Is there an objective world?

[Marblehead]

clearly, simplicity is not a Buddhist principle..

 

Be well..

 

Hehehe. That, Sir, is an understatement if I have ever heard one.

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

the "unborn and undying"... all the rest comes and goes.

 

I like that. Tao is eternal but all of the Manifest, the Mystery, and Chi are in constant change. The coming and going. There is no beginning; there is no end; only change.

 

Peace & Love!

 

I need to change that above sentence. Tao is timeless ... . Tao is beyond time and space therefore it is beyond eternal.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited January 1, 2010 by Marblehead

[goldisheavy]

If you can't explain clearly your belief system to your audience, then intelligent readers will question the validity of what you posit as so called truth.

 

I get tired of copypasta myself. It is especially annoying when a person feels free to cut-n-paste entire pagefuls of bland copypasta. It feels like you're not having a real discussion, but instead, you're getting a book tossed at your face.

 

Personally, I always type from myself. I only quote sources when I talk to very orthodox and/or stubborn people who simply won't accept anything else.

 

When I deal with an intelligent person, we can discuss things without any external references.

[xabir2005]

[Marblehead]

Hi Xabir,

 

Yes, I was already aware of that supposition. And that is all it is, after all.

 

Yes, I watched the holographic TV presentation by (NBC?) on election night when they presented a holograph of one of the news people in New York onto the set in Chicago.

 

I will readily say that it was very impressive. But, of course, we were told in advance that the 'real' person was still in New York and it was only an electronic replication of the image of the person in New York that was being presented onto the set in Chicago.

 

Plato did basically the same thing in his "Cave" of the shadow people.

 

So in both cases you first need to have the objective object in order to represent it in a different form.

 

All this means is that it is possible for one or two of our senses to lead us to believe that there is some objective thing there when there is really only a representation of the thing.

 

In order to find the difference between the 'real' objective 'thing' we must use all our senses. So we view the holographic image as think, "There is someone there." We talk with that image and because of electronic communication devices we are able to have a discussion and again it seems that they are really there. But, being the man that I am and being that the image is that of a beautiful woman I will try to give her a hug.

 

And this is where illusion falls away. She does not exist objectively. 'She' is nothing but a replication of the original.

 

Just as in Plato's cave, once all the shadow people moved into the light the shadows (replications of the original objective people) disappeared and the real people were observed, talked with, smelled, and touched.

 

Once again I suggest that we should not allow ourself to be mislead by illusion and delusion. There is a real, objective, Manifest reality. It exists in real time and space. Yes, it is forever changing but it has all its attributes allotted to it at any given point in time but all these attributes are real none-the-less.

 

One of the problems with thinking too much is that we begin imagining things that really don't exist. And when we think of them too much they begin to become 'real' in our mind. This is the flaw in every psychological diviant anywhere on this planet. They begin thinking that some 'god' has told them that they must do such and such but in reality there was no god, there was only their own mind imagining everything.

 

We all need to keep things in perspective. There is an objective reality. It has been proven to exist over and over again. And the brain has the ability to imagine. This has been proven over and over again. We must understand what is reality and what is imagination so that we can live our life to the fullest.

 

I will state here for all my Buddhist friends that I do accept the possibility of other planes of reality. This is part of what spirituality is all about. I, personally, have never experienced any of these possible other planes of reality so I must therefore say that, in my experience, none have ever existed.

 

If someone else suggests that they have experienced another plane of reality I will simply say, "Okay." But if I am truely interested in what they actually experienced I would ask them a number of questions just to find out if they truely had an experience in an alternate plane of reality or if they were just making up the story. To this date, all I have questioned have just made the stuff up in their own mind.

 

No, I have never seen an UFO either. But I don't deny the possibility that there may be life forms on other planets in other solar systems throughout the universe. The planets exist. This has been proven over and over again. But to this point no life forms have been found.

 

Please do not confuse objective reality with the ability to break it down into it most minute parts and pretend that it does not exist. Whenever we break a thing down into its various parts we have destroyed the original thing.

 

There is a Manifest, objective reality for a reason. No, I don't know what that reason is. We have a life for a reason. As I understand it, it is for the purpose of living. Beyond that I have no idea except perhaps so that Tao can experience itself.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited January 2, 2010 by Marblehead

[goldisheavy]

There is a Manifest, objective reality for a reason. No, I don't know what that reason is. We have a life for a reason. As I understand it, it is for the purpose of living. Beyond that I have no idea except perhaps so that Tao can experience itself.

 

That's just great. You can't even think coherently. Act first, think later. You truly live that slogan.

 

Edited January 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Marblehead]

That's just great. You can't even think coherently. Act first, think later. You truly live that slogan.

 

 

This picture is a perfect representation of how you act here on this forum sometimes.

 

BTW You responded to the wrong thread.

 

Really you have been being a real ass lately toward some of the members on this forum and I am just showing you how stupid you can really be sometimes.

 

Now I know you are not stupid but an ass? I'm not sure about that yet. Time to prove yourself.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited January 2, 2010 by Marblehead

[goldisheavy]

Really you have been being a real ass lately toward some of the members on this forum and I am just showing you how stupid you can really be sometimes.

 

I hate it when you speak of yourself in plural form.

[Marblehead]

I hate it when you speak of yourself in plural form.

 

So are you suggesting that you are being an ass only toward me? I wonder how true this really is. And even if this is so, why do you feel it necessary to be an ass?

 

And BTW, you need to get a handle on your hatred. It is very un-Buddhist-like. It also rots your insides and kills your spirit.

 

Peace & Love!

[goldisheavy]

So are you suggesting that you are being an ass only toward me?

 

I suggest you speak for yourself and only for yourself.

 

I wonder how true this really is. And even if this is so, why do you feel it necessary to be an ass?

 

And BTW, you need to get a handle on your hatred. It is very un-Buddhist-like. It also rots your insides and kills your spirit.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Feelings arise from having preferences. As long as my preferences are not unreasonable, neither are my feelings unreasonable.

[Marblehead]

I suggest you speak for yourself and only for yourself.

 

I have never, contrary to some Buddhists here, suggested that my view was correct, or the only correct way of viewing any concept. It is you who refuse anyone to disagree with your mis-understandings.

 

Feelings arise from having preferences. As long as my preferences are not unreasonable, neither are my feelings unreasonable.

 

But why does it offend you if someone views a concept differently than you do? You are a Buddhist! You are supposed to be one of the most open-minded people in the world. But yet you are fixed with your preferences and consider all preferences of others unreasonable. This is being hypocrital. Now, I really don't consider you a hypocrite but I do believe that you are very closed-minded concerning the views of others.

 

 

Peace & Love!

[goldisheavy]

But why does it offend you if someone views a concept differently than you do? You are a Buddhist!

 

First of all, while I respect Buddhist teachings up to a point, I am not a Buddhist. Never have been. Never will be. I reserve the right to free thinking, which absolutely precludes me from becoming a Buddhist.

 

Secondly, I think the idea of objective reality has been doing a lot of harm in my life. Thus I have decided to uproot it (and this means I will be uprooting it together with anything that is foolish enough to attach itself to that idea too).

 

You are supposed to be one of the most open-minded people in the world.

 

Why should such burden be mine? I must be open-minded so that you can have the luxury of being a moron? No sir. That will not do.

 

But yet you are fixed with your preferences and consider all preferences of others unreasonable.

 

The fixated one is you, don't you agree? How are you not fixated in your preferences? Are you high? Take an honest look at yourself and your preferences. Stop lying.

 

Now, if you want to discuss my preferences, please do. So far, you've been discussing my feelings more than my preferences though. You don't want me to feel anything, that's what I gather from you. You don't care what I think, as long as I have no feelings, is that right?

[Marblehead]

First of all, while I respect Buddhist teachings up to a point, I am not a Buddhist. Never have been. Never will be. I reserve the right to free thinking, which absolutely precludes me from becoming a Buddhist.

 

Okay. So you are not a Buddhist. But still you always argue the Buddhist view-point. You ahve just as much right to free thinking as I or anyone else on this planet have.

 

Secondly, I think the idea of objective reality has been doing a lot of harm in my life. Thus I have decided to uproot it (and this means I will be uprooting it together with anything that is foolish enough to attach itself to that idea too).

 

You, Sir, will never be able to uproot reality. There are far too many people who accept it as fact. Nearly every scientist accepts it. What you are attempting is called pissing into the wind.

 

Why should such burden be mine? I must be open-minded so that you can have the luxury of being a moron? No sir. That will not do.

 

Now see, you ignorant shit-head, there you go with your personal attacks again. It is you who is being the moron with your closed-minded mis-understanding of the Manifest.

 

The fixated one is you, don't you agree? How are you not fixated in your preferences? Are you high? Take an honest look at yourself and your preferences. Stop lying.

 

Perhaps I am fixated in many of my views. But that still does not give you the right to call me a moron and a fool. But then prehaps it 'really' is you who is fixated with the need to denigrate anyone who disagrees with you. So perhaps too, it is you who are lying and have not really opened your mind to alternative points of view.

 

Now, if you want to discuss my preferences, please do. So far, you've been discussing my feelings more than my preferences though. You don't want me to feel anything, that's what I gather from you. You don't care what I think, as long as I have no feelings, is that right?

 

I honestly do not give a shit what preferences you have. If you would like to carry on a constructive conversation I am all in favor of that. I promise I will even consider your point of view without calling you stupid or a fool.

 

So. In this last paragraph I think I see a possible root of the problem you have with me. Do you think that I have not been giving you credit for the validity of your points of view? I have honestly tried to point out those comments you make on this forum that I think are worthy of consideration. Perhaps I have not been forthgiving enough? I don't know.

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

"When perception is stronger than mindfulness

(i take this to mean that when one is too caught up with objectivity),

we recognize various appearances and create concepts such as 'body',

'cat', 'house', 'person', ('solid', 'empty') etc. On some clear night, go

outside, look up at the sky, and see if you can find the Big Dipper.

For most people that is a familiar constellation, easy to pick out from

all the other stars. But is there really a Big Dipper up there in the sky?

There is NO Big Dipper up there! (Although the diehards will still not

understand how this could be...) The 'Big Dipper' is merely a concept.

Humans looked, saw a certain pattern, and then created a concept in

our collective consciousness to describe it. That concept is useful

because it helps us recognize the constellation. But it also has another,

less useful effect. By creating the concept 'Big Dipper' we separate

out those stars from all the rest, and then, if we become attached to

the idea of that separation, we lose the sense of the night sky's

wholeness, its oneness. Does the separation actually exist in the sky?

No. We created the separation through the use of a concept(like we

do with everything else we call the objective world). Does anything

change in the sky when we change our way of seeing that there is

no 'Big Dipper' as such? No. (But that does not mean stars do not exist).

--- JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN

[goldisheavy]

Okay. So you are not a Buddhist. But still you always argue the Buddhist view-point.

 

I wouldn't say "always."

 

You, Sir, will never be able to uproot reality. There are far too many people who accept it as fact. Nearly every scientist accepts it. What you are attempting is called pissing into the wind.

 

So, if all those people had objective reality, this really would be an enormous task, wouldn't it? Just think of all the incredible inertia I would have to overcome. One against billions. Even if I was an idiot who believed such things, the task would be possible to accomplish.

 

Haven't you heard the Taoist story about the crazy fool who wanted to remove the mountain? Obviously not, or you wouldn't open your mouth here in the manner that you do. So let me tell you.

 

Once upon a time there was a poor farmer who lived on the side of the mountain. He always had to go around the mountain to get to the farming fields, and one day he decided that enough is enough, and that now he will remove the mountain.

 

So the old farmer got a shovel and started digging. There was a local "wise" man who saw the old farmer digging, and asked, "What are you doing?"

 

"I am moving this mountain out of the way. It's obstructing the path from my house to the fields."

 

"Fool, don't you understand how big this mountain is? You'll never move it! Hahahah!"

 

"No, the fool here is you. I am going to dig until the end of my days. After that, my sons will dig. Then my sons' sons. Then my sons' sons' sons. And so on, until the mountain is moved."

 

Now the spirit that lived in the mountain heard this, and begin to tremble in fear, because upon hearing this, he realized that the farmer's resolve was unshakable. So the spirit made a trip to the Jade Emperor's palace and complained to the Jade Emperor, "You know, there is a farmer there that is disturbing my mountain. He has resolved himself to move the mountain!" And the Jade Emperor replied, "No kidding?? Is there a human who can muster such diamond-like resolve? I don't believe it! Let me take a look-see." So the Jade Emperor looked inside the heart of the man, and indeed, the resolve was diamond-like. The Jade Emperor was so pleased and amused, that he said, "Normally we don't do this, but this man is so outstanding in his resolve, I am going to send two Titans to move the mountain tomorrow morning." And lo, the mountain was summarily moved right the next day, much to the mountain spirit's chagrin.

 

Nice, eh? There is a really deep and profound point in that story.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this story is from Liezi (Lieh Tzu).

 

Perhaps I am fixated in many of my views. But that still does not give you the right to call me a moron and a fool.

 

Of course not. What gives me that right is the fact that you simply make statements without actually engaging in any real discussion. So we could be make arguments here that objective reality is not real, and what you will do is come in, ignore what we are saying, and simply declare, "Yo guys, objective reality exists, and is real." That's it.

 

Then you start ranting about some irrelevant story and flood the forum with useless and irrelevant-to-the-argument junk.

 

It's your manner of engaging, or rather non-engaging, that elicits my comments to you.

Edited January 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Marblehead]

"When perception is stronger than mindfulness

(i take this to mean that when one is too caught up with objectivity),

we recognize various appearances and create concepts such as 'body',

'cat', 'house', 'person', ('solid', 'empty') etc. On some clear night, go

outside, look up at the sky, and see if you can find the Big Dipper.

For most people that is a familiar constellation, easy to pick out from

all the other stars. But is there really a Big Dipper up there in the sky?

There is NO Big Dipper up there! (Although the diehards will still not

understand how this could be...) The 'Big Dipper' is merely a concept.

Humans looked, saw a certain pattern, and then created a concept in

our collective consciousness to describe it. That concept is useful

because it helps us recognize the constellation. But it also has another,

less useful effect. By creating the concept 'Big Dipper' we separate

out those stars from all the rest, and then, if we become attached to

the idea of that separation, we lose the sense of the night sky's

wholeness, its oneness. Does the separation actually exist in the sky?

No. We created the separation through the use of a concept(like we

do with everything else we call the objective world). Does anything

change in the sky when we change our way of seeing that there is

no 'Big Dipper' as such? No. (But that does not mean stars do not exist).

--- JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN

 

Hi CowTao,

 

I wish GoldisHeavy had posted this so that I would be able to agree with him. I do agree with the quote. Much of what we hold in our mind is there because it makes life easier for us (in most cases) even though what it is that we are holding to is nothing more than a subjective concept that we, or someone else, has established.

 

Peace & Love!

[goldisheavy]

"When perception is stronger than mindfulness

(i take this to mean that when one is too caught up with objectivity),

we recognize various appearances and create concepts such as 'body',

'cat', 'house', 'person', ('solid', 'empty') etc. On some clear night, go

outside, look up at the sky, and see if you can find the Big Dipper.

For most people that is a familiar constellation, easy to pick out from

all the other stars. But is there really a Big Dipper up there in the sky?

There is NO Big Dipper up there! (Although the diehards will still not

understand how this could be...) The 'Big Dipper' is merely a concept.

Humans looked, saw a certain pattern, and then created a concept in

our collective consciousness to describe it. That concept is useful

because it helps us recognize the constellation. But it also has another,

less useful effect. By creating the concept 'Big Dipper' we separate

out those stars from all the rest, and then, if we become attached to

the idea of that separation, we lose the sense of the night sky's

wholeness, its oneness. Does the separation actually exist in the sky?

No. We created the separation through the use of a concept(like we

do with everything else we call the objective world). Does anything

change in the sky when we change our way of seeing that there is

no 'Big Dipper' as such? No. (But that does not mean stars do not exist).

--- JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN

 

This is what I call "naive anti-conceptualism." It's a stupid trend in American Zen. This guy would be right at home with some Christian anti-intellectuals. That's not a complement, btw.

[Marblehead]

This is what I call "naive anti-conceptualism." It's a stupid trend in American Zen. This guy would be right at home with some Christian anti-intellectuals. That's not a complement, btw.

 

Hi GoldisHeavy,

 

Except for the word 'stupid' I appreciate the way you posted you disagreement. This is a perfect example of how two individuals can see a given concept as having totally opposite values.

 

Who is to say if GiH is correct or if Joseph Goldstein is correct?

 

Peace & Love!

[goldisheavy]

Hi GoldisHeavy,

 

Except for the word 'stupid' I appreciate the way you posted you disagreement.

 

Marblehead, what's up with your fetish for decorum? Don't you care about anything beyond appearances? So if things look good, they are good, eh?

 

So we could be pouring poison in each other's cups, but if we smile and are polite while doing it, that's GREAT! That's the gentleman's way!

 

Who is to say if GiH is correct or if Joseph Goldstein is correct?

 

I am to say. The division between concepts and non-conceptual is just another concept that Goldstein is railing against. Therefore Goldstein is a moron, or a hypocrite, to be more precise.

Edited January 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Marblehead]

I wouldn't say "always."

 

Yes. That was my error.

 

So, if all those people had objective reality, this really would be an enormous task, wouldn't it? Just think of all the incredible inertia I would have to overcome. One against billions. Even if I was an idiot who believed such things, the task would be possible to accomplish.

 

Now there you are, criticizing people who have PhD's in their field of study, have written numerous books and articles, are paid large sums of money to offer presentations at various functions and you, a relatively unknown, is calling them idiots. Is disrespect for others a fixed trait of your character?

 

Haven't you heard the Taoist story about the crazy fool who wanted to remove the mountain? Obviously not, or you wouldn't open your mouth here in the manner that you do. So let me tell you.

 

Once upon a time there was a poor farmer who lived on the side of the mountain. He always had to go around the mountain to get to the farming fields, and one day he decided that enough is enough, and that now he will remove the mountain.

 

So the old farmer got a shovel and started digging. There was a local "wise" man who saw the old farmer digging, and asked, "What are you doing?"

 

"I am moving this mountain out of the way. It's obstructing the path from my house to the fields."

 

"Fool, don't you understand how big this mountain is? You'll never move it! Hahahah!"

 

"No, the fool here is you. I am going to dig until the end of my days. After that, my sons will dig. Then my sons' sons. Then my sons' sons' sons. And so on, until the mountain is moved."

 

Now the spirit that lived in the mountain heard this, and begin to tremble in fear, because upon hearing this, he realized that the farmer's resolve was unshakable. So the spirit made a trip to the Jade Emperor's palace and complained to the Jade Emperor, "You know, there is a farmer there that is disturbing my mountain. He has resolved himself to move the mountain!" And the Jade Emperor replied, "No kidding?? Is there a human who can muster such diamond-like resolve? I don't believe it! Let me take a look-see." So the Jade Emperor looked inside the heart of the man, and indeed, the resolve was diamond-like. The Jade Emperor was so pleased and amused, that he said, "Normally we don't do this, but this man is so outstanding in his resolve, I am going to send two Titans to move the mountain tomorrow morning." And lo, the mountain was summarily moved right the next day, much to the mountain spirit's chagrin.

 

Nice, eh? There is a really deep and profound point in that story.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this story is from Liezi (Lieh Tzu).

 

Did you know that I don't believe in fairy tales, Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny? The story suggests an improbable scenario, a goal that is unachievable, and it envokes gods, which concept I do not hold to. I don't know who's work the story is because I do not read trash (IMO) like that.

 

Of course not. What gives me that right is the fact that you simply make statements without actually engaging in any real discussion. So we could be make arguments here that objective reality is not real, and what you will do is come in, ignore what we are saying, and simply declare, "Yo guys, objective reality exists, and is real." That's it.

 

You are totally incorrect in what you have said here. I shall not point out any posts I have presented on this forum to satisfy your childish behavior. I will not repeat the word of others. I will use my own words while in a conversation. Just because they are words that you do not agree with does not make them null and void. Stop trying to make me be what you want me to be. I am not you and I and so very happy of that fact. I do not think like you and I am very happy of that fact. I sometimes wish that you were only a subjective item of my imagination so that I could erase you from my memory. But, perhaps regretfully, you do exist objectively and I have to deal with that.

 

Then you start ranting about some irrelevant story and flood the forum with useless and irrelevant-to-the-argument junk.

 

Now you are being stupid. And an ass too BTW.

 

It's your manner of engaging, or rather non-engaging, that elicits my comments to you.

 

So freaking put me on ignore. There are a few members here who appreciate what I offer. Is that the problem? Jealousy? Perhaps I over-guessed your age and should have considered maybe three or four.

 

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

Marblehead, what's up with your fetish for decorum? Don't you care about anything beyond appearances? So if things look good, they are good, eh?

 

Are you actually trying to be funny? What an absent-minded comment this is. It is I who have been saying that actions speak louder than words. It is I who has been saying that we should observe the real world (Manifest) and learn the processes so that we can live our life to the fullest and discard all the trash that we have accumulated over the years.

 

So we could be pouring poison in each other's cups, but if we smile and are polite while doing it, that's GREAT! That's the gentleman's way!

 

Please stop displaying your ignorance! It is very unbecoming.

 

I am to say. The division between concepts and non-conceptual is just another concept that Goldstein is railing against. Therefore Goldstein is a moron, or a hypocrite, to be more precise.

 

And you are a real ass for judging another according to your distorted values. You don't agree with what he said. Big deal. From what I read of his writings he is not a moron and he did not say anything that was hypocritical.

 

You have done nothing less than found negatives that are within yourself and placed them on others.

 

 

Peace & Love!

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

It IS, what it IS.. and if one person's IS differs from another person's IS, celebrate!!! Diversity is a beautiful condition, until someone decides to impose their perception on another..

 

Be well..

[Marblehead]

... until someone decides to impose their perception on another..

 

Be well..

 

Silence oftentimes speak louder than do words.

 

Marbles that are stationary are silent.

 

Peace & Love!

[goldisheavy]

Now there you are, criticizing people who have PhD's in their field of study, have written numerous books and articles, are paid large sums of money to offer presentations at various functions and you, a relatively unknown, is calling them idiots.

 

This is very revealing of your character.

 

Is disrespect for others a fixed trait of your character?

 

I neither respect nor disrespect others. In other words, I do not take any fixed attitude toward beings. Instead I do have some relatively fixed attitudes toward certain ideas, and actions that emanate when those ideas are put into practice. Upon the final analysis, nothing of mine is fixed though.

 

Did you know that I don't believe in fairy tales, Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny?

 

I gave you a story from one of the founders of Daoism. And you dismiss it as mere fancy talk. You are a troll Marblehead. You don't believe in any Daoism or anything at all. It is only obvious. Why are you here? At least, if you're a troll, you should enjoy being insulted.

Edited January 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Marblehead]

This is very revealing of your character.

 

Yeah. I respect people who deserve respect and remain silent of those who I believe have offered nothing of value whereas you what to jump in their face and call them morons and fools just because "you" do not consider what they have said to be of value.

 

I neither respect nor disrespect others. In other words, I do not take any fixed attitude toward beings. Instead I do have some relatively fixed attitudes toward certain ideas, and actions that emanate when those ideas are put into practice. Upon the final analysis, nothing of mine is fixed though.

 

I wish you would exhibit that more on this forum. But I will suggest that respect is due to those who deserve it. What you just said reminded me of something very similar another member (who is no longer very active) said a while back. Now let's face it, if you do not offer others respect I don't see how you can expect respect from others. And during my lifetime I have found that those who do not respect others are very likely to not even respect themselves.

 

I gave you a story from one of the founders of Daoism. And you dismiss it as mere fancy talk. You are a troll Marblehead. You don't believe in any Daoism or anything at all. It is only obvious. Why are you here? At least, if you're a troll, you should enjoy being insulted.

 

You are an ass GoldisHeavy! First, he was not the founder of Taoism. He is not even considered to be of the Philosophical Taoist school. He was a Religious Taoist. I believe you are an obnoxious spoiled little brat who should have had his ass whipped by his parents many years ago.

 

You are so narrow-minded it is pathetic! And you are a hypocrite as well because you constantly accuse me of being such. What the heck gives you the right to tell me what I am supposed to believe in? Are you some type of god who is trying to control the universe?

 

You are resorting to pathetic insults and all you are doing is showing your true colors.

 

So you go ahead on and do what you have to do until you get bored from displaying your childish behavior and I assure you that I will stay right here with you.

 

 

I haven't had this much fun since I divorsed my last wife.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

I had something semi or at least quasi profound to add but forgot what it was...

[Tao99]

I had something semi or at least quasi profound to add but forgot what it was...

 

funny you should say that, I just had the same problem. This puzzle is a real mind teaser. It was something like a chart of the situation over time:

 

 

Self/Buddhist mind stream <==> ||Images from Sensors (eyes,etc)|| <==> {Objective Reality}

 

 

So, whereas its true that all externals are mediated by internal subjective images, that in no way entails that there is therefore no objective, external reality. So I believe there is, just as Marblehead says, with its own inherent properties, etc.

 

Or something like that.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Tao99