Category: Artifact

Posted on

Out of Body

“Teacher, you say all phenomena is manifestation of mind, but  surely when cut, I bleed. How is that manifestation of mind? Does not something outside of mind cut me? Can you explain this?”

“Indeed. Is it mind that is cut or body?”

“The mind cannot be cut, it is body that is cut.”

“This sculpture of stone when chipped would it say ‘I am chipped’?”

“No, it has no mind to perceive that has been chipped.”

“And no mind that holds concept of being chipped, nor even mind that holds concept of self to chip.  Yet to the mind that chipped, it has been chipped. Do you understand?” 

After a moment of reflection, the student replies, “Mind cannot be cut where body can, but without mind body does not perceive being cut. Likewise, sculpture that is chipped is not chipped but by observing mind.”

“Good. Good. Very good. You have understood.”

Posted on

Is and not

“Teacher, earlier when teaching the dharma to the townsfolk and when explaining the emptiness of form and the other aggravates you said, “A thing that is not can be understood as that which is not, and that which is.” This is confusing to me. Could you explain it’s meaning?”

“Indeed.  Conceptually, a thing that is not can be understood as that which it is not and that which it is. Likewise, that which is can be known by both what it is and by what it is not. Glass that was full, when emptied, would you say that it is not full or empty?”

”One could say either, but I would say it is empty.”

The student then pulls out a copper coin from his mendicant bowl,  studies it from side to side, and after a brief pause says, “Other side of heads, not heads or tails.”

Good. Good. Very good. You have understood.

Posted on

Foundations (of Equivalent Exchange)

Transmutation Circle from Fullmetal Alchemist

Newtonian mechanics is built on the foundation of Newton’s three laws of motion (cause and effect) 

Which state: 

1. An object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force. Because inertia is the property of a body to resist any change in its state of rest or uniform motion, this law is also known as the law of inertia. In this sense, the mass of a body is a measure of its inertia and is called the inertial mass of the body.

2.  If a net force acts on an object, it will cause an acceleration of that object. The relationship between an object’s mass m, its acceleration a and the applied force F is given by the vector equation

F = ma

3. When one object exerts a force on another object, the second object exerts an equal force in the opposite direction on the first object. Said another way, that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, hence the alternative name for this law as the action-reaction law.

Commensurately:

Buddhist philosophy is built on the foundation of cause and effect (Tibetan: rgyu ‘bras; Sanskrit: hetuphala) the primary features of this law being:

1. Nothing evolves uncaused

2. Any entity which itself lacks a process of change cannot cause any other event

3. Only causes which possess natures that accord with specific effects can lead to those effects

 

“It is mind itself that sets in place the myriad array of beings in the world, and the world that contains them…living beings all arise from karma, and so without mind, there could be no karma.”

Madhyamakāvatarā, VI: 89
Bibliography:
A Most Incomprehensible Thing: Notes Towards a Very Gentle Introduction to the Mathematics of Relativity by Peter Collier

The Handbook of Tibetan Culture, 1993. 
Compiled by Graham Coleman
Posted on

Parable of the Snake

“Teacher, it is said you have spoken of the four reliances in relation to the parable of the snake. Could you explain the message in the parable and how it relates to the four reliances?”

“Indeed. Amid a certain community of monks there was a known prankster. One day, as the monks gathered in the courtyard for meditation, the prankster points and says, “Careful, there lies a snake.” Knowing the nature of the prankster, the skeptical monks looked to where he pointed and there they too saw a coiled snake. The monks took heed to stay clear of the snake.  One astute monk took notice and realized that the snake did not move, and from head to tail its girth seemed too uniform. As he cautiously approached the snake, he soon realized it to  be a coil of rope. Grabbing the rope, to show the others, the monk was bit on the hand by a snake that lay hid in the coil of rope.”

“As the monks first doubted the prankster’s statement, rely not merely on the person  but on the words.”

“As the monks, upon investigation, accepted what the prankster said, rely not merely on the words but on their meaning.”

“As the astute monk who on deeper reflection questioned  initial observations, rely not merely on provisional meaning but on definitive meaning.”

“As the astute monk who discovered  conceptual truth and experience differ, rely not merely on intellectual understanding but on direct experience.”

“Do you understand the message in the parable of the snake, my son?”

Wherein the student replied, “The snake that lies in the coils of a rope in the coils of the rope lies, likewise truth by truth is often hid.”

“Good. Good. Very good. You have understood.”

Posted on

The Five Aggregates

Dhamma wheel

skandha. (Pali,  khandha; Tibetan,  phung po). In Sanskrit, lit. “heap,” viz., “aggregate,” or “aggregate of being”; one of the most common categories in Buddhist literature for enumerating the constituents of the person. According to one account, the Buddha used a grain of rice to represent each of the many constituents, resulting in five piles or heaps. The five skandhas are materiality or form (RŪPA), sensations or feeling (VEDANĀ), perception or discrimination (SAṂJÑĀ), conditioning factors (SAṂSKĀRA), and consciousness (VIJÑĀNA). Of these five, only rūpa is material; the remaining four involve mentality and are collectively called “name” (NĀMA), thus the compound “name-and-form” or “mentality-and-materiality” (NĀMARŪPA). However classified, nowhere among the aggregates is there to be found a self (ĀTMAN). Yet, through ignorance (AVIDYĀ or MOHA), the mind habitually identifies one or another in this collection of the five aggregates with a self. This is the principal wrong view (DṚṢṬI), called SATKĀYADṚṢṬI, that gives rise to suffering and continued existence in the cycle of rebirth (SAṂSĀRA). Continue reading “The Five Aggregates”

Posted on

Quintessential

Circle complete ends 
Where it begins. 

Any coordinate plane
With curvature same,
Radius reciprocal. 

Measure of perimeter
To bisecting line though center, 
Irrational, transcendental. 

Quintessential measurement
Of rational transcendental, 
Devoid judgement, 
Present in contemplation, 
Compassion in perpetuation.
Posted on

Soñar Boriken

Jibaro lo soy, 
desde ayer hasta hoy. 

En brazos abrazados, 
canciones
de alegría
yo cantaria,
de los reflejos del mañana
en las alas de una paloma.

Olvidando lo olvidado,
palabras en el viento engendrado. 

Todavía cantando,
porque todavía lo soy.
Posted on

Māyā

Illusory singular irregularity
Of certainty’s regular singularity

Bound by 
Unknowable perpetual 
Boundless range,
Understood as
Abstraction of conceptual
Changeless change

Unattached Afflictions
Unattached Affections
Unattached Reflections  

At vertex of angle of incidence 
Thoughts reflect coincidence
Toward vantage at angle of reflection, 
From vector of perfection.
Posted on

SOME MATHEMATICAL THEOREMS ON PERSPECTIVE DRAWING

From: Chapter 10, Mathematics for the Nonmathematician, Morris Kline

Let us accept, then, the principle that the canvas must contain the same section that a glass screen placed between the eye of the painter and the actual scene would contain. Since the artist cannot look through his canvas at the actual scene and may even be painting an imaginary scene, he must have theorems which tell him how to place his objects on the canvas so that the painting will, in effect, contain the section made by a glass screen.

Suppose then that the eye at E (Fig. 10–8) looks at the horizontal line GH and that GH is parallel to a vertical glass screen. The lines from E to the points of GH lie in one plane, namely the plane determined by the point E and the line GH, for a point and a line determine a plane. This plane will cut the screen in a line, G′H′, because two planes which meet at all meet in a line. It is apparent that the line G′H′ must also be horizontal, but we can prove this fact and so be certain. We can imagine a vertical plane through GH. Since GH is parallel to the screen and the latter is also vertical, the two planes must be parallel. The plane determined by E and GH cuts these parallel planes, and a plane which intersects two parallel planes intersects them in parallel lines. Hence G′H′ is parallel to GH, and since GH is horizontal, so is G′H′. But GH was any horizontal line parallel to the screen. Hence the image on the screen of any horizontal line parallel to the screen or picture plane must be horizontal. Thus in a painting which is to contain what this glass screen contains, the line G′H′ must be drawn horizontally.

We can present practically the same argument to show that the image of any vertical line, which is automatically parallel to the vertical screen, must appear on the screen as a vertical line. Thus all vertical lines must be drawn vertically. Continue reading “SOME MATHEMATICAL THEOREMS ON PERSPECTIVE DRAWING”