What's going to happen to YOU when you die?

[Shonin]

I love this guy.

phpBB .

[PeterB]

Brilliant.
And of course where he has ended up is the same position as Ajahn Buddhadasa or Lung Por Chah.
That questions of after death states or Rebirth or " eternal life" only come about when we lose sight of the fact that in reality there is only now. That questions about Rebirth or Non Rebirth are subsumed into the question what is time ?...And time arises dependently with all dhammas.

[dhamma_spoon]

Brilliant.
And of course where he has ended up is the same position as Ajahn Buddhadasa or Lung Por Chah.
That questions of after death states or Rebirth or " eternal life" only come about when we lose sight of the fact that in reality there is only now. That questions about Rebirth or Non Rebirth are subsumed into the question what is time ?...And time arises dependently with all dhammas.

How do you know and can you show that "time arises dependently with all dhammas"?

Dhamma_spoon

[PeterB]

Are you suggesting that time is unconditioned ?
One of the synonyms of the unconditioned is "akaliko" the timeless. That which is not subject to time.
Time is not the ground of experience. Time arises with all dhammas.
There is a parallel with Big Bang Theory...the question what happened before the Big Bang is redundant. There was no " before" .
Time arose according to Big Bang Theory with everything else.
In the same way causality includes the time in which it happens. There is no before. There is only now.
Dependant Origination is not actually sequential. We simply treat it as if it were to facilitate discussion.

[dhamma_spoon]

Are you suggesting that time is unconditioned ?

No, Peter, I did not.
But this question you asked is a separate issue from the one I had asked you earlier! [i.e. How do you know and can you show that "time arises dependently with all dhammas"?]
All I know about time is that it is a concept that is based on rotation of the Earth around the Sun.

Dhamma_spoon

[PeterB]

There is one possible answer to your question in my reply Dhamma Spoon.

[dhamma_spoon]

There is one possible answer to your question in my reply Dhamma Spoon.

So, please kindly advise ... what is that answer, Peter?

[PeterB]

If time is not unconditioned, it is conditioned. It therefore arises with all conditioned phenomena. Dependently.

[Shonin]

This is an experience - experiencing 'now' as liberation from linear time - an experience in the here and now, not something that is dependent on theory and conjecture. It's something that is often experienced in meditation. We can also experience the conditioned nature of time by taking LSD - the experiences do not occur within normal linear time, but in radically distorted time which may include dramatic glimpses of timelessness.Similarly our sense of time is slowed down in moments of emergency, and speeds up as we get older. The sense of time is mentally conditioned.

[5heaps]

I love this guy.

why?

[Sobeh]

Tīn'imāni bhikkhave sankhatassa sankhatalakkhanāni. Katamāni tīni. Uppādo paññāyati, vayo paññāyati, thitassa aññathattam paññāyati. Imāni kho bhikkhave tīni sankhatassa sankhatalakkhanānī ti.
-Sankhata Sutta (AN 3.47)

"There are, monks, these three determined-characteristics of what is determined. Which are the three? Arising (appearance) is manifest; disappearance is manifest; change while standing is manifest. These, monks, are the three determined-characteristics of what is determined."

Tayo'me bhikkhave addhā. Katame tayo. Atīto addhā, anāgato addhā, paccuppanno addhā. Ime kho bhikkhave tayo addhā ti.
-Itivuttaka, § 63

"There are, monks, these three periods. Which are the three? The past period, the future period, the present period. These, monks, are the three periods."


---
The Dhamma renders these statements on experiential, or epistemological, time; ontological statements of time are unnecessary speculation.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

If time is not unconditioned, it is conditioned. It therefore arises with all conditioned phenomena. Dependently.

Or.... "time" is just a concept, and it only arises (in its capacity as a concept) when somebody conceives of it.

Metta,
Retro.

[5heaps]

Or.... "time" is just a concept, and it only arises (in its capacity as a concept) when somebody conceives of it.

im interested to hear your position Retro.. do you accept changing and unchanging things [or just changing things]? is the concept of time changing or unchanging? if changing, are all concepts changing? if its unchanging, how can we have a constantly fluctuating sense of time?

[lojong1]

Another small reason to love this guy: http://www.gratefulness.org/qbox/item.cfm?qbox_id=170" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

J.P.-- "My present spiritual advisors perceive Christianity and Buddhism as basically incompatible, principally because of the Buddhist idea of the Void. As a Christian with Buddhist training, I’ve never considered this a problem. Could you elaborate briefly on the compatibility or incompatibility of Christian ideas of the Divine (personal God) and the Buddhist concept of the Void?"

David Steindl-Rast-- "Dear J.P., the God space is so vast that different space missions may bring back seemingly contradictory reports. When we speak of God, we should expect such paradoxes as fullness and emptiness. In fact, since all the opposites arise from God and are one in God, we should be suspicious of any God talk that is not paradoxical.
From early on, Christian theology has been aware that whatever we say about God, no matter how true, falls infinitely short of the full truth. (This strand of theology is called Negative or Apophatic Theology.) The emptiness of which Buddhists speak is, paradoxically, also the source of all fullness.
Don’t try to correct your spiritual advisors. Just add in your own mind what is missing. In controversies, as has been observed, most people are correct in what they affirm, but wrong in what they deny.
-- Your Brother David"

[Shonin]

He seems to be an interesting character. And has Zen training in his background.

His bio:
http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/bio.htm

I like him because he is insightful, because he speaks from experience over theory. His view of time is existential not ontological. And he is humble and good-humoured. There is a profound beauty to what he is talking about.