Nature and its Truths

Buddhitakso · Post time 19-6-2013 10:42 AM

We have to realise that there are two sides of truth in existence within the nature i.e. the conventional truth and the ultimate truth. When addressing a problem, in the first place, we need to ensure whether our point of view is from the conventional perspective or from the ultimate perspective. For example, from the conventional perspective, we agree that duality or multiplicity does exist. Therefore, nibbāna is a phenomenon because we are speaking as a subject on the other side of the object or matter. In other words, the subject is pondering on the object or matter - phenomenon arises. However, from the ultimate perspective, we would then agree that no duality or multiplicity arises. Therefore, nibbāna is not a phenomenon (also applies on all other things) because there is no subject to ponder on the object or matter. In other words, no phenomenon arises if we speak from the ultimate perspective.

Conventional truth is a subjective and a relative truth. This means the truth orientation is dependent on the observer (i.e. the subject’s mind) to provide with the description, definition, recognition, valuation, etc. on the other side of the object or matter. And the truth conclusion varies among different observers or minds. Whereas, an ultimate truth is a reality that exists beyond mind and beyond concepts and words in the sense that it is beyond our usual ways of perceiving things. Language and conception only imply that things exist in distinct manners i.e. wise person, dumb person, saint, devil, etc. - in such well-defined and independent categories. Perceiving ultimate reality is seeing that things do not exist in these fantasised, impossible ways, in black and white categories.

The principle in effect: -

If one stays on with seeing the conventional truth only, one would remain in samsāra,

If one stays on with seeing both the conventional truth and the ultimate truth, one has the choice of remaining either in samsāra or nibbāna,

If one stays on with seeing the ultimate truth only, one would remain in nibbāna.

In the Buddhist context, samsāra literally means ‘continuous flow’ - referring to a repeating cycle of birth, life, death and re-birth. When samsāra arises, dukkha would arise concurrently. And the meaning of dukkha or suffering would be to ‘bear with’ or ‘contemptible emptiness.' The cure to suffering is to ‘let go’ which is the antonym to ‘bear with.' Therefore, when one has stopped submitting oneself to the conditional circumstances, one would be freed, be liberated and be neutralised – that means achieving enlightenment – a state of nibbāna. To understand further on the existence of the two truths, let us analyse into a place called the nature. Nature is originally referred to essential qualities or innate disposition; related to the intrinsic characteristics that plants, animals, and other features of the world develop of their own accord. These essential qualities of the nature can be divided into two categories i.e. inherence and dependence. Both of these qualities as observed by the mind would exist concurrently in a harmonious orientation. Therefore, it is imperative for one to understand that the nature is sufficiently universal and infinite in its original disposition and is governed by the universal laws. In other words, there are two aspects of the nature - the dependence and the inherence. These two aspects would exist concurrently and can be illustrated in a mathematical equation as below: -

Two Facets of the Nature

Facet 1 --> ...(-2+2) + (-16+16) + (-832+832) + (-133+133) + (0) + (-54+54) + ...., etc. = 0 <-- Facet 2

References: -

Facet 1

= dependent arising.
= the existence of mind - that conjures up perceptions, conceptions, labels, names, descriptions, shapes, values, languages, etc.
= the existence of rising and falling phenomena.
= the existence of beginning and ending processes.
= all subjects and objects are created i.e. inherent existence is devoid.
= the emptiness could be realised in various stages.

Facet 2

= inherent existence.
= the absence of mind to conjure up perceptions, conceptions, labels, names, descriptions, shapes, values, languages, etc.
= the absence of beginning and ending processes.
= the absence of conditional phenomena.
= nothing has ever been created or changed.
= the Buddha nature.

Zero (0) = intermediation = absence = emptiness but not nothingness.
= a mathematical value intermediate between positive and negative values.
= the absence of any or all units under consideration.

...(-2+2) + ... + (-133+133) ... = values of fluxes that are dependent arising.

... + (-2+2) + (-54+54) + ... = this arising, that arises.

... + (0) + ... = this ceasing, that ceases = the stage of enlightenment.
= all dependent arising are completely blown-off or extinguished.
= a stage of perfect intermediation = a stage of absence = a complete realisation of emptiness.

(....) = the Law of Karma = the universal law of balancing.

-2+2 or -133+133 = the Law of Attraction.

From the above mathematical equation, one could summarise the conclusion as below: -

Nature is a system of constant with a factor of intermediation or absence. It means that nature would orientate towards a state of balance, intermediation or absence at all times.
When things run off-balance or when one stirs up in the nature - be it in volitional or non-volitional sense, the law of nature would take its course to balance it in one way or another across time and plane of existence.
Anything that inherently exists would not involve change and created objects cannot inherently exist since that would involve change.
The dependent nature is similar to the inherent nature.

So how could one identify the ultimate truth in the nature? Rightfully, one could mention that the nature is ultimately universal and encompassed with both the inherent and the dependent qualities. Our enlightened mind is capable of perceiving this reality of nature and Buddhism is all about transformation from an ignorant state of mind into a realised state of mind.

When one stays on with seeing the conventional truth only, one would remain in samsāra. This is because the conventional truth involves with the mind to conjure up the circumstances of duality and multiplicity. The mind which is also known as the consciousness in individuality is the main culprit for the continuous arising of ignorance, suffering, birth, life, death and re-birth in the dependent nature – the characteristics of samsāra.

On the other hand, when one stays on with seeing both the conventional truth and the ultimate truth, one has the choice of remaining either in samsāra or nibbāna. This is what the term ‘bodhisattva’ is all about. A bodhisattva being is an enlightened being who has preferred to forgo temporarily the advancement into the state of nibbāna out of his/her vast compassion for the rest of the ignorant beings within the cosmos.

Finally, when one stays on with seeing the ultimate truth only, one would remain in nibbāna. An arahant is a being who has advanced into the fourth stage of enlightenment that is also known as the stage of cessation with remainder. The ultimate liberation or cessation without remainder can only be achieved without sustaining a living body i.e. the passing into parinibbāna (a state of complete neutralising state of affairs).

Last edited by Buddhitakso on 25-6-2013 05:01 PM

Sephiroth · Post time 11-9-2013 04:09 PM

From the above mathematical equation, one could summarise the conclusion as below: -

Nature is a system of constant with a factor of intermediation or absence.  It means that nature would orientate towards a state of balance, intermediation or absence at all times.
When things run off-balance or when one stirs up in the nature - be it in volitional or non-volitional sense, the law of nature would take its course to balance it in one way or another across time and plane of existence.
Anything that inherently exists would not involve change and created objects cannot inherently exist since that would involve change.
The dependent nature is similar to the inherent nature.

Reminds me of a quote from my favorite Atheist, Carl Sagan :