xabir2005 Posted July 23, 2011 D.O. is a concept which points to something beyond concepts: Maha as a living reality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xabir2005 Posted July 23, 2011 http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html A week ago, the clear experience of Maha dawned and became quite effortless and at the same time there is a direct realization that it is also a natural state. In Sunyata, Maha is natural and must be fully factored into the path of experiencing whatever arises. Nevertheless Maha as a ground state requires the maturing of non-dual experience; we cannot feel entirely as the interconnectedness of everything coming spontaneously into being as this moment of vivid manifestation with a divided mind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thuscomeone Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html A week ago, the clear experience of Maha dawned and became quite effortless and at the same time there is a direct realization that it is also a natural state. In Sunyata, Maha is natural and must be fully factored into the path of experiencing whatever arises. Nevertheless Maha as a ground state requires the maturing of non-dual experience; we cannot feel entirely as the interconnectedness of everything coming spontaneously into being as this moment of vivid manifestation with a divided mind. I am just not sure if this is the same as what I'm saying. As I see it, there are two levels of duality: The duality of inherent existence vs impermanence and the duality of the content of concepts themselves 1 points to and leads to 2. I don't know. I don't get much regarding 2 from your blog. Edited July 23, 2011 by thuscomeone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xabir2005 Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) I am just not sure if this is the same as what I'm saying. As I see it, there are two levels of duality: The duality of inherent existence vs impermanence and the duality of the content of concepts themselves 1 points to and leads to 2. I don't know. I don't get much regarding 2 from your blog. If you are liberated from views i.e. 'is' and 'is not' and this leaves you with 'emptiness is form' basically, how is this not 'the duality of the content of concepts themselves'? Edited July 23, 2011 by xabir2005 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thuscomeone Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) If you are liberated from views i.e. 'is' and 'is not' and this leaves you with 'emptiness is form' basically, how is this not 'the duality of the content of concepts themselves'? Because even "not is or is not" can be clung to as a concept. This is really hard to explain. What "not is or is not" leads you to is seeing that YOU embody emptiness is form. From this, at least for me, there was yet another realization about concepts in context of emptiness is form beyond the "not is or is not" one. Not is or is not is another step to something else. I don't know. Maybe we're saying the same thing in different ways. But I'm viewing it from the anatta perspective and you're seeing it from emptiness as d.o. perspective...? Edited July 23, 2011 by thuscomeone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thuscomeone Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) Ok, if I had to say where I'm at right now: is and is not don't apply leads to emptiness as form is YOU, just you. Reality is nothing more than the skandhas functioning. Not as a noun. As a verb. leads to ANY concept/thought when taken to be "what is" distorts what is Edited July 23, 2011 by thuscomeone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xabir2005 Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) Ok, if I had to say where I'm at right now: is and is not don't apply leads to emptiness as form is YOU, just you. Reality is nothing more than the skandhas functioning. Not as a noun. As a verb. leads to ANY concept/thought when taken to be "what is" distorts what is Conventionally speaking it's you. Ultimately there is no you-ness and it-ness. Drinking tea that's all. p.s. this is funny - reminds me of some of the things in this forum: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja86AkbxQLQ&hd=1 Edited July 23, 2011 by xabir2005 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thuscomeone Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) Conventionally speaking it's you. Ultimately there is no you-ness and it-ness. Drinking tea that's all. p.s. this is funny - reminds me of some of the things in this forum: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja86AkbxQLQ&hd=1 Of course, conventionally it's just you as a human being and your five skandhas. Ultimately...can't say. that was pretty good. "oneness." I think it's a perfect description of the debates on this forum. Nonsense, getting nowhere Edited July 23, 2011 by thuscomeone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
