[MD] Pinhead with dancing angels

[MarshaV]

>

Emptiness of natural things.

Maybe we can rescue Plato's ideas of the inherent existence of 
perfect forms if we assume there is a strict demarcation between 
man-made and natural objects, with the former existing in dependence 
upon the 'judgement' of the observer, but the latter existing 'from 
their own side'. For having come to accept that man-made things such 
as chariots and cars owe some of their existence to dependence on our 
mind, we may suspect that this is somehow because they are originally 
products of the human mind - as first conceived by the designer.

We find it more difficult to accept the natural things in the world, 
such as flowers and trees are dependent upon our minds. A rose would 
smell as sweet by any other name. A rose bush is a rose bush is a 
rose bush, and is different in its inherent nature from a plum or a 
cherry tree. There is no continuum between these three species and 
thus no necessity for our mind to make a judgment of the borderline. 
But is this really the case?


Leaving aside nightmare genetic engineering scenarios of octophants, 
elepuses and all stages in between, we may consider that there is (or 
was) a continuum of form between all living things. If we were to 
examine the fossil records of the ancestors of cherry trees and plum 
trees we would find that they diverged from one common ancestor. 
Looking back through the fossils we would seen a continuous gradation 
of characteristics from the ancestors of the cherry to to the 
ancestors of the plum, leading back to a time when they were 
indistinguishable. But the decision as to where ancestor ended and 
plum or cherry began would be totally arbitrary. And if we were to 
trace the common ancestor of the cherry and plum we would find 
convergence with the ancestors of the rose, strawberry, raspberry 
etc. What Darwin did for creationism he also did for biological 
Platonism - the biological species concept does not encapsulate any 
underlying truth [BROOKES 1999], and each individual species is unfindable


The ultimate unfindability of the real nature of all phenomena - 
their lack inherent existence, is usually referred to by 
English-speaking Buddhists as 'emptiness', which is a translation of 
the Sanskrit word Sunyata (sometimes spelled Shunyata). According to 
David Loy the English word emptiness has a more nihilistic 
connotation than the original Sanskrit. The Sanskrit root su also 
conveys the concept of being swollen with possibility [LOY 1996]. It 
is therefore most important not to confuse emptiness with total 
nothingness. Emptiness implies the potential for existence and 
change. The mathematical analogy of emptiness is not zero, but the empty set.

The conclusion that all things are empty of inherent existence and 
appear only in dependence on our minds is not an obvious truth. So 
deeply ingrained is the idea of inherent existence and authority in 
Western culture that even when we have analysed all things as 
dependent on causes, and dependent on parts, we still hold back from 
the most subtle truth of dependence on mind. We think there ought to 
be 'something out there', or someone 'authoritative' who prevents the 
real world from being so much dependent upon our judgement. On first 
meeting teachings on emptiness the western mind often suspects it is 
the victim logical trickery or mere playing with words. Fortunately 
it is possible to demonstrate the true and all-pervasive nature of 
emptiness by examining the mode of existence of fundamental 
particles, the building blocks of all things in the material universe.

http://kwelos.tripod.com/sunyata.htm



.
_____________

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.