That'll do nicely!tiltbillings wrote:Dhammas are "ultimate things" only as a way of talking aspects of the relational flow of experience, not in terms of describing static realities. In other words, dhammas are empty of self
Thanks...
All empty apart from the Dhammas?
Re: All empty apart from the Dhammas?
Thanks...
-
tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: All empty apart from the Dhammas?
If it is "behind our experience," it looks like you are adovacting some sort of neo-platonism. If it is "beyond our experience," it cannot be experienced, then what is the point of it?mal4mac wrote:Isn't Nibbana "beyond or behind what is our experience"?tiltbillings wrote: The Buddha's notion of "ultimate reality" is that there isn't one beyond or
behind what is our experience. There is no need to appeal to something
supposedly more real behind or beyond what we experience...
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
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
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
Re: All empty apart from the Dhammas?
"Behind" is ambiguous. A chair can be 'behind' a table, but the table have no casual connection to the chair. Some malign organisation might be 'behind' J.F. Kennedy's assassination, and 'behind' implies a causal connection.tiltbillings wrote:If it is "behind our experience, it looks like you are adovacting some sort of neo-platonism. If it is beyond our experience, it cannot be experienced, then what is the point of it?mal4mac wrote:Isn't Nibbana "beyond or behind what is our experience"?tiltbillings wrote: The Buddha's notion of "ultimate reality" is that there isn't one beyond or
behind what is our experience. There is no need to appeal to something
supposedly more real behind or beyond what we experience...
From what I've read, I would certainly consider Nibbana to be outside the chain of causality, so if it is 'behind' experience is it 'behind' in the sense of the chair being behind the table.
Nibbana is (obviously) not part of our everyday experience, so it might (if it exists) be beyond our *everyday* experience. Indeed it may only be revealed in a total lack of experience (as we might only see the chair if the table is removed).
- Mal
Re: All empty apart from the Dhammas?
M said:
"Nibbana is (obviously) not part of our everyday experience, so it might (if it exists) be beyond our *everyday* experience. Indeed it may only be revealed in a total lack of experience (as we might only see the chair if the table is removed"
================
The way I understand Nibbana is part of our every day experience.
It is not beyond our everyday experience.
It is not total lack of experience.
You experience Nibbana here and now.
"Nibbana is (obviously) not part of our everyday experience, so it might (if it exists) be beyond our *everyday* experience. Indeed it may only be revealed in a total lack of experience (as we might only see the chair if the table is removed"
================
The way I understand Nibbana is part of our every day experience.
It is not beyond our everyday experience.
It is not total lack of experience.
You experience Nibbana here and now.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: All empty apart from the Dhammas?
Agreed.tiltbillings wrote:If it is "beyond our experience," it cannot be experienced, then what is the point of it?
That would be conjecture.