Philosophy Now Forum

And yet every religion preaches the way of the nondual reality. It's a divine contradictory paradox.
Nonduality is synonymous with the word 'Nothingness', or ''Nothing and Everything'' combined as a double bind.

This ''No-Mind'' concept is probably expressed more than anything else.But the word itself does not have a meaning, simply because paradoxically there is always something even though it may not be perceivable except as a known CONCEPT.
Something doesn't dissolve into nothing.
Something always dissolve back into that something from which it came and which it always forever is.

That something....is the one thing that can't be imagined.That something is what no word, expression, thought, sensation, idea, concept, dream, nightmare, illusion, hallucination, drug, trip, fantasy, mirage can describe, immulate, imitate, create, articulate, deviate, situate or imagine.

No word can describe or define 'Nonduality' OR every word describes define it. (paradoxical and contradictory) is the nature of language.

Reality doesn't have a MIND - the mind is an artificial contruction spontaneously self arising from out of it's own void in this immaculate conception.

Depicted here in the following Zen poem:
''The wild geese do not intend to cast their reflection; The water has no mind to retain their image''

Water being synonymous with the word Consciousness.

Consciousness is all there IS ..the absurdity of ONEness





.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 am And yet every religion preaches the way of the nondual reality. It's a divine contradictory paradox.

Nonduality is NOT contradictory, although it may SEEM to be, to some.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 am Nonduality is synonymous with the word 'Nothingness', or ''Nothing and Everything'' combined as a double bind.

Well Nothing AND Every thing is exactly how the One singular Universe works. Literally, without nothing, there is only every(physical)thing, and without everything, then there is only nothing. Every(physical)thing AND Nothing have to co-exist otherwise there would only be ALL (physical) or ALL NOTHING. And, NEITHER of these two things could exist alone. Existence just can NOT BE if it was ALL or NOTHING.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amThis ''No-Mind'' concept is probably expressed more than anything else.

No matter how many times that concept is expressed it still REMAINS completely absurd and incorrect.

But the word itself does not have a meaning, simply because paradoxically there is always something even though it may not be perceivable except as a known CONCEPT.

The reason WHY NONE of this has any meaning is because it is just a nonsensical explanation for what is ESSENTIALLY very easy AND very simple to explain.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amSomething doesn't dissolve into nothing.
Something always dissolve back into that something from which it came and which it always forever is.

ALL OF THIS can be very easily and simply explained, as well as being verified just as easily and simply through scientific methods.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amThat something....is the one thing that can't be imagined.

But that Thing does NOT even need to be imagined as It is ALREADY KNOWN.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amThat something is what no word, expression, thought, sensation, idea, concept, dream, nightmare, illusion, hallucination, drug, trip, fantasy, mirage can describe, immulate, imitate, create, articulate, deviate, situate or imagine.

That Thing could be very easily described in just a few words, and just as simply verified as being True, Right, and Correct in just a very short period.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amNo word can describe or define 'Nonduality' OR every word describes define it. (paradoxical and contradictory) is the nature of language.

Nonduality is about one of the most simplest AND easiest things to describe. That is; Once HOW to do it is KNOWN, which it ALREADY IS.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amReality doesn't have a MIND - the mind is an artificial contruction spontaneously self arising from out of it's own void in this immaculate conception.

The absurd way 'you', "dontaskme", uses words is WHY 'you' can NOT define 'that', which is Truly simple AND easy to define AND describe.

Saying things like; "the mind is an artificial construction", but then also saying, "spontaneously SELF arising from out of ITS OWN ..." is just plain ridiculous.

Is the 'mind' an artificial (not real) construction?

If yes, then 'it' can NOT have "its own any thing". A non real thing can NOT have ANY thing of "its own", simply BECAUSE 'it' does NOT even exist.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 8:36 amDepicted here in the following Zen poem:
''The wild geese do not intend to cast their reflection; The water has no mind to retain their image''

Water being synonymous with the word Consciousness.

Consciousness is all there IS ..the absurdity of ONEness
.

If 'Consciousness' is SUPPOSEDLY "all there IS", then what are these 'wild geese' things? What is 'reflection', what is 'water, and what is 'image'?

Again what 'you' and these "other" human beings are 'TRYING' so hard to explain CAN BE explained in a way that can be VERIFIED TRUE so easily AND simply with and through science.

There REALLY IS nothing hard nor complex about ANY OF THIS.

Nonduality is not a Religion, yet paradoxically all if not all Religions teach it's MYTHology.

Although not a Religion per-se, it's more a method of inquiry into the nature of Being, only to realise the MYTH of this self-inquiry.
This inquiry is seeing auspiciously that you can NEVER not be. So any seeking is a MYTH

A phone is not really smart until it can take a selfie of itself. And so any image of you is and will always be an image of the imageless.
What you are looking at is also what's looking which cannot be looked at.

You are under the illusion that you are the doer. In reality things are done to you, not by you.

.

We ourselves are not an illusory part of Reality; rather are we Reality itself illusorily conceived.

There is no such thing as a dog.
It's no coincidence that man's best friend cannot talk.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:52 pm Nonduality is not a Religion, yet paradoxically all if not all Religions teach it's MYTHology.

Although not a Religion per-se, it's more a method of inquiry into the nature of Being, only to realise the MYTH of this self-inquiry.
This inquiry is seeing auspiciously that you can NEVER not be. So any seeking is a MYTH

A phone is not really smart until it can take a selfie of itself. And so any image of you is and will always be an image of the imageless.
What you are looking at is also what's looking which cannot be looked at.

You are under the illusion that you are the doer. In reality things are done to you, not by you.

.

But there is NO 'you'. So HOW could things be done to 'you'?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:02 am We ourselves are not an illusory part of Reality; rather are we Reality itself illusorily conceived.

There is no such thing as a dog.
It's no coincidence that man's best friend cannot talk.

If there is no such thing as a dog, then there is no such thing as man's best friend.

WHY is it so hard for 'you', "dontaskme", to look at any thing other than what 'you' BELIEVE is the truth of things?

Nonduality itself is also a duality, i.e.
'Nonduality' versus 'duality.'

The concept of duality is generally discussed within Mind–body dualism.

• Mind–body dualism, or mind–body duality, is a view in the philosophy of mind that mental phenomena are non-physical,[1] or that the mind and body are distinct and separable.
  -wiki

The opposite of dualism is Monism;

• Monism attributes oneness or singleness (Greek: μόνος) to a concept e.g., existence.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

The general view of nonduality, i.e. monism is that of God.
The non-dualistic Abrahamic God is very controversial.

People like DAM believe and rationalize the idea of nondualism with dogmatic fervor and are very anti-dualism.
This dogmatism is a kind of perversion and should be treated by a professional.

People like Age, believe they know what is nonduality and thus had the experience of what is non-duality, e.g. the experience of oneness with all of reality.
It is undeniable humans can experience nonduality in an altered states of consciousness the following manner;

• 1. from triggering it deliberately with hallucinogens, drugs, etc.
  2. they are suffering from some kind of mental illness, e.g. schizophrenia, depersonalization,
  3. Brain damage,
  4. Etc. reasons

In the case of Age, he is more likely belong to category 2 above.

The idea of non-duality or experience of non-duality is not something that is real per-se.
What is really real is the mental activities that enable the thought and experience of non-duality, thus its basis is purely psychological.

As mentioned above, in one perspective non-duality itself is dualistic, i.e.

'nonduality' versus 'duality' in opposition to each other.

The idea of non-duality is a useful idea but it should not be taken as superior to the non-dual views. Both should operate on the basis of Newton's Third Law, i.e. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Like Yin-Yang they should work in complementarity.

In Buddhist philosophy, the Two-Truths Theory recognize both nonduality and duality as necessary and co-existing to be applied in the right context to optimize well-being of the individual.

The extremist and dogmatic views of DAM and AGE are due to some sort of mental perversion.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 am Nonduality itself is also a duality, i.e.
'Nonduality' versus 'duality.'

Yes of course. Non-duality is Duality. As there is no such thing as a Non-existing Duality. Knower and Known is a duality. A known needs a knower and vice versa. And while the known is known, the known cannot know it is known. For example: the body cannot know it is a body. the body is known by no body.

Non-duality is duality in the same context there cannot be a reflection without a mirror.
A reflection is wholly dependant on a mirror to be known, but the mirror is not dependant on a reflection to be, the mirror is the being. The mirror is no thing reflecting every thing but itself which is no thing.

The concept Nonduality is an oxymoron. No thing is being nonduality, nonduality is being every thing.

Very difficult concept to grasp, but letting go of the grasp reveals the understanding to appear quite effortlessly.

Nonduality verses duality is a misnomer, there is no thing HERE to be in opposition with itself.
The Nondual self is as opaque as a mirror. A mirror cannot reflect unless it is empty.
A reflection being of the mirror contains the exact same emptiness as the mirror that reflects.
The self is a reflection of emptiness. An image of the imageless.

The Buddha said "If you merely look upon my body, you do not truly see me."

"stop trying to hit me and hit me" ~Morpheus



.

Your replies to me are just telling me what I already KNOW.

You can project your mental illness ideas onto me all you want, but you cannot prove your projection to be true, for one very good reason, you are not me. You have no idea what's going on in this mind here, except as your own projection there in you.


.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 am Nonduality itself is also a duality, i.e.
'Nonduality' versus 'duality.'

Yes of course. Non-duality is Duality. As there is no such thing as a Non-existing Duality. Knower and Known is a duality. A known needs a knower and vice versa. And while the known is known, the known cannot know it is known. For example: the body cannot know it is a body. the body is known by no body.

A visible physical body does NOT know any thing.
But, non-visible 'thoughts' think they know things.
Therefore, the body is known, literally, not by a visible physical body, but by the non-visible.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amNon-duality is duality in the same context there cannot be a reflection without a mirror.
A reflection is wholly dependant on a mirror to be known, but the mirror is not dependant on a reflection to be, the mirror is the being. The mirror is no thing reflecting every thing but itself which is no thing.

But the mirror is a thing. It is, literally, a mirror.
And, if a mirror is held up to another mirror, then the thing which is a mirror will be reflected. Mirrors reflect off of each other, making them things.
Therefore, a mirror is a thing, which can reflect every thing, but not itself, but itself can be reflected off of another mirror.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amThe concept Nonduality is an oxymoron. No thing is being nonduality, nonduality is being every thing.

Nonduality is just Everything as One. Whereas,
Duality is just EVERY single thing.

The word nonduality is NOT an oxymoron.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amVery difficult concept to grasp, but letting go of the grasp reveals the understanding to appear quite effortlessly.

But the concept is VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY to grasp AND FULLY understand.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 am Nonduality verses duality is a misnomer, there is no thing HERE to be in opposition with itself.

But there IS obviously A 'thing' here.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amThe Nondual self is as opaque as a mirror. A mirror cannot reflect unless it is empty.

The nondual Self is just thee One and only True Self, which is Truly OPEN so can SEE, and KNOW, ALL.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amA reflection being of the mirror contains the exact same emptiness as the mirror that reflects.

Eternal OPENNESS is what ALLOWS ALL to be SEEN and KNOWN.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amThe self is a reflection of emptiness. An image of the imageless.

The Self is ALL-KNOWING and ALL-SEEING.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amThe Buddha said "If you merely look upon my body, you do not truly see me."

OBVIOUSLY.

The little 'self' is the non-visible 'thoughts and emotions', and thee big True Self is thee non-visible Mind. Both are NOT the visible physical human body, which is obviously just a visible physical 'body'. If what is LOOKED AT is merely the 'body', then 'i', nor 'I', am SEEN.

To Truly see 'me' or 'Me' is to Truly LISTEN to what is being said and to differentiate between the True (collective and unified) Self, and, the little (individual and personal) self. If this is being HEARD, then Truly SEEING 'me' AND 'Me' will be SEEN (and UNDERSTOOD).

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 am "stop trying to hit me and hit me" ~Morpheus



.

Your replies to me are just telling me what I already KNOW.

So 'I' ALREADY KNOW that 'you' are just the thoughts (AND emotions) within that body, of which some are completely and utterly WRONG. Those thoughts are NOT 'I', which, by NATURE, can NEVER wrong.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amYou can project your mental illness ideas onto me all you want, but you cannot prove your projection to be true, for one very good reason, you are not me.

OBVIOUSLY 'you' are NOT 'me', NOR even 'Me'. The word 'you' defines "another".

'you' may NOT be 'me', But I can still PROVE things to be True.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:38 amYou have no idea what's going on in this mind here, except as your own projection there in you.


.

There is NO another mind. There is ONLY One Mind, which KNOWS EXACTLY what is going on HERE.

The Mind KNOWS that the thoughts in that body do NOT know, for sure, what is going on in this One and only Mind. BUT this Mind KNOWS, for sure, what is going on in that body.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 am Nonduality itself is also a duality, i.e.
'Nonduality' versus 'duality.'

The concept of duality is generally discussed within Mind–body dualism.

• Mind–body dualism, or mind–body duality, is a view in the philosophy of mind that mental phenomena are non-physical,[1] or that the mind and body are distinct and separable.
  -wiki

The opposite of dualism is Monism;

• Monism attributes oneness or singleness (Greek: μόνος) to a concept e.g., existence.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

The general view of nonduality, i.e. monism is that of God.
The non-dualistic Abrahamic God is very controversial.

ONLY if 'you' make it controversial, otherwise It is NOT controversial at all.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amPeople like DAM believe and rationalize the idea of nondualism with dogmatic fervor and are very anti-dualism.
This dogmatism is a kind of perversion and should be treated by a professional.

And what about 'your' dogmatism "veritas aequitas"? Is this dogmatism also a kind of perversion, which some say should be treated by a professional?

Or is 'your' dogmatism NOT a kind of perversion at all, and as such does NOT need to be treated by a professional, and just should be left alone?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amPeople like Age, believe they know what is nonduality and thus had the experience of what is non-duality, e.g. the experience of oneness with all of reality.

People like "age" neither BELIEVE nor DISBELIEVE any thing.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amIt is undeniable humans can experience nonduality in an altered states of consciousness the following manner;

• 1. from triggering it deliberately with hallucinogens, drugs, etc.
  2. they are suffering from some kind of mental illness, e.g. schizophrenia, depersonalization,
  3. Brain damage,
  4. Etc. reasons

There is NO separation anywhere in Life, therefore experiencing duality is just an illusion. Although 'you', human beings, have conceptually separated the One into perceived individual and separate compartments when challenged and questioned about this, an explanation of WHERE the actual separation IS has NOT been yet given.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amIn the case of Age, he is more likely belong to category 2 above.

When "veritas aequitas" diagnosis some thing, then it MUST BE true, right "veritas aequitas"?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amThe idea of non-duality or experience of non-duality is not something that is real per-se.

The idea of duality or an actual REAL experience of duality is NOT some thing that is real, by or in itself.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amWhat is really real is the mental activities that enable the thought and experience of non-duality, thus its basis is purely psychological.

What is real is that there are thoughts that duality is some actual real thing. Yet when asked what separates the One? a reasonable answer has yet to be given.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amAs mentioned above, in one perspective non-duality itself is dualistic, i.e.

'nonduality' versus 'duality' in opposition to each other.

But they are NOT in opposition to each other.

They are just two different views of the One SAME thing.

Absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer. So, depending on what way an observer is LOOKING this will influence what they SEE and understand.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amThe idea of non-duality is a useful idea but it should not be taken as superior to the non-dual views.

Taking thee actual Truth of things is much better than taking a perceived truth of things. It would thus be far superior to take the actual Truth of things view or perspective over any thing else.

The idea of duality is just that - only an idea, and NOT some thing that actually exists.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amBoth should operate on the basis of Newton's Third Law, i.e. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Like Yin-Yang they should work in complementarity.

Obviously for EVERY action there is a reaction. But this ONLY backs up AND supports thee Truth of thee One nondual.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amIn Buddhist philosophy, the Two-Truths Theory recognize both nonduality and duality as necessary and co-existing to be applied in the right context to optimize well-being of the individual.

But 'buddhist philosophy' is just as WRONGLY misinterpreted as ALL religions ARE.

Is that the ONE 'individual' of the Nondual, or, the MANY individuals of the dual?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:29 amThe extremist and dogmatic views of DAM and AGE are due to some sort of mental perversion.

And what are the extremist and dogmatic views of "veritas aequitas" due to exactly?

By the way, what do 'you', "veritas aequitas" BELIEVE 'my' so called "extremist and dogmatic" views are OF EXACTLY?

Nonduality is thought free Awareness. It's a state, not a concept.

So Ramana Maharshi teaches to: "Be rid of current thoughts" and no one does it.

And Age blathers on and on about how simple all this is to conceptualize while being unable to abide in/as effortless thought free Awareness.

roydop wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:43 pm Nonduality is thought free Awareness. It's a state, not a concept.

So Ramana Maharshi teaches to: "Be rid of current thoughts" and no one does it.

And Age blathers on and on about how simple all this is to conceptualize while being unable to abide in/as effortless thought free Awareness.

Very good, and yes, it's not a concept and is why words can only point to it, not explain or describe it. You are right roydop.

Also, although nonduality is a state, to state it's a state is a concept, in truth, it's a stateless state. The paradox is unavoidable, because in knowing you know, you can also know you don't know, both states are known conceptually speaking, without knowing HOW or WHY

.

.

roydop wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:43 pm Nonduality is thought free Awareness. It's a state, not a concept.

So Ramana Maharshi teaches to: "Be rid of current thoughts" and no one does it.

And Age blathers on and on about how simple all this is to conceptualize while being unable to abide in/as effortless thought free Awareness.

Considering what 'one' is EXACTLY, then how do 'you' propose it is possible to "be rid of current thoughts"?

What will replace the "current" thoughts?

ALL-OF-THIS is Truly EASY and SIMPLE to UNDERSTAND and REASON. But, OBVIOUSLY, the ONLY way to express this is THROUGH THOUGHTS.

If the "current" thoughts are OF thee actual Truth of ALL-OF-THIS, then the idea is to get rid of those "current thoughts", then that would obviously be a TOTALLY illogical AND ridiculous idea.

To obtain the KNOWLEDGE of thee actual Truth of ALL-OF-THIS happens almost instantaneously. Remaining OPEN, as in NOT LOOKING nor SEEING from previously gained thoughts is HOW thee actual Truth of things is KNOWN to be True, and NOT thought to be true. So, BEING in this state of thought free Awareness is ALL that is NEEDED to learn, SEE, and understand thee actual Truth of ALL-OF-THIS, which come in parts. REMAINING OPEN allows ALL the parts of ALL-OF-THIS to come.

There is ALSO another way that 'thought free Awareness' EXISTS, and that is by just STOP thinking, altogether. All this does is SHOW what living in/with True Bliss feels like. Only a few seconds are NEEDED to experience, and WANT this.

'you' being a thinking human being and just NOT knowing what is actually True unless 'you' are learning from "others", and following their teachings, just SHOWS that 'you' can NOT even do what 'you' are preaching and telling "others" to do.

Also, what point is there is being in/as "effortless thought free Awareness", NO thinking state?

If 'you' do NOT KNOW what the actual Truth of things is YET, then just NOT thinking will NOT show 'you' any thing further.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:18 am

roydop wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:43 pm Nonduality is thought free Awareness. It's a state, not a concept.

So Ramana Maharshi teaches to: "Be rid of current thoughts" and no one does it.

And Age blathers on and on about how simple all this is to conceptualize while being unable to abide in/as effortless thought free Awareness.

Very good, and yes, it's not a concept and is why words can only point to it, not explain or describe it. You are right roydop.

But the WORDS "it is not a concept" just DID explain AND describe 'it', as was just PROVEN True here.

So, WORDS are EXACTLY what explains AND describe ALL things.

Just because 'you', human beings, in the days of when this is written, do NOT yet KNOW the RIGHT WORDS to explain AND describe ALL things, then that does NOT mean that I am in the process of learning the RIGHT order, to place the RIGHT words, so that ALL of 'you', human beings, will eventually understand ALL-OF-THIS, ALSO.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:18 amAlso, although nonduality is a state, to state it's a state is a concept, in truth, it's a stateless state. The paradox is unavoidable, because in knowing you know, you can also know you don't know, both states are known conceptually speaking, without knowing HOW or WHY

.

.

'you', "dontaskme", use the word 'paradox' as though it is a negative and/or failing word in describing, defining, and understanding things here, just like those human beings known as "scientists" SEE a 'paradox' is some thing, which to avoid completely.

But from the definition of the word 'paradox' I use, I find 'paradoxes' beautiful things. Paradoxes actual REVEAL thee Truth.

SEE unlike 'you', adult human beings, who write statements or propositions, which seem to be true on first glance, but when investigated are actually proven to be absurd and/or contradictory, I write statements or propositions in a way that seem, on first glance, to be absurd and/or contradictory, but when investigated actually express thee actual REAL Truth of things.

I write 'paradoxically', purposely.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 9:44 am

But the WORDS "it is not a concept" just DID explain AND describe 'it', as was just PROVEN True here.

NO AGE..it doesn't work like that okay?


The finger pointing to the moon is not the moon.
Nonduality is this immediate direct experience, that CANNOT be conceptualised.

The divine beautiful paradox here..is that (no word can describe ''WHAT IS'' ) OR every word describes ''WHAT IS'' ...NETI NETI

Age wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 9:44 amSo, WORDS are EXACTLY what explains AND describe ALL things.

Now try to descibe nonduality without using concepts.
Nonduality is this immediate direct experience, it cannot be conceptualised.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2019 9:44 amTo ASSUME any thing is just plain STUPID.

The moon represents the true mind.
The Dharma which is spoken is the finger.


---------

“It is like the finger pointing to the moon…”

Where did this imagery originally come from? It comes from the Shurangama Sutra, a core text for Zen/Chan Buddhist training, where the Buddha wanted to point out where Ananda’s real mind (the True Mind) was to him.

So in this “Finger to the moon” analogy, the Buddha explained that:

Imagine someone is trying to show you the moon by pointing to it:

Your True Mind is the Moon (naturally bright, i.e., has enlightenment naturally)
The Finger is the Teachings (dark, i.e., lacks enlightenment)
The Finger points directly to the Moon – so that you can see the moon for yourself – directly.

Similarly, the Buddha’s Teachings point directly to your True Mind (your Buddha Nature).

If someone points to the moon – don’t just look at the finger – because:

You’ll miss the moon
You think the finger is the moon
You don’t know what is naturally bright (has enlightenment) vs what is naturally dark (lacks enlightenment)

Teachings (Dharma) point directly to your True Mind – don’t just look at the teachings – in your mind training/meditation – reflect upon your mind and USE the teachings to see where the teachings are pointing to – so that you can see your own real Mind for yourself (which is naturally radiant because it is naturally endowed with its own enlightenment)

....

Age you really need to stop being ABSURD thinking and believing IT IS POSSIBLE to speak from the ABSOLUTE perspective. When all truths are relative, and when ALL relative truths regarding the ABSOLUTE are ABSURD.

The only real truth is there isn't one that can be known. Not knowing is the only real truth.



.