Cosmologies - Split

[Jeff]

5 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

Ok, I usually get rather lost in the Dzogchen stuff but that was readable after three times...  so how about emptiness.  I think we've had this discussion before but my cosmological brain is trying to sort out the void vs emptiness thing again.

 

I thought in the past you defined Dao=Emptiness... kind of not Two and Not One... then void is a quasi-preliminary One with potential for movement.

 

The Void is not the same thing as the One.  The void is an aspect of Emptiness.  If you go back to my quote from chapter 25 of the TTC, you see...

 

In the silence and the void, 
Standing alone and unchanging, 
Ever present and in motion. 
Perhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things. 
I do not know its name 
Call it Tao. 

 

Comparing it to the Dzogchen quote...

 

In the Dzogchen teachings the primordial state of the base is not defined only as being void, but is explained as having three aspects or characteristics, called the "three primordial wisdoms": essence, nature, and energy

 

You can sees a somewhat equivalent mapping of...

 

In the silence and the void = Essence

Standing alone and unchanging (self perfected)  = Nature

Ever present and in motion = Energy

[Michael Sternbach]

29 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

 

In the Dzogchen teachings the primordial state of the base is not defined only as being void, but is explained as having three aspects or characteristics, called the "three primordial wisdoms": essence, nature, and energy. The essence is the void, the real condition of the individual and of all phenomena. This base is the condition of all individuals, viduals, whether they are aware of it or not, whether they are enlightened or in transmigration. It is said to be "pure from the beginning" (ka dag), because, like space, it is free of all impediments, and is the basis of all the manifestations in existence.

 

-Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State.

 

 

So much for the void... But what about it being different from emptiness in Buddhism? In what way does your quote address that question?

[Michael Sternbach]

16 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

With your Big Bang theory, how do you explain the fact that the rate of growth for the universe is accelerating, requiring ongoing and increasing energy into the system as opposed to a base "bang"?

 

The acceleration of the expansion is generally attributed to what is called Dark Energy in modern cosmology. There are some different (or maybe not so different, after all) ideas about what the nature of this Dark Energy is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

 

In my view, it has to do with the aether that permeates space according to all traditional metaphysical doctrines.

[Jeff]

10 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

So much for the void... But what about it being different from emptiness in Buddhism? In what way does your quote address that question?

 

Address what question?  Maybe we just do not have agreement on the definition of void, but emptiness is not about "void-like" as you can see from the quote below...

 

Listen, great being! I will teach you that, being my manifestation from the beginning, all phenomena are the pure dimension of emptiness.

 

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu;Adriano Clemente. The Supreme Source: The Fundamental Tantra of the Dzogchen Semde 

 

[Jeff]

30 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

The acceleration of the expansion is generally attributed to what is called Dark Energy in modern cosmology. There are some different (or maybe not so different, after all) ideas about what the nature of this Dark Energy is.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

 

In my view, it has to do with the aether that permeates space according to all traditional metaphysical doctrines.

 

The problem is that the models are not stable with how much theoretical dark energy is out there, because to get the changing acceleration requires the dark energy amounts themselves to shift.  Here is another recent article on the topic...

 

Explaining the accelerating expansion of the universe without dark energy

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170330115254.htm

 

Either way, we seem to be off topic,  I apologize and will stop now...  

[dawei]

47 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

The Void is not the same thing as the One.  The void is an aspect of Emptiness.  If you go back to my quote from chapter 25 of the TTC, you see...

 

In the silence and the void, 
Standing alone and unchanging, 
Ever present and in motion. 
Perhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things. 
I do not know its name 
Call it Tao. 

 

Yes, so how does the aspect (void) get to a next step from emptiness?  Simply the inherent potential of Dao/Emptiness ?

 

Do you associate Dao with Emptiness or just the process that unfolds ?

 

[Jeff]

2 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

Yes, so how does the aspect (void) get to a next step from emptiness?  Simply the inherent potential of Dao/Emptiness ?

 

Do you associate Dao with Emptiness or just the process that unfolds ?

 

 

I don't understand the question.  What do you mean by next step?  Next step to what?

 

I dont think it makes a lot of sense to try to directly compare the Dao and emptiness as they are completely different frameworks. But, I do agree as described earlier, there are many cross over points. Personally, I prefer the framework described in the TTC.

[Marblehead]

8 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

Do you associate Dao with Emptiness or just the process that unfolds ?

 

Oh!, I so much don't like that question.  Hehehe.

[dawei]

10 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

I don't understand the question.  What do you mean by next step?  Next step to what?

 

I dont think it makes a lot of sense to try to directly compare the Dao and emptiness as they are completely different frameworks. But, I do agree as described earlier, there are many cross over points. Personally, I prefer the framework described in the TTC.

 

I thought you were setting up an Emptiness >> Void shift... was wondering who causes that shift in your view.

 

But if they are different frameworks then no need to compare them too much.

[Jeff]

2 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

I thought you were setting up an Emptiness >> Void shift... was wondering who causes that shift in your view.

 

But if they are different frameworks then no need to compare them too much.

 

No, this just started as me saying that the Dao did not emerge from the void. My view is that the void is more like an aspect (or component) of the Dao. The void would be more like a “frozen” or empty One with no motion/energy in Daoist terms. 

[Marblehead]

I always relate Taoist "empty" with Mystery, Wu, potential; totally full of every possible possibility.  And yes, it is an aspect of Tao.

 

[3bob]

"Vanity of vanities, all is is vanity"  per only the mind but not for the true heart and mind...

[voidisyinyang]

53 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

I thought you were setting up an Emptiness >> Void shift... was wondering who causes that shift in your view.

 

But if they are different frameworks then no need to compare them too much.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiNlsTx-eLaAhURmoMKHdUSD98QFghJMAs&url=https%3A%2F%2Fterebess.hu%2Fenglish%2Ftao%2FSarahAllan.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1NfKbZM-V0G2lVpTEvgqwe

 

The terms you used earlier are discussed in this pdf -

The great one, water, and the Laozi: New light from Guodian

Sarah Allen, prof. Dartmouh

 

And when we apply them to alchemy training then things get interesting. thanks.

[Jeff]

14 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

I always relate Taoist "empty" with Mystery, Wu, potential; totally full of every possible possibility.  And yes, it is an aspect of Tao.

 

 

Well said. Void, infinite potential and energy to manifest...

[dawei]

39 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiNlsTx-eLaAhURmoMKHdUSD98QFghJMAs&url=https%3A%2F%2Fterebess.hu%2Fenglish%2Ftao%2FSarahAllan.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1NfKbZM-V0G2lVpTEvgqwe

 

The terms you used earlier are discussed in this pdf -

The great one, water, and the Laozi: New light from Guodian

Sarah Allen, prof. Dartmouh

 

And when we apply them to alchemy training then things get interesting. thanks.

 

Thanks I have that... and well worth it !

[dwai]

6 hours ago, dawei said:

 

I was trying to point out that One as (taiji) is a later imposition.  Earliest works described it differently but history is always being re-written to a degree.

 

Added: BTW, LZ never used the word Taiji but did use Wuji once... he used Ji a few times but at least one was in replacement for the more ancient word, Heng.   Even his one reference to Yin and Yang seems like a small footnote... like these ideas didn't get to great fruition and application till later. 

The Yijing has the cosmology of Taiji to 10,000 things. The Taijitu Shuo (later text) completes the correlation iinm.

I don't think they are speaking about different things. Daoist teachers (such as my Teachers' teacher) also teach along these lines. It is not surprising that these concepts fructified later, because man's thinking changed over the ages too..more rational, etc. 

[dawei]

30 minutes ago, dwai said:

The Yijing has the cosmology of Taiji to 10,000 things. The Taijitu Shuo (later text) completes the correlation iinm.

I don't think they are speaking about different things. Daoist teachers (such as my Teachers' teacher) also teach along these lines. It is not surprising that these concepts fructified later, because man's thinking changed over the ages too..more rational, etc. 

 

The Yijing did not have Taiji as the most ancient character... it was Da Heng.   Heng was virtually removed from all ancient texts and has forever been forgotten. 

 

One has to know that characters got replaced out due to emperor taboo name issues...  they could not keep Heng as that was the emperors name... and Da was very often changed to Tai ...   Ji was rarely used to replace Heng but by the development of the of Taiji, it made the most sense.

 

see my post from years ago:  https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/31887-tai-ji-太極-original-use-in-ancient-times/

 

 

So, the Yijing had the cosmology of Da Heng to 10,000 things...  Same as the ancient text of Heng Xian... and Yuan Dao talk of Heng.  It is all now lost to be Taiji. 

 

I'm happy to accept Taiji... but also happy to share the history of word changes.    

 

Taiji sounds much cooler too

 

[Michael Sternbach]

12 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

Address what question?  Maybe we just do not have agreement on the definition of void, but emptiness is not about "void-like" as you can see from the quote below...

 

Listen, great being! I will teach you that, being my manifestation from the beginning, all phenomena are the pure dimension of emptiness.

 

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu;Adriano Clemente. The Supreme Source: The Fundamental Tantra of the Dzogchen Semde 

 

 

Okay, please give me your definition of "void" as opposed to "emptiness".

[Michael Sternbach]

12 hours ago, Jeff said:

The problem is that the models are not stable with how much theoretical dark energy is out there, because to get the changing acceleration requires the dark energy amounts themselves to shift. 

 

Hah! Try to think of Dark Energy as negative energy; while the pull of gravity is a positive force that by itself would lead to a gradual deceleration and even potential reversal of cosmic expansion, Dark Energy acts in the way of anti-gravity, thus overcoming that pull and naturally causing constant acceleration.

 

Quote

 Here is another recent article on the topic...

 

Explaining the accelerating expansion of the universe without dark energy

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170330115254.htm

 

 

Yes, there are many attempts at alternative explanations by small teams of researchers. It is possible that one or the other will eventually be found to be superior to what current mainstream cosmology has to offer, however, what you have presented thus far can hardly be said to be the cutting edge of research (as suggested by one of your previous posts).

 

Quote

Either way, we seem to be off topic,  I apologize and will stop now...  

 

I am not sure that we are really off topic. To get somewhere with bigger-than-life questions like the one posed by Dwai, many paths should be pursued. And what seems to be a wrong track can turn out to be a circuitous route taking us right back to where we started from - but enriched by the vistas we have come to experience on the way.

 

And now that I'm thinking about it: Aren't Dark Energy and Light Energy a perfect expression of Yin and Yang? Nothing less than the the binary action of the Dao, in other words.

[Marblehead]

My personal understanding:  Void is what the universe is expanding into.  Void cannot be defined except to say that it is beyond the totality of the manifest universe.

 

Most often though, I call it "Absolute Nothingness".

 

[Jeff]

2 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Hah! Try to think of Dark Energy as negative energy; while the pull of gravity is a positive force that by itself would lead to a gradual deceleration and even potential reversal of cosmic expansion, Dark Energy acts in the way of anti-gravity, thus overcoming that pull and naturally causing constant acceleration.

 

 

Yes, there are many attempts at alternative explanations by small teams of researchers. It is possible that one or the other will eventually be found to be superior to what current mainstream cosmology has to offer, however, what you have presented thus far can hardly be said to be the cutting edge of research (as suggested by one of your previous posts).

 

 

I am not sure that we are really off topic. To get somewhere with bigger-than-life questions like the one posed by Dwai, many paths should be pursued. And what seems to be a wrong track can turn out to be a circuitous route taking us right back to where we started from - but enriched by the vistas we have come to experience on the way.

 

And now that I'm thinking about it: Aren't Dark Energy and Light Energy a perfect expression of Yin and Yang? Nothing less than the the binary action of the Dao, in other words.

 

December 18, 2017
by Glenn Roberts Jr., Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

When scientists recorded a rippling in space-time, followed within two seconds by an associated burst of light observed by dozens of telescopes around the globe, they had witnessed, for the first time, the explosive collision and merger of two neutron stars.

 

The intense cosmological event observed on Aug. 17 also had other reverberations here on Earth: It ruled out a class of dark energy theories that modify gravity, and challenged a large class of theories.

 

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-12-star-mergers-gravity-dark-energy.html

 

[Starjumper]

Maybe  this thread could be split into another one about cosmology, one of my favorite things.  From what I know, to facilitate this the person who started the thread can designate which posts belong/don't belong in the split off thread.

[Jeff]

5 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Okay, please give me your definition of "void" as opposed to "emptiness".

 

I am not a Buddhist, so it is probably not my place to define a Buddhist term, but as I stated earlier with the Norbu quote, void would be like an aspect (or subset) of emptiness. I simple differentiation would be that void is empty of all phenomena, while emptiness is both empty of and includes all phenomena. 

 

In meditation, void is like the space between two thoughts. Perfectly quiet mind. 

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Starjumper said:

Maybe  this thread could be split into another one about cosmology, one of my favorite things.  From what I know, to facilitate this the person who started the thread can designate which posts belong/don't belong in the split off thread.

I'd prefer if the cosmology topics get split off into another thread. On second thoughts...cosmology plays a big part in the OP...so perhaps not  

 

However, wrt. Emptiness, it is important to understand what the difference between Daoist Wu and Shunyata is. I don't think they are different at all, but are different perspectives from different vantage points.

 

• Wu as Ontological nonbeing -- It is the opposite of "being",  as in Being, where there is a sense of existence. It is Non-being, as in no sense of existence.
• Wu as personal experience - Emptiness, as I understand from my daoist practices, is a condition that is cultivated to release all bondages of personality, all egoistic colorations. It is a state of freedom from likes, dislikes, desires, nondesires, etc. It is a state of non-attachment to concepts and percepts. This leads to wu wei.

 

Compare that with Buddhist Shūnyata, and we see the following --

 

• Shūnyata the term is coined from the phrase Sva-Bhāva Shūnya, or empty of independent self-nature - This is an ontological aspect. 
• However, in Buddhist meditation practices, there is also the personal emptiness experience, where there is similar relinquishment of personality-based colorations. Experiences rise and fall, but there is no egotistic identification with any doership, etc. 

 

Neither Daoism, nor Buddhism, or for that matter Hindu Advaitic traditions (Advaita Vedanta, or Kashmir Shaivism), consider emptiness to be a dead void space.

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by dwai

[Apech]

For what its worth and because I can't help putting my two-pennies worth into this interesting discussion.

 

Wang Bi had the idea of being emerging from (and dependent on ) non-being.  Non being could be said to be beyond definition and infinite - while 'a being' is defined and finite.  This is like saying that all sounds appear because of the soundless sound, are modalities of it.  If you superimpose all vibrational possibilities you get total destructive interference - that is the peaks and troughs cancel each other - and is this silence = the soundless sound.  The slightest disturbance of this equilibrium produces suddenly all variety of vibrations - or you could say for a single note to be produced all other notes have to be suppressed.  So it is not creation from nothing - but creation from the soundless sound which is the void.  The full void or plenum.

 

The Dao is not the non-being or void - or at least is not just the void.  It is both the void , the ten thousand emergent things and the process by which they emerge and are sustained.  The drum beat of Heaven and Earth to which all things dance.

 

 

As far as Buddhist emptiness goes - it is used in two ways.  When applied to phenomena it is their lack of independent self-being which is why they are ephemeral and so on.  They emerge through dependent origination that is waves of 'dharmas' which as samskaras are both the action of karmic cause and effect and also the actuality.  So with regard to 'things' they are empty of self.

 

However if you apply emptiness to Mind itself - when all the apparent stains of emotions, habits and karmas have been quietened then the mind in equipoise is at base empty - whether you attribute to this an eternality and so on depends on which camp of Buddhist philosophy you belong in - which to non-Buddhists is probably not ver interesting (tbh).  However you could say that the equipoisal nature of the mind is empty or void and this would be slightly different to saying that phenomena are empty.  Of course the dharmakaya is the union of emptiness (in the former sense) and luminosity - and not just emptiness - where luminosity is the wisdom or knowing aspect of mind.

 

Excuse my clumsy attempt to explain this.