07-28-2010, 12:07 AM
Gonzo wrote:Tiff wrote:To prove you are individual essence. Or, if you prefer, then to prove you can have personal notions.
First it cannot happen. Not in your body...which was composed by family DNA, not in mind which was shaped by friends, family, teachers, co-workers, partners. Not in perception which knows only interaction in phenomena (all your memories up till today that gives a sense of identity)...at no point can you be in a void alone, just you, as a personal entity without ever having been connected with everything else. If it can't be done, then it can't be so. In other words, there is no personal you that stands alone. And the criteria of individual essence (personal notions) is it must stand alone. No-thing stands alone. You cannot show me anything that does this.I submit this is specious logic. That is, your conclusion that there is no personal you cannot follow merely from the standpoint that that personal being does not stand alone. Obviously, in order to have identity, there must be "other". In fact, quite the opposite conclusion is logical.There is no personal individuality and by definition individuality must stand apart and be self-aware and truth is our awareness is due to "others". Such as your notions of enlightenment as you say come from Gautama you say, and The Blue Cliff Records, etc. So those are interdependent reflections. Your sense of enlightenment therefore is not personal (came from elsewhere). And BTW is is more intricate than just the two mentioned. When I say elsewhere I am not suggesting separate from you, but elsewhere in that you are extended beyond the borders of "you" in appearance sense.
That which is believed to be personally alone cannot be extracted and remain what it thinks itself to be, so "it" is merely an appearance of. A reflection of all phenomena. An I, personal in the vaguest sense, that is mere I because it dependents on everything to appear what it appears to be.
The One Mind is that in which all phenomena and emptiness arises. Not a person's mind verses the rest of the world. The problem is its not perceived the former way, and is most often seen as the latter way. The "out there" and "in here" appear to be separate domains. Which is why I said imagine a void and this void was to prove or disprove if individual "anything" can stand apart and then we could say, "yes it is individual". But we see it can't be done. The fact that you are reliant on other phenomena shows you are truly not an individual as you perceive "yourself " to be. And our reliance is vast and interconnected...
Such as in modern life we are globally reliant. Imagine if we lost electricity and fuel. We would all, well most people would, starve or die from other reasons such as cold or heat or illness that would otherwise be prevented with technologies.
Its easy to forget how interdependent we are. There was a movie, Castaway, with Tom Hanks. He has to journey into this realization. In a way he comes out stronger and more self-reliant, but no one can become completely isolated, and even on that island he is never completely cut-off from exisitence, not even close, what happens is his perceived exisitence undergoes a shift because he looses access to it, and that perceived exisitence was that he was isolated and didn't need anyone. He sees this is not so, ironically, by becoming isolated, but again its never going to be a complete isolation, it can't be.
First it cannot happen. Not in your body...which was composed by family DNA, not in mind which was shaped by friends, family, teachers, co-workers, partners. Not in perception which knows only interaction in phenomena (all your memories up till today that gives a sense of identity)...at no point can you be in a void alone, just you, as a personal entity without ever having been connected with everything else. If it can't be done, then it can't be so. In other words, there is no personal you that stands alone. And the criteria of individual essence (personal notions) is it must stand alone. No-thing stands alone. You cannot show me anything that does this.I submit this is specious logic. That is, your conclusion that there is no personal you cannot follow merely from the standpoint that that personal being does not stand alone. Obviously, in order to have identity, there must be "other". In fact, quite the opposite conclusion is logical.There is no personal individuality and by definition individuality must stand apart and be self-aware and truth is our awareness is due to "others". Such as your notions of enlightenment as you say come from Gautama you say, and The Blue Cliff Records, etc. So those are interdependent reflections. Your sense of enlightenment therefore is not personal (came from elsewhere). And BTW is is more intricate than just the two mentioned. When I say elsewhere I am not suggesting separate from you, but elsewhere in that you are extended beyond the borders of "you" in appearance sense.
That which is believed to be personally alone cannot be extracted and remain what it thinks itself to be, so "it" is merely an appearance of. A reflection of all phenomena. An I, personal in the vaguest sense, that is mere I because it dependents on everything to appear what it appears to be.
The One Mind is that in which all phenomena and emptiness arises. Not a person's mind verses the rest of the world. The problem is its not perceived the former way, and is most often seen as the latter way. The "out there" and "in here" appear to be separate domains. Which is why I said imagine a void and this void was to prove or disprove if individual "anything" can stand apart and then we could say, "yes it is individual". But we see it can't be done. The fact that you are reliant on other phenomena shows you are truly not an individual as you perceive "yourself " to be. And our reliance is vast and interconnected...
Such as in modern life we are globally reliant. Imagine if we lost electricity and fuel. We would all, well most people would, starve or die from other reasons such as cold or heat or illness that would otherwise be prevented with technologies.
Its easy to forget how interdependent we are. There was a movie, Castaway, with Tom Hanks. He has to journey into this realization. In a way he comes out stronger and more self-reliant, but no one can become completely isolated, and even on that island he is never completely cut-off from exisitence, not even close, what happens is his perceived exisitence undergoes a shift because he looses access to it, and that perceived exisitence was that he was isolated and didn't need anyone. He sees this is not so, ironically, by becoming isolated, but again its never going to be a complete isolation, it can't be.