Emptiness

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Emptiness

Postby PeterB » Thu May 13, 2010 8:51 am

tut tut :lol:

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Emptiness

Postby PeterB » Thu May 13, 2010 9:53 am

tiltbillings wrote:
PeterB wrote:Its probably just me Tilt. The years spent on cushions listening to discourses on the" Seventeen Kinds of Emptiness " during my time in the Vajrayana have no doubt left their scars..

Well, the nice things about the 17 kinds of Emptiness is that they are all empty.


I have grown to dwell in aversion to that capital " E "...it has a whiff of papanca about it.. ;)
No doubt this indicates an area I need to work on. The Emptiness of the "e".
Sorry, I meant the emptiness of the "E"..

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Emptiness

Postby m0rl0ck » Thu May 13, 2010 3:11 pm

TMingyur wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote:
TMingyur wrote:"Empty of whatever is not there" does this entail "impermanence" still being there?

To what would one ascribe the quality of impermanence?

To "something" which is identifiable and that which is "identifiable" as "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") may appear so based on the construction of "own being" of "this". Otherwise if there is no "own being" to what does "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") refer to?



Wow. Thats a heck of a question and neatly phrased too. What it brings me up against is that the ground or point from which one is looking is empty as well.
A monk asked Unmon,
"Not a single thought arises: is there any fault or not?"
Unmon said,
"Mt. Sumeru."
~Case 19, The Book of Equanimity

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 21276
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Emptiness

Postby tiltbillings » Thu May 13, 2010 4:23 pm

m0rl0ck wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
To "something" which is identifiable and that which is "identifiable" as "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") may appear so based on the construction of "own being" of "this". Otherwise if there is no "own being" to what does "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") refer to?



Wow. Thats a heck of a question and neatly phrased too. What it brings me up against is that the ground or point from which one is looking is empty as well.
But is the question actually meaningful, or might there be an unstated assumption or three lurking there?
.


++++++++++++++++
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Emptiness

Postby m0rl0ck » Thu May 13, 2010 8:06 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
To "something" which is identifiable and that which is "identifiable" as "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") may appear so based on the construction of "own being" of "this". Otherwise if there is no "own being" to what does "this" (which is said to be "impermanent") refer to?



Wow. Thats a heck of a question and neatly phrased too. What it brings me up against is that the ground or point from which one is looking is empty as well.
But is the question actually meaningful, or might there be an unstated assumption or three lurking there?


Its meaningful to me and has arisen i think partly because of my practice. In fact for a while it had me feeling a little pinned to the wall. Im also sure that assumptions unstated and maybe even unknown figure in. :)
A monk asked Unmon,
"Not a single thought arises: is there any fault or not?"
Unmon said,
"Mt. Sumeru."
~Case 19, The Book of Equanimity


Return to “General Theravāda discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine