A Universe from Nothing?

[ArtieE]

This is an abstract description of the MECHANICS of sound, not sound itself. Sound is an AUDITORY experience. If there is no receiver, there is no auditory experience. There is only 'a periodic disturbance....blah blah blah' which says absolutely nothing.

Why don't you check your definitions before posting?

LOL Anybody can go the dictionary I listed and see for themselves. It's the first definition listed.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Does it count if any birds, lizards, animals, frogs, and insects hear it?

 

[ArtieE]

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Does a dog whistle make a sound? According to godnotgod only if there are dogs nearby. As if the presence or absence of dogs matters to the dog whistle.

 

[Kemosloby]

Does it count if any birds, lizards, animals, frogs, and insects hear it?

If you can get enough of them to swear the noise came from the tree and not the forest floor, then yes.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No one said anything about Cosmic Consciousness in relation to Emptiness in this discussion. The reference to Emptiness in this discussion was simply to differentiate between perceptual reality and fundamental reality.

So you accept that sunyata is incompatible with your new-age belief in "Cosmic Consciousness"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

According to Sunyata, we are empty of self-nature, so there is no 'I' that experiences the pain. There is only the pain itself, and that experience is the experience of the Universe.

According to sunyata everything is empty of self-nature because everything arises in dependence on conditions, including consciousness. It is completely incompatible with your new-age belief in "Cosmic Consciousness". Every time you refer to emptiness you are shooting yourself in the foot and exposing another huge flaw in your DIY religion.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If you can get enough of them to swear the noise came from the tree and not the forest floor, then yes.

LOL...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

There is a difference between certainty and being cocksure. Besides, you are talking about a future scenario you only believe to be true, and gambling on it, while I am talking about the ego and how it works, something everyone experiences directly in the here and now, and not in some future fantasy based on the ego, which is an illusion to begin with!

Your "Cosmic Consciousness" is also a fantasy, it is a sort of new-age God substitute, a belief you cling to. The here and now has no need of such nonsense. I would suggest you spend some time practising mindfulness and let go of all your convoluted metaphysical beliefs. Empty your mind of all the new-age nonsense and spend some quality time in the present moment.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Does a dog whistle make a sound? According to godnotgod only if there are dogs nearby. As if the presence or absence of dogs matters to the dog whistle.

That's an interesting one. For a dog the whistle makes a sound, but for us it doesn't. It depends on the definition of "sound" of course - are we talking about sound as a physical phenomenon, or as a subjective experience?

 

[godnotgod]

LOL Anybody can go the dictionary I listed and see for themselves. It's the first definition listed.

You give credence to it just because it is in the dictionary, but are not paying attention to what it actually is describing. Until you hear it, it is not sound. You are reading a DESCRIPTION of the MECHANICS that create sound. Try again.

 

[godnotgod]

So you accept that sunyata is incompatible with your new-age belief in "Cosmic Consciousness"?

I am not referring to Cosmic Consciousness. I am differentiating between perceptual reality and fundamental reality, which is what the Heart Sutra is doing.

 

[godnotgod]

According to sunyata everything is empty of self-nature because everything arises in dependence on conditions, including consciousness. It is completely incompatible with your new-age belief in "Cosmic Consciousness". Every time you refer to emptiness you are shooting yourself in the foot and exposing another huge flaw in your DIY religion.

If Sunyata says that everything is empty of self-nature, then it can only point to one thing: no-self nature, and no-self nature is a universal view. It cannot be anything else.

Again, what are you trying to say? No one is talking about Cosmic Consciousness.

 

[godnotgod]

Does it count if any birds, lizards, animals, frogs, and insects hear it?

Yes, of course. But if no human or animal is present, there is no sound.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I am not referring to Cosmic Consciousness. I am differentiating between perceptual reality and fundamental reality, which is what the Heart Sutra is doing.

This is just eel-wriggling. Either you don't understand the Heart Sutra or you are deliberately misrepresenting it.

In any case emptiness is incompatible with your "Cosmic Consciousness". Your desperate attempts to claim support for your new-age beliefs is laughable.

 

[godnotgod]

Does a dog whistle make a sound? According to godnotgod only if there are dogs nearby. As if the presence or absence of dogs matters to the dog whistle.

Not to the dog whistle itself, or the vibrations emanating from it, but to the actual audible intonation. Without dogs or other animals capable of hearing that frequency of the whistle, there is no sound. Show me where you see sound. Are you confusing sound with vibration? Your dictionary definition is about vibrations, not audible sound.

 

[godnotgod]

This is just eel-wriggling. Either you don't understand the Heart Sutra or you are deliberately misrepresenting it.

In any case emptiness is incompatible with your "Cosmic Consciousness". Your desperate attempts to claim support for your new-age beliefs is laughable.

The Heart Sutra is referring to a view that the conditioned mind is unaware of, namely, that all phenomena are empty of self-nature. The conditioned mind thinks phenomena possesses self-nature. The mind free of conditioning, which is that of the Buddha, sees phenomena as it really is. That mind is not the mind of self-view, but that of universal view.

Why are you bringing Cosmic Consciousness into the discussion, when I said nothing about it? You are obviously trying to put words into my mouth to suit your strawman.

You're also trying to pretend that you know what the Heart Sutra is saying, and that I do not. I do, and I know that I do. If fact, I understand it better than you, as you are a Legalist, and see it only in terms of Black and White.

 

[ArtieE]

Not to the dog whistle itself, or the vibrations emanating from it, but to the actual audible intonation. Without dogs or other animals capable of hearing that frequency of the whistle, there is no sound. Show me where you see sound. Are you confusing sound with vibration? Your dictionary definition is about vibrations, not audible sound.

Go to the Collins Dictionary online and the entry for sound. Can you see it says "Definition of sound" and "Sound" in big letters under there? Can you then read definition 1a?

 

[ArtieE]

That's an interesting one. For a dog the whistle makes a sound, but for us it doesn't. It depends on the definition of "sound" of course - are we talking about sound as a physical phenomenon, or as a subjective experience?

Sound cannot be a subjective experience since hearing a sound requires the presence of the physical phenomenon of existing sound waves.

 

[godnotgod]

Your "Cosmic Consciousness" is also a fantasy, it is a sort of new-age God substitute, a belief you cling to. The here and now has no need of such nonsense. I would suggest you spend some time practising mindfulness and let go of all your convoluted metaphysical beliefs. Empty your mind of all the new-age nonsense and spend some quality time in the present moment.

If you were, you would know what you're talking about. Unfortunately, you are stuck in the stagnant waters of your doctrine.

 

[godnotgod]

Go to the Collins Dictionary online and the entry for sound. Can you see it says "Definition of sound" and "Sound" in big letters under there? Can you then read definition 1a?

I read the definition. It is a definition, once again, of the MECHANICS of sound, but not of sound itself. For you to know what sound is, you must have an auditory experience of it. A person deaf from birth cannot know what sound is via your clinical dictionary definition.