doc benway

I'll have to disagree on that point. I think you made it quite clear that you were taking a nihilist point of view, eg nothing exists, period. That is a misinterpretation of the diamond sutra. I think that non-existent is the wrong word. Video game characters certainly exist. Try to take a 3DO away from a teenager in the middle of a game. Video game characters occupy our kids' thoughts more than school work, sell more high fructose corn syrup than can possibly be imagined, and influence the lives of millions of people. And what is our daily experience other than a waking dream? Your mind and it's particular set of sensory organs are what evoke your experience of reality from what would otherwise be an unrecognizable amalgam of energetic vibrations. It's not much different from dreaming. And Buddhism takes it ones step further and subjects your waking, real experience to the same scrutiny and concludes that it is an energetic happening that does not exist separate from the mind of the dreamer. That is not the same as saying that it doesn't exist. And so is your neural net and so are you. So are you absolutely sure that all of that is contained within our neural nets? It certainly seems that way but even that must be carefully scrutinized. And one can also view all of reality in exactly the same manner. Perhaps we agree on that point.

You can if it is an incomplete fragment or a misinterpretation.

A dream is empty but it is not non-existent. You probably had some last night and will again tonight. Dreams are excellent analogies to waking experience and are very often used as aids to understanding the Buddhist view of sunyata as they point to the role of mind in our waking experience. I think you are confusing empty with non-existent. That is a common error in the interpretation of Buddhist scripture because sunyata points to a non-conceptual state that is not directly accessible to the conceptual/rational mind. Furthermore, sunyata can be interpreted in a number of different ways depending on the context (spaciousness, openness, thusness, void, expansiveness, fullness, and so on). Some people can come to an understanding of sunyata through scripture. Most seem to have better luck through meditation. Some simply get it spontaneously. You are certainly entitled to your interpretation but it's an error to equate sunyata with non-existence and it is an error to interpret the Buddhist view as "nothing exists." That seems to be what is being challenged here.

Not while you're around... But then when the cat's away The mouse tends to play!

I'll bite Also from the Diamond Sutra - ""How do I know this? Because this person must have discarded all arbitrary notions of the existence of a personal self, of other people, or of a universal self. Otherwise their minds would still grasp after such relative conceptions. Furthermore, these people must have already discarded all arbitrary notions of the non-existence of a personal self, other people, or a universal self. Otherwise, their minds would still be grasping at such notions. Therefore anyone who seeks total Enlightenment should discard not only all conceptions of their own selfhood, of other selves, or of a universal self, but they should also discard all notions of the non-existence of such concepts." "When the Buddha explains these things using such concepts and ideas, people should remember the unreality of all such concepts and ideas. They should recall that in teaching spiritual truths the Buddha always uses these concepts and ideas in the way that a raft is used to cross a river. Once the river has been crossed over, the raft is of no more use, and should be discarded. These arbitrary concepts and ideas about spiritual things need to be explained to us as we seek to attain Enlightenment. However, ultimately these arbitrary conceptions can be discarded. Think Subhuti, isn't it even more obvious that we should also give up our conceptions of non-existent things?" "Suppose, Subhuti, a man had an enormous body. Would the sense of personal existence he had also be enormous?" "Yes, indeed, Buddha," Subhuti answered. "His sense of personal existence would be enormous. But the Buddha has taught that personal existence is just a name, for it is in fact neither existence nor non-existence. So it only has the name 'personal existence'." "Subhuti, how can one explain this Sutra to others without holding in mind any arbitrary conception of forms or phenomena or spiritual truths? It can only be done, Subhuti, by keeping the mind in perfect tranquility and free from any attachment to appearances."

Standing meditation can be a very valuable addition to your practice. For me there tends to be more of a somatic component as more of the awareness and neural resources need to attend to maintaining posture. It is also a wonderful medicine for a variety of illnesses and injuries and a great rehabilitation method. My advice would be to start with simple, basic, natural standing posture. Start for a few minutes a day and slowly build up until you are able to stand for an hour. There's little advantage to focusing on more complicated or advanced postures early on. The body will begin to naturally adopt more advanced postures if you allow it to lead you. Enjoy!

admire the curves as the USPS tires bring you a surprise!

in the beginning there was stig's first haiku, now 5723

I've realized that I am not better than anyone else. That is one reason I'm comfortable that "my way" is working for me. Some other effects - I've come to terms with many issues I used to struggle with. I'm better able to deal with adversity and challenges. I'm able to self "medicate" without the need for drugs or therapy. I'm no longer quick to anger and no longer blame the outside world and other people for my problems. I have a closer and more loving relationship with most of the people in my life. Work is more gratifying and less infuriating and frustrating than it used to be. I am comfortable being with myself without needing to keep busy or be distracted. I'm much better at (and care more about) recognizing when I'm mistreating others through words or actions. So "my way" seems to have made some very positive changes in my life. That's how I know it's the right one for me.

I was going to comment on how much you agreed with my earlier post and how something must be changing for one of us... Then I decided to let it rest.

She spat on the ground after reading my shit post... Hers is much better!

So true, and yet they are different facets of the same diamond, no? That is brilliant, how can it not be your TTB's nick?

I do something similar with respect to others - if I don't expect anything from anyone, I'll never be disappointed...

Really glad you like them, guess where I got it from...

Nothing certainly does exist. Every time I ask my kids what they're doing, they say "Nothing" And it's obvious that they're pretty busy....

Nevermind...

yes, they are mutually arising (Daoist) and dependently originating (Buddhist). Only if you are a matter-ialist.

I have to disagree here. The universe would be just fine without human life. If human never existed, the universe would not know the difference (nor would we). If we go extinct, it will be Ziran and things would carry on just fine.... Regarding Buddhism - To say that nothing exists, whether us or a chair, is a misinterpretation of the Buddhist view of emptiness, in my opinion. The more accurate way to express sunyata is that nothing has independent, inherent existence, in and of itself, separate from everything else; and yet things cannot be said to be non-existent either. All things are fundamentally inter-related and can be said to 'exist' (or arise/originate) dependently on all other things (pratitiyasamutpada). This is an important distinction because Buddhism is not nihilism. Just my opinion, and as others have pointed out, I'm not much of a Buddhist scholar. For me the "why" question of existence, and in general, is a peculiarity of the human being and is a consequence of the verbal nature of our thought process. Having an intellectual and verbal explanation for things creates an illusion of security. It is also useful in a practical sense, but not so useful in metaphysical and spiritual matters. The universe has no need of explanation, nor is it likely that we could conceive of a satisfactory explanation conceptually, even if one did exist. The best reason for our existence, IMO, is that we are 'of ourselves so' - Ziran.

More than you think! Fair enough It certainly does. Nice bantering with you.

One of my favorite gurus described the three hardest things to do as: including the excluded admitting when we are wrong returning love for hate

Albert Einstein: "The scientists’ religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection." "The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift." "We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality." "A human being is a part of the whole, called by us Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest-a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty."

Lately my kids have been making me laugh. Sometimes what they say really isn't terribly funny but it touches me in some way or evokes a nostalgia and I just lose it.

I was here and left little trace... _/\_

we will live in tents and wear togas and sandals but keep the PC's!

Nice post, 3bob. I've learned a lot from Watts over the years. Edit: I'd like to emphasize the first part: "Atheism in the name of God is an abandonment of all religious beliefs, including atheism, which in practice is the stubbornly held idea that the world is a mindless mechanism. Atheism in the name of God is giving up the attempt to make sense of the world in terms of any fixed idea or intellectual system. It is becoming again as a child and laying oneself open to reality as it is actually and directly felt, experiencing it without trying to categorize, identify or name it." To the extent that atheism "is the stubbornly held idea that the world is a mindless mechanism", I feel that atheism is equally misguided as the religions it seeks to supplant as a coherent and comprehensive world view. Watts' excerpt brings to mind a favorite quote of mine: "God does not die on the day when we cease to believe in a personal deity, but we die on the day when our lives cease to be illumined by the steady radiance, renewed daily, of a wonder, the source of which is beyond all reason." Dag Hammarskjold And by personal deity, I would not separate the deity part from oneself, whether Hammarskjold intended so or not.