Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[Papoon]

And a still mind free of thought is in actuality 'no-mind'. Sunyata is empty of mind itself.

Sunyata is more an adjective than a noun. Adjective is not the right term either, but noone teaches English anymore. Redness as opposed to red. Anyone here old enough to remember the niceties of our ever-more-decrepit language ? I used to know this stuff, but so much is fading from lack of use....

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Sunyata is more an adjective than a noun.

Yes, it's the nature of stuff. You find the same theme in the Pali Canon, for example the Phena Sutta which looks like a precursor to The Heart Sutra:

“Form is like a lump of foam,
Feeling like a water bubble;
Perception is like a mirage,
Volitions like a plantain trunk,
And consciousness like an illusion,
So explained the Kinsman of the Sun."

“However one may ponder it
And carefully investigate it,
It appears but hollow and void
When one views it carefully."

https://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.95

 

[godnotgod]

Yes, it's the nature of stuff.

yup! (more accurately, the nature of 'things'.)

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, completely wrong, you're just making stuff up. Sunyata means that all consciousness is empty of inherent existence. One more time, sunyata is not compatible with "cosmic consciousness".

Śūnyatā (Sanskrit, also shunyata; Pali: suññatā), translated into English as emptiness, voidness,[1] openness,[2] spaciousness, or vacuity, is a Buddhist concept which has multiple meanings depending on its doctrinal context. In Theravada Buddhism, suññatā often refers to the not-self (Pāli: anatta, Sanskrit: anātman)[note 1] nature of the five aggregates of experience and the six sense spheres. Suññatā is also often used to refer to a meditative state or experience.

Sunyata is a key term in Mahayana Buddhism, and also influenced some schools of Hindu philosophy.

You can read on....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Śūnyatā

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And a still mind free of thought is in actuality 'no-mind'. Sunyata is empty of mind itself.

No.....there is only one mind....cosmic mind...only when a soul's chattering corporeal mind empties itself of all desires will it be still and realize union... If the cosmic mind were empty of itself....then the universe would not exist...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You can read on....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Śūnyatā

Right. It doesn't equate sunyata to cosmic consciousness, Brahman or god. Like I said.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

yup! (more accurately, the nature of 'things'.)

No, the nature of everything, all phenomena, including consciousness of whatever type. The Heart Sutra makes it clear that insight and attainment are also characterised by emptiness.

You are trying to view Buddhist teachings through a Hindu lens, that is why you are in such a complete muddle.

One last time: sunyata is not compatible with "cosmic consciousness".

 

[godnotgod]

Thich Nhat Hanh, the famous Buddhist monk from Vietnam, has created a new translation of the Heart Sutra "because" as he himself explains, "the patriarch who originally compiled the Heart Sutra was not sufficiently skilful enough with his use of language. This has resulted in much misunderstanding for almost 2,000 years."

One of the primary points he makes regarding this misunderstanding, is that:

"The Heart Sutra was intended to help the Sarvāstivādins relinquish the view of no self and no dharma. The deepest teaching of Prājñāpāramitā is the emptiness of self (ātmaśūnyatā) and the emptiness of dharma (dharmanairātmya) and not the non-being of self and dharma. The Buddha has taught in the Kātyāyana sutra that most people in the world are caught either in the view of being and non-being. Therefore, the sentence ‘in emptiness there is no form, feelings…’ is obviously still caught in the view of non-being. That is why this sentence does not correspond to the Ultimate Truth. Emptiness of self only means the emptiness of self, not the non-being of self, just as a balloon that is empty inside does not mean that the balloon does not exist. The same is true with the emptiness of dharma: it only means the emptiness of all phenomena and not the non-existence of phenomena. [which includes the phenomena of consciousness]. It is like a flower that is made only of non-flower elements. The flower is empty of a separate existence, but that doesn’t mean that the flower is not there."

So from this it is made clear that consciousness, along with all other phenomena, is empty of self, but not the non-being of consciousness. And because it is empty of self-nature, and because it still does exist as consciousness, it exists as universal consciousness, free of self.

Here is the link to the story of this new translation so you can understand more:

http://plumvillage.org/news/thich-nhat-hanh-new-heart-sutra-translation/

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No.....there is only one mind....cosmic mind...only when a soul's chattering corporeal mind empties itself of all desires will it be still and realize union... If the cosmic mind were empty of itself....then the universe would not exist...

OK, so that's what you believe, it's sort of vaguely Hindu. Have you any evidence for this belief?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

And because it is empty of self-nature, and because it still does exist as consciousness, it exists as universal consciousness, free of self.

More nonsense, again you are just making stuff up. You are clearly so attached to your dogmatic belief in "cosmic consciousness" that you are willing to pervert anything to suit your personal agenda. You're not fooling anyone.

 

[godnotgod]

No, the nature of everything, all phenomena, including consciousness of whatever type. The Heart Sutra makes it clear that insight and attainment are also characterised by emptiness.

One last time: sunyata is not compatible with "cosmic consciousness".

Wrong! It IS precisely CC!

As ben pointed out, "Suññatā is also often used to refer to a meditative state or experience."

The meditative state or experience of Sunyata is one in consciousness, empty of self nature.

What I am saying is that emptiness is the nature of all 'things', as in 'every-thing', because there are no such separate things that possess inherent or self-nature. What the ordinary mind calls 'things' are actually interdependent relationships of form. This includes consciousness only insofar as consciousness has self-nature. It does not, but it still exists as consciousness. Not having self-nature, it can then only have not-self nature, and not-self nature, by default, is universal nature.

The Buddha experienced Supreme Enlightenment, the highest potential a human being can attain in consciousness. His conscious experience is real, but it was not a consciousness defined by self-nature; it is defined by universality, empty of self-nature. Get it?

 

[godnotgod]

More nonsense, again you are just making stuff up. You are clearly so attached to your dogmatic belief in "cosmic consciousness" that you are willing to pervert anything to suit your personal agenda. You're not fooling anyone.

You are so filled with rigid doctrine that you are simply unable to extrapolate the obvious. Can't you understand this simple lesson? If the phenomena of consciousness is empty of self-nature, then it is obvious that it is not defined by self, or contained by self. It is free, or empty, of self. Being empty of self, it's true nature is that of not-self, or emptiness. However, this does not mean consciousness does not exist, as Thich Nhat Hanh points out. It only means that consciousness is empty of self-nature, and as such, must, by default, be of the nature of universality. It's akin to bursting a water balloon over the ocean. The water in the balloon has no self-nature, and when merged with the ocean, becomes universal in nature, which is it's true nature. In reality, it never lost its universal nature. That it possessed a self nature was merely an illusion. Likewise, our true nature is universal consciousness, now freed from the false concept of self. This, the Buddha achieved. That is how he knew what to say in the Heart Sutra about the Five Aggregates, knowledge that the ordinary man does not yet realize.

Think about it.

 

[godnotgod]

No.....there is only one mind....cosmic mind...only when a soul's chattering corporeal mind empties itself of all desires will it be still and realize union... If the cosmic mind were empty of itself....then the universe would not exist...

What I mean is that it is empty of any concept of itself. Let us distinguish between mind and consciousness. I think when you say 'mind', you really mean 'consciousness'. Mind is the faculty of thought, and as such, creates a self-concept of mind. Mind, IOW, is a self-created principle. It is only brought into being when thought is present. But consciousness does not involve thought. Consciousness is Pure Being, not existence in Time or Space, as Mind is. So yes, as Patanjali tells us: 'yoga [divine union] is the cessation of all of the activities of the mind'. No-mind is, in essence, pure consciousness, without thought; without concept; without self-nature, which is Sunyata.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Right. It doesn't equate sunyata to cosmic consciousness, Brahman or god. Like I said.

From the Wiki article..."Suññatā is also often used to refer to a meditative state or experience.".....I referred to the term "empty" as meaning a mind free from activity...that's what I've been practicing for decades...as to other religious traditions and their respective terms for the state of union...a rose by any other name smells as sweet...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The meditative state or experience of Sunyata is one in consciousness, empty of self nature.

<sigh> Now you're just eel-wriggling. The Heart Sutra makes it clear that insight and attainment are also characterised by emptiness. Meditative states, all experience of whatever type, all characterised by emptiness. No exceptions. Get it?

Sunyata is simply not compatible with your "cosmic consciousness". Attempting to move the goalposts by referring to "universal consciousness" is not going to get you out of trouble here. You are just twisting things to suit your personal agenda. Clearly you are so attached to your belief in "cosmic consciousness" that you can't see the wood for the trees.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What I mean is that it is empty of any concept of itself. Let us distinguish between mind and consciousness. I think when you say 'mind', you really mean 'consciousness'. Mind is the faculty of thought, and as such, creates a self-concept of mind. Mind, IOW, is a self-created principle. It is only brought into being when thought is present. But consciousness does not involve thought. Consciousness is Pure Being, not existence in Time or Space, as Mind is. So yes, as Patanjali tells us: 'yoga [divine union] is the cessation of all of the activities of the mind'. No-mind is, in essence, pure consciousness, without thought; without concept; without self-nature, which is Sunyata.

OK fine....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

OK, so that's what you believe, it's sort of vaguely Hindu. Have you any evidence for this belief?

Sure.....

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No-mind is, in essence, pure consciousness, without thought; without concept; without self-nature, which is Sunyata.

Nonsense, sunyata is not "pure consciousness". Again you are muddling up Hindu and Buddhist teachings and ending up in complete confusion.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Sure.....

So you have no evidence for your beliefs? OK.

 

[godnotgod]

The Heart Sutra makes it clear that insight and attainment are also characterised by emptiness. Meditative states, all experience of whatever type, all characterised by emptiness.
.

I agree. But such states are still conscious, just that this consciousness has no self-nature. Instead it's true nature is universality. That is the only choice available if you eliminate 'self' from the mix.