‘the golden rule’ ~ of everything; duality does not exist!

Messages
2,924
Reaction score
10
Points
0
Where exactly does light end, and dark begin? Same with hot/cold - rough/smooth, etc ... If they were really seperate, then we could identify the seperation, but they are not seperate, they are one and the same substance. They are just opposite ends of the same thing. I think perhaps that they vary only in degree of 'vibration' ...

I think duality is an illusion; there are opposite poles, but the poles are of the same substance. My question is, is there an [absence of] in any of these opposing poles? Like a negative existence of some sort?

James

If duality is an illusion, then at some point in the gray scale darkness starts to turn back into light. Just a thought.

Chris
 

cyberpi

Interfaith Forums
Messages
1,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
These things have everything to do with doing:
Sure, but some of my point is kind of the opposite, that the notion of what is right is not seen until doing and realizing. For example your child learning to ride a bike: whatever works, whatever is right, whatever is good in it is not fully seen until later. There is no way to know the experience except to do. The plank that prevents the learning or seeing would be whatever prevents the doing. But, having already learned or deemed it good... sure, doing is still doing.

juantoo3 said:
There is no cold, only lack of heat. There is no dark, only lack of light.
There is cold. For example space is NOT cold because there is very low pressure where there are no particles to thermally carry away the heat. Space is a lack of hot and a lack of cold. The few particles that do exist are often very hot. If there were particles at a lower temperature they would be called cold because they would carry away heat. Something cold is a heat sink or something with a capacity to be heated. The cold can be measured. Identically, something hot is a heat source or something with a capacity to be cooled. In space though like everywhere else there is still radiative cooling and heating, which is not really a function of space itself.

The light / dark I agree with... the true spectrum of light is the frequency or wavelength.... not the intensity.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
445
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
There is cold. For example space is NOT cold because there is very low pressure where there are no particles to thermally carry away the heat. Space is a lack of hot and a lack of cold. The few particles that do exist are often very hot. If there were particles at a lower temperature they would be called cold because they would carry away heat. Something cold is a heat sink or something with a capacity to be heated. The cold can be measured. Identically, something hot is a heat source or something with a capacity to be cooled. In space though like everywhere else there is still radiative cooling and heating, which is not really a function of space itself.

The light / dark I agree with... the true spectrum of light is the frequency or wavelength.... not the intensity.
I suspected I might have had it backward...which is why I put the caveat at the beginning. Physics is not my strong suit.
 

cyberpi

Interfaith Forums
Messages
1,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
In reverse order. You may be pro thought, pro speech, but seem to get excited when someone has another thought which is contrary to yours.
Absolutely! Does that mean I am not a genuine member of the 'ticks, tones, and words will never hurt' club? I am a student in school and find excitement in what is different. Agreement has its place, but it gets boring. Disagreement is far more exciting and informative.

And no that Golden Rule does not apply to my son or daughter, at the age they are at I determine what is best for them, in my opinion.
Danger, Danger, Danger wil < Robinson >.

They'll not be going out at any hours, with any friends, wearing, doing whatever they want. They or you may not like it, but it doens't matter, I spend the gold, I make the rules.
Yes the making of rules. One of my kids was frustrated with mother and had said, "It is not fair." So much I wished to say but in the moment I said, "Life is fair because someday you will get to be the parent." But I submit to you that children can and do make rules for their parents too. For example, the proverbial child in the toy store throwing a tantrum to get the toy has already made (or learned) the rule that if he/she will not get the toy then there will be hell to pay. Similarly a parent might be tempted to make hell for their child if he/she disobeys.

I don't like how we are involved in others affairs or our arrogance, but I'll be here until I finish being a dictator over my kids lives and they move on.
Appears to me ironic... maybe a duality... a dual aspected perspective. Dictatorship appears good for those you love, born under your rule... yet fortunate you say it is being born in the USA under its rule.
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
These things have everything to do with doing:

Wisdom

1. Right view
2. Right intention

Ethical conduct

3. Right speech
4. Right action
5. Right livelihood

Mental discipline

6. Right effort
7. Right mindfulness
8. Right concentration

How so 1, 2, 7 and 8?

As to the OP, perhaps there is the dual, the non-dual and the perspective that transcends.

“To seek Mind with the discriminating mind
is the greatest of all mistakes.”
- Sengcan: Trust in Mind.

s.
 
Messages
2,924
Reaction score
10
Points
0
If these are doing, then all is doing.

s.

Well, I dunno. Tell me what you think.

I was thinking that one has to float all eight boats at once. In that sense the really active things like right livelihood have to keep up with the more contemplative things. Or something...

Chris
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Well, I dunno. Tell me what you think. I was thinking that one has to float all eight boats at once.

Yes I agree; “path” is a bit of a misnomer in that the factors are not generally meant to be sequential. I say “generally” because Right View has to arise first of all because without this the others cannot / will not arise (Right View being the acceptance - in the heart – of the Four Noble Truths).

In that sense the really active things like right livelihood have to keep up with the more contemplative things.


So OK, yes... keep up…not sequential. I took “doing” to mean activity, in the physical sense; hence my original comment. Maybe I was just being a bit more simplistic in my distinction; the other factors being the “more contemplative” (i.e. not involving activity) rather than the “really active” ones, to use your terms. Maybe your non-dual confused my dual. :)


s.
 

_Z_

from far far away
Messages
878
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
oxfordshire
oh i got replies but no email notification again ~ sorry i havent replied. :rolleyes:

i have read through all your replies, so apart from subjective and holistic views and perceptions, are we all in agreement that duality doesn’t actually exist?

what does this mean for buddhists [nirvana must be part of a universal whole]?
what for abrahamics [ god/satan, heaven/hell, must be part of a universal whole?
for science [everything belongs to a whole inc eternity, infinity, mind {and ‘life’?}]?

:)
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
apart from subjective and holistic views and perceptions, are we all in agreement that duality doesn’t actually exist?

So to paraphrase...are you saying: apart from those who don't agree, are we all in agreement?

If so, I think the answer must be a resounding yes!

s.
 
Top