Timeline for Why is nirvana not mara?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2016 at 9:04 | comment | added | Tenzin Dorje | When the short stick is destroyed, the long stick might not be apprehended as a long stick anymore. However, the basis of designation of the long stick does not cease to exist with the short stick being destroyed. One has to think in terms of (1) basis of designation and (2) object of observation. When a table cases, its emptiness also ceases. It's not about whether it is apprehended as being this or that but whether it is an object of observation at all. | |
| Jul 6, 2016 at 1:38 | comment | added | user2341 | If you had a short object and a long one, and you destroyed the short object, on what basis would the long object still be "long"? Comparison is rather like the whole-part oneness, isn't it? | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 14:01 | comment | added | Tenzin Dorje | They depend upon each other, not by way of cause and effect, not by way of being one entity, but in a more subtle way. | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 14:01 | comment | added | Tenzin Dorje | The "standard" position is that good and evil depend on one another, but they are (1) different isolates and (2) different entities. While a whole and its parts, or emptiness and its basis are one entity - although they are two isolates - because they can not be found apart and abide together, it is not the case of good and evil. When a table turns into ashes, its emptiness ceases to exist as well. Such is not the case of good and evil, long and short, etc. Destroying a short object will not destroy long ones. | |
| Jun 29, 2016 at 13:35 | comment | added | user2512 | are you sure that non duality never means that in any mahayana tradition mean, that the terms good and evil are not separate? i still believe you are wrong on that count, and am doing some research into it | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 22:12 | comment | added | Dhamma Dhatu | @Tenzin Dorje Excellent very clear answer.that distinguishes Mahayana 'non-duality' from other doctrines of 'non-duality'. It was an excellent guided meditation. | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 20:25 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | moved from User.Id=2512 by developer User.Id=4937 | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 18:45 | comment | added | user2512 | i wager that i could find a primary source that claims that it does mean they "depend on each other". v good answer, thanks | |
| Jun 28, 2016 at 17:56 | history | answered | Tenzin Dorje | CC BY-SA 3.0 |