Science and Buddhism - a presentation.

Originally posted by Taoman
Good.
You also may find this quote from "Quantum Buddhism" by Graham Smetham of interest. It's on the issue of the existential necessity of quantum "hovering" between existence and non-existence.

"Here Chown ( Marcus Chown -'Never ending Days of Being'😉 clearly indicates that the condition of hovering between existence and non-existence is precisely the n ...[text shortened]... '
(pp.108-109)

I find this quite "completing", along with a sense of wonder.

No wonder, just ride your Foal!


At a fast pace: What is a photon? A particle or a wave? Perhaps we could agree that a wave is not a particle and a particle is not a wave.

Nagarjuna would say:
-- "A photon is not a wave, not a particle, not both, not neither."

Mind you, a wave is just a model, a mathematically defined thing -therefore it is a detailed label applied to a specific reality the way We perceive it. The same goes for the particle, so all we have is these two labels that must be reduced to a list of properties.
(If you are an actor and behave like the Batman, you are not the Batman. A photon is not a wave in the sense that you are not the Batman. Yes, in certain circumstances you might behave just like the Batman, but that does not make you the Batman. A photon is not a particle either, in the sense that you are not the Spiderman. Of course in certain circumstances you might behave just like the Spiderman, but this does not make you the Spiderman).

A photon is not a wave and a particle since it does not hold at all times all the properties of a wave and a particle. You cannot play at the same time the role of the Batman and the role of the Spiderman because they have conflicting properties.

Can we say now that a photon must be neither a wave nor a particle? The wavefunction shows that, just as you are not the Batman or the Spiderman but in certain circumstances you may act just like either, this way a photon is not a wave or a particle. Can we say that the photon is a quantum wave packet capable of exhibiting particle-like or wave-like properties depending on the circumstances, plus other properties that enable the construction of several things that are based on these properties? Methinks we can. So, I argue that the “identity” of the photon that is unveiled each time We measure it, it is consciousness dependent.

Now, if you apply the catuscoti, you see that a photon is not a wave, a particle, or a quantum wave packet, and it is not in fact the same thing as any description of it. And it is not any other undiscovered description. So we have to find more accurate and complete descriptions without affecting the utility of science. At this point, for the time being I argue that the “identity” of the photon is empty, otherwise its orthogonal properties would be stable and continuous.

So methinks Nagarjuna is OK
😵

Originally posted by RJHinds
That is the idea of turning the other cheek.

No😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Yes, yes! When you have your grudges eliminated for good, you see that your mind can hijack you no more -then you can ride your mind the way you want keeping in mind that all of its projections lack of inherent existence. Then, the sole truth you have is you; choosing on your own what kind of truth will you become, and knowing deep down that your truth lacks of inherent existence, you enter the stream and you go beyond the gateless gate
😵

However -

Forgive your enemies, but remember their names.
-John F. Kennedy

Originally posted by SwissGambit
However -

Forgive your enemies, but remember their names.
-John F. Kennedy

I forgive or I don't forgive my enemies, but I remember their names😵

Originally posted by black beetle
No wonder, just ride your Foal!


At a fast pace: What is a photon? A particle or a wave? Perhaps we could agree that a wave is not a particle and a particle is not a wave.

Nagarjuna would say:
-- "A photon is not a wave, not a particle, not both, not neither."

Mind you, a wave is just a model, a mathematically defined thing -therefore it is a ...[text shortened]... e its orthogonal properties would be stable and continuous.

So methinks Nagarjuna is OK
😵

Returning. A double mask, Batman<>Spiderman and which one is seen depends on which way consciousness chooses to look, but still a mask, and behind....keep looking, keep looking. Perhaps this is where Dr Who comes into it? 🙂 The explanation was appreciated.
However, the opening line catches me, and I've heard it before.
Been wondering about wondering and riding that Foal.
😕

Originally posted by Taoman
Returning. A double mask, Batman<>Spiderman and which one is seen depends on which way consciousness chooses to look, but still a mask, and behind....keep looking, keep looking. Perhaps this is where Dr Who comes into it? 🙂 The explanation was appreciated.
However, the opening line catches me, and I've heard it before.
Been wondering about wondering and riding that Foal.
😕

"Foal" means "mind" -in the literature you will find many koans in which other words are also used the same way (horse, ox, sword, mirror, lake, treasure, jewel etc.).
However, each time each method of sudden awakening is different (at the level of the words/ koans, but always the same as regards the specific point of attention that has to be highlighted so that the student can see It and break free), because the pair master-student, their environment, their mutual context and the level of the student are different.

"Just riding the Foal" (the way you want and thus "going" towards the "place" -suchness- you want: if you have a certain modification of the mind), you have your Foal -mind- serving you in full (instead of ending up with your Natural Condition hijacked by your mind), and hopefully you can then go beyond the Gateless Gate
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
"Foal" means "mind" -in the literature you will find many koans in which other words are also used the same way (horse, ox, sword, mirror, lake, treasure, jewel etc.).
However, each time each method of sudden awakening is different (at the level of the words/ koans, but always the same as regards the specific point of attention that has to be highlight ...[text shortened]... ion hijacked by your mind), and hopefully you can then go beyond the Gateless Gate
😵

Thank you. The implication of desisting from wonder is pre-eminent in my frowns.
From reflection I see that the emotion of wonder, though positive, is still in the position of differentiation. This is not a negative thing but in terms of being in the space of no mind, dwelling in 'suchness', it is a hindrance. Really, dwelling in 'suchness' embraces both wonder and living the mundane. The foal appears slow and distracted.

Originally posted by black beetle
"Foal" means "mind" -in the literature you will find many koans in which other words are also used the same way (horse, ox, sword, mirror, lake, treasure, jewel etc.).
However, each time each method of sudden awakening is different (at the level of the words/ koans, but always the same as regards the specific point of attention that has to be highlight ion hijacked by your mind), and hopefully you can then go beyond the Gateless Gate
😵

Watching the America's Cup 3rd Venice race on my laptop, and then reading here of the gateless gate, brought my morning thoughts to a focus. We seem to construct gates (as are constructed at arbitrary points on the arbitrary path in the race), to turn a pleasant day on the Laguna Veneta into a 30-minute thrill ride and test of control.

Is a gateless gate another term for a gate that we construct, and can choose not to heed? Are there any gates that are not of our design, or at least, that are not of our choosing?

Originally posted by Taoman
Thank you. The implication of desisting from wonder is pre-eminent in my frowns.
From reflection I see that the emotion of wonder, though positive, is still in the position of differentiation. This is not a negative thing but in terms of being in the space of no mind, dwelling in 'suchness', it is a hindrance. Really, dwelling in 'suchness' embraces both wonder and living the mundane. The foal appears slow and distracted.

Your Foal does its thing, you appear slow and distracted😵

Originally posted by JS357
Watching the America's Cup 3rd Venice race on my laptop, and then reading here of the gateless gate, brought my morning thoughts to a focus. We seem to construct gates (as are constructed at arbitrary points on the arbitrary path in the race), to turn a pleasant day on the Laguna Veneta into a 30-minute thrill ride and test of control.

Is a gateless gate an ...[text shortened]... eed? Are there any gates that are not of our design, or at least, that are not of our choosing?

“Gateless Gate” in the tradition is the establishment of a specific point of attention so that certain obstacles to the insight are permanently demolished. Once this point of attention is established, the polarities of consciousness do not arise😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Your Foal does its thing, you appear slow and distracted😵

Is not the Foal a metaphor, one of many, for the pure light of consciousness?

Is it not by the pure unchanging light of consciousness that all is displayed, including slowness, distraction - and moments of wonder?

Originally posted by Taoman
Is not the Foal a metaphor, one of many, for the pure light of consciousness?

Is it not by the pure unchanging light of consciousness that all is displayed, including slowness, distraction - and moments of wonder?

No.
The foal is mind/ mental activities, and it is either trained (aware of the Two Truths and thus serving its beholder in full) or not trained (not aware of the Two Truths and, hence, deceiving).

So we are talking about the mental activity of both producing and giving rise to cognitive appearances, and also about the mental activity of cognitively engaging with cognitive appearances; the foal/ mental activities of a sentient being that is aware of the Two Truths is at the same time clarity and awareness that leads towards the gateless gate. It follows that the trained foal/ mind serves its beholder, whilst a non trained foal holds its beholder hijacked😵

Originally posted by black beetle
No.
The foal is mind/ mental activities, and it is either trained (aware of the Two Truths and thus serving its beholder in full) or not trained (not aware of the Two Truths and, hence, deceiving).

So we are talking about the mental activity of both producing and giving rise to cognitive appearances, and also about the mental activity of cognitively ...[text shortened]... trained foal/ mind serves its beholder, whilst a non trained foal holds its beholder hijacked😵

Thank you, EB.

As I have appeared to understand from worthies of the Way to the present....

The trained and the less trained are of the first truth and belong to its realm. In the untrained moments comes obscuration to awareness (and communication). Training develops the awareness, but it remains an expanded awareness within the first realm. It points and brings to the region of the Gate at best, but if misunderstood such goal-centred training, over-stressed, can lead itself away from the region of the Gate. Such excess of goal striving can lead the 'rider' into a marsh of fixated duality, difficult to extract from.

The second truth is the realm of the undivided, Sunyata. Subject and object are one. Goal and path are one. Moments of distraction and full awareness are one. Space, absence, unity, spontaneity ('emerging of itself'😉 reign.

The Gateless Gate is the Gate from one to the other, on the Path of No-Path.

If, having arrived in the region of the Gateless Gate, is it by 'training' we pass through, carrying our goal-striving duality with us? Or is it just a flower that is needed?

Namaste.

ó

Originally posted by Taoman
Thank you, EB.

As I have appeared to understand from worthies of the Way to the present....

The trained and the less trained are of the first truth and belong to its realm. In the untrained moments comes obscuration to awareness (and communication). Training develops the awareness, but it remains an expanded awareness within the first realm. It points a ...[text shortened]... our goal-striving duality with us? Or is it just a flower that is needed?

Namaste.

ó

Having arrived there, hopefully we can see that the first and the ultimate truth are one and the same; sometimes a flower is needed and sometimes not

Namaste
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Having arrived there, hopefully we can see that the first and the ultimate truth are one and the same; sometimes a flower is needed and sometimes not

Namaste
😵

Form is, in truth, emptiness, and emptiness is form.

The wind blows around that and the leaves settle where they do.

I bow.

Thank you.

ó