What is Truth, What is Reality?
-
This forum invites: Discussions, Sharing and Enquiries to the truths (Dharma) of Wisdom, Bliss, Enlightenment and Liberation...
In many posts, truth was used sparingly and the context in which the word was used was not explicit.
What is truth? And what is reality? Are they the same or different?
-
Reality is simply what we experience... Seeing, hearing, thinking, etc. Truth is a fact about experience that can be verified directly....
Such as, 'all phenomena are impermanent, arising and fading moment by moment'... Check that out with the eyes of awareness.
-
I have problems with the concept of soul. Alot of religions have the concept of souls. How do we know is there a soul or not ? Alot of ppl I know also believe in soul which consists of christians, catholic, hindus, taoists and muslims.
-
no self, how to have soul.
yes all other religions all teach there is a soul, except for Buddhism. this is unique in Buddhism.
the ultimate reality is there is no truth, much less reality.
-
existence precedes essence...
through the consciousness of his existence, man creates values and determines a meaning for his being and experiences...reality shifts with new experiences...
buddhism is way ahead of existentialism ....
-
Originally posted by Protoman:
I have problems with the concept of soul.
Alot of religions have the concept of souls. How do we know is there a soul or not ?
Alot of ppl I know also believe in soul which consists of christians, catholic, hindus, taoists and muslims.
The concept of soul can be another topic so as not to side-track the theme of this thread. Pls initiate another thread.
Tell us your understanding of truth and reality.
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
no self, how to have soul.
yes all other religions all teach there is a soul, except for Buddhism. this is unique in Buddhism.
the ultimate reality is there is no truth, much less reality.
//the ultimate reality is there is no truth, much less reality.//
why do you say this? you have to start with what is truth and what is reality before you reach 'ultimate'.
-
Originally posted by Fcukpap:
existence precedes essence...
through the consciousness of his existence, man creates values and determines a meaning for his being and experiences...reality shifts with new experiences...
buddhism is way ahead of existentialism ....
.... we can leave existence aside for the moment .... another thread?
.... suffice to say for now, we will be in trouble if we are not conscious of our existence!
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Reality is simply what we experience... Seeing, hearing, thinking, etc. Truth is a fact about experience that can be verified directly....
Such as, 'all phenomena are impermanent, arising and fading moment by moment'... Check that out with the eyes of awareness.
1) does it mean that if we don't 'experience' or do not 'have the experience', there is no reality?
2) fact is truth ... is fact also reality?
-
no soul, how about do we have 'spirit' after we die? haha this 1 buddhism never answer. always answer by saying 'no soul' instead.
-
Truth accords to our individual perception of reality. It belies on individual capacity, our newly discovered truth in context of our previously so called truths,now labelled beliefs, and that is the reality. What you hold to be truth may be just facts without context to another person. Just like watching an event on TV, the is no actual experiencing. You react or interpret the event by proxy, your values, your mental state and attention levels. Therefore what you may have asserted as truth bears no relevance in others' lives. As it does not have any immediate consequence, save in an argument! Put it another way, maths, for instance, if you are relating to very young kid, you start with numbers of one, two, then many. Later, you relate to number of digits on the hand/s. Then you introduce symbols of 1,2,3......to 0, +,-. Numbers in to the sum of ten. These symbols is no consequence without mathematics. Without the understanding the concepts and its applicability, it becomes irrelevant! It is all greek to me! If you wish to relate truth to beliefs and religion, is has to be of some significance and relevance to them! Different people come here with their different disposition. The point is that they benefit in their own way. We practise by helping others and also allow ourselves to be helped! Our previous insights are enriched by increments particular to ourselves and no body else! Knowing truths is not about regurgition of facts, but it's relevance and applicability to our individual lives!
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
no self, how to have soul.
yes all other religions all teach there is a soul, except for Buddhism. this is unique in Buddhism.
the ultimate reality is there is no truth, much less reality.
There is no ultimate reality.... yes I agree.... there is no reality? That depends what you mean, if you mean reality is empty then yes.
There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.
-
Originally posted by whylikethatah:
no soul, how about do we have 'spirit' after we die? haha this 1 buddhism never answer. always answer by saying 'no soul' instead.
Due to karmic conditions...
By the way it is not that we all become ghosts after we die.
We will take rebirth in the 6 realms (3 lower: hell, ghost, animal, 3 higher: human, asura, heaven) depending on our karma, and there is a 49 day intermediate period where consciousness takes on the form of a 5 year old tall antarabhava or intermediate body... this antarabhava awaits conditions for rebirth every 7 days until the 49th day, after which if due to attachments he refuses to take rebirth will fall into the ghost realm.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Due to karmic conditions...
By the way it is not that we all become ghosts after we die.
We will take rebirth in the 6 realms (3 lower: hell, ghost, animal, 3 higher: human, asura, heaven) depending on our karma, and there is a 49 day intermediate period where consciousness takes on the form of a 5 year old tall antarabhava or intermediate body... this antarabhava awaits conditions for rebirth every 7 days until the 49th day, after which if due to attachments he refuses to take rebirth will fall into the ghost realm.
but i thought Theravada say don't have this intermediate period? so u believe in which?
-
Originally posted by whylikethatah:
but i thought Theravada say don't have this intermediate period? so u believe in which?
From http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/157941?page=1
From the Theravadin Perspective
From http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/lofiversi...php/t17918.html,
Basically, Ajahn Brahm (and the forest monks of Ajahn Chah) believe
there is an antarabhava, partly from the numerous accounts in the
Suttas, and according to Ajahn his personal experiences dealing with
the dying in Thailand (I have not inquired further on this). Hoping he
has written on this and will be published.
From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/message/7751?viscount=100,
> >*Intermediate State between Existences*
> >
> >In contrast to the orthodox stand, there is significant Pali canonical
evidence strongly suggestive of an intermediate state between one existence and
another, a view supported by Theravada fundamentalists. Various suttas from the
Nikayas clearly talk about a state of existence before actual rebirth as a
another sentient being. Let me quote some examples from them.
> >
> >In Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta (MN 3
the Buddha
states that for conception to
occur, one of the conditions is that the being to be reborn (gandhabba) has to
be present at the moment of union between the father and mother. Here, it is
implicitly stated that there is an intermediate state of existence between death
in the previous existence and rebirth in the next.
> >
> >There are various references to the rebirths of bodhisattas as well as other
beings, which also imply as much. According to Sampasadaniya Sutta (DN 2 and
Sangiti Sutta (DN 33), some beings "enter the mother's womb unknowing, stay
there unknowing and leave it unknowing", while others "enter the mother's womb
knowing, stay there knowing, and leave it unknowing". One who "enters the
mother's womb knowing, stays there knowing and leaves it knowing� is, according
to the commentary, a bodhisatta in its last rebirth. This is confirmed by
several suttas that describe the bodhisatta's moment of entry into the mother's
womb as "being mindful and fully aware�. [Mahapadana Sutta (DN 14);
Acchariya-abbhuta Sutta (MN 123); Pathama-tathagata-acchariya Sutta (AN 4: 27);
Bhumicala Sutta (AN 8:70)].
> >
> >There are references to a fivefold typology of non-returners, one of which is
called antaraparinibbayi (�attainer of Nibbana in the interval�
, in
the
Samyutta Nikaya (SN 48:15, 24, 66, 51:26, 54:5, 55:25); Purisagati Sutta (AN
7:55) and Samyojana Sutta (AN 4:131). Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi, in his "The Connected
Discourses of the Buddha: a new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya", Volume II
(Note 65, Pp 1902-1903), argues (with support from Samyojana Sutta) that the
antaraparinibbayi is "�one who has abandoned the fetter of rebirth
(upapattisamyojana) without yet having abandoned the fetter of existence
(bhavasamyojana)."
> >
> >Orthodox Theravadins argue against this interpretation of the
antaraparinibbayi because in the Kathavatthu (e.g. Kv 366), an Abhidhamma text
regarded by them as canonical, the idea of antarabhava (intermediate life) was
strongly refuted.
> >
> >However, there is further evidence to consider. In Metta Sutta (Khp 9, Sn
1: there is reference to bhuta (those who have been
born) and sambhavesi
(those seeking birth). Several suttas [Channovada Sutta (MN 144); Channa Sutta
(SN 4:35:87); Catuttha-nibbana-patisamyutta Sutta (Ud 74)] mention the states of
"here or beyond or between the two". Kutuhala Sutta (SN 4:44:9) also tells of "a
being [that] has laid down his body but has not yet been reborn in another
body".
> >
> >All the above references from the suttas implying an intermediate state of
existence should provide sufficient food for thought by Theravadins and ample
reason to keep an open mind regarding the mystery of dying and rebirth.
> >
> >Although fundamentalist Theravadins may subscribe to a belief of an
intermediate afterlife, it does not necessarily mean that they accept all of the
bardo (�gap in between� or intermediate state) teachings postulated by the
Vajrayana tradition.
btw, i was told by someone who visited Ajahn Brahm yesterday (he came Singapore for a talk), that Ajahn Brahm cld read his mind
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
There is no ultimate reality.... yes I agree.... there is no reality? That depends what you mean, if you mean reality is empty then yes.
There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.
If there is no reality .. how could there be ultimate reality? And what is ultimate reality? Similarly, what is ultimate truth?
"That depends what you mean, .... " - i.e. to say there is no reality and reality depends on what you want reality to mean, and it is a "if".
//There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.// I take this to mean there is no truth but there is ultimate truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth. Now, now, this is ludicrous. There is no truth but there is ultimate truth. There is no truth but emptiness is the truth.
What kind of bull is this? It is like saying this, there is no tooth but there is great tooth. However, though there is no tooth, nothing is the tooth!
-
existence is a fact or state of reality....but when it ceases, reality of non-existence becomes another fact or state...it shifts according to changes...thus the whole process becomes a truth...
-
We are reminded from time to time that the pursuit of fact, and the relativity of fact itself, may be distinctly severable from truth due to individual perception, ego and attachment, and exponentially the ego’s attachment to perception, the ego’s attachment to outcome, and the evolution of the imposter of ego as ‘Trier-in-Fact’. If such a distinction is agreeable, then perhaps the discussion may be favorable to a subtle ear…
An object is seen by a hundred different people like a hundred reflections in a hundred mirrors. But is it the same object? As a first approximation, it’s the same object, but one that can be perceived in different ways by different beings.
Colors, sounds, smells, flavors, and textures aren’t attributes that are inherent to the objective world, existing independently of our collective or individual senses. The objects we perceive through the myriad of causes and conditions seem completely ‘external’ to us, but do they have intrinsic characteristics that define their true nature? What is the true nature of the world as it exists independently of ourselves? We have no way of knowing, because our only way of comprehending the true nature of the world, the true nature of reality, the true nature of fact, the true nature of all things, all conditions and all constituent parts is via our own personal mental process and are the result of our own personal and particular way(s) of investigation.
Efforts furthering the explanation, understanding and pursuit of truth and reality are surely commendable. As we each think, comprehend, and pontificate our conscience to the extent of intellectual capacity and honesty, we nevertheless remain quintessentially quintessential in this and other matters and means of surety. As such there is no fault, only ignorance…
Only one who has attained enlightenment recognizes the ultimate nature, the true nature, the unencumbered nature of the world, of reality, of fact, of all things, their constituent parts and the methods, the causes and conditions, by which they manifest – they appear, but are devoid of any intrinsic existence – as the direct contemplation of absolute truth/absolute reality transcends any intellectual concept, any duality between subject and object. It is in this manner that there is but one Truth one Reality, and it resides equally within the Buddha-nature of us all without any insurmountable disparity.
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
If there is no reality .. how could there be ultimate reality? And what is ultimate reality? Similarly, what is ultimate truth?
"That depends what you mean, .... " - i.e. to say there is no reality and reality depends on what you want reality to mean, and it is a "if".
//There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.// I take this to mean there is no truth but there is ultimate truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth. Now, now, this is ludicrous. There is no truth but there is ultimate truth. There is no truth but emptiness is the truth.
What kind of bull is this? It is like saying this, there is no tooth but there is great tooth. However, though there is no tooth, nothing is the tooth!
Please don't quote out of nothing.
AEN's post is refering to Rooney. Please read Rooney's post before u comment
-
Originally posted by 2009novice:
Please don't quote out of nothing.
AEN's post is refering to Rooney. Please read Rooney's post before u comment
i read Rooney's post but I was replying to AEN's. Read carefully before you comment!
-
I have extracted this from the other thread: //Most meditators accept that no-self is a core truth of reality. //
Isn't this confusing? "truth of reality" what does this phrase mean?
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
If there is no reality .. how could there be ultimate reality? And what is ultimate reality? Similarly, what is ultimate truth?
"That depends what you mean, .... " - i.e. to say there is no reality and reality depends on what you want reality to mean, and it is a "if".
//There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.// I take this to mean there is no truth but there is ultimate truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth. Now, now, this is ludicrous. There is no truth but there is ultimate truth. There is no truth but emptiness is the truth.
What kind of bull is this? It is like saying this, there is no tooth but there is great tooth. However, though there is no tooth, nothing is the tooth!
What is ultimate clarity? -
erm , i read there's a question mark in AEN's "There is no truth?"
-
Originally posted by I No Stupid:
If there is no reality .. how could there be ultimate reality? And what is ultimate reality? Similarly, what is ultimate truth?
"That depends what you mean, .... " - i.e. to say there is no reality and reality depends on what you want reality to mean, and it is a "if".
//There is no truth? Emptiness is the ultimate truth.// I take this to mean there is no truth but there is ultimate truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth. Now, now, this is ludicrous. There is no truth but there is ultimate truth. There is no truth but emptiness is the truth.
What kind of bull is this? It is like saying this, there is no tooth but there is great tooth. However, though there is no tooth, nothing is the tooth!
There is no ultimate reality, however there is an ultimate truth.
Ultimate reality means something like God... something totally real, existing, that we must seek.
In Buddhism, there is no ultimate reality.
But there is an ultimate truth, and that is emptiness. What dependently originates is in nature empty, and this emptiness is the ultimate truth and applies to all things.
-
Originally posted by Weychin:
What is ultimate clarity?When a message is clear and easily understood, there is clarity. It means no clarification is needed. What is clear is clear. Unless it was not so clear before, then you can use the term clearer (as comparison).
Do not confuse clarity with reality or truth. I don't know what is ulitimate clarity. Is there an undertone in your question or you care to explain?