« Relative to what? | Main | Munan Zenji »

September 12, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yes, but at our most vulnerable moments, the mind morphs or imagines this "animating principle" into a super-someone resembling ourselves so we can interact with it.

Why should I deny a God now that I know I will need to call on when I die?

I always thought there was a reason the Buddha didn't answer when asked about God.

Later writers like Nagarjuna denied a creator and had good reason for doing so, but did the Buddha himself ever flatly deny a creator?

I have seen and felt the almighty presence of the primordial light? But how can I be sure it is not a figment of my imagination, what are the signs? does this mean I have escaped the life and death cycle

Nice post. It reminds me of something I read a long time ago that went like this;
"Let me tell you about this unseen principle governing all things without the slightest error; It is uncreated, and as thus absolute. Absolutness here, denotes only a permanent state of perfection, incorruptability and imagelessness. As much as it is perfectly solid, it still moves faster then the eye, thus it is beyond the scope of your present body consciousness. It is simply complete and to recall its true nature equals nirvana.

Nothing can be seen without the radiance of this auspicious body, just as a piece of iron, dark in the darkness, becomes dull red and then dazzling white if heated by an invisible energy. Where the dull observes and speculates on the existentiality of the rod the wise inquires on the invisible energy enabling this sight and how to bring forth its completeness within oneself."



Why do we need an absolute if there is Nirvana? Frankly, at least Hegel`s absolute is merely another term for god. In what respect is the absolute neccessary to achieve Nirvana? I think even in Indian thought, the term absoulte is empty of any reality.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo