I agree there might be a relationship between the physical state and the actual experience of it, but ultimately they cannot be bridged. There's only one way to bridge that gap and it's to "be" the physical state, and that's a concept that has absolutely no analogy in physical phenomena.
But it's even worse than you say, because those relationships are generated purely within the mind, we don't find them outside the mind, so really all physicality is an illusion, it's all ultimately internal.
Or even worse, the phenomena doesn't exist internally or externally. They are a combination of the processing of the sensory inputs and the internal model. So the 'phenomena' is really the processing of the inputs, no substance at all because it is the processing itself.
Kind of what was described in 'Being You', by Anil Seth. Our reality is a 'controlled hallucination'. Though I don't like the terminology because it is to easily misunderstood.
But. Guess, I fall on side that we can still study how Phenomena is generated internally. And still be able to understand it. Just because we can't experience the exact same phenomena as someone else, shouldn't mean we can't figure out how it is generated.
> so really all physicality is an illusion, it's all ultimately internal.
You don't really believe that. If you did, you would be fine jumping out of an airplane without a parachute, or something even more fatal.. because the physical "doesn't matter", only the internal.
If I do that I think I will have a negative mental experience, therefore it matters. The internal world will become undesirable if I jump out of an airplane. There is no external reason why I don't want to do that. If I could jump out of an airplane without a parachute and not expect it will have a negative impact on my internal world I would be fine with doing it.
Why on earth would doing ANYTHNG in an imaginary, unimportant, realm affect your mental internal world?
You don't want to admit it, but you're basically confirming that you do understand that you can not stand apart from the physical realm. You are playing mental gymnastics to pretend you're in touch with some higher knowledge and understanding... but you're still constrained to the physical world, just like the rest of us.
Well, a story can also affect my internal world, if that’s your criteria of reality, yet I doubt you consider that as real as the physical world. Basically, according to your argument, there is already no distinction between physical and mental, which is the very reason I simply say it’s all mental. The reason I don’t call it all physical is because physical usually means “out there” and not “in here”. No, everything, absolutely everything, is “in here”. There is no “out there”. I perceive reality in this way. If you touch some outside directly that is amazing magic and a contradiction to any Logic I know.
It seems kind of like you can’t really accept that this is how I understand reality. I have a tip for you: others’ views will be much clearer to you if you don’t assume they’re lying about believing them. Maybe they really do see differently to you
There's a recent video you can search, a woman walking out the door of her apartment building. A young man sneaks up behind her and puts a bullet in her head. She died.
She didn't have to have any thought about the bullet. She didn't have to think ANYTHING about the physical world. Nothing about her state of mind affected the outcome.
Physical reality is independent of what we think of it.
> Maybe they really do see differently to you
I appreciate you think you see it differently. But your actions show you don't believe it as deeply as you think you do. You are a prisoner of the physical realm, not an inhabitant of a higher, more spiritual, plane. What good is it saying something is imaginary, if it affects everything you do, and you can't escape it. That sounds like something very real indeed.
I can’t really infer anything about the internal world of the woman. Also according to Buddhism the state of her mind would affect into which realm she was reborn after death, and arguably getting shot itself was a manifestation of her mental state. Yogachara philosophy of Buddhism says that all appearances of external reality is created by our internal world
The point of the video, is that she had zero awareness of the bullet. It all happened in 2 seconds without attracting her attention. I'm sure if you're honest, you can think of 1000 other examples as well.
Physical reality proceeds without your thoughts, it will continue after you and I die, it doesn't need our feelings or thoughts to exists and persist.
> Physical reality proceeds without your thoughts, it will continue after you and I die, it doesn't need our feelings or thoughts to exists and persist.
My belief is it is unfounded and ultimately based in narcissism.
"I am so important that I create the external reality, I really am
the center of the universe, it wouldn't exist without my mind"
It's an appeal to self-importance.
It can't account for something like the fossil record, that existed
before any human was on the planet; other than to say, "I dreamed
that up in my own special imaginary fiction!!"
Perhaps the primal nature of the world isn't physical matter, but
to pretend that we create reality with our mind, is not only silly,
it's dangerous and flies in the face of how everyone, even those
who claim to believe otherwise, actually act in the world.
Well, only deluded beings (including myself) act that way. Buddhas and bodhisattvas don’t. Indeed they can bend so called “physical reality” to their will, manifesting physical bodies and appearances in the minds of others. It’s just simply the following: form is emptiness, emptiness is form
That is NOT what the Buddha taught. It is expressly the opposite.
Promoting these types of wrong understandings really distract people from further learning.
This turns people away from further investigations that might help them.
People that might be aided in their suffering by learning more about buddhism, read some weirdness posted about "buddha can earth bend, whoooo, I learned about buddhism from watching Avatar, I'm a bender", and are completely turned away.
Read and meditate further before promoting something that is incorrect.
Yes he did, it’s in the Lotus sutra and Lankavatara sutras, to name two. Perhaps you’re a Pali canon fundamentalist or something but thats not my problem, what I’m saying is orthodox Mahayana: Buddhas can create bodies and are basically omnipotent in the Mahayana. The lotus sutra even says that the Buddha faked his appearance on this Earth so that the sravakas would have a nice narrative to believe in
Also the fact you said meditate makes me think you are quite ignorant about Buddhism. Most Buddhists don’t meditate, the idea that most do is a western misconception. I’m a pure land Buddhist, which is the most popular in the world, and we mainly engage in recitation and offerings and bowing
EDIT and I understand it may just be ignorance but it’s highly offensive to characterise traditional Mahayana Buddhist beliefs as some kind of children’s show. This is effectively slandering the Dharma
To tell people that buddhas have supernatural powers, and take that literally, is turning people away from the teaching.
'Faking' his appearance? Being omnipotent in this physical world? Able to manipulate this world?
You are supposed to understand that those are metaphors. Stories, not truth.
Language is imperfect and only points the way, not to be taken literally. A core teaching is how imperfect language is, and that even the sutras should be only taken as a rough guide and eventually abandoned when they no longer serve a purpose.
You can cite sutras, that doesn't mean you understand them. I fear that publishing these concepts as if an authority is damaging to people.
Meditate, prayer, recitation/mantras. Call it what you want.
Concentration/Samadhi is part of the 8-fold path.
That you would say that is not part of Buddhism is frankly making me think this whole thing is a Troll. Maybe you can make some argument that concentration in every moment is meditation, so you don't need to sit. But to say most Buddhist don't? Come on.
You know enough Buddhist terms to Troll someone on the internet. But this is damaging. Someone could read what you say and think that is Buddhism and be turned away or mislead.
Also, there is no such thing as slander to Buddhist, like there is some god in a Church that is taking offense. I guess we all get offended by things, and what I said was offensive, wrong speech. Just not technically 'slander'.
> To tell people that buddhas have supernatural powers, and take that literally, is turning people away from the teaching.
No it isn't, it's literally the sutras say and what a vast majority of Buddhists actually believe.
> You are supposed to understand that those are metaphors. Stories, not truth.
Then why don't we see this reflected in traditional teachings? This is a modern western reinterpretation, so called "secular Buddhism". Supernatural powers are well documented in Buddhism and even today in Tibetan Buddhism.
> Concentration/Samadhi is part of the 8-fold path.
A vast majority of Buddhists are relying on Amida's path for salvation through the Pure Land and/or producing merit for a better rebirth though, they don't practise such things in this lifetime.
> You know enough Buddhist terms to Troll someone on the internet. But this is damaging. Someone could read what you say and think that is Buddhism and be turned away or mislead.
Well, I'm right, and it sounds like I've actually researched, studied, and practised Buddhism more than you.
> Also, there is no such thing as slander to Buddhist
Yes there is, it's even included in Amida's 18th vow:
> Excluded, however, are those who commit the Five Gravest Transgressions and slander the right Dharma.
and is mentioned throughout the Lotus sutra. For example the whole basis of Nichiren's theology is that those who slander the Buddhadharma will be reborn in avicci hell.
What you are presenting is a very inaccurate view of the Buddhadharma. Let me set some facts in order:
* The sutras do teach extensively of supernatural powers
* The sutras do teach extensively of both mind-only philosophy and anti-physicalism (in both the sravakayana and the Mahayana!)
* There is no evidence that those aspects of the sutras should not be taken literally
* Those aspects of the sutras are indeed taken literally by most Buddhists historically
* Most Buddhists in the world follow paths that don't involve meditation/samadhi/concentration
* Buddhism ultimately even has no concept of metaphor vs. literal, since everything is emptiness anyway, so already it denies the fundamental reality of anything
If you are actually willing to learn about Buddhism, not just some western misconception of it, I am willing to point you to resources...
however from what you say I have a feeling you will just abuse the teaching, and likely be reborn in Hell, due to your fundamentalist religious belief, therefore I will not pass on any resources to you beyond what I did unless you can somehow prove to me that you won't abuse it
It's okay if YOU don't want to believe those things, but going around and telling others that they are wrong for accurately portraying the Dharma is unwise. Please do more research, ideally with an actual teacher
Well. I certainly agree that arguing on the internet about who is a Buddhist, and who is not, is hurtful and not helping anyone. I just happen to think you are the one leading people down the wrong path. But so do you, of me.
Seems like we understand words differently. Have different definitions of same words.
You say I'm 'fundamentalist' even to point of going to Hell, then in return say the most scary extreme 'fundamentalist' things. Maybe we just mean different things by that word 'fundamentalist'.
You say you are Mahayana, then say things that are not very Mahayana.
Then you say for me to get a teacher. And I'm thinking, man your teacher isn't doing you any favors, you should find another.
Who is right? No way to know?
So. Guess there is nothing else. I think you are wrong, you think I am wrong.
We can quote the same sutras endlessly and both have opposite interpretations. Can quote demographics, and 'who meditates', 'who doesn't', what is it, what is it not, as some kind of proof. Using sutras to disprove sutras, then cling to them, is kind of blowing me away. I haven't encountered something like this.
I guess I just have to say, to try and help. Try to understand the sutras a bit more and less.
You are very wound up in conceptual thought. And it seems to be blinding you. Sutras are to be abandoned when their purpose is done, not clung to.
""Though others may talk of the Way of the Buddhas as
something to be reached by various pious practices and
by sutra-study, you must have nothing to do with such
ideas.
"" - Huang Po
Ultimately, I am actually saying things that are in line with the traditional teachings and is what Buddhism actually is among most people in the world today. You said I was perpetuating falsehoods, and all I care about right now is stating that actually I am not. All this stuff about "conceptualisation is a barrier on the path" is not really relevant. We don't even believe it is in my tradition, in fact.
Next time just think a little before you accuse someone of what you did. You are the one that insisted I was wrong about the concepts of Buddhism, that's why I called you a fundamentalist. The previous comments are still there, you know? We can actually just go back and check this.
Now, what do we plan to achieve in this discussion? You accused me of perpetuating falsehoods, I showed that I'm not, now you are upset. Why? I guess it's just human to not be able to accept when you are wrong. Quite sad but that's just how it is I guess. I won't reply again, for your sake. I don't want you to hurt yourself even more. I hope you have taken some education from my information at least, and have dispelled some ignorance for you.
""All this stuff about "conceptualization is a barrier on the path" is not really relevant. We don't even believe it is in my tradition, in fact.""
You just re-iterated a falsehood.
That is a fundamental Teaching. That is part of Mahayana. Your claimed tradition. One of you're arguments was just "man everything is emptiness", but I mention 'concepts', and suddenly it isn't part of the tradition. You are going in circles.
You haven't proven a single thing. You simply listed sutras and gave your own opinion.
I can't believe I'm falling for a Troll.
Please, if you are for real, continue studying. Maybe some clarity will arrive. But stop posting misleading statements. It can turn people away from a path that can help them.
But it's even worse than you say, because those relationships are generated purely within the mind, we don't find them outside the mind, so really all physicality is an illusion, it's all ultimately internal.