XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: niunian@ymail.com   
      
   On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 00:06:58 -0500, Keynes    
   wrote:   
      
   >On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:16:01 -0700 (PDT), zenworm  wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Aug 16, 9:23?pm, Jigme Dorje  wrote:   
   >>> On Aug 16, 9:20?pm, Keynes  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> > >On Aug 16, 8:39?pm, niunian  wrote:   
   >>> > >> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:08:16 -0500, Keynes    
   >>> > >> wrote:   
   >>> > >> >On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:53:55 +0000 (UTC), oxtail  wrote:   
   >>> > >> >> Is awakening subjective?   
   >>>   
   >>> > >> >Is samsara subjective?   
   >>>   
   >>> > >> Stupid people always ask stupid questions. Samsara is empty. Awakening   
   >>> > >> is perfect, and perfection is never empty. Subjectivity is only about   
   >>> > >> mind vs. matter which is dualistic thinking that has nothing to do   
   >>> > >> with awakening or samsara.   
   >>>   
   >>> > Do you realize you are completely contradictory and incoherent?   
   >>>   
   >>> You're only just applauding him for it now?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>Actually this seems coherent.   
   >>Paraphrasing -   
   >>Awakening = Awareness/Non-dual/Totality.   
   >>Samsara = the emptiness (illusionary nature)   
   >>of the appearances of form.   
   >>Dualistic thinking, the subjectivity about   
   >>mind vs matter = the delusional layer of   
   >>labels and assumption/prejudice/conceptualization   
   >>that holding to views or beliefs adds on top of the   
   >>appearances of form. (mental fermentation)   
   >>   
   >>it is great to see Niunian fielding some content   
   >>that shows some depth   
   >>there seems to be a language issue.   
   >>and a peculiar approach that seems Tao flavored.   
   >>(understandable since he claims to be Chinese)   
   >>he also has a "big tree" 'i wanna be the biggest tree   
   >>in the valley' kind of thing going, which predictably   
   >>will have him saying:  "stupid worm has it all wrong."   
   >>"blah, blah, blah, blah",   
   >>but this still seems to be insight showing.   
   >>with some belief and dogmatism mixed in.   
   >>   
   >>^~   
   >   
   >"Stupid people always ask stupid questions."   
   >   
   >(And stupid people give stupid answers.)   
      
   We will see about that.   
      
   >   
   >"Samsara is empty."   
   >   
   >(Those in samsara will dispute that.   
   >If this comes from the point of view of awakening,   
   >then this next assertion would not follow.)   
      
   I'm sure you are disputing that, but I can also see not even zenworm   
   dares to disagree. It shows you are still blinded by the appearances   
   of samsara.   
      
   >   
   >"Awakening is perfect,"   
   >   
   >(Neither perfect nor imperfect.)   
      
   False. Buddha himself is the symbol of perfection.   
      
   >   
   >"and perfection is never empty."   
   >   
   >(Empty and full do not apply. Full is empty   
   >and empty is full, so what can be said about it?   
   >So the previous, 'samsara is empty' comes not   
   >from awakened speech but clipped out of context   
   >by mistake in order to simulate some sort of   
   >stolen knowledge.)   
      
   In the context of Buddhism, empty is not the opposite of full, empty   
   means void and false. Perfection is never empty, simply means   
   perfection is never void or false.   
      
   >   
   >"Subjectivity is only about mind vs. matter which is dualistic thinking"   
   >   
   >(true. But all the previous statements are completely dualistic.   
   >A lucky shot in the dark? And if we deny mind and matter,   
   >what is it that we are speaking about?  Some unseen ultimate   
   >beyond view or even imagination? If so, speak on.  Without   
   >self-righteous insults, unless that is the sagely way of   
   >the self-proclaimed pretentious 'awakened'.)   
      
   No one is asking you to deny mind and matter. Mind and matter are one   
   and the same. In Buddhist view, there is no such thing as subjective   
   vs. objective. There is only the difference between Buddha wisdom and   
   human illusion. What the western philosophers call the objective world   
   is what the Buddhists call the illusional world. What the western   
   philosophers call the subjective mind is what the Buddhists call the   
   illusional mind.   
      
   In fact, the illusional world is the illusional mind.   
      
   >   
   >"that has nothing to do with awakening or samsara."   
   >   
   >(Awakening is reported to be beyond dualism,   
   >while samsara IS dualism, and has everything   
   >to do with dualism.  Yet from the point of view   
   >of non-duality (a dualistic term BTW) neither   
   >dualism, samsara, nor nirvana are true.)   
      
   Dualism is true only when we are blinded by samsara. Samsara does not   
   impose dualism as its binding truth. It only appears that way. That is   
   why it is called an illusion which we must overcome.   
      
   Yes, even in samsara, dualism is false.   
      
   >   
   >It's easy to pepper ones talk with jargon and pious   
   >words and phrases.  It's the stock in trade of all   
   >professional religious frauds.   The magic of   
   >'enchantment' is real. Words and explanations   
   >are all lies to clothe our ignorance. Don't believe   
   >what you hear.  Don't even believe what you think.   
   >   
      
   Simple concepts can show deep understandings. It all depends on how   
   you use them.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)