formulations. I am the Dip-Shit Donkey of the barnyard because of it! They sling mud at me and are otherwise exceedingly cruel! But bran, now that's a subject I cn unnerstan! With soy milk I reckon? Any fruit?
fiat mihi
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Dennis Mahar »

And what you have written makes sense to you, eh? Sounds like high-faluting buddhese to me. What did you have for breakfast?
I'm concerned about the condition of your priorly aroused penis.
It appears to have been presently rendered flaccid.
Gurrb
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Gurrb »

David Quinn wrote:
  • Once there was a lion cub lost in the forest and found by a goat herder who brought him up with his goats. The cub grew up to bleat like a goat and eat grass. One day a lion passed by and saw this strange phenomenon. The goats ran away leaving behind cub. The lion asked the cub what he was doing with a bunch of goats. The cub answered, “What do you mean? I am a goat.” The lion took him to river and let him see that the cub was no goat but a lion and gave him a piece of meat to eat. The cub gagged on it but once he got a taste of it, he gave his first lion roar. We are all lions behaving like goats, not knowing our true nature.
-
i would think that he has accepted he is a goat, therefore he is a goat. on a metaphorical level, maybe we are all 'goats' and our main obstacle is believing we are a 'lion' because of our external perceptions instead of our internal ones. we are what we feel, not what we see.
cousinbasil
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:26 am
Location: Garment District

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by cousinbasil »

Gurrb wrote:i would think that he has accepted he is a goat, therefore he is a goat. on a metaphorical level, maybe we are all 'goats' and our main obstacle is believing we are a 'lion' because of our external perceptions instead of our internal ones. we are what we feel, not what we see.
No, we are what we are. That is the point of Quinn's little parable. We are neither what we see nor still less what we feel. Because once one finds out who/what one is, both of these manifestations can change.

The parable fails, in my humble opinion, on a variety of levels, this one foremost:
We are all lions behaving like goats, not knowing our true nature.
This assumes that everyone's life is a mistake, one from which a person can be rescued. We may not be born with the knowledge of who or what we are (or can be), but I think this is normal and quite acceptable. David's story would ignore that no matter how much the cub roared, he is still a cub, not a lion. Furthermore, he might become the most dedicated lion in the jungle, but he will always have "goat" within him.

For an allegory to be effective, one has to be able to buy it. So, David, pray tell: What is a goat-herder doing in the forrest...?
Gurrb
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by Gurrb »

cousinbasil wrote:
Gurrb wrote:i would think that he has accepted he is a goat, therefore he is a goat. on a metaphorical level, maybe we are all 'goats' and our main obstacle is believing we are a 'lion' because of our external perceptions instead of our internal ones. we are what we feel, not what we see.
No, we are what we are. That is the point of Quinn's little parable. We are neither what we see nor still less what we feel. Because once one finds out who/what one is, both of these manifestations can change.

The parable fails, in my humble opinion, on a variety of levels, this one foremost:
We are all lions behaving like goats, not knowing our true nature.
This assumes that everyone's life is a mistake, one from which a person can be rescued. We may not be born with the knowledge of who or what we are (or can be), but I think this is normal and quite acceptable. David's story would ignore that no matter how much the cub roared, he is still a cub, not a lion. Furthermore, he might become the most dedicated lion in the jungle, but he will always have "goat" within him.

For an allegory to be effective, one has to be able to buy it. So, David, pray tell: What is a goat-herder doing in the forrest...?
you've misunderstood my point. my point is that we are what we feel. and to fully realize this we cannot perceive what we 'truly' are. tiger woods is asian and black, yet at his core he is actual a white guy.
User avatar
mental vagrant
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:16 pm
Location: A flick of green to be seen between alone between two giants

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by mental vagrant »

Gurrb wrote:
cousinbasil wrote:
Gurrb wrote:i would think that he has accepted he is a goat, therefore he is a goat. on a metaphorical level, maybe we are all 'goats' and our main obstacle is believing we are a 'lion' because of our external perceptions instead of our internal ones. we are what we feel, not what we see.
No, we are what we are. That is the point of Quinn's little parable. We are neither what we see nor still less what we feel. Because once one finds out who/what one is, both of these manifestations can change.

The parable fails, in my humble opinion, on a variety of levels, this one foremost:
We are all lions behaving like goats, not knowing our true nature.
This assumes that everyone's life is a mistake, one from which a person can be rescued. We may not be born with the knowledge of who or what we are (or can be), but I think this is normal and quite acceptable. David's story would ignore that no matter how much the cub roared, he is still a cub, not a lion. Furthermore, he might become the most dedicated lion in the jungle, but he will always have "goat" within him.

For an allegory to be effective, one has to be able to buy it. So, David, pray tell: What is a goat-herder doing in the forrest...?
you've misunderstood my point. my point is that we are what we feel. and to fully realize this we cannot perceive what we 'truly' are. tiger woods is asian and black, yet at his core he is actual a white guy.
More importantly the deaf and dumb is highly likely to follow deaf and dumb off a cliff.

We are very complex chemical reactions.
unbound
cousinbasil
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:26 am
Location: Garment District

Re: Absolute Reality

Post by cousinbasil »

Gurrb wrote:tiger woods is Asian and black, yet at his core he is actual a white guy.
What a load of crap. Here's another. How did Tiger get his nickname? His mother is Thai... And his father is a nigger.
you've misunderstood my point. my point is that we are what we feel.
That's about as vapid a conclusion as one could accept. What we feel changes constantly. If the rest of the world were able update its information on who "we" are instantaneously, nothing would get done. One's responsibility transcends what one "feels." I don't quite feel like a father today. Junior set the cat on fire this morning. Perhaps I will feel like discussing it with him some time tomorrow.
Locked