“This is why I am poking around the fire for some luminosity. I just want to see if we can talk about it without being a state of something. ..” – e
I’m not clear about the words you used here and what is intended. I will guess until you clarify. IF you are suggesting that ‘it’ [Nirvana] is NOT some state as in state of mind, I will suggest that most written about it includes the exact term ‘state’ when addressing nirvana as well as emptiness. Of course, such things can differ from one level of apprehension to another. Forging on, when you use the terms ‘being a state of something’, I wonder if you are suggesting something other than a state of mind. I’m not dogmatic about the term ‘state’, but it is the most common way to address the thing. “…Now I am not asking you to let go of your mind only beliefs, just trying to look afresh at what the heck it is or isn't, etc. BTW you said the luminosity as conditioned state of mind was not emptiness but it is now Nirvana?...” – e Add to this the differing schools of Buddhist thought, things can become confusing. So, I will quote something that seems to be nonsectarian and simple: “I don't know how many people understand what the difference between Samsara and Nirvana. The difference between Samsara and Nirvana is just mind training outwardly and mind training inwardly. To reach Nirvana we must use mind training to look inward to recognize the true nature of our mind. On the other hand, Samsara is also mind training, but one that looks outward, which causes you to not to recognize the true nature of our mind. What really happens in Samsara is that even though we want to have happiness, but we actually run away from those true causes of genuine happiness.” http://bodhicittasangha.org/lang-en/teachings Since I stated that many writings include the term ‘state’ and the above doesn’t, most of the first ‘hits’ on Google when looking for Nirvana or Tibetan Buddhist Nirvana etc. include the following. http://library.thinkquest.org/28505/buddhism/nirva.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana http://science.howstuffworks.com/nirvana1.htm http://www.near-death.com/experiences/buddhism04.html I’ll stop there since there are literally millions of ‘hits’ for it. And, I’m not sure what sort of reference you would appreciate. And, as an aside, I must have a jaded view of the term ‘belief’. I just am not attracted to it at all. In general, I associate attachment to some meme or even some esoteric set of words/thoughts as being a belief. Personally I don’t embrace faith nor revelation. And, even though I do seem to have a point of view when it comes to these sort of things, ….well…I’ll let it go for now. Perhaps I am attempting to defend not being dogmatic? >And, this base of mind does not change (come > and go). It is omnipresent. - Orn “…Right and so we hit on another issue I see with calling it a state of permanence that exists in (my) mind. Buddha felt that all conditioned things were impermanent and human beings by definition are impermanent. So how can (my) mind have permanence? Now please don't think I am being dogmatic here referring to Buddha in my posts, it just seems to me if we stretch the thread in the yanas too thin then it breaks and are we then still talking about Buddhism?...” – e I’ll accept your question about ‘(my) mind’ at face value. Here you have said something that is true and that is that (I’ll use the terms I’m more comfortable and familiar with) all relative things including all appearances are impermanent. Here we are talking about things comprised of components. Perhaps you know of the phrase “Look for that which has no components.” This implies that during this lifetime, we should look for something other than appearances. And, to do this, we use ‘mind’. We even use “(my) mind” in the process even though the brain itself is impermanent as are the thoughts and concepts that arise therefrom. This is why I have been pointing, as sort of an analogy, at the base of ‘mind’…at that void that is the natural state of mind. Again, the term state is appropriate because such a state can be and is permanent when achieved. A quick analysis and extension of looking at the Buddhist notion of reincarnation…an eternal continuum, one knows that there is an aspect of the eternal within us all. If this were not the case, much proposed by Buddhism just would not be able to even be suggested. So, say for Gautama, who it is said was omniscient, omnipresent etc., there would have to be a ‘place’ (state) that is changeless – has no components that is illuminated with this ‘light’. Call it enlightenment. Call it being aware of the eternal…and a pure state that is non-changing. Obviously such a ‘state’ is not thinking. It is something else. “…FYI, I love all the yanas. However, I don't see three turnings but 3 broad commentaries that arose as Buddhism spread thru other cultures. I think this 3 turning stuff is sort of silly, it is not like Nagarjuna found anything new within the teaching. He just clarified and recentered the teaching as folks went astray. Which was/is inevitable. …” – e OK. Even within different schools of Buddhism this is a contentious issue. Also, what you call ‘clarification’ is not accepted by many. If so, there wouldn’t be differing schools. This is not an attempt at negating your thinking…more of a recognition and expansion. When it comes to consciousness…we can say it exists because we are aware of it, yet, when looked for, it is nowhere to be found. There is the “Neither being nor not-being, nor both nor neither.” …that one can contemplate that is applicable and even directly to our current discussion. On Nov 2, 1:50 pm, e <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 29, 2:53 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > “OK if it is a state of mind, then it is conditioned as all states > > come and go. But Nirvana is supposedly unconditioned. What do you make of > > that?” – e > > At the base of Mind is found this luminosity which is for lack of > > better words, a state. > > This is why I am poking around the fire for some luminosity. I just > want to see if we can talk about it without being a state of > something. Now I am not asking you to let go of your mind only > beliefs, just trying to look afresh at what the heck it is or isn't, > etc. BTW you said the luminosity as conditioned state of mind was not > emptiness but it is now Nirvana? > > >And, this base of mind does not change (come > > and go). It is omnipresent. > > Right and so we hit on another issue I see with calling it a state of > permanence that exists in (my) mind. Buddha felt that all conditioned > things were impermanent and human beings by definition are > impermanent. So how can (my) mind have permanence? Now please don't > think I am being dogmatic here referring to Buddha in my posts, it > just seems to me if we stretch the thread in the yanas too thin then > it breaks and are we then still talking about Buddhism? > > >So, in that sense it [state – Nirvana] is > > equivalent to the Christian “Kingdom”. > > Even though I was born, raised and live in the US, I was never > indoctrinated into Christianity. Thank God! Otherwise I probably would > never have found Buddhism. :-) So I have no basis of understanding to > comment. > > > I believe that some confusion > > arises here when people hold a belief that Nirvana (or the Kingdom) > > can only be ‘entered’ upon death. I do not hold this belief. > > Me neither. > > FYI, I love all the yanas. However, I don't see three turnings but 3 > broad commentaries that arose as Buddhism spread thru other cultures. > I think this 3 turning stuff is sort of silly, it is not like > Nagarjuna found anything new within the teaching. He just clarified > and recentered the teaching as folks went astray. Which was/is > inevitable. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" 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/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
