Is Tao an Ontological Essence of Life?

[Marblehead]

Know more, directly... of what you are speaking about.

 

Once again I remind you that you should look into the mirror more often.

 

Peace & Love!

[Vajrahridaya]

You proved nothing. However, I will agree that all life is dynamic, not static. Even Self is not static because we, as are all things, are dynamic, constantly changing. But this has nothing to do with dependent origination, it has to do with the fact that Tao itself is dynamic.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Thus your conceptual orientation is quite static?

 

This has everything to do with dependent origination, which I call, "The Tao"... or, "the Dharma" or... "the way" in English.

 

boy oh boy you people are a bed of defensive and thorn filled seeming roses.

[C T]

:lol: The most worthy of compassion. As it say's, water flows from low to high to low again.

Hmm... my suspicion too. 3Bob made me see that as well, in a clearer way that is. He can be quite inspiring at times. Wish he was here. Quite a remarkable man, must say. Some of things he bring up occasionally makes me go like 'Wow!'. Deep he is.

Edited July 15, 2010 by CowTao

[Marblehead]

You're quite wrong. I do argue, but from the point of view of perspective rather than person.

 

No, you make many things personal just as you accuse others of doing.

 

The mirror says that I'm right and he's quite wrong. Oh well...

 

When was the last time you cleaned your mirror. A dirty mirror will give a false reflection.

 

 

Well.. you are reading subjectively then. Which is fine.

 

You know very well that I most often speak from the subjective.

 

Ok, so you also are attached to religious terminology not considering it religious at all?

 

And you are out of your mind. What religion is it that you think I am a follower of?

 

I'm not forcing anything, I'm just trying to re-associate the terms into awake-ism within a context I can understand directly. Though, I am open contexted... I'll do it the other way around if oriented to do so.

 

Yes you are trying to be forceful. That is why you get so much disagreement. You are trying to show the imagined inadequacies of Taoism to express life and want to change everything into Buddhist concepts. That ain't gonna happen as long as I am a member of this forum.

 

If you are truely sincere about trying to have others understand you I would think that you would want to use words and concepts thay the others understand. To constantly harp on you inadequate Buddhist understanding only show your shortcomings.

 

[Marblehead]

Then bound you will be, even after your death, of which you don't even have experience beyond, because you do limit the nature of your own consciousness to the 5 senses thinking that's the end all be all of perception. Really brother... there is more to see than the paradigm of your own self fooling through your 5 senses. Please get more mystical with yourself bro. Play with your own potential a bit more before leaving us physically.

 

 

 

Well... except that the mirror is quite right in it's reflection.

 

 

 

No, in finding that it is lacking in foundation is based upon subjective karmic influence. Please think about what this means. This means that conditioned influences from within based upon without, as in the information thus experienced so far has subjected the experience of a persons view of Buddhism to limitations outside of reality.

 

 

 

No... but funny anyway.

 

 

Is this your expression of inner contentment and security?

 

 

Oh of course I'm still an unpolished slab of marble. :lol: I wish you peace and love too. Just don't take my arguments so personally... as you really seem to. You seem to cling to your philosophy like religion.

 

You know what? This isn't even fun anymore. I am very tired of your insults and pushing me to a lower position of existence than that of yours.

 

You have a serious problem with insecurity and your lack of true belief in your own philosophy and religion.

 

You are right only for yourself. You may be right for CowTao. You are very wrong for many of us.

 

I shall now return to discussing the opening post.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited July 15, 2010 by Marblehead

[C T]

MH,

 

How about a ciggy break and a cuppa tea eh? Wotcha say?

 

@ Vaj - a reminder: You are still under admonishment.

Edited July 15, 2010 by CowTao

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

@ Vaj - a reminder: You are still under admonishment.

 

It's interesting how much people only agree with you as a person if you agree with them philosophically. This really reveals attachment to a self, and nothing more or less.

 

Tea is good, if green!

Sorry I didn't mean to come across as dogmatic in my tea preference. I do like all sorts of teas... LOL!

Edited July 15, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[C T]

 

You may be right for CowTao...

Many times you are right for me too, MH, and i have told you so when those times were apparent. I am quite down-trodden that one as wise as yourself could come up with an observation that is rather (implying) leaning slowly towards a left (or a right) partisan camp. Not Mr Wolter's i hope.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ps - @ Adept.. since you are present here, i just want to say that your '365 Tao' posts are pretty sharp! Many thanks!

Edited July 15, 2010 by CowTao

[Vajrahridaya]

Many times you are right for me too, MH, and i have told you so when those times were apparent.

 

[Marblehead]

The answer is, "Yes".

 

And "No".

 

From Wikipedia:

 

Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.

 

I say no because of the phrase I bolded. This would suggest that Tao is dualistic. This would be a false assumption.

 

Once again I express the undersanding that there are very few, if any, absolutes in this universe. This is because everything is in constant change.

 

Change then, may be considered an absolute because the processes of change, Tzujan, are continuous, and maybe changeless but I think it not be accurate to state that. Even the processes may change over time.

 

Peace & Love!

[adept]

Back to the topic in question,

is an excellent presentation.

[Marblehead]

MH,

 

How about a ciggy break and a cuppa tea eh? Wotcha say?

 

 

Indeed. I have over-stated my position. Too much has already been said. Time for a smoke and coffee. (Coffee in the morning and tea in the afternoon/evening.)

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

Indeed. I have over-stated my position. Too much has already been said. Time for a smoke and coffee. (Coffee in the morning and tea in the afternoon/evening.)

 

Peace & Love!

...and so have i, moreso than anyone else here. Guess i am a goner, beyond reparation. A downright reject. Emphasis on right! hehe

 

adios amigos... (not sure how to say this in Latin though... Mr Wolter must be very dissapointed.)

[Marblehead]

Many times you are right for me too, MH, and i have told you so when those times were apparent. I am quite down-trodden that one as wise as yourself could come up with an observation that is rather (implying) leaning slowly towards a left (or a right) partisan camp. Not Mr Wolter's i hope.

 

I know, I know. You and I have never had a problem. I am ashamed of my inappropriate statement.

 

CowTao, I am capable of going to whatever level is called for in whatever the conditions. I do NOT enjoy being down in the gutter but I can go there.

 

Actually, VJ and I have agreement on occasion as well. I alway try to not generalize but sometimes I get emotionally involved and it is then that my emotions show.

 

Don't concern yourself with whether or not I am going anywhere. I am exactly where I am supposed to be.

 

I am sure that we will have many opportunities to have very constructive discussions in the future.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

...and so have i, moreso than anyone else here. Guess i am a goner, beyond reparation. A downright reject. Emphasis on right! hehe

 

adios amigos... (not sure how to say this in Latin though... Mr Wolter must be very dissapointed.)

 

Hehehe. You know what? I have no idea who Mr. Wolter is.

 

I am not disappointed in you though. Yes, we both made a similar error. So we are still human. Now we have to work on being more humane. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

I know, I know. You and I have never had a problem. I am ashamed of my inappropriate statement.

 

CowTao, I am capable of going to whatever level is called for in whatever the conditions. I do NOT enjoy being down in the gutter but I can go there.

 

Actually, VJ and I have agreement on occasion as well. I alway try to not generalize but sometimes I get emotionally involved and it is then that my emotions show.

 

Don't concern yourself with whether or not I am going anywhere. I am exactly where I am supposed to be.

 

I am sure that we will have many opportunities to have very constructive discussions in the future.

 

Peace & Love!

You epitomise the words "Peace and Love" (oops and Humility too! ) ... that's what i really find admirable in you MH!

(Had to come back just to say this).

 

I have nothing ontologically sound to contribute at the moment, so i am gone outta here! Cheerio, and take care y'all.

Edited July 15, 2010 by CowTao

[Marblehead]

(Coffee in the morning and tea in the afternoon/evening.)

 

Peace & Love!

 

BTW I bought a box of Oolong tea the last time I visited my Korean store. I am sure I will enjoy that.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

You epitomise the words "Peace and Love"... that's what i really find admirable in you MH!

(Had to come back just to say this).

 

I have nothing ontologically sound to contribute at the moment, so i am gone outta here! Cheerio, and take care y'all.

 

Thank you kind Sir.

 

And if you ever wondered, I have great admiration for you. You hang in there and enjoy your time here, Okay?

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

BTW I bought a box of Oolong tea

 

Nice one! This was the only tea i stayed with for many years actually. Wonderful, sublime. Check this out MH: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tieguanyin

 

(and btw, thanks for being exactly where you were meant to be... same goes for whoever reads this )

 

ima really outta thisa time.

[Marblehead]

Nice one! This was the only tea i stayed with for many years actually. Wonderful, sublime. Check this out MH: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tieguanyin

 

(and btw, thanks for being exactly where you were meant to be... same goes for whoever reads this )

 

ima really outta thisa time.

 

"Iron Goddess of Mercy"

 

Oh!, I so much love the sound of that! A loving bitch! Hehehe.

 

What I bought is called "Tian Hu Shan". That would be the mountain region where it is grown.

 

Peace & Love!

[dwai]

Posterity of clarity, instead of posterity of muddling and meddling by the foolish, much like what's been done to Hatha Yoga.

 

You don't find Yantra (physical Buddhist) Yoga which is just as old getting abused, do you? This is because it's saved for those that will really utilize it and not capitalize on it.

 

This is what I mean by posterity.

 

You still haven't grasped what "posterity" means. No worries mate...mull over what posterity means then go over your statements again and see how silly they sound. And like this statement, 99% of what you write is utter gibberish (you might have convinced some naive TTB'ers of your "Arhat-like" spiritual strature, but it will take an act of the Eternal Tathagata himself to convince me that you aren't one (or all) of the following:

 

1) empty-headed

2) vain

3) egotistical

4) have very poor english language skills (which, given that it is your native language reflects your intellectual capabilities)

 

This needed saying so there, it is out! Your proselytizing without properly understanding Buddha Dharma is doing not just yourself, but many others on TTB a great deal of harm. Instead of being able to leverage this great tradition of spirituality, those who think you are right will simply go the way of the blind following the blind. Those who see through your "emptiness" might be so put off by Buddha Dharma that they might not want to learn more about it.

[dwai]

And "No".

 

From Wikipedia:

 

Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.

 

I say no because of the phrase I bolded. This would suggest that Tao is dualistic. This would be a false assumption.

 

Once again I express the undersanding that there are very few, if any, absolutes in this universe. This is because everything is in constant change.

 

Change then, may be considered an absolute because the processes of change, Tzujan, are continuous, and maybe changeless but I think it not be accurate to state that. Even the processes may change over time.

 

Peace & Love!

Greetings MH,

 

From a text-book perspective, I can see your point. However, Tao is Being/existent...just not ephemerally existent like our limiting adjuncted selves.

The problem is that of syntax...since Lao Tzu has said "The Tao that can be named..."...

 

I wish more people would learn Vedanta.

 

The whole understanding of this Duality/Non-Duality is very nicely and methodically articulated in Vedantic thought, through the concept of Nama-Rupa (or Name-Form) aka Categorical Frameworks.

 

Nama-Rupa is the root cause of Duality and conditions our understanding and awareness of the universe that we can sense. Tao is beyond Nama-Rupa because any attempt to describe Tao leads to absurdity and contradiction (just like this attempt at showing the ontological status of Tao demonstrates).

 

Nagarjuna's Madhyamika too shows the same thing...and actually has a very good demonstration of why it is pointless to show that the Self exists, Does not Exist, both exists and does not exist and neither exists nor does not exist (replace Self with Tao and you have the same result).

 

The point of both Vedanta (Advaita) and Madhyamika is to show that "IT" cannot be grasped by Dualistic methods (such as sensory or intellectual faculties)..but only via direct experience (prajna or intuitive knowledge).

 

I hope this makes my position (maintained since several months, maybe even more than one year) here more clear.

 

 

 

[Vajrahridaya]

[Vajrahridaya]

 

The point of both Vedanta (Advaita) and Madhyamika is to show that "IT" cannot be grasped by Dualistic methods (such as sensory or intellectual faculties)..but only via direct experience (prajna or intuitive knowledge).

 

 

Nagarjunas' point is also that there is no ultimate "it" to be understood directly. He basically said that any experience that is said to prove that there is an ultimate "it" originates dependent upon a view clinging to existence. This is why he said, "If there is something left not emptied of self existence, that too should be emptied of inherent existence." Emptiness means dependent origination, not ultimate existence, or self origination which you keep referencing. Emptiness does not mean Brahman.

 

Nagarjunas' statements directly contradict your own conclusions. You should stop reading Hindu propaganda based interpretations of Nagarjuna and read Buddhist clarifications of Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna was a Vedantin by birth by the way before he became Buddhist, and there are reasons for this.

 

Your version of non-duality is still filled with substance and the pride of self existence.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

From the Dalai Lama: Emptiness and Existence

 

"A consciousness that conceives of inherent existence does not have a valid foundation. A wise consciousness, grounded in reality, understands that living beings and other phenomena—minds, bodies, buildings, and so forth—do not inherently exist. This is the wisdom of emptiness. Understanding reality exactly opposite to the misconception of inherent existence, wisdom gradually overcomes ignorance.

 

Remove the ignorance that misconceives phenomena to inherently exist and you prevent the generation of afflictive emotions like lust and hatred. Thus, in turn, suffering can also be removed. In addition, the wisdom of emptiness must be accompanied by a motivation of deep concern for others (and by the compassionate deeds it inspires) before it can remove the obstructions to omniscience, which are the predispositions for the false appearance of phenomena—even to sense consciousness—as if they inherently exist."

 

This is talking about the meditative experiences or absorptions as well.

 

"Selflessness

 

Both Buddhists and non-Buddhists practice meditation to achieve pleasure and get rid of pain, and in both Buddhist and non-Buddhist systems the self is a central object of scrutiny. Certain non-Buddhists who accept rebirth accept the transitory nature of mind and body, but they believe in a self that is permanent, changeless and unitary. Although Buddhist schools accept rebirth, they hold that there is no such solid self. For Buddhists, the main topic of the training in wisdom is emptiness, or selflessness, which means the absence of a permanent, unitary and independent self or, more subtly, the absence of inherent existence either in living beings or in other phenomena.

The Two Truths

 

To understand selflessness, you need to understand that everything that exists is contained in two groups called the two truths: conventional and ultimate. The phenomena that we see and observe around us can go from good to bad, or bad to good, depending on various causes and conditions. Many phenomena cannot be said to be inherently good or bad; they are better or worse, tall or short, beautiful or ugly, only by comparison, not by way of their own nature. Their value is relative. From this you can see that there is a discrepancy between the way things appear and how they actually are. For instance, something may—in terms of how it appears—look good, but, due to its inner nature being different, it can turn bad once it is affected by

conditions. Food that looks so good in a restaurant may not sit so well in your stomach. This is a clear sign of a discrepancy between appearance and reality.

 

These phenomena themselves are called conventional truths: they are known by consciousness that goes no further than appearances. But the same objects have an inner mode of being, called an ultimate truth, that allows for the changes brought about by conditions. A wise consciousness, not satisfied with mere appearances, analyzes to find whether objects inherently exist as they seem to do but discovers their absence of inherent existence. It finds an emptiness of inherent existence beyond appearances.

Empty of What?

 

Emptiness, or selflessness, can only be understood if we first identify that of which phenomena are empty. Without understanding what is negated, you cannot understand its absence, emptiness.

 

You might think that emptiness means nothingness, but it does not. Merely from reading it is difficult to identify and understand the object of negation, what Buddhist texts speak of as true establishment or inherent existence. But over a period of time, when you add your own investigations to the reading, the faultiness of our usual way of seeing things will become clearer and clearer.

 

Buddha said many times that because all phenomena are dependently arisen, they are relative—their existence depends on other causes and conditions and depends on their own parts." Which also arise dependently.

 

 

Therefore, the Tao of things, or the Way of things cannot be an ontological essence in and of itself outside of relativity.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Vajrahridaya