A Question for my Twitter Sangha: is Non-Dualism the same as the doctrine of Emptiness? My experience with Dzogchen and Tibetan Buddhism confused the two (either they confused them or I did), but now I'm starting to see them as very different doctrines. What's your take on it?
Mainly that objects aren't even objects, but just thought to be so by convention. Your text could imply that, but I'd make it explicit.
-
-
True, but I said at the end of the paragraph ‘They are all transformations of energy, expressions of physical laws, the fundamental forces of the universe itself.’
-
Which is still something more than ‘absolute emptiness’, but the current scientific consensus is that absolute emptiness is not physically possible.
-
Emptiness is not the same as "empty space", or "nothing", in the physical sense. It's not meant as a metaphysical description of reality. For Nagarjuna, asserting that an object "doesn't really exist" is just as flawed as asserting that it has ultimate/independent existence.
-
Agreed.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Sentient comet
Meditation freak
Teacher
Author
Podcaster
SF nerd
Serial comma enthusiast
Raised by wolves
Bad influence 