Is there an objective world?

[Marblehead]

Our idea, concept, label, of flowers as 'inherently red' and inherently existing, that is just a conceptual fabrication. Nothing in our experience tells us that a flower inherently exist and is inherently red. It is delusion to think like that and grasp on forms as having inherent existence.

 

All I will ask you to do is grasp firmly the rose by the stem where you observe thorns. I am very sure you will feel the thusness of the thorns.

 

Regarding space. if you fill a glass to the rim with water and then add three ice cubes you will absolutely see that the things of the objective universe do indeed take up space. Then wipe up the overspilled water.

 

You do sit in a chair while you are at the computer, don't you? The chair exists each time you choose to sit in it. It does not require any delusion of yours in order for the chair to be there. And if you allow a friend to sit at your computer the chair will be there for them as well.

 

I already agreed that there is no 'redness' to the rose. Color perception is a matter of light refraction. A blind person could not see the redness of the rose or the greenness of the leaves but they darn sure could feel the thornness of the thorns.

 

I understand the Buddhist concept of emptiness but you are taking that concept to the extreme. Buddha really did exist for a while. He lived! He loved! He even pooped in the woods.

 

To say something doesn't exist just because it is not going to last a trillion years is not reasonable or logical. Some mushroom live for only one day and some trees live for thousands of years. Before they came into existence they did not exist, then they came into existence and were a part of the objective universe for their time then they died and became something else.

 

I wouldn't even be having this discussion if you didn't exist becaue I have already had the very same discussion with other Buddhists. I will agree that no 'thing' is independantly originated. Everything of this universe started with the 'big bang'.

 

And if the universe dies the cold death as some suggest then everything that is will continue to exist eternally even though these things will take different forms over time. On the other hand, I hold to the concept that the universe will one day stop expanding, reverse its movement resulting in the 'big crunch'. But even then, everything that exists will continue to exist but only in a different form.

 

And here I sit in my objectively real chair typing on my objectively real keyboard of my real computer sitting on my real computer desk that is sitting on the floor of my real house that has its foundation on the real earth that is rotating our real sun that is rotating around the center of our real galaxy that is located somewhere (I forget where it is said our galaxy is located in the universe) in this real universe.

 

However, that naked, foxy, beautiful redhead I just imagined in my mind really does not exist. Darn!

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

 

There is appearance of solidity.

 

All I ask is that you walk through the wall of your home. I am sure you will quickly realize how solid some things can be.

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

A 'solid' tea cup depends on the space within it before it can hold any liquid.

 

While this is true the tea cup still depends on its solidity in order to hold the tea when the tea is poured into it. So still, it is the solidity of things that give them essence but it is their emptiness that give them their utility. A room that is filled from floor to ceiling with concrete is useless whereas a room that is empty has many uses. However, without floor, ceiling, walls, and an entrance there is no room. The floor, ceiling, walls and entrance (door) are the solids (objective reality) that give the room its essence.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited December 29, 2009 by Marblehead

[3bob]

[Marblehead]

All Buddhists do not agree: ...

 

I have nothing to say.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

hehehe

[3bob]

[Sunya]

All Buddhists do not agree: (& niether do many other groups across all the forms and names of religions or schools thus each being has to ultimately come to truth on their own, although much help is given through many honorable forms and names)

 

Dolpopa was a controversial Tibetan, his views aren't shared by most since its seen as a monist teaching, swaying into the extreme of eternalism.

 

All I ask is that you walk through the wall of your home. I am sure you will quickly realize how solid some things can be.

 

Ask any physicist what solidity means and he will give you a lengthy explanation about molecular workings, Buddhists have a much simpler explanation: conditions, but both will tell you that solidity does not exist as an inherent quality of an object because it has relative existence. What does solid mean? Here are some definitions:

 

"of definite shape and volume; firm"

"entirely of one substance, one character, with no holes inside"

 

So solidity is when an object has no holes, is of one substance. Ask any physicist of this is true, of anything. He will simply tell you to name one aspect of the universe that isn't made up of smaller things that are constantly moving.

 

For example if you are small enough to fit into the cracks of a wall.. you can go right through it. From your vantage point though, as a human, the wall does indeed seem solid but in reality there are many cracks. Also, from your point of view it seems that everything is standing still but on a molecular level there's actually utter chaos, nothing is standing still, and there's way more space than matter on this level. Solidity then is simply a word we used describing a facet of our experience, it has no reality whatsoever outside of your relative experience. Since we are talking about 'objectivity' here, I don't understand how you can say that the wall is truly solid, when that solidity depends entirely on your relative position and interaction with it.

Edited December 29, 2009 by mikaelz

[Sunya]

What if? What if in the 21st century using the Hadron collider science discovers the postulated Boson particle, or "God particle", the particle that gives mass (solidity) to all the other particles? Then we will know there is mass, and where it comes from. Then the Buddhist metaphysical theory will be shown wrong. Will the Buddhists be able to do what the DL suggests and follow science? Does Buddhist metaphysics at that level of theoretical detail (then proven wrong) change the Buddha's supposed core message? From my Chinese Zen (Chan) training, seeing the impersonal (empty) nature of the Tao as spontaneous, dependent origination was a part of the training but not the core, and whether there is mass (solidity) or not was not discussed. I personally don't think the Buddha would care; his concern being at core with the 4 NT. The collider is about to begin experiments on the God particle and we shall see what we see, whether we want to see or want not to see.

 

Science is always changing, always finding new and better ways to theorize about the universe. I've had a deep appreciation for it due to my Philosophy professor, who's also a Physicist, but even he recognizes that science and ultimate truth just don't go hand in hand since science is created by and interpreted by humans. Science posits theories, not facts and all data is prone to interpretation and conclusions are made out of that interpretation by humans [monkeys with very crude intelligent] How will any data found by physicists ever prove Buddhist metaphysics wrong? All Buddhist metaphysics does is show that everything is interdependent and that the ultimate reality is completely beyond human conception. Buddhist philosophy doesn't pretend to posit any truth, it does the complete opposite and forces you to give up that quest. Science is still on that quest and thus will never fulfill it because it's impossible.

 

"God Particle" is actually just an overhyped media term, too bad you fell for it. It makes Christians excited because it could "prove" a prime mover, a substance that everything depends on, unfortunately that isn't the case. Remember when atoms were discovered? O man, people must've thought they were God's lego blocks! And the big bang? That definitely proved God's creation! So why aren't you converting to Christianity already? Doesn't science have all the answer? No, basing metaphysics off scientific discovery will only lead to confusion when those scientific theories change, they are never conclusive... always part of a bigger picture.

 

Anyway, you haven't explained how Buddhist metaphysics will be proven wrong. Any discovery would only, eventually, prove Buddhist metaphysics right because we see the interdependent nature of particles to the Higgs Boson field, the emptiness of mass.

 

Your arguments remind me of the "blind men and the elephant". I studied science and philosophy before you were born. The absolute value you attach to your arguments only applies to your point of view and not a general or cosmic point of view. It is you who make assumptions and proceed to argue from incorrect assumptions. For example, your use of the pronoun "we" incorrectly assumes a collective agreement with your point of view. Furthermore, you incorrectly assume that only humans objectify reality. Animals don't? It is a proven fact that chimps use very basic tools for rudimentary tasks.

 

As long as you defer to an external authority to form your world view, you will never experience the cosmos as it truly is.

 

ralis

 

First, I must congratulate you on being old; I guess that makes you an authority figure here. Second, if you're going to try to belittle me, at least add more substance to your response. If my arguments are wrong then explain why. My use of pronouns and lack of including animals into the discussion has no bearing whatsoever on what I said. There's no use of even talking about the animals' worldview since they have no language to communicate what they experience. We can speculate that animals do not think about such ideas as 'objective world' since language and thought is required as well as dis identifying with the self as the center of experience, all of which animals lack the potential of, presently. There is enough evidence to warrant a conclusion that animals have a purely subjective experience full of instinctual response, like many and most humans. I generalize humanity as "we", the exceptions are the enlightened who see through their dream-like subjective experience.

 

And, I don't defer to an external authority. a] there is no such thing as external and b] if you don't learn from others then you are thoroughly deluded in thinking you can figure everything out for yourself. I study philosophy for inspiration, not reliance. I'm on a path because it's a silly idealistic dream that the ego can pick its way out of the cage, much easier to listen to the advice of others that have escaped. What's this obsession with individualism you have? It's as if... it's the cosmic point of view.. and not your own... relative..point of view.

Edited December 30, 2009 by mikaelz

[C T]

From the angle of compassion, we often hear how closely all beings are connected. Its my view that

the deepest connections occur in the "emptiness" aspect of ourselves, and not in the "form" aspect -

it is the radiant and space-like nature of our being where we can truly find our connectedness, for

if we try to do it thru "form", often all we end up seeing is only distance and separation and individualism.

Just pause for a moment, and imagine this scenario - it wont happen, but at least we can imagine it -

every single human being on earth were to cease all activities for 10 minutes, be still, and remain in

silent contemplation.. at that point i think there will not be 6 billion separate, silent beings.. all that

there will be is One universe echoing One silence! How wonderful if that came to pass! Imagine the

potential there for healing the Mother in that 10 minutes of total abstinence of all movements and activities.

[C T]

Hello MH and TzuJanLi, and anyone else who may be interested - here's a clip i found

which might be of interest. Its called "The Perception of Consciousness", and there's

a quote in there somewhere (@ around the 7 minute mark) where a Professor of Physics,

Hans Peter Duerr, remarked, "Matter is not matter. Matter as we know it exists only in the mind."

Perhaps something to ponder over, or not.. its up to you. The presenter, @ 7.37, begins

to question if there is actually such a thing as an Objective World?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKryvqiOFNs&aia=true

 

All the best!

 

PS - There's also another one here, a longer one, from a more scientific perspective, called

" Perception - The Reality Beyond Matter".

 

 

Enjoy!

Edited December 30, 2009 by CowTao

[3bob]

"...One universe echoing One silence! How wonderful if that came to pass! Imagine the

potential there for healing the Mother in that 10 minutes of total abstinence of all movements and activities"

 

Righto, right on CowTao

 

image to if everyone at an every NFL game and everyone at soccor game did so every weekend!

 

Om

[3bob]

Mikaelz,

 

Is there any type of eternalism that you don't see as extreme?

[ralis]

 

 

First, I must congratulate you on being old; I guess that makes you an authority figure here. Second, if you're going to try to belittle me, at least add more substance to your response. If my arguments are wrong then explain why. My use of pronouns and lack of including animals into the discussion has no bearing whatsoever on what I said. There's no use of even talking about the animals' worldview since they have no language to communicate what they experience. We can speculate that animals do not think about such ideas as 'objective world' since language and thought is required as well as dis identifying with the self as the center of experience, all of which animals lack the potential of, presently. There is enough evidence to warrant a conclusion that animals have a purely subjective experience full of instinctual response, like many and most humans. I generalize humanity as "we", the exceptions are the enlightened who see through their dream-like subjective experience.

 

And, I don't defer to an external authority. a] there is no such thing as external and b] if you don't learn from others then you are thoroughly deluded in thinking you can figure everything out for yourself. I study philosophy for inspiration, not reliance. I'm on a path because it's a silly idealistic dream that the ego can pick its way out of the cage, much easier to listen to the advice of others that have escaped. What's this obsession with individualism you have? It's as if... it's the cosmic point of view.. and not your own... relative..point of view.

 

 

Actually you do defer to external authorities i.e, Nietzsche and the Buddha. How can you state that you don't defer to external authorities and then claim there is no external! Who are the external others you learn from? I guess they really aren't external? I think there are a few logical fallacies in your arguments.

 

If there is no external, where did the others that have escaped go to?

 

ralis

Edited December 30, 2009 by ralis

[Sunya]

Actually you do defer to external authorities i.e, Nietzsche and the Buddha. How can you state that you don't defer to external authorities and then claim there is no external! Who are the external others you learn from? I guess they really aren't external? I think there are a few logical fallacies in your arguments.

 

No such thing as external because there's no internal, so Nietzsche, Buddha, Johnny Appleseed are all empty manifestations of Dharmakaya. The degree of wisdom in the manifestation varies, so though the manifestations are equally pure, they are not equally wise, thus discretion is necessary to choose which facets are appropriate to use as guiding forces.

 

If there is no external, where did the others that have escaped go to?

 

loaded question. there is no correct answer because the question is wrong. the cage is a metaphor for incorrect vision, there is no elsewhere. the others have only stopped wrongly seeing that a cage exists.

Edited December 30, 2009 by mikaelz

[Sunya]

Mikaelz,

 

Is there any type of eternalism that you don't see as extreme?

 

the kind that doesn't hold all of reality to be of one, eternal, self-substance that can be identified with. unfortunately this is every kind of eternalism since this is the definition of it lol. it's just my opinion though, if you dig it that's your cup of chai

[Sunya]

Hello MH and TzuJanLi, and anyone else who may be interested - here's a clip i found

which might be of interest. Its called "The Perception of Consciousness", and there's

a quote in there somewhere (@ around the 7 minute mark) where a Professor of Physics,

Hans Peter Duerr, remarked, "Matter is not matter. Matter as we know it exists only in the mind."

Perhaps something to ponder over, or not.. its up to you. The presenter, @ 7.37, actually begins

to question if there is actually such a thing as an Objective World.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKryvqiOFNs&aia=true

 

All the best!

 

PS - There's also another one here, a longer one, from a more scientific perspective, called

" Perception - The Reality Beyond Matter".

 

 

Enjoy!

 

wonderful! thanks for posting..this is basically what we went over in my Mysticism philosophy course which was run by a philosopher/physicist, very respected man. I love seeing physicists talk about this stuff, unfortunately most people aren't interested in hearing any of this. It doesn't matter if Buddha said it, or many other philosophers said it, or the top physicists from Cambridge are saying it, it's wrong! These people will use circular argumentation, dancing around everything you say, because they have no interest in truth. How many people are genuinely interested in truth? I'd dare say very few.

[goldisheavy]

Hello MH and TzuJanLi, and anyone else who may be interested - here's a clip i found

which might be of interest. Its called "The Perception of Consciousness", and there's

a quote in there somewhere (@ around the 7 minute mark) where a Professor of Physics,

Hans Peter Duerr, remarked, "Matter is not matter. Matter as we know it exists only in the mind."

Perhaps something to ponder over, or not.. its up to you. The presenter, @ 7.37, actually begins

to question if there is actually such a thing as an Objective World.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKryvqiOFNs&aia=true

 

I love this video. This one is a synopsis or a fragment of a larger presentation. The entire presentation is also available.

 

Thanks CowTao.

Edited December 30, 2009 by goldisheavy

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

Hi CowTao: I find no inconsistencies between the video references and my understandings of existence.. i acknowledge the 'no-thing-ness' of existence, that Consciousness is its own creator.. What i also acknowledge is that we/us/Life has evolved as a manifestation of Consciousness to this present version of 'Experience/relationship'.. that the mind's perception of 'thing-ness' is an intended result of Consciousness.. a tangible representation of itself.. it is the self-awareness of Consciousness.. All of which is dependent on a common medium, Energy..

 

I/we/us, we are Life, we are Consciousness discovering its own potential.. as such, i am eager to manifest that process of self-discovery, that process of realizing potential.. to deconstruct the process in favor of some contrived 'blissful state of nothingness' is contrary to my realization of the process.. the process is an evolution of Consciousness itself, realizing its own potential, and.. we/us/Life are that realization.. i accept the 'thing-ness' of Consciousness as the process, i am eager to participate in the evolution of myself, of the human experience, and of Consciousness undifferentiated..

 

I accept 'thing-ness' as thingness, i accept the 'in-formation' experienced through relationships as me discovering ME.. i accept that i am both separate and whole, simultaneously without contradiction.. It was only after finding my 'way' to this understanding that Life begins to reveal its subtle and amazing truth, this is IT.. our existence is exactly what it IS, the ongoing creation/evolution of Consciousness.. in that realization there is a profound peace, unburdened by the 'desire' to deconstruct the intention of Consciousness itself..

 

Be well..

[Marblehead]

where a Professor of Physics, Hans Peter Duerr, remarked, "Matter is not matter. Matter as we know it exists only in the mind."

 

Hi CowTao,

 

That just shows how far one can remove themself from reality when they think too much. I think the good Professor is one of those.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited December 30, 2009 by Marblehead

[ralis]

No such thing as external because there's no internal, so Nietzsche, Buddha, Johnny Appleseed are all empty manifestations of Dharmakaya. The degree of wisdom in the manifestation varies, so though the manifestations are equally pure, they are not equally wise, thus discretion is necessary to choose which facets are appropriate to use as guiding forces.

loaded question. there is no correct answer because the question is wrong. the cage is a metaphor for incorrect vision, there is no elsewhere. the others have only stopped wrongly seeing that a cage exists.

 

Like you, I used to be very serious! Thought I had it all figured out!

 

 

ralis

[Sunya]

Edited December 30, 2009 by mikaelz

[Marblehead]

[ralis]

Hi Mikaelz,

You are painting an inaccurate picture of me and my thought processes.

 

First, I have no disdain for anything. (At this moment in time anyhow.) I understand the importance of analyzing our experiences as well as the world around us. I regularly watch scientific, educational and nature programs on TV. I enjoy understanding what the world is made of.

 

Secondly, I hold to nothing that has been proven to be false. I hold to ideas and concepts that have been proven to be true. I am always questioning new information. But once I have questioned and found an answer that is consistent with nature and other ideas and concepts that I already hold to there is no reason to constantly question the "obvious".

 

Yes, I will suggest that there are things that shouldn't be questioned. A perfect example of this is my inspirations when I recieve them. I have found that there are no answers to inspirations. I will even go so far as to say that even if I were to question I would find no logical answers.

 

Yes, there are many aspects of my life that are absolutely true and logical and these need no further questioning. Why waste time on questions where you get the same answer every time you ask the question? At some point one should say, "Okay, this is useful to me and I should hold to it."

 

For al practicle purposes my brain is just fine in supplying me with the information I need to live a comfortable live and to be at peace with my Self. My brain does not constantly wander onto the questions of "What if?" When we live in 'wu wei' there are no "What if's". Everything is done and there is never any regrets.

 

Yes, I always question what I do not know if I feel it is important to me. But there are truely many things that just don't matter to me one way or the other. I don't need to keep asking the same questions over and over again just to see if many somehow they matter to me. What matters to me will show itself naturally and then I will act on it when the time is appropriate.

 

And in response to your quote by Ludwig: What is the use of constantly asking the same questions that have been shown to have no answers. To questions of this sort any answer will do because any answer we choose will probably be wrong. So a proper answer to the unanswerable questions would be: "I don't know."

 

My comment to CowTao was to the comment by the professor that: "Matter is not matter. Matter as we know it exists only in the mind."

 

This is really not a fair statement because firstly, matter does exist. Then he suggests that matter, physicality, exists only in our mind and this is so far from the truth it is actually a lie. Yes, things can be taken apart and reduced to their smallest conponents and in the end you will have nothing. But of what freaking use is nothing? Again, these kinds of thoughts lead only to apathy. Nothing matters so why do anything? Why try to make life better? Why try to help someone in need if nothing matters?

 

No, I do not accept that kind of thinking because it is reducing the importance of life and living life to its fullest and being compassionate toward our fellow beings. When things matter we are inspired to take action to try to make things better.

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

Mikaelz et al. deny appealing to external authority, yet quote from external authority. I never see a first person account, rather their style is to use the ideas of others.

 

You are so right in that nothingness leads to an apathetic state of being. That kind of apathy is what I experienced while studying Buddhism. Apathy leads to depression. Depression leads to.....

 

 

ralis

[C T]

To say that everything matters is one extreme, and has the potential to create much causes for

fixations and wanton indulgences, which may lead to grasping, and finally the difficulty to find

release at the time of death. The Buddha taught against latching on to such an extreme.

 

To say that nothing matters in the opposite extreme, and has the potential to create much causes

for wanton neglect and blind abandonment, which may lead to non-grasping, and finally the difficulty

to find appreciation and meaning in life. The Buddha taught against latching on to this other extreme.

 

Between these two views lie the middle way, and he that walks this path is free from greed and attachments,

fears and aversions. Having transcended all extreme views, one is neither bound by chains of gold or by

chains of iron. Such a person maintains a serene equanimity at all times.. when blessings abound, and the

seas are calm, he is not overly happy; when hardships are rife, and the seas become stormy, he is

not overly burdened. When he is hungry, he eats with a gladdened heart; when tired, he sleeps without

dreams of yesterdays and of tomorrows. Such is the way of one who has gone beyond...

 

Gate gate paragate parasamgate Bodhi Svaha!

(Gone, gone, gone beyond, altogether gone beyond, O what sublime awakening, All hail!)

[goldisheavy]

Hi CowTao,

 

That just shows how far one can remove themself from reality when they think too much. I think the good Professor is one of those.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Is this a doughnut?

 

 

Or is this?

 

 

Or this?

 

 

If you say only the first one is a doughnut, you don't have a complete vision of what a doughnut is. The second view is a doughnut from far away. The last view is a doughnut from very far away or a doughnut from very up close (through the hole). Which view is the right view? None of them are either right or wrong and all of them are doughnut.

 

If you refuse to train your mind to see flexibly and fully like this, then you really have no business on any cultivation forum, as you're not interested in cultivating anything except your assumptions about what a doughnut is.

[Marblehead]

To say that everything matters is one extreme, ...

 

To say that nothing matters in the opposite extreme, ...

 

Between these two views lie the middle way, ...

 

Yes, between the two lies the concept of 'useful/useless'.

 

Everything is relative. If a 'thing' matters to me then it matters. If a 'thing' does not matter to me then it does not matter. So (potentially) everything matters but nothing matters.

 

I very much agree with you that the middle way (path) is the preferred. To have and to do but yet clinging to none. To experience life in its fullest yet being able to leave everything that happens in the past where it belongs. This allow for new life, new experiences, new loves, etc.

 

And indeed, we eat when hungry and rest when tired. This is wu wei. And we take action when action is required. When the task is accomplished we rest. We don't linger, admiring our accomplishment, nor do we brag upon what we have done. We continue to live.

 

I don't know what this has to do with an objective world but it does have a lot to do with an objective life.

 

Peace & Love!