Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Searcher08 wrote:A_D, that made me laugh out loud, because in all my years on the net, that is actually the first time I have seen ever a visual map / flowchart for having a rational discussion.
Which when I think about it, given the importance of the subject (and the number of fruitless arguments I have taken part in), makes my jaw drop.
A diamond find - thank you.
Joe Hillshoist wrote:Searcher08 wrote:A_D, that made me laugh out loud, because in all my years on the net, that is actually the first time I have seen ever a visual map / flowchart for having a rational discussion.
Which when I think about it, given the importance of the subject (and the number of fruitless arguments I have taken part in), makes my jaw drop.
A diamond find - thank you.
Same, tho it is slightly biased toward rationality. I sometimes find that irritating and limiting.
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”
(Philip K Dick)
American Dream wrote:“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”
(Philip K Dick)
Canadian_watcher wrote:So is beauty a thing of reality or not?
American Dream wrote:C_w, I thought your question was problematic on multiple levels.
That said, I'm not interested in engaging with you further on this as I don't see very good odds of it being a fruitful exchange.
So, without intending personal offense, I'm going to stop participating in this with you now.
IanEye wrote:Canadian_watcher wrote:So is beauty a thing of reality or not?
"I just believe in me, Yoko & me. And that's reality."
John & Yoko are beautiful. John & Yoko are reality.
American Dream wrote:
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”
(Philip K Dick)
Vasubandhu resorts to an analogy. He says, let us consider a situation in which a magician, using certain spells (mantras) or tricks, was to cause, before a crowd of spectators, a log of wood to appear as an elephant. The fact that no elephant is there, but nevertheless is seen to be there by the audience, may be defined as the elephant's parikalpita-nature. In that sense the spectators imagine or project something that factually is not present.
The elephant is no more than a magician's illusion and yet the elephant is indeed seen. The hallucination (akrti), the illusion that is seen, of the elephant by the crowd may be defined as the situation's paratantra-nature. This means that the appearance of the illusion itself must be contingent on something else.
Finally, if we consider what the elephant really is in its self (i.e., a suggested image that isn't really there) then it's actual non-existence is its ultimately true or actual (parinishpanna) nature.
Vasubandhu then explains his analogy as follows: the All-ground Consciousness (alaya-vijnana) is the magic spell, with which cosmic ideation (visva-vikalpa), the Magician, magically produces the illusion of a Universe, and in which duality (dvaya) of subject and object becomes the result. The elephant is the Universe that appears to us as real. The original log of wood which has been misapprehended as the illusory elephant is the Tathata, the Absolute, that ever remains unchanged and pure from the beginning.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests