Dancing David
18th April 2003, 08:58 AM
Thanks for all those who responded to my posts in the logic of the dharma thread.
I am slow and very concrete: I just don't see the inherent dualistic nature of reality.
You draw a circle and say this inside the circle, that outside the circle ergo dualism?
I draw a square on the beach, a circle on the mountain, a triangle on a volcano and a crescent on the ocean. And I say here I have defined four fields and that which is not included in the fields. Therefore reality is quintessential.
You then state well there is still evrything that is not in the circle and the circle: dualism.
I state there is that inside the circle, the circle, that which is outside the circle ; therefore trinity
Everyone else goes 'ugh' and walks away.
So far the discussion is semantic, human logic and words defining spaces. I still don't see an inherent duality in reality. But I am slow and if there are examples please use them.
I await instuction. Thank You.
Peace
dancing david
I am slow and very concrete: I just don't see the inherent dualistic nature of reality.
You draw a circle and say this inside the circle, that outside the circle ergo dualism?
I draw a square on the beach, a circle on the mountain, a triangle on a volcano and a crescent on the ocean. And I say here I have defined four fields and that which is not included in the fields. Therefore reality is quintessential.
You then state well there is still evrything that is not in the circle and the circle: dualism.
I state there is that inside the circle, the circle, that which is outside the circle ; therefore trinity
Everyone else goes 'ugh' and walks away.
So far the discussion is semantic, human logic and words defining spaces. I still don't see an inherent duality in reality. But I am slow and if there are examples please use them.
I await instuction. Thank You.
Peace
dancing david