Hi Marsha, Well Marsha, what does that snippet tell you? Yes, of course emptiness does not exist except to deny inherent existence, I thought you knew this. "Emptiness" is a concept which the intellect develops to embody a path. It does not exist outside of that intellectual framework, how can it, it is empty of such things? In other words, there is no such thing as Emptiness which can create something, it is simply the state of the universe. I have repeatedly suggested to you that Emptiness is a tool used by Buddhism who's intent is to free the Self from the Ego. Now that you have read it somewhere else, perhaps you will agree with me. Of course there is existence, I bump into it every day. For me to bump into something the Self must exist. If not, we are right back to determinism. We could say that Buddha was determined to go down a passionate pathway, and that he had not choice but to achieve nirvana and help others, since "He" could not do so "Himself". However, I do not think Buddha would agree with this sense of Emptiness.
But now I wish to question your logical conclusion that Emptiness is the same as DQ. Emptiness as used by Buddhists is a "condition" of the universe, it is not something other than an opinion. It has no value outside of such statement of "condition". Indeed, if we say that DQ is a similar condition (to emptiness), then DQ also can not create. Emptiness has no direction associated with it, this would mean by your analysis that DQ also has no direction. This, I believe, would be at odds with MoQ, in that direction is presented in its elaboration of levels and evolution. So, by saying that Emptiness and DQ are the same, you are at odds with MoQ. Perhaps this is your intent, and if so, please tell us why. I believe that Quality has existence, and is not just a logical description of no "inherent existence". As with the Tao, Quality exists, and from it come all things. Nothing can come from Emptiness. To say that something does would be like saying that something comes from the nowhere. So, my question is: How do you rectify the condition of emptiness with the active direction of Quality? One is a concept which detracts, the other is a concept which imparts (sounds almost like opposites to me). Why do you think they are the same? If you state that in order to understand MoQ one must understand emptiness, then please tell us why. As usual, I am trying to discuss MoQ in MoQ_discuss. Cheers, Mark On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 11:13 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Marsha: > This too is very interesting... > > > "Emptiness too, does not exist by way of its own being, as it is without an > essential nature. Emptiness is an absence, not an essence. When a person > discovers that what he or she thought existed does not, the realization is a > stunning absence. We think that things correspond to their appearance and > exist in this same way. We take objects to be exist as their own things, > including the self of persons and when such identity, when the establishment > of true entities cannot be found, its absence is astonishing. > > "During meditation, emptiness is experienced as non-conceptual and without > subject-object duality. However emptiness teachings resist reification, > turning this absence back into an independent essence. And so it is said > that emptiness too, is empty. Emptiness is not the substance of phenomena, > not its “filler,” substratum or indicative of the absence of all phenomena. > Emptiness is not an independent entity, but is inseparable from form and > countless dependent conditions, though all empty ones. > > "Nothing stands alone, even though at the time of abiding in emptiness, there > is no conceptual mediator present. Many things are not conceptually > mediated, such as being startled, despite there being a recognition of what > occurred. This is why there is some ability to talk or write about the > experience of emptiness afterwards, although the words are not the same as > the non-conceptual experience. Emptiness then, is dependent upon perception. > For what cannot be perceived cannot be known. > > "Emptiness then, is the absence of inherent existence, but not all existence. > Everything is an interconnected web of both thing and no thing, neither > existent nor non-existent, neither one nor many. Emptiness teachings are > about freedom from the burden of believing that things inherently exist, not > about finding an ultimate truth to try and feel free in." > > > http://www.emptinessteachings.com/Emptiness.html > > > Sent from my iPad > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
