Is Tao a Living Organism? (Please, Discuss)

[Vajrahridaya]

State precisely what you mean and not vague generalities.

 

ralis

 

Just for you ralis. Boy you always feel so hard and bitter. Are you a cop? You sure act like one.

[Marblehead]

We as in sentient beings, not humans. Humans are not the center of the cosmos, but rather the cosmos is a manifestation of the consciousness of infinite sentient beings, as things are made of consciousness, because conscoiusness is not made of matter. We humans have incarnated in an endless assortment of sentient activities.

 

AAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

 

People!! The moon exists whether Vajrahridaya sees it or not. If you don't believe me just look up in the sky when the meteorologists say it is going to be visible in your area during such and such a time.

 

Matter existed for over 14 billion years before there were any humans on Earth. (Of course, we don't know yet if there are any conscious beings on planets other than Earth.)

 

Be well! (And don't forget to breathe.)

[Marblehead]

Hi Vajrahridaya,

 

Thus there is no difference between attending to the body and being from from the body.

 

Yes, that is what I would call having one foot in each state (of awareness). Kinda' like looking at yourself through someone else's eyes.

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

AAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

 

People!! The moon exists whether Vajrahridaya sees it or not. If you don't believe me just look up in the sky when the meteorologists say it is going to be visible in your area during such and such a time.

 

Matter existed for over 14 billion years before there were any humans on Earth. (Of course, we don't know yet if there are any conscious beings on planets other than Earth.)

 

Be well! (And don't forget to breathe.)

 

According to Buddhadharma, Hinduism and religious Taoism I would think. Matter had to go through it's evolution before it could become ready to host sentient consciousness which was existing in subtler, less dense realms even prier to the big bang of this physical universe. Buddhist cosmology explains what you just said in a different way that is not provable by physical science but only through meditative or contemplative insight.

 

We weren't even aware as sentient beings in higher realms of what was going on in a denser realm below us, but once we manifested the conditions through the power of attachment to the modifications of the mind, we took up residence in physical bodies of very tangible density... Dinosaurs and Saber Tooth Tigers, etc. (It's actually more complicated than this explanation)

 

Hi Vajrahridaya,

 

Thus there is no difference between attending to the body and being from from the body.

 

Yes, that is what I would call having one foot in each state (of awareness). Kinda' like looking at yourself through someone else's eyes.

 

Be well!

 

Ah, you know I meant free from the body, not from from the body... good. I had to go back and correct that.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Marblehead]

(It's actually more complicated than this explanation)

 

Really??? Who wooda' noed?

 

Matter had to go through it's evolution before it could become ready to host sentient consciousness which was existing in subtler, less dense realms even prier to the big bang of this physical universe.

 

That's an interesting thought. Maybe I'll think about it.

 

Ah, you know I meant free from the body, not from from the body... good. I had to go back and correct that.

 

Hey, I make lots of typos. Most I don't even go back to correct as I figure the readers will understand what I am saying.

 

Be well!

[ralis]

Just for you ralis. Boy you always feel so hard and bitter. Are you a cop? You sure act like one.

 

Not bitter at all. LOL!! Just wanting more clarity from your writing. No, I am not a cop!! I am someone who is intellectually curious with a very high IQ. Because I usually find flaws in people's arguments, it can be difficult to debate with me.

 

ralis

Edited August 14, 2009 by ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

Not bitter at all. LOL!! Just wanting more clarity from your writing. No, I am not a cop!! I am someone who is intellectually curious with a very high IQ. Because I usually find flaws in people's arguments, it can be difficult to debate with me.

 

ralis

 

My IQ is also very high... People find it hard to debate with me, because I always find flaws in their lack of depth perception.

[DalTheJigsaw123]

It is my observation that this discussion has turned suspiciously Buddhist. We should not confuse the two philosophies. Just my opinion.

 

Be well!

 

 

I love your opinion! Thank you:)

 

AAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

 

People!! The moon exists whether Vajrahridaya sees it or not. If you don't believe me just look up in the sky when the meteorologists say it is going to be visible in your area during such and such a time.

 

Matter existed for over 14 billion years before there were any humans on Earth. (Of course, we don't know yet if there are any conscious beings on planets other than Earth.)

 

Be well! (And don't forget to breathe.)

 

Lovely! Thank You!

[Vajrahridaya]

I love your opinion! Thank you:)

Lovely! Thank You!

 

So you agree that everything is based on and limited by the 3 dimensional level of perception and experience?

[DalTheJigsaw123]

So you agree that everything is based on and limited by the 3 dimensional level of perception and experience?

 

I do not, but I think it's great to have people from different walks of life, speak out and share their opinion! Just because I say "Lovely and I love your opinion," doesn't mean I agree! Thanks for pointing that out for me.

[Vajrahridaya]

I do not, but I think it's great to have people from different walks of life, speak out and share their opinion! Just because I say "Lovely and I love your opinion," doesn't mean I agree! Thanks for pointing that out for me.

 

Oh, ok... just curious, thanks for clarifying.

[DalTheJigsaw123]

Most certainly! Thanks for asking:)

[xabir2005]

There is no such thing as selfless flow in yo (the Manifest). This is experienced only in wu (the Mystery). Yes, it is true that many Taoists do live with one foot in yo and the other in wu. However, the selfless flow will never happen when we are in any aspect of yo because we will naturally (There! I said it for you.) try to swim if we feel we are sinking.

 

It is only the rare Sage who can attain total wu for any length of time (more than a couple minutes). Yes, there are Buddhist who can do this too (I am sure they call it something else). But we must attain to our bodily functions and this can be done only in the yo state.

 

However, the slant toward Buddhist thought entered before your first post so I wasn't pointing to you (nor to the moon either).

 

Be well!

 

Edit to add. Yes, you entered after someone (Leon?) mentioned Buddhism as a means to contrast a thought.

 

Presonally, I don't mind including the Buddhist perspective. I just feel that we should point out that this (whatever) is a Taoist concept and that (whatever) is a Buddhist concept.

I don't know what's the Taoist view on this... At first it seems that remaining in wu needs to be sustained through letting go of the self and entering into a state of nothingness. But as insights mature it needn't necessarily be a stage to be sustained once it's recognised that there never was a self to begin with, there never was a stage to enter, no I to cease and never has it existed. In hearing just sounds happening, never a hearer. In seeing, just scenery, no seer. All just spontaneous manifestation. This is the transition from 'Stage 3' to 'Stage 4' in Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Experience on Spiritual Enlightenment

 

Of course prior to that point, the role of absorption is still important, but after the arising of insight there is a transition from efforting to non-efforting, due to seeing the pathless path without entry or exit: simply manifestation is the unmanifested, and never was there a 'self' to needs to be removed... and hence never was there a state to enter when all states and experiences are already spontaneously manifesting and self liberating.

 

At this point No-Self is seen or realised as a Dharma Seal, the nature and ever-present characteristic of reality, no longer seen as a stage to attain.

 

As my friend Thusness wrote a few years ago...

 

Unmanifested is the manifestation,

The no-thing of everything,

Completely still yet ever flowing,

This is the spontaneous arising nature of the source.

Simply Self-So.

Use self-so to overcome conceptualization.

Dwell completely into the incredible realness of the phenomenal world.

 

....

 

See deep silence as flow,

See form as emptiness,

See actuality as tendencies,

See solidity as flux.

Edited August 14, 2009 by xabir2005

[Marblehead]

My IQ is also very high... People find it hard to debate with me, because I always find flaws in their lack of depth perception.

 

Well, just to pump the ego of you two individuals, my IQ is rather low but I do try to use logic in everthing I say. Sometime I fail at that because, hey, I have a low IQ. But my heart is big.

 

I am still watching for the opportunity to discuss something with Ralis.

 

Be well!

 

 

So you agree that everything is based on and limited by the 3 dimensional level of perception and experience?

 

Is that a trick question? Hehehe.

 

Of course I agree with you. (But don't let that go to your head.)

 

That is one of the reasons we all have our own illusions and delusions. Some people are even limited to the 2 dimentional level as describe in Plato's cave.

 

The reasons for the differences are very muliple and complex. So much so that there is no standard theory for it.

 

No only perception and experiences apply but our perceptions of our experiences alter our understanding.

 

But we must keep on trying.

 

Be well!

Edited August 14, 2009 by Marblehead

[Marblehead]

I don't know what's the Taoist view on this... At first it seems that remaining in wu needs to be sustained through letting go of the self and entering into a state of nothingness. But as insights mature it needn't necessarily be a stage to be sustained once it's recognised that there never was a self to begin with, there never was a stage to enter, no I to cease and never has it existed. In hearing just sounds happening, never a hearer. In seeing, just scenery, no seer. All just spontaneous manifestation. This is the transition from 'Stage 3' to 'Stage 4' in Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Experience on Spiritual Enlightenment

 

Of course prior to that point, the role of absorption is still important, but after the arising of insight there is a transition from efforting to non-efforting, due to seeing the pathless path without entry or exit: simply manifestation is the unmanifested, and never was there a 'self' to needs to be removed... and hence never was there a state to enter when all states and experiences are already spontaneously manifesting and self liberating.

 

At this point No-Self is seen or realised as a Dharma Seal, the nature and ever-present characteristic of reality, no longer seen as a stage to attain.

 

Hi Xabir2005,

 

Indeed. This is a key difference between the two. As long as we have a body and consciousness we will continue, at some level, to remain in the Manifest (the physical). We cannot excape the physical. Without the physical there is no consciousness so there is no reason for life.

 

Without hearing there is no beautiful music hear; without seeing there is no beautiful rose to see.

 

I do agree that manifestation is spontaneous - no reason, no purpose, no great goals to accomplish. However, I suggest that it is the experience of the manifest that is all-important. That's what life is all about.

 

I almost agree with your second paragraph except that some of your words carry connotations that are not acceptable to me but that's just my personal opinion.

 

Yes, I can imagine in my mind a point prior to the big bang where nothing existed - even to the short-term past to where "I" did not exist. I can even imagine a point of time when "I" will no longer exist. But this is speaking only to the manifest. Everything that "I" am existed prior to there being a "me" and everything that "I" am will exist after "I" no longer am.

 

So, basically, our consciousness of 'self' is attained in the Manifest. Our understanding of 'no-self' is also attained in the Manifest. 'No-self' is realized in the Mystery. But we can't stay there else there will be no further attainment. (Sorry, that [attainment] was the best word for me to use to this point.)

 

Be well!

[DalTheJigsaw123]

Well, just to pump the ego of you two individuals, my IQ is rather low but I do try to use logic in everthing I say. Sometime I fail at that because, hey, I have a low IQ. But my heart is big.

 

I am still watching for the opportunity to discuss something with Ralis.

 

Be well!

Is that a trick question? Hehehe.

 

Of course I agree with you. (But don't let that go to your head.)

 

That is one of the reasons we all have our own illusions and delusions. Some people are even limited to the 2 dimentional level as describe in Plato's cave.

 

The reasons for the differences are very muliple and complex. So much so that there is no standard theory for it.

 

No only perception and experiences apply but our perceptions of our experiences alter our understanding.

 

But we must keep on trying.

 

Be well!

 

For having such a low IQ you seem to be able to know how to string words together! Nice way of putting things. Thanks:!)

 

 

Well, just to pump the ego of you two individuals, my IQ is rather low but I do try to use logic in everthing I say. Sometime I fail at that because, hey, I have a low IQ. But my heart is big.

 

I am still watching for the opportunity to discuss something with Ralis.

 

Be well!

Is that a trick question? Hehehe.

 

Of course I agree with you. (But don't let that go to your head.)

 

That is one of the reasons we all have our own illusions and delusions. Some people are even limited to the 2 dimentional level as describe in Plato's cave.

 

The reasons for the differences are very muliple and complex. So much so that there is no standard theory for it.

 

No only perception and experiences apply but our perceptions of our experiences alter our understanding.

 

But we must keep on trying.

 

Be well!

 

For having such a low IQ you seem to be able to know how to string words together! Nice way of putting things. Thanks:!)

[Vajrahridaya]

Well, just to pump the ego of you two individuals, my IQ is rather low but I do try to use logic in everthing I say. Sometime I fail at that because, hey, I have a low IQ. But my heart is big.

 

Enlightenment is felt faster by the one with the open heart, but understood for longer if that open heart is balanced and tempered by the mental comprehension. Mind and heart really aren't separate from the spiritual point of view though, ya know? There is designation only for the sake of endless elaborating...

 

 

Is that a trick question? Hehehe.

 

Of course I agree with you. (But don't let that go to your head.)

 

That is one of the reasons we all have our own illusions and delusions. Some people are even limited to the 2 dimentional level as describe in Plato's cave.

 

The reasons for the differences are very muliple and complex. So much so that there is no standard theory for it.

 

No only perception and experiences apply but our perceptions of our experiences alter our understanding.

 

But we must keep on trying.

 

Be well!

 

This is why the Buddha merely laid out the way nature works... "dependent origination", that every perspective, every experience, every truth or Truth, every explanation originate dependent upon causes and conditions which are themselves dependently originated add infinitum, and that upon looking at it deeply, nothing real or substantial is found, thus the endless possibility of this ever flowing interdependency that is nature was called by him... "emptiness." Which is merely the quality of things and experiences that allows for transformation and none static-ness.

 

It's called The Dharma, or "The Path" Which is pretty similar to saying, "The Way" or Tao. As I get more and more intimate with what you Taoists are saying.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

Hi Xabir2005,

 

Indeed. This is a key difference between the two. As long as we have a body and consciousness we will continue, at some level, to remain in the Manifest (the physical). We cannot excape the physical. Without the physical there is no consciousness so there is no reason for life.

 

See Buddhism see's the manifest is on many levels, including levels that would be deemed Casperish to you. But, the Buddhist goal is never to attain unmanifestness. It's to realize what the nature of everything is and just continue to be through it without identification with limitations that are of it.

 

Without hearing there is no beautiful music hear; without seeing there is no beautiful rose to see.

Really Buddhism is about how better to hear and dance, and to see and co-create.

 

Really, that's what Buddhism is truly about when it comes down to it's final teachings.

 

I do agree that manifestation is spontaneous - no reason, no purpose, no great goals to accomplish. However, I suggest that it is the experience of the manifest that is all-important. That's what life is all about.

 

There really is only relativity and how best to be liberated while experiencing and doing... is really the sole of the shoe.

 

 

Yes, I can imagine in my mind a point prior to the big bang where nothing existed - even to the short-term past to where "I" did not exist. I can even imagine a point of time when "I" will no longer exist. But this is speaking only to the manifest. Everything that "I" am existed prior to there being a "me" and everything that "I" am will exist after "I" no longer am.

 

Before this big bang was only the end or big crunch of the previous universe.

So, basically, our consciousness of 'self' is attained in the Manifest. Our understanding of 'no-self' is also attained in the Manifest. 'No-self' is realized in the Mystery. But we can't stay there else there will be no further attainment. (Sorry, that [attainment] was the best word for me to use to this point.)

 

Be well!

 

The manifest and the mystery are not dichotomous realities. The two truths of ultimate and relative don't have two distinct locations as Yo and Wu, and Yin and Yang are merely description of the one Tao that is everything.

 

For having such a low IQ you seem to be able to know how to string words together! Nice way of putting things. Thanks:!)

For having such a low IQ you seem to be able to know how to string words together! Nice way of putting things. Thanks:!)

 

He's just being humble.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[xabir2005]

So, basically, our consciousness of 'self' is attained in the Manifest. Our understanding of 'no-self' is also attained in the Manifest. 'No-self' is realized in the Mystery. But we can't stay there else there will be no further attainment. (Sorry, that [attainment] was the best word for me to use to this point.)

 

Be well!

"No-Self" is not an unmanifest state contrasted to manifestation.... it's the realisation that all experiences, manifestation, spontaneously arise without an experiencer or a self. Or in other words the unmanifested is the manifestation. There never was an experiencer in any experiences... only due to karmic propensities/deep conditioning do we contract into the sense of self and an experiencer-experience split. But actually Always Already, in hearing only just sounds, no hearer, in seeing only just forms, no seer. This is the nature of reality, and should be realised as such, not a stage to be attained.

 

The experience and realisation of No-Self is beyond any mental constructs that is perceivable from the mind. Therefore it is the "Mystery" -- yet it is not in opposition to Forms or Manifestation. It is not a form of subjective knowing. There is no person that perceives or understands no-self, nor an inner knower or witness that is aware of no-self, that would be contradictory. Rather, in the perceiving, just shapes, colours, sounds, no perceiver.

 

When looking at bamboo through the insight of no-self, we do not study a bamboo scientifically as a subjective observer, nor do we even observe the bamboo carefully from a distance as a separate self. Instead of experiencing bamboo from the viewpoint of a 'me', rather, from the bamboo experience the bamboo: totally no distance between me and bamboo. In other words, we enter into the mode of being where the bamboo is the bamboo itself, and from there to look at the pine tree and the bamboo. Everything becomes manifest in their suchness. It is Mystery because there is no separate observer studying it from a distance, rather, it is a mode of everything being itself, or rather in a dynamic state of becoming. There is no knower and it is not a form of subjective knowledge. The Tao, being non-dual, is ultimately a Mystery since it cannot be made an object of observation by a subject since there is no subject/object relation.

 

The Satipatthana Sutta, a Buddhist sutra from the Buddha which teaches awareness, uses expressions such as "observing the body in the body," "observing the feelings in the feelings," "observing the mind in the mind," "observing the objects of mind in the objects of mind." repeatedly. This means not separating oneself from the object of observation, and see/experience that the Observer and the Observed is one. Or to use a quote by Guru Padmasambhava,

 

And when you look into yourself in this way nakedly (without any discursive thoughts),

Since there is only this pure observing, there will be found a lucid clarity without anyone being there who is the observer;

only a naked manifest awareness is present.

Edited August 14, 2009 by xabir2005

[dwai]

First there is 'I' vs The Universe...

 

Then I become a part of the flow...

 

Then there is no I going with the flow, just flow.

 

Walking effortlessly and naturally happening (happening without the need to think 'walk front, walk left') is Tao.

 

A spontaneous movement of coughing due to itchiness in the throat, an un-selfconscious activity, that is the evidence of Tao.

 

Grass growing by itself is Tao.

 

Fingernails growing by itself is Tao.

 

Turd on the floor also is Tao.

 

Everything is happening on its own accord without any separate self or doer, the Way of things simply flows.

 

Well said!

[Marblehead]

 

It's called The Dharma, or "The Path" Which is pretty similar to saying, "The Way" or Tao. As I get more and more intimate with what you Taoists are saying.

 

Well, let's don't get too intimate. Your lady-friend might start wondering about you.

 

Be well!

[Marblehead]

Okay, I am goig to respond to this before reading the next post - it looked like someone was beating me up. Hehehe.

 

See Buddhism see's the manifest is on many levels, including levels that would be deemed Casperish to you. But, the Buddhist goal is never to attain unmanifestness. It's to realize what the nature of everything is and just continue to be through it without identification with limitations that are of it.

 

You speak of levels and I speak of states. I actually don't see any significant differences between the two philosophies with this subject.

 

Really Buddhism is about how better to hear and dance, and to see and co-create.

Really, that's what Buddhism is truly about when it comes down to it's final teachings.

 

Welcome to my world, the world of Tao!

 

There really is only relativity and how best to be liberated while experiencing and doing... is really the sole of the shoe.

 

But we Taoists need no liberating, and we especially don't need to be saved.

 

Before this big bang was only the end or big crunch of the previous universe.

 

Yeah, Yeah. We both know that but none of it can be proved. It is only supposition.

 

The manifest and the mystery are not dichotomous realities. The two truths of ultimate and relative don't have two distinct locations as Yo and Wu, and Yin and Yang are merely description of the one Tao that is everything.

 

Totally agree. It is the individual who decides if they are going to put 100% of themselves in the Manifest or find some comfortable position between the two. I prefer a nice harmony; the ups and downs; the wonderous variations of my emotions; letting my Yany hang out and then getting slapped aside the head by my Yin.

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

 

But we Taoists need no liberating, and we especially don't need to be saved.

 

See Buddhism is concerned with 1. the end of suffering and 2. the end of unconscious rebirth, either while still alive as in rebirth into every new moment, or also in the after this life rebirth.

 

Buddhism if practiced correctly (which is personal and individual) leads to the end of psychological suffering and the end of unconscious rebirth. This is what we call liberated. Those that still suffer psychologically, are considered bound and those that may seem happy in this life but don't know what's going to happen to them in their next life, or where they are going to go after death, are considered bound ignorance.

 

So in that sense, we do see that we are saved through Buddhism as both 1 and 2 cease completely.

 

Yeah, Yeah. We both know that but none of it can be proved. It is only supposition.

 

Actually scientists are finding out that this is true. That this universe is based on the previous one. I don't think they have absolutely conclusive evidence, but they have found some material evidence that suggests this hypothesis.

 

Totally agree. It is the individual who decides if they are going to put 100% of themselves in the Manifest or find some comfortable position between the two. I prefer a nice harmony; the ups and downs; the wonderous variations of my emotions; letting my Yany hang out and then getting slapped aside the head by my Yin.

 

Be well!

 

Indeed... my yang hang's low... and swings high!

 

Well, let's don't get too intimate. Your lady-friend might start wondering about you.

 

Be well!

 

Oh, she knows I'm pretty unconventional. But... um... no.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Marblehead]

Hi Xabir2005,

 

Okay. Let me start of by saying that we are really not that far apart as to our understanding. It is just that you use such funny words at times.

 

"No-Self" is not an unmanifest state contrasted to manifestation.... it's the realisation that all experiences, manifestation, spontaneously arise without an experiencer or a self. Or in other words the unmanifested is the manifestation. There never was an experiencer in any experiences... only due to karmic propensities/deep conditioning do we contract into the sense of self and an experiencer-experience split. But actually Always Already, in hearing only just sounds, no hearer, in seeing only just forms, no seer. This is the nature of reality, and should be realised as such, not a stage to be attained.

 

However, this is not one of the areas where we agree. Hehehe. If what you say is true there would be no reason for the Manifest at all. I do agree that all arises spontaneously (but, consistent with the processes of Nature which are the guideposts for the Manifest) because of the process of cause and effect. Well, okay, almost consistently - there are variances from the norm. (But even this is within the realm of the natural.)

 

Thing is, there is no 'sound' if there is no hearer. Yes, there are vibrational waves but no sound. The same with sight - there is no image if there is no receptor, only variations of the frequency of light waves.

 

Therefore I suggest that the Manifest is very important as it is through the Manifest that Tao experiences itself.

 

PS You will never convince me that "I" do not exist.

 

The experience and realisation of No-Self is beyond any mental constructs that is perceivable from the mind. Therefore it is the "Mystery" -- yet it is not in opposition to Forms or Manifestation. It is not a form of subjective knowing. There is no person that perceives or understands no-self, nor an inner knower or witness that is aware of no-self, that would be contradictory. Rather, in the perceiving, just shapes, colours, sounds, no perceiver.

 

Oh! This is another area where we don't agree. Hehehe. Chuang Tzu expressed it very well in the "Butterfly Dream". There is a state of wu where one becomes a non-descript observer and one may even see themself in the scene. But everything that is seen is of the Manifest nature. I will agree with you that the Mystery is non-descriptive. And that is because the Mystery is "potential", it is not yet Manifested.

 

When looking at bamboo through the insight of no-self, we do not study a bamboo scientifically as a subjective observer, nor do we even observe the bamboo carefully from a distance as a separate self. Instead of experiencing bamboo from the viewpoint of a 'me', rather, from the bamboo experience the bamboo: totally no distance between me and bamboo. In other words, we enter into the mode of being where the bamboo is the bamboo itself, and from there to look at the pine tree and the bamboo. Everything becomes manifest in their suchness. It is Mystery because there is no separate observer studying it from a distance, rather, it is a mode of everything being itself, or rather in a dynamic state of becoming. There is no knower and it is not a form of subjective knowledge. The Tao, being non-dual, is ultimately a Mystery since it cannot be made an object of observation by a subject since there is no subject/object relation.

 

Okay. I cannot become bamboo nor can I become a pine tree. I may become either of those after this manifestation. I may have been those prior to this manifestation. I do agree that all Manifest eminates from the same source - the Mystery. But the purpose, in my mind, for the Manifest is so that Tao can have its various experiences. Everything is dynamic except perhaps Tzujan. But at this point in time I am one of the seers, one of the hearers, one of the feelers, physical and emotional, etc.

 

And a pine tree is a pine tree. It cannot be me in this , its current manifestation. Yes, the tree can be cut down and the timber used to build a house and the cuttings used to make a fire. This is the transmutation of things. In this case man caused the transmutation but over time transmutation would have none-the-less taken place.

 

I just can't imagine myselfg being a bamboo back-scratcher. Sorry.

 

The Satipatthana Sutta, a Buddhist sutra from the Buddha which teaches awareness, uses expressions such as "observing the body in the body," "observing the feelings in the feelings," "observing the mind in the mind," "observing the objects of mind in the objects of mind." repeatedly. This means not separating oneself from the object of observation, and see/experience that the Observer and the Observed is one. Or to use a quote by Guru Padmasambhava,

 

And when you look into yourself in this way nakedly (without any discursive thoughts),

Since there is only this pure observing, there will be found a lucid clarity without anyone being there who is the observer;

only a naked manifest awareness is present.

 

Taoist use words like that sometimes too. Except that they are making reference to one looking inside theirself, not trying to se themself as something else.

 

Yes, we all must stand naked one day. And we will have to say, "This is what I have become."

 

I do like your "... only a naked manifest awareness is present". (I will probably use it at some point in the future.)

 

Be well!

[Marblehead]

See Buddhism is concerned with 1. the end of suffering and 2. the end of unconscious rebirth, either while still alive as in rebirth into every new moment, or also in the after this life rebirth.

 

Buddhism if practiced correctly (which is personal and individual) leads to the end of psychological suffering and the end of unconscious rebirth. This is what we call liberated. Those that still suffer psychologically, are considered bound and those that may seem happy in this life but don't know what's going to happen to them in their next life, or where they are going to go after death, are considered bound ignorance.

 

So in that sense, we do see that we are saved through Buddhism as both 1 and 2 cease completely.

 

Yeah, well, like I said, I am not imprisoned so I need no liberation and to the best of my knowledge I do not need saving for any catastrophe. Surely my creator knows what is best for me. Why should I assume to know better?

 

Actually scientists are finding out that this is true. That this universe is based on the previous one. I don't think they have absolutely conclusive evidence, but they have found some material evidence that suggests this hypothesis.

 

You might have your info confused here. The most recent revelation in this regard that I am aware of is concerning meteors in our solar system that are older than our sun. These are likely debris from the star that exploded allowing for the creation our sun and solar system.

 

But, allowing for a fudge factor, there may well have been some debris left over from the previous universe that was not consumed by the giant black hole that created this present universe. Science would have to be able to accurately date the material to an age greater than 13.7 billion years though.

 

Be well!