I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your own research. / Ornamentalmind
Oh, so that;s the way of it, is it?... Well, if you're going to be "snooty".... let me be a bit "sarcastic" in return....If I assume that this "void" exists only in some contemplative or meditative state attained in the mind of the Adept... does that mean that the said Adept-practitioner is .... empty-headed?.... nominal9 On Nov 27, 3:57 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your > own research. > > On Nov 27, 8:57 am, nominal9 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > while most schools of Tibetan > > Buddhism do make a synthetic separation, call it void/not-void for > > now, ... etc./ ornamentalmind > > > I'm lazy, Orn, especially when it comes to the "meditative religions- > > philosophies" named....can you save me some reading and give me a > > notion of what is contained in the "void" or whatever else the > > different views may care to call it?.... and what is the character or > > the special way in which the "synthesis" interaction you speak of > > takes place between the two... void .. non-void... > > nominal9 > > > On Nov 25, 1:56 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > “…The Tibetan Buddhists call these two aspects the void and > > > nonvoid. The nonvoid is the reality of visible objects. The > > > void,…” – soc > > > > A slight addition to this statement…while most schools of Tibetan > > > Buddhism do make a synthetic separation, call it void/not-void for > > > now, how these two truths are apprehended/understood varies from one > > > school to the next. That is, the very notion of ‘reality’ and what > > > ‘visible objects’ are differs greatly from one system to another. > > > > For a simple overview, see: > > > > “Appearance & Reality, The Two Truths in the Four Buddhist Tenet > > > Systems” by Guy Newland, Snow Lion. > > > > On Nov 24, 9:47 pm, socratus <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ‘ The idea that the universe can be viewed as the compound > > > > of two basic orders, the implicate and the explicate, can be > > > > found in many other traditions. > > > > The Tibetan Buddhists call these two aspects the void and > > > > nonvoid. The nonvoid is the reality of visible objects. The > > > > void, like the implicate order, is the birthplace of all things > > > > in the universe, . . . > > > > . . . only the void is real and all forms in the objective world > > > > are illusory, . . . . > > > > The Hindus call the implicate level of reality Brahman. > > > > Brahman is formless but is the birthplace of all forms in > > > > visible reality, which appear out of it and then enfold back > > > > into it in endless flux. > > > > . . . consciousness is not only a subtler form of matter, > > > > but it is more fundamental than matter, and in the Hindu > > > > cosmology it is matter that has emerged from consciousness, > > > > and not the other way around. Or as the Vedas put it, the > > > > physical world is brought into being through both the > > > > ‘ veiling’ and ‘ projecting’ powers of consciousness. > > > > . . . the material universe is only a second- generation > > > > reality, a creation of veiled consciousness, the Hindus > > > > say that it is transitory and unreal, or ‘ maya’. > > > > . . . > > > > This same concept can be found in Judaic thought. > > > > . . . . in shamanistic thinking . . . . . . > > > > . . . . . . > > > > Like Bohm, who says that consciousness always has its > > > > source in the implicate, the aborigines believe that the > > > > true source of the mind is in the transcendent reality of > > > > the dreamtime. Normal people do not realize this and > > > > believe that their consciousness is in their bodies. > > > > . . . . . > > > > The Dogan people of the Sudan also believe that the > > > > physical world is the product of a deeper and more > > > > fundamental level of reality . . . . . .’ > > > > === . > > > > Book / The Holographic Universe. > > > > Part 3 / 9. Pages 287 – 289. > > > > By Michael Talbot. / > > > > ==================== . . . > > > > My questions after reading this book. > > > > > Is it possible that Physics confirmed and proved the > > > > Religion philosophy of life ? > > > > How is it possible to understand the Religion philosophy > > > > of life from modern Physics view? > > > > # > > > > My opinion. > > > > Fact. > > > > The detected material mass of the matter in the > > > > Universe is so small (the average density of all > > > > substance in the Universe is approximately > > > > p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that it cannot ‘close’ the > > > > Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe > > > > as whole is ‘open’, Endless Void / Nothingness / > > > > Vacuum : T=0K. > > > > Quantum Physics says the Vacuum is the birthplace > > > > of all ‘ virtual’ particles . Nobody knows what there are, > > > > but ‘the virtual particles’ change the Vacuum in a > > > > local places and create Non Void / Material / Gravity > > > > World with stars, planets and all another objects and > > > > subjects in the Universe. > > > > === . > > > > Without Eternal/ Infinite Void / Vacuum physics makes no sense. > > > > But as Paul Dirac said: > > > > " The problem of the exact description of vacuum, > > > > in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. > > > > Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, > > > > how it is possible to expect a correct description > > > > of something more complex ? " > > > > === . > > > > # > > > > But there is a strong tradition ( scientific and religious) that > > > > insists > > > > that any time we say we know who God is, or what God wants, > > > > we are committing an act of heresy. > > > > == . > > > > Best wishes. > > > > Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. > > > > == .- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
