Causation

[Kunga]

"And the most important time is not in the past or future but in the present, every moment containing the beginning and end of things."
http://www.dharmadana.org/previousbook.html

[Pye]

Kunga asks: then who errors ?

Dennis answers: a possibility for existence.

This here is your shining thing, Dennis, what you know . . . . it seems you love the clearing more than what it opens onto, for any way of being excludes any other way of being to be sure, but no way of being remains long and no clearing is a clearing without what it is making room for.

What is a possibility, though? What is opening, clearing, but the ground for appearance? How does one cling to the opening, the possibilities themselves without the possibilities of the appearance as well? These appearances don't seem to be to your taste. You ask for "winning formulas" in order to deconstruct them . . . what are you trying to protect? A continuous state of not-yet-being (possibilities) over their appearance as actualities? What is "truer" to the clearing than what it makes way for? serious, and not rhetorical, questions.

[Dennis Mahar]

That's a good way of putting it Pye.
Thanks.
Try this out,
The clearing is true nature, never not there, always/already present and everything clears up ultimately.
possibilities show up in the field that are attractive or repulsive.
repulsive is avoided.
attractive is meaningful and is pursued like an adventure for the promise of pleasure,
every nuance experienced, actualised, realised, lived out until its possibility is exhausted,
it breaks down,
the field clears,
a new possibility shows up and a new adventure begins.

the mind runs multiple possibilities every day in various stages of breakthrough or breakdown, moving always, ever changing.

chasing possibilities or actualising them generally involves the participation of another or others who are enrolled in the same possibility and commit and one can have one's own possibility and run with that.
possibilities break down when you or the other lose the possibility in the possibility that was shared and enrolment is over.

Who you are being in the breakdown is important.
do you whinge, blame, abuse, get violent, act out overwhelm, victim.

breaking thru' breakdown means being restored in clearing zone.
shouldn't take more than 5 minutes.

intelligent minds can take it easy and generate pleasure for a lifetime,
the clearing must be understood,
home base.

[Dennis Mahar]

anyway Pye,
we got conversation's highest possibility in the Heidegger sense,
to 'be with',
now and then.
looking for something 'really useful' as a will to power gets the 'be with' messed up.
defining the indefinable is a bit of a task.

[Cathy Preston]

a possibility for existence.

That doesn't make sense,
you mean this illusion makes mistakes ?
Can a dreamer make mistakes in a dream ?
If so,
are there real consequenses ?

Kunga think of people who believed the world was flat. They simply mis-perceived reality, from that simple mistake all kinds of other silly mistakes arouse, that is what we do. We mis-perceive reality by believing that the "Self" inherently exists, from this erroneous viewpoint (that we are a singular, independent, separate being) all kinds of errors arise. Its not so much that self doesn't exist it's how self exists, think of Beer for example, there is no independent, singular, inseparable element called beer, rather beer is water, hops and wheat. Self isn't an independent, singular, inseparable thing either, a self can be broken into parts like beer, and if we further add what actually necessitates self, such as air, water, plants, other people (mother/father) etc., our previous concept of "Self" collapses.

In practical terms then things that are unreal require belief in them to cause effects, things that are real have no such requirement.

I just want to know the truth. Why do you say there are no reasons for the formless to form?

Have you ever read the Buddhas explaination?
We were once composed of clear light. Google the Agganna Sutta.
desire is the cause of our true nature devolving into course material.

Like a child asking mommy; why is the sky blue? Desire is an effect of believing in a singular, independent, separate self. Our true nature is nothingness, simply an illusion of self (neither existing nor not-existing) caused by the play of senses on environment, coming from nowhere and going nowhere.

[Kunga]

mis-perceived reality

Dennis Mahar wrote:
"a possibility for existence".


This: "a possibility for existence" Is mis-perceiving reality.
As everything is empty of inherent existence. To say something has the "possibility for existence" ,
is the same as saying non-existence can exist. The only thing that is possible to exist,(That which is Ultimately REAL),
is that which does not inherently exist(NOT dependent on something else for it's manifestation) . Which is Causeless.

So,
it's not possible for something to exist unless it's un-caused. Everything else inherently exists. Is temporal.
The UN-CAUSED is NOT empty :

"The Buddha-nature can also be understood as the primordial reality from which phenomenal reality springs or the changeless reality empty of only that which is other than itself. Some sutras, such as the Mahayana Angulimaliya Sutra, also insist that not everything is empty, for the Buddha Nature, and Liberation (moksha) are stated not to be empty."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C5%ABnyat%C4%81


The Angulimaliya Sutra is a Buddhist scripture belonging to the Tathāgatagarbha class of sūtra, which teach that the Buddha is eternal, that the non-Self and emptiness teachings only apply to the worldly sphere (not the nirvanic), and that the tathagatagarbha (buddha-essence) is real and immanent within all beings and all phenomena. It must not be confused with the Angulimala Sutta, a completely different work included in the Majjhima Nikaya of the Pāli Canon.,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angulimaliya_Sutra

[Dennis Mahar]

look around you.
that's how it turned out.
a possibility for existence.

[Kunga]

look around you.
that's how it turned out.
a possibility for existence.

It's not a possibility for existence, if it is empty.
Existence is eternal. Emptiness is form. Form is temporal.
Temporal Phenomena does not exist Ultimately.
This is like a dream. Not a possibility.
Dreams cannot possibly exist.
This is emptiness.
Temporary.
Only THE REAL exists .

get tit ?

[Kunga]

lol

[Eric Orwoll]

I'm going to make an attempt to translate this relational dependence into metaphysics that I can understand.

___________

According to a relationally dependent conception of reality a phenomenal universe exists by this description:
A point with vectors toward all other points.

But not by this:
All points exist regardless of the reference frame.
___________

Please inform me if I'm still not capturing the essence of this viewpoint.

It seems that this conception of reality (assuming I'm not attacking a straw-man at this point) is self defeating. If any point can be treated as the location of perspective, then why can't all points be treated as being the location of perspective at all times?

As perspective is merely the application of limits on phenomenology, applying all perspectives removes all limits. All perspectives co-existing amount to the same thing as a perspective-less existence.
Imagine the limited perspective of a 1 degree slice from a circle. If you apply all 360 perspectives then you've removed the limits which were originally imposed by any one perspective acting alone.

If all perspectives occur then all the information in the phenomenal universe exists.
If all information exists simultaneously then the totality of being as an undifferentiated set of information is confirmed because:

Simultaneity indicates the cohabitation of multiple entities along a single dimension (time).
Simultaneity is dependent on the velocity of one's reference frame.
The only situation where all entities could be said to occur in simultaneity is one where all motion and distance is uniform.
This only occurs in a spacial singularity.

In short:
If all perspectives exist at all times then all information exists simultaneously.
If all information exists simultaneously then information must exist in a spacial singularity (that is to say without reference to dimensionality), otherwise true simultaneity could not occur.


So the question is, what prevents all points being considered their own locus of perspective?

[Kunga]

Are you a genius ?
If so, explain that in one sentence please. Thank you :)

[Kunga]

As perspective is merely the application of limits on phenomenology, applying all perspectives removes all limits. All perspectives co-existing amount to the same thing as a perspective-less existence.

No View, or Perspective is the correct perspective . (Oh, the irony !)
To give limitations (Perspectives),
is to limit the limitless.

[Kunga]

So the question is, what prevents all points being considered their own locus of perspective?

If all perspectives are united in the singularity then nothing prevents their own locus,
as all are considered equally.

[Dennis Mahar]

To give limitations (Perspectives),
is to limit the limitless.

it happens.
it's a possibility for existence.

[Kunga]

To give limitations (Perspectives),
is to limit the limitless.

it happens.
it's a possibility for existence.

Yes,
it happens,
and it's possible.
But you are impossible ! :)

[Dennis Mahar]

You've got a good handle on emptiness descriptively Kunga, well done.

Nevertheless emptiness is a cognition, a cognitive experience, that somehow transforms the mind.

Nagarjuna cautioned that it's like a snake that had to be picked up just so, else it would bite your bum and take you down into nihilism.

Dignaga argued that if a sufficient number of monkeys cognited emptiness then that would constitute it as a valid cognition.

Buddha didn't require it to be believed,
suck it and see was his instruction.

[Cathy Preston]

So,
it's not possible for something to exist unless it's un-caused. Everything else inherently exists. Is temporal.
The UN-CAUSED is NOT empty :

No thing is un-caused, everything we see and don't see is caused, and the absolute is the Totality of that. Absolute and Relative are one thing, form and formless are one thing.

[Pam Seeback]

Kunga, it is true that desire, ignorance, causes the material, but what causes desire? Ultimately, the mind arrives at silence of cause. Nibbana.

Greed, caused desire (according to the Agganna Sutta/Buddha).http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Agganna_Sutta
But I agree that trying to figure some things out can be fruitless,
and only lead one to more unanswerable questions,
thus prolonging ignorance, when the energy can be used for other more liberating and useful activity.

Like if someone shot you, would you be more concerned knowing who fired the shot,
or try to save yourself from bleeding to death ?

Greed, caused desire: obviously the next step into causal inquiry is "what caused greed?"

Trying to figure out the cause of reality is not fruitless for it is by the intense fire of inquiry that one arrives at the silence of unknown cause of all known causes. Arriving here, the most useful and liberating activity is to contemplate the nature of unknown cause. Why? Because until one completes their metaphorical Story of Self, they remain groping in the darkness of 'feeling incomplete.' It is my belief that the cause of all depressions originates in this feeling of "not knowing [languaging] Me."

One who has completed their metaphorical Story of Self would not be fazed by a gunshot wound nor the resulting death by bleeding out. Death, to such an individual is but a part of the Story of Self. They could, however, choose to stop the bleeding so as to sustain the faculty of speech so as to help others find their way to Define, for themselves, the Undefinable.

Languaging SELF, uncaused and caused, is the key to Liberation.

[Dennis Mahar]

Yes Pam,
the emptiness breakthru, identifies 'the story of self' as the machinery that constitutes a breakdown in the understanding of the true nature of the situation.

selfing the self, as an activity, is only a possibility for existence,
one item on a menu of a range of possibilities,
nevertheless it's a popular activity and has a high subscription rate.

it's the 'voice in the head' that says,
I think,
I feel,
My life,
my body,
I'm not good enough,
poor me,
I'm smart,
I'm cute,
I don't fit in,
I, I, I, me, me, me.

the 'voice in the head' upon analysis looks like a crazy tenant that moved into the attic and got to run the household.

it's a part of human being (causes/conditions) and can't be got rid of completely,
it can be broken thru and relatively detached from as a source of inspiration or wisdom.

Heidegger was a smart cookie.
pointing out 'the crazy tenant' is always looking around for something 'really useful' as a will to power, as a grab for power, as a shot at dominating.

that a nobler, purer possibility never occurs to the 'crazy tenant',
the possibility to 'be with' without agenda.
or,
as you call it,
spirit touching spirit.

[Pam Seeback]

Dennis,

Yes Pam,
the emptiness breakthru, identifies 'the story of self' as the machinery that constitutes a breakdown in the understanding of the true nature of the situation.

When I spoke of the Story of Self in my post above, I was not referring to the ego self that out of ignorance does not understand the true nature of the situation, but rather, to the metaphorical Self that understands its ontology.

selfing the self, as an activity, is only a possibility for existence,
one item on a menu of a range of possibilities,
nevertheless it's a popular activity and has a high subscription rate.

The only menu of which I am aware once the delusion/illusion of the five aggregates or carnal mind is realized is the language of being purified of attachment to the delusion/illusion, language such as the four noble truths and the eightfold path.

it's the 'voice in the head' that says,
I think,
I feel,
My life,
my body,
I'm not good enough,
poor me,
I'm smart,
I'm cute,
I don't fit in,
I, I, I, me, me, me.

the 'voice in the head' upon analysis looks like a crazy tenant that moved into the attic and got to run the household.

it's a part of human being (causes/conditions) and can't be got rid of completely,
it can be broken thru and relatively detached from as a source of inspiration or wisdom.

If one's goal is complete detachment [perfection], there cannot be a subscription to the limitation that causes/conditions cannot be got rid of completely. Perhaps this is the source of our disagreement vis a vis your wisdom of 'what's on the menu' to include such things as romantic/sexual flirting. Worldly things are worldly things, spiritual things are spiritual things, never the twain shall meet, except, of course, in the conscious activity of contemplation-purification.

Heidegger was a smart cookie.
pointing out 'the crazy tenant' is always looking around for something 'really useful' as a will to power, as a grab for power, as a shot at dominating.

that a nobler, purer possibility never occurs to the 'crazy tenant',
the possibility to 'be with' without agenda.
or,
as you call it,
spirit touching spirit.

'Being with' is not a will to power or a shot at dominating, it is indeed higher in the hierarchy of categories of Being than those directed to will, but 'being with' is not without agenda. 'With' is the agenda. Again, it goes back to whether or not one sees themselves on the road to almost realizing perfection or on the road to realizing perfection.

Spirit touching spirit is not a relationship of 'being with', au contraire, it is a relationship whose sole purpose is to end 'being with.' I come to bring a sword is the mantra of such a touch which means that often the touch is one of severance, of material pain for spiritual gain. Spirit touching spirit is a ruthless love union. :-)

[Cathy Preston]

Worldly things are worldly things, spiritual things are spiritual things, never the twain shall meet, except, of course, in the conscious activity of contemplation-purification.

Jesus said, “If your leaders say to you, ‘Look, the (Father’s) kingdom is in the sky,’ then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father’s) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.

Gospel of Thomas

[Dennis Mahar]

The only menu of which I am aware once the delusion/illusion of the five aggregates or carnal mind is realized is the language of being purified of attachment to the delusion/illusion, language such as the four noble truths and the eightfold path.

Yeah, I get it.

'the four noble truths and the eightfold path'

a menu item.
a possibility for human being taken straight off the menu.
a winning formula.
winning formulas assume there's something to fix.

My Buddhist friends (bodhisatvas) tell me the way of being for bodhisatva is witholding Liberation for themselves,
in order to fix others,
for the ultimate sake of (who knows).

obviously, on this side of Liberation there's something to fix,
Liberation is nothing to fix.

Let's head over to the Complaints Department and cash in.

[Eric Orwoll]

Have we yet decided the fate of causation?

I still assert that because time is a property of perspective and because either a total perspective or non-perspective (same thing) exists, time/change/causality cannot be a property of reality as such. Causality/Time/Change are some of the limiting aspects of our perspective, we are their home.
This is not to say that causality is not real, it's simply a property of our selves- not of any reality external to us.

The general argument against this has been that - there is no reality external to us and because of that, causality is all there is.
I attempted, with my last post, to gain some clarification from those who deny the existence of an undifferentiated reality, or any reality outside of perspective, but no one took the bait.

[Dennis Mahar]

time/change/causality,
depend for their existence on mind.
do not exist independently of mind.

mind,
depends for its existence on time/change/causality,
does not exist independently of time/change/causality.
dependent origination.

Its a Context.
mind contributes.
time/change/causality contribute.

[Eric Orwoll]

I agree.

But what of existence outside of mind?