I think "reality" would be quite sufficient here. Or "things as they really are". I'm not a fan of the word "reality" though, I think it's a can of worms. Before we go any further, it would be useful for you to define what you meant with these terms "ultimate reality", "ground of being" and "things...

Greetings Dinsdale, Could you explain the practical difference between "extant realities" and fabrications, particularly in relation to form? As said earlier, the four great elements are the only "extant realities" taught in the Dhamma. Note, the Buddha does not teaching their arising and cessation...

As I see it sunyata is basically a Mahayana development of themes in the suttas. Anatta and sunna are relevant, but I also see a strong connection with iddapaccayatta (conditionality), which is re-expressed as phenomena lacking independent existence, or not existing "from their own side". There has...

As I see it sunyata is basically a Mahayana development of themes in the suttas. Anatta and sunna are relevant, but I also see a strong connection with iddapaccayatta (conditionality), which is re-expressed as phenomena lacking independent existence, or not existing "from their own side". There has...

What is the orthodox position, the suttas' position or your position about the knowledge of reality itself, beyond any intervention of subjective factors? My position: There is a reality beyond any intervention of subjective factors. This is the reality that is beyond subject-object reality. It is ...

Hello Empty of what? Air? Hindrances? Self? Regards Empty of independent existence. If all dhammas are empty of independent existence, it would mean that when a dhamma has all its links to other dhammas severed, that dhamma is annihilated. This in turn would mean that regarding the twelve links of ...

Greetings, Can we say that : - element of solidity (earth) = Strong interaction - element of cohesion (water) = Electromagnetic force - element of heat (fire) = Weak interaction - element of movement (air) = Gravity What do you think ? :anjali: Definitely not. Their definitions are not even remotel...

The knowledge of the world that we now know through science is much more advanced than the knowledge present during the time of the Buddha. I would expect the Buddha to use the knowledge of the time even if they are later proven wrong as tools to explain his Dhamma. As long as we seek the meaning o...

How do we approach Suttas which go against current scientific knowledge? For example, modern science tells us that a Big Crunch and a cyclic universe is impossible due to the increasing rate of expansion of the universe. The only two options are the Big Rip or the Big Freeze. This contradicts the s...

When you watch everything arising, arising, arising, all the time, the idea of non-existence doesn't occur to the mind. When you see these things passing away, passing away, passing away, the idea of existence doesn't occur to the mind. 'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't ...

In point of fact, whether or not Germann's hypothesis is correct is irrelevant , despite what he or anyone else might say, for the simple reason that correctness on convoluted expositions and scholastic evolutions of doctrine is not the point . We are (supposed to be) here to practice for the end o...

null wrote: ↑Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:24 am Germann's argument is more of an argument against beginningless time than anything else.

This is incorrect.

He has laid out his argument very clearly here viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33879&start=630#p509911.

The infinite monkey theorem is the conditional probability that one of them will write Shakespeare--given that they exist and are writing. This is where the analogy breaks down because monkeys who achieved nibbana wouldn't be here to attempt to do so. No, he already covered the case of the infinite...

Is uncompounded a synonym for unconditioned?
Is something that is uncompounded necessarily be something that is unconditioned?

cappuccino wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:18 am

Sherab wrote:

cappuccino wrote:

yes and no

Why yes?
Why no?
Why yes AND no?

consciousness depends on eyes, ears, it also doesn't

which consciousness?