The Project Meditation Community Forum is temporarily in a Read-Only state due to maintenance and upgrades that are being applied. Although registration and the creation of new posts are currently not possible, you can still read and search the forum...

    If you are unable to find what you are looking for within the Project Meditation Community please check out our new Blog and/or our Facebook page.

    We will notify you as soon as our maintenance work is completed,

    Have a great day,

    Yours for HUGE success
    The Project Meditation Team

Ponder this for me

Discussion in 'Mind, Body & Spirit' started by Karmoh, Oct 11, 2010.

  1. Karmoh

    Karmoh Member

    We were visiting friends on the weekend, when a conversation came up about the color blue, and if everything is blue, blue wouldn’t exist.

    So that got me thinking, if the above is true meditation only exists because a majority of people do not meditate and ultimately stuff only exists because we have something to compare it with.

    Does that mean that, in the NOW there is no enlightenment, nor spiritual awakening, no god nor religion......etc...etc?

    This thought has got me! :rolleyes: :eek: :D

    In reality (if it exists) nature as we know it is never at odds with itself, except in our thoughts.

    Just pondering………:)
  2. Edwin

    Edwin Member

    If everybody is enlightened allready, how can we recognise it ? ;)
  3. Karmoh

    Karmoh Member


    Before enlightenment - Wash the dishes
    After enlightenment - Wash the dishes

    No difference in our house ;)
  4. GilesC

    GilesC Member

    I had this discussion with some people a few years back, though many didn't grasp the concept. With them being 'into' complementary therapies and the like, they would often excuse the "bad" or "evil" things that happened to people as necessary or part of spiritual life lessons (the same was also raised on the question of why God let's "bad" things happen) saying things like "you can't have good without evil, and therefore evil must exist in this world".

    My argument was that "good" and "bad"/"evil" are merely labels created by the human mind / society (community mind), and what some people see as bad or evil is seen as good in other cultures and visa versa. These labels are created by people 'need' to differentiate between different things; to categorise things; to create a quality between things. As Robert M Persig talked about in his book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, where he investigates subjective and objective quality, if there was no such thing as quality, then a blank wall would look just as appealing as a wall with a picture on it.

    Whilst many didn't/don't agree with me (that's their choice ;) ), it IS possible to have good without bad/evil i.e. everything good. The difference would be that we would not be able to quantify the good as we would have nothing to compare it against; nothing to give it the "good" quality. Just because something can't be quantified does not mean that it doesn't exist.

    Likewise there is beauty in everything. One person may look at an object and see it as beautiful, whereas another may look at it and find it disgusting. The object cannot be both beautiful and disgusting and therefore the quantification of those people is purely subjective; the fact that beauty has been recognised in the object means that it does have beauty (and by the same token it does have disgust), but in truth it is neither of those things, as it simply IS.

    In Buddhist terms they talk of "emptiness" which is often something that is not explained well or understood well, and probably that comes from the fact it's labelled "emptiness" whereas it relates closely to interdependence (or Inter-Being as Thich Nhat Hahn calls it). What it really refers to is "empty of being seperate". A good example to demonstrate this is a glass. The glass is not just a glass, but is made from the silica components, and would not exist without having had those components created by the earth, using elements of the sun, earth, water as well as the people involved in creating it in it's current shape and form to deliver it, and the things that created those people (their mother and father and their mothers and fathers, their teachers, the food and the suppliers of their food etc. etc. etc.) and so it goes on. This is interdependance, and from it we can see that the glass contains everything in the universe. It is not seperate from anything. We can look at the glass filled with water and say the glass if full of water, but if we look at the glass without water we say it is empty, but empty of what? Nothing can be empty, unless it is empty of something. The glass is empty of water, but still contains everything. This is why emptiness is synonymous with Oneness.... hence, you can seem to take the evil out of something to leave goodness, but the goodness is everything anyway, including the evilness. Both exist, both are empty and both are merely labels created by us to discriminate in our attachment to quality. Let it go! ;)

    So yes, we are all already enlightened, we are all already complete of knowledge, we are all emptiness. We simply cover these things up with our ego monkey minds. :D


  5. Karmoh

    Karmoh Member

    good stuff Giles, I haven't heard the glass simile before, I heard it explained in a similar way using a wooden chair and returning it to its natural state, which was impossible as it lead all the way to the beginning of time...

    The Buddha lived with form, sound, odour, taste, touch and thought, exactly as we do today. He was an arahant so he was able to turn away from them rather than toward them.

    He knew to turn away and let go, yet 2500 years later we still strive to understand. He understood unequivocally that the heart is just the heart and thought is just thought. He didn’t confuse them and mix them together.

    Thoughts and feelings are just thoughts and feelings. Let things be as they are. Let form be just form, let sound be just sound, let thought be just thought.

    Why should we bother to attach to them?

    Peace :)
  6. GilesC

    GilesC Member

    A good book (and one that I read recently) is this by Thich Nhat Hanh...

    Heart of Understanding: Commentaries on the Prajnaparamita Heart Sutra: Amazon.co.uk: Thich Nhat Hanh: Books

    which is his explanation of the Prajnaparamita Heart Sutra. It's only about 50 pages long, but it's succinct and clear in explaining emptiness, attachment and inter-Being. Certainly one of the better descriptions I've read.

    We have to attach with the 'senses' in the Now in order to live, just as I am attaching with the sense of my hot buttered toast and bowl of meusli at this very minute (day off work, late breakfast ;)), but once we've dealt with the Now we have to let go and move on, just as I will not spend all day thinking of the toast and muesli, but will get on with the things that need to be done to live life as they are presented.



  7. Karmoh

    Karmoh Member

    One I read early last year and never really understood, but since this thread I have picked up again...

    Introduction to Emptiness by Guy Newland

    quote from Intro
    "I wrote this book mainly by summarizing and explaining in my
    own words key ideas and arguments that the sect’s founder, Tsong-
    kha-pa Lo-sang-drak-pa (1357–1419), puts forward in the “insight”
    section of his massive text The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path
    (byang chub lam rim chen mo; Great Treatise hereafter)."
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2010

Share This Page