If "everything is energy" then what does this mean?

[godnotgod]

Does this mean 'smug'?

 

[`mud]

When all the labels are stripped of their value,
when all categories are applied,
what then ?
~
'mud

 

[Rick O'Shez]

When all the labels are stripped of their value,
when all categories are applied,
what then ?

Just the present moment in all it's glory.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Bikkhu translates the Buddha as saying that 'the unconditioned' is equivalent to the destruction of lust, hatred, and delusion. Therefore, 'the unconditioned' is what is the case after these three no longer exist. IOW, only that which is the unconditioned exists in reality. If that is the case, it can only be the absolute, since there is no 'other' which exists that can be compared to it. This 'unconditioned' state is Nirvana, the only true Reality.

Your first sentence above is correct, the rest is nonsense, it's just stuff you are making stuff because you are desperate to make Nirvana an "Absolute Reality" so it fits into your bizarre DIY religion. You want Nirvana to be the same as Atman/Brahman, well it just isn't, so get over it.

The real problem is that the DIY religion you are preaching here is just ****e, and all you are doing is putting lipstick on a pig.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Why is it that you fail to properly understand the very quote you posted? I think it is because your non-Buddhist education is deficient, as you fail to grasp simple ideas and concepts, and cling instead to a rote, black and white 'understanding' of the texts. This pattern of misunderstanding is consistent both with your take on the Heart Sutra and now with this particular passage. You say you now practice a simple Zen approach, but Zen is a mystical practice which requires a tuned-in intuitive mind, which you clearly lack, or suppress instead with a kind of fundamentalist/legalistic approach to Buddhist teachings.

This is pure projection and hypocrisy on your part. All you do is quote-mine, you have no idea what the texts actually mean, you take everything literally and cannot see behind the words. This is because you are a new-ager, a jack of all trades and master of none. You are all mouth and trousers.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I am STILL waiting for you to respond to the previous points:

You claimed the "five egotistical states of apparent love" are from the world of psychology, so let's see a referenced explanation FROM the world of psychology.

You introduced yet another bit of jargon which you haven't bothered to explain, ie "authentic self". What exactly does this mean?

And by the way, you STILL haven't provided succinct plain English definitions for "cosmic consciousness" and "universal consciousness", so let's be having those as well.

 

[YmirGF]

This is pure projection and hypocrisy on your part. All you do is quote-mine, you have no idea what the texts actually mean, you take everything literally and cannot see behind the words. This is because you are a new-ager, a jack of all trades and master of none. You are all mouth and trousers.

You know, Rick, I've often wondered why @godnotgod almost never posts in the Buddhism or Hinduism DIRs. You would think he would be a veritable fixture in the Zen Dir.

I've participated extensively in the first two DIRs and run into very little resistance, and have received many supportive comments therein, so I know my understanding is fairly good in both areas. Then, here I run into Godnotgod and Ben D and suddenly I know nothing and my experience is worth nothing. I'm a deluded lost little waif that can only tremble in excitation at their next monumental utterances.

Perhaps, I'm just not used to trying to work with such august personalities who have their finger on the living pulse of reality, though if that were in fact true, I would expect them to be much, much more understanding. I just don't see much evidence of that greater understanding, though both talk a good game.

 

[atanu]

No. If it were, it would not be Shunyata.

Exactly. But ....

When we call Shunyata an 'Absolute' and juxtapose the Absolute against the non-Absolute, the Absolute loses its absoluteness, since non Absolute becomes a second to it.

So, Sunyata is not the Absolute as long as Absolute and non Absolute are different. But surely, Shunyata is a phenomenological term experience of the Absolute reality.

This applies to Brahman too. You cannot compartmentalise Brahman as 'Absolute' as opposed to some other 'Not Absolute'. Yet, Brahman embraces all, includes all, and transcends all .. where the all is neither true nor untrue (mAyA=myth=mythya= neither true nor untrue).
...

Those who have mere theoretical notions, based on fragmentary reading of purports will not comprehend this point, leave aside the ability to explain the point to others. They can only vomit the vague things that they read.

...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So, Sunyata is not the Absolute as long as Absolute and non Absolute are different. But surely, Shunyata is a phenomenological term experience of the Absolute reality.

No, emptiness is also empty, there is no "Absolute reality" in the sense you mean. Clearly you still can't think outside your Atman/Brahman box, and clearly you cannot approach this with an open mind. And I think you have difficulty seeing the distinction between insight and belief.

Frankly I am getting a little tired of being lectured by a Hindu about a Buddhist teaching, it is rather rude of you. Clearly you have an axe to grind here. Buddhism teaches something different to Hinduism, get over it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You know, Rick, I've often wondered why @godnotgod almost never posts in the Buddhism or Hinduism DIRs. You would think he would be a veritable fixture in the Zen Dir.

Yes, strange, isn't it. I think we all know why.

 

[godnotgod]

When we call Shunyata an 'Absolute' and juxtapose the Absolute against the non-Absolute, the Absolute loses its absoluteness, since non Absolute becomes a second to it.

...

No. There is no such 'non-absolute'. There is only the Absolute, which is why it is called 'The Absolute'. What you are calling 'the non-absolute' is what is relative, but all that is relative makes up The Absolute.

When Nirvana is realized, that is to say, when (the illusions that are) lust, greed, and delusion are extinguished, there is only Nirvana. Nothing relative remains that can be compared to it. So there really is no 'non-absolute' as an opposite, just as maya is not an opposite to the Reality that is Brahman. There is only Brahman. There is no second.

 

[godnotgod]

When all the labels are stripped of their value,
when all categories are applied,
what then ?
~
'mud

The vast limitless formless and infinite Absolute that is also The Unconditioned.

 

[godnotgod]

Your first sentence above is correct, the rest is nonsense....

Use your head. If that which is conditioned, namely lust, greed, and delusion, are no more, (ie 'extinguished) then what remains can only be The Unconditioned, which is Nirvana. The opposite of absolute is relative, but now nothing that is relative remains. Therefore that which remains, The Unconditioned, can only be The Absolute.

Besides, dictionary.com defines 'unconditioned' as 'absolute'. Deny that if you can.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The vast limitless formless and infinite Absolute that is also The Unconditioned.

Nonsense. Meaningless word salad deepity.

 

[atanu]

... What you are calling 'the non-absolute' is what is relative, but all that is relative makes up The Absolute.....

If relative makes up the absolute then it is not absolute.
...

 

[godnotgod]

You know, Rick, I've often wondered why @godnotgod almost never posts in the Buddhism or Hinduism DIRs. You would think he would be a veritable fixture in the Zen Dir.

I've participated extensively in the first two DIRs and run into very little resistance, and have received many supportive comments therein, so I know my understanding is fairly good in both areas. Then, here I run into Godnotgod and Ben D and suddenly I know nothing and my experience is worth nothing. I'm a deluded lost little waif that can only tremble in excitation at their next monumental utterances.

Perhaps, I'm just not used to trying to work with such august personalities who have their finger on the living pulse of reality, though if that were in fact true, I would expect them to be much, much more understanding. I just don't see much evidence of that greater understanding, though both talk a good game.

You can solve your dilemma quite easily by paying attention to the moon, and stop attaching to the pointing finger.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If that which is conditioned, namely lust, greed, and delusion, are no more, (ie 'extinguished) then what remains can only be The Unconditioned, which is Nirvana. The opposite of absolute is relative, but now nothing that is relative remains. Therefore that which remains, The Unconditioned, can only be The Absolute.

We've been through all this before and you are STILL making stuff up. What is wrong with you? There is no "The Unconditioned", just an awakened mind unconditioned by lust, greed and delusion.
Nirvana is not a thing or a place, it's an EXPERIENCE. Stop surrounding it with a load of new-age woo.

Stop misrepresenting Buddhist teachings in an attempt to prop up your ****e DIY religion.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You can solve your dilemma quite easily by paying attention to the moon, and stop attaching to the pointing finger.

Bring me my sick bucket!!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If relative makes up the absolute then it is not absolute.
...

In Buddhism it's ALL relative. Emptiness all the way down. No "Absolute".

That's what sunyata IS, relativity and conditionality.

 

[godnotgod]

Nonsense.

When all labels are removed, there remains only the nameless. Don't just dismiss by calling it 'nonsense'. Demonstrate how the nameless is not now limitless. Now there is nothing to contain reality, nothing to encapsulate it via concept or definition. Now it is unconditioned, its original state; man's original state. The Absolute.