DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Nesskissabe** · 05-08-2011, 09:52 AM

Everything in the world is independent of our ideas concerning it. Except, of course, for our ideas. The Buddha wasn't advocating looking for "the truth and what is really real". The Buddha did not advocate chasing "hidden truths". The Buddha advocated seeing "this is not me, this is not mine, this is not my self.".

Whether The Buddha can be said to have sent people looking for 'hidden truths' depends on what you mean by hidden. The real state of things exists in plain view, but we do not see it because of our attachment to "me" and "mine", therefore, the ultimate reality of things is hidden -- hidden in plain view! So people mediatate and so forth in order to clear away those things that block the experience of 'ultimate reality'.

My understanding is that the term 'ultimate reality' refers to the ever changing nature of phenomena, which is different from the sort of solidified notion of things that people cling to, such as "me" and "mine" and also with regard to external phenomena which appear to be solid and unchanging but are in fact constantly in some state of decay. This also includes seeing the transitory nature of thoughts and emotions which arise in the mind.

The realization of 'ultimate reality' refers to the direct experience, not just an academic understanding, of the ever-changing nature of conditioned things. Buddha may not have used the term 'ultimate reality' specifically, but his teachings point directly to that which has been given this label. It is not a reference to some other reality, such as another dimension.

In the link provided in the beginning of this thread, there is this: "...It's rather the letting go of our selves to realize the nondual nature of reality."
So, I think conclusions are being drawn. If, as Buddha proposes, there is no "me" and "mine" , then what naturally follows here is that in the 'ultimate reality' of things, there is no separation between self and other, because by definition, "me" and "mine" is a conditional view that can only arise in the context of another object, as in "I see my chair". The entire sensation, or experience of a "me" that we cling to is wholly dependent on some exterior reference point. "me" is experienced becuse there is an object that "me" experiences, and "me" is experienced as the experiencer of that thing. "I heard a loud noise and it startled me".

In actual application, the experience of 'ultimate reality' is referred to in contrast with this ordinary dual experience of self and other. So, for example, you can say "I see the chair" if in fact, you are looking at a chair. This is an ordinary approach. But of couse, if there is no "me" or "mine", meaning that ultimately no (unconditioned arising) self can be said to exist, then there is no ultimate "me' to see the chair. And, ultimtely there is no chair. It is only the temporary coming together of the events of conditions (things) which, until they rot away, appear as what we would call a chair.

05-08-2011, 09:52 AM	#7
Nesskissabe Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 446 Senior Member	Everything in the world is independent of our ideas concerning it. Except, of course, for our ideas. The Buddha wasn't advocating looking for "the truth and what is really real". The Buddha did not advocate chasing "hidden truths". The Buddha advocated seeing "this is not me, this is not mine, this is not my self.". Whether The Buddha can be said to have sent people looking for 'hidden truths' depends on what you mean by hidden. The real state of things exists in plain view, but we do not see it because of our attachment to "me" and "mine", therefore, the ultimate reality of things is hidden -- hidden in plain view! So people mediatate and so forth in order to clear away those things that block the experience of 'ultimate reality'. My understanding is that the term 'ultimate reality' refers to the ever changing nature of phenomena, which is different from the sort of solidified notion of things that people cling to, such as "me" and "mine" and also with regard to external phenomena which appear to be solid and unchanging but are in fact constantly in some state of decay. This also includes seeing the transitory nature of thoughts and emotions which arise in the mind. The realization of 'ultimate reality' refers to the direct experience, not just an academic understanding, of the ever-changing nature of conditioned things. Buddha may not have used the term 'ultimate reality' specifically, but his teachings point directly to that which has been given this label. It is not a reference to some other reality, such as another dimension. In the link provided in the beginning of this thread, there is this: "...It's rather the letting go of our selves to realize the nondual nature of reality." So, I think conclusions are being drawn. If, as Buddha proposes, there is no "me" and "mine" , then what naturally follows here is that in the 'ultimate reality' of things, there is no separation between self and other, because by definition, "me" and "mine" is a conditional view that can only arise in the context of another object, as in "I see my chair". The entire sensation, or experience of a "me" that we cling to is wholly dependent on some exterior reference point. "me" is experienced becuse there is an object that "me" experiences, and "me" is experienced as the experiencer of that thing. "I heard a loud noise and it startled me". In actual application, the experience of 'ultimate reality' is referred to in contrast with this ordinary dual experience of self and other. So, for example, you can say "I see the chair" if in fact, you are looking at a chair. This is an ordinary approach. But of couse, if there is no "me" or "mine", meaning that ultimately no (unconditioned arising) self can be said to exist, then there is no ultimate "me' to see the chair. And, ultimtely there is no chair. It is only the temporary coming together of the events of conditions (things) which, until they rot away, appear as what we would call a chair.
	Quote