3 ms·
Interesting article. Not entirely relevant, but I think that the Buddhist view of time is interesting, and I guess quite relevant to this block universe idea.
by bowsamic 4y ago
Interesting article.
Not entirely relevant, but I think that the Buddhist view of time is interesting, and I guess quite relevant to this block universe idea.
In the Buddhist view, all things are "emptiness", shunyata, without self-existence. This means that there is no fundamental basis with which you can distinguish between things. For example, there is no fundamental property that you can use to distinguish between you and I, or an apple and a keyboard, or even your body and your consciousness. The distinctions are just concepts that we make up and assert that the world fits into it. The Heart sutra says that not only is this true for all the elements that make up our experience, but even also for causal connections such as time.
This view of time was most explicitly emphasised by the Soto Zen philosopher Dogen. He called it Uji, which means "time-being". Effectively he said that being equals time, and that really all time is right now:
[quote]
An ancient buddha said:
For the time being stand on top of the highest peak.
For the time being proceed along the bottom of the deepest ocean.
For the time being three heads and eight arms.
For the time being an eight- or sixteen-foot body.
For the time being a staff or whisk.
For the time being a pillar or lantern.
For the time being the sons of Zhang and Li.
For the time being the earth and sky.
"For the time being" here means time itself is being, and all being is time. A golden sixteen-foot body is time; because it is time, there is the radiant illumination of time. Study it as the twelve hours of the present."Three heads and eight arms" is time; because it is time, it is not separate from the twelve hours of the present.
[/quote] (https://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/Uji_Welch.htm https://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/Uji_...)
The way we understand this as Buddhists, is that we are both at the very beginning and very end of our path, at the same time we are both deluded beings and also perfectly enlightened Buddhas:
> Time is not separate from you, and as you are present, time does not go away. As time is not marked by coming and going, the moment you climbed the mountains [walked the Buddhist path] is the time-being right now.
So effectively, we believe that all moments are contained in this moment, because there is no fundamental basis by which we can say that any other moment is separated from this moment. Before and after are illusions, they are just ideas that we have right now.
- ncmncm 4y ago"between you and me".
- bowsamic 4y agoBoth are grammatically correct
- ncmncm 4y agoNo. One is, one is not. Many Americans are terminally confused about this.
- bowsamic 4y agoI'm British, why assume I'm a yank? Also, I don't really care. Grammar is incredibly low on my list of priorities
- ncmncm 4y agoBecause Yanks are more often confused about grammar. As a Brit you have less excuse. It is not low enough for you to have avoided being Wrong on The Internet after failing to take correction, and then complaining after that.
- bowsamic 4y agoDon't rudely and pedantically pick on my comment. I put effort into it and you are hung up on a very basic grammatical mistake.
- ncmncm 4y agoThe Buddhist response would have been to quietly accept the correction. Maybe learn something. Quarreling without even looking it up is decidedly, how do Buddhists say? "attached".
- willismichael 4y agoWhen I was growing up, it was self evident that there was no distinction between the Apple and the keyboard. Same with the Commodore and the Atari.