Resolving Ultimate and Conventional Truth

[Nasruddin]

The sages and mystics of all religions seem to speak a common tongue. Ultimate Reality, the Truth that underpins all things, is true. Further, the experienced nature of the Ultimate Reality is peace, harmony, bliss, ecstatic union. Julian of Norwich observed that “…All shall be well and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well. Buddhists point to the clear luminosity and peace that truly underlies all things, Taoist masters, Christian monastics, Sufi masters, etc.. all of them at the mystic level of their respective religions keep saying that everything is fine and that further, all things are already in accordance with the way things are, and all things are just as they should be. And yet our experience , our story, seems very different.

What further complicates understanding is that from our perspective, the getting of peace, the working toward bliss, Divine union, grace or what have you, is something of a double bind. We know we need this, but how to get it? Some of us throw up our hands and say the whole idea is simply magical thinking anyway so why pursue it?

Some people think that in a far off time, given proper discipline, penance, training, suffering, enlightenment happens, grace comes, and to be honest, that does seem to happen. Witness the efforts of the desert fathers sitting in their cells, practicing asceticism until the Word is clear, and the Holy Spirit enters their experience.

Some people, wanting to believe what the mystics say begin a practice of magical thinking and superstition. They have practices that are really little more than what the behaviorialist B. F. Skinner observed in the way pigeons behaved when they wanted food. In a famous experiment, Skinner learned that his birds would repeat behaviors they were doing when food was randomly introduced into the pen when they desired more. This tells us much about how we attempt to control our environment in the same way, using charms, spells, magical thinking like “the secret” in which holding a particular thought brings things into your life. At best this is a rather simplistic way of understanding of the way events rise and fall. The Japanese have a term for this called “ji ji muge” which means “no block” or the reality that all things flow together and the idea of separate events is incorrect.

Still, the sages keep pointing out that we need to relax, everything is okay. Didn’t Bob Marley point that out when he wrote the line “…every little thing is gonna be all right.”? Clearly the Rastafari believe it too! So where does this leave us? The mystics say all things are in their proper place, and all things are happening and unfolding as they should, but clearly this is crazy. The world is a mess, man is a mess, and don’t even start me on current events!

So this is our riddle, our Zen koan. How do you resolve this?

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

I think Ultimate truth and Conventional truth are speaking of different things.
A Taoist might think "I'm hungry now, but it will be ok soon because dinner is almost ready".
A Democrat might think "Our country is a mess and gun-control will never get passed".
A Buddhist might think "I'm suffering so much right now but sooner or later I will leave the wheel".
A Christian might think "My family is fleeing war but we will be rewarded for our faith and conduct in these trying times".
Moving towards one state towards another and hoping or having faith that that other state is better than the current one. There can be unifying principles between these truths but I don't think of them as the same.

 

[Nasruddin]

I think Ultimate truth and Conventional truth are speaking of different things.
A Taoist might think "I'm hungry now, but it will be ok soon because dinner is almost ready".
A Democrat might think "Our country is a mess and gun-control will never get passed".
A Buddhist might think "I'm suffering so much right now but sooner or later I will leave the wheel".
A Christian might think "My family is fleeing war but we will be rewarded for our faith and conduct in these trying times".
Moving towards one state towards another and hoping or having faith that that other state is better than the current one. There can be unifying principles between these truths but I don't think of them as the same.

Perhaps. If so, then wouldn't there have to be two universes, two realities? If we posit that there is a oneness to the universe if, as we often say, all things are one, then there cannot be two. If there are two, then the concept of "oneness" must be wrong. Do you see the dilemma?

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Not for me because where you see two I see many or one, dependent on perspective.

 

[Thomas]

The sages and mystics of all religions seem to speak a common tongue...

Yes. They do.

Further, the experienced nature of the Ultimate Reality is peace, harmony, bliss, ecstatic union.

Indeed, but I have reservations about this, which I have expressed elsewhere. I think we make more of this than they do ...

... ulian of Norwich observed that “…All shall be well and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well. Buddhists point to the clear luminosity and peace that truly underlies all things, Taoist masters, Christian monastics, Sufi masters, etc.. all of them at the mystic level of their respective religions keep saying that everything is fine and that further, all things are already in accordance with the way things are, and all things are just as they should be. And yet our experience , our story, seems very different.

Yes ... and no ... I agree with the principle, but the same masters, monastics, etc., have nevertheless practiced detachment from the world (again in a general sense). So while they make this point, they also tend to point out that cultural endeavour is misdirected.

The world is a bit like the web. It's gob-smackingly important, vital, etc., etc ... but 99+% of it is spam.

We know we need this, but how to get it? Some of us throw up our hands and say the whole idea is simply magical thinking anyway so why pursue it?

Or a discreet way of saying I'm not prepared to make that sacrifice.

To be a Christian for example:
"Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in: Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me..." (cf Matthew 25)

In short: Love thy neighbour. Very easy to say. Very hard to do.

A Catholic priest went home to Japan and met the Buddhist elder who was his tutor at the monastery where he was educated prior to his conversion. He related the Beatitudes to the monk, and the monk say, "whoever said that was enlightened, that's the message I've been preaching all my life".

The message: Blessed are the poor in spirit, they that hunger and thirst after justice, the merciful, the clean of heart, the peacemakers, they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake... "

The message is one of Social Justice. Indeed, you need no religious affiliation to practice either the Beatitudes (Matthew 5) or their practical application given in Matthew 25.

The mystical dimension utilises the same text, but read in a metaphorical sense, and that brings in the religious dimension, and then one can start talking about Union, etc. But the point is the grace is there, and the union is there, from the get-go ... it just has no commercial value, therefore is not perceived in a consumer context.

Actually, the spirit of the message runs contrary to consumer-culture, so there's the root of the problem.

I'm sure if the world got the Gitas, the Scriptures, the Sutras, etc., tied them all up, dumped them in the sea, and got on with the basics of social justice, then God, the Gods, the Cosmos, It, Whoever, would be as pleased as pleased can be ...

 

[Nasruddin]

So would it be safe to say then, the resolution of an apparent dilemma is that both are true? Everything in the universe is already perfect, and we perceive it as a mess that needs fixing. That leads me to believe that the only real problem exists by virtue of the way we perceive, the kind of thinking driving our actions.

 

[Devils' Advocate]

I suppose if the answer is that the universe is already perfect that makes perfect sense on a universal scale. After all, the angst on one completely insignificant dustball in an outer arm of a single galaxy is so irrelevant as to be ludicrous. To the universe 14 billion years old, what occurs on one tiny rock in the span of a couple hundred years is so infinitesimally insignificant as to be not worth a footnote.

What happens on this planet may seem important to those of us who live here. But in the greater perspective, does any of it matter at all? It is the ultimate perception of the self overrating its importance.

I'm not sure I believe this; have to do some pondering yet, though it is an interesting perspective indeed!

 

[Thomas]

... Everything in the universe is already perfect ...

I view it as, in a finite and contingent Cosmos, the universe is the way it is.

When we say perfect we invoke an absolute, and there is only one Absolute ...

... so is the universe perfect? No, it could be better, it could be worse, but that really is not the point. It is as it is.

... and we perceive it as a mess that needs fixing.

LOL. That leads me to wonder whether it might not be better if we focussed on fixing ourselves, rather than trying to fix the world, and by fix of course, I mean shape the world in a way that suits me.

That leads me to believe that the only real problem exists by virtue of the way we perceive, the kind of thinking driving our actions.

I wholeheartedly agree with that!

 

[Nasruddin]

I view it as, in a finite and contingent Cosmos, the universe is the way it is.

When we say perfect we invoke an absolute, and there is only one Absolute ...

... so is the universe perfect? No, it could be better, it could be worse, but that really is not the point. It is as it is.

See, once again we do not disagree. The word "perfect" was a poor choice, I like "It is as it is" very much too. I seem to remember, perhaps the Taoists could steer me right, that the Chinese word "Li" means everything in its perfect order, such as how a cloud organizes itself or the way sea foam collects, or the gentle arc of a blade of grass, the patterns that even though they seem chaotic still seem to have a kind of order. Artists usually get this right away because they see clearly the absolute "rightness" in chaotic things. Does that make sense?

 

[Devils' Advocate]

There are things that seem chaotic because they are indeed chaotic. There are ordered patterns. And there are chaotic patterns. Very different things. Now seeing the 'rightness' in chaotic things is another issue entirely. Just because a system is chaotic does not mean it isn't 'right'. And ordered things can be 'wrong'.

These are convenient constructs to allow us to examine them. In 'reality' everything is neither ordered or chaotic. Rather everything is in a constant state of flux somewhere between those two extremes.

 

[Nasruddin]

There are things that seem chaotic because they are indeed chaotic. There are ordered patterns. And there are chaotic patterns. Very different things. Now seeing the 'rightness' in chaotic things is another issue entirely. Just because a system is chaotic does not mean it isn't 'right'. And ordered things can be 'wrong'.

These are convenient constructs to allow us to examine them. In 'reality' everything is neither ordered or chaotic. Rather everything is in a constant state of flux somewhere between those two extremes.

There was once a young monk who asked the master, "what is the fundamental principle of Buddhism?" The master replied, "follow me into the garden", the young monk walked with the teacher into the moonlight garden where the master pointed out two bamboo stalks growing and said "there, do you see how tall one is, and how short the other is? Upon hearing this, the young man was enlightened.

 

[Namaste Jesus]

There was once a young monk who asked the master, "what is the fundamental principle of Buddhism?" The master replied, "follow me into the garden", the young monk walked with the teacher into the moonlight garden where the master pointed out two bamboo stalks growing and said "there, do you see how tall one is, and how short the other is? Upon hearing this, the young man was enlightened.

Until some not so enlightened scientist comes along and deems the inequity of growth the result of global warming and while attempting to correct the situation, buts heads with a civil rights activist who has vowed to end growth prejudice among the wooded grasses.

 

[Wibble]

The sages and mystics of all religions seem to speak a common tongue. Ultimate Reality, the Truth that underpins all things, is true.
So this is our riddle, our Zen koan. How do you resolve this?

The first step is get rid of ridiculous notions like "Ultimate Reality".

 

[Nasruddin]

The first step is get rid of ridiculous notions like "Ultimate Reality".

Okay, so how would you define "ridiculous notion" and apply that to the concept of "ultimate reality"? Perhaps you might expand on your thought a bit to help us out.

 

[Wibble]

"Ultimate Reality" is just another fiction, an assumption that there is something behind the world that we experience.

And is "Ultimate Reality" more "real" than plain old "reality"?

 

[Devils' Advocate]

And is "Ultimate Reality" more "real" than plain old "reality"?

That's a great line. Can I steal it and use it from time to time?

As to the first sentence, there is so much going on beyond what our meager senses can experience. At the most basic level, there is a huge swath of light that we are not able to see. Same huge range of sounds we cannot hear. And so on.

It goes much deeper than that though. Reality as we 'see' it is completely false experience. That things are solid. That time goes by the way we experience it, when there are any number of ways for time to flow depending on our own speed and relative to how massive an object we are near. I could go on and on and on though I expect you get what I am saying here.

 

[Nasruddin]

"Ultimate Reality" is just another fiction, an assumption that there is something behind the world that we experience.

And is "Ultimate Reality" more "real" than plain old "reality"?

Yes, it is, and it isn't. Note that many of us have an idea about what reality is, and we constantly differ about what that is, therefore the common idea of reality is just an idea. So even your idea of "plain old reality" is arbitrary and may not be an intersubjective experience. Therefore I use the term "ultimate reality" to describe that which is not merely my perception or your perception but that which is independent of what I or you for that matter believe it is.
So in one sense it may seem like a fiction if you posit another reality or consciousness beyond this one, but if you posit that our collective ideas and thoughts are only blind men looking at an elephant, it is a point of reference to something beyond our discursive thinking. In the OP I mentioned the different points of view between the common man's ideat the world is a hardship and life is a problem to be solved, while the mystics and sages seem to think everything is absolutely perfect as it is. These two world views seem to clash, and if there is not a reality outside of our perceptions then the mystics may be thought of as just crazy people with a deluded view, and the view that we are separate individuals born into an uncaring and often hostile universe is more correct.

Do you see?

 

[Wibble]

As to the first sentence, there is so much going on beyond what our meager senses can experience. It goes much deeper than that though. Reality as we 'see' it is completely false experience. That things are solid. That time goes by the way we experience it, when there are any number of ways for time to flow depending on our own speed and relative to how massive an object we are near. I could go on and on and on though I expect you get what I am saying here.

OK, so using instruments we can detect stuff beyond the range of our senses. But that is probably still a tiny fraction of what might be "out there", thinking for example of dark energy and dark matter, and some of what is out there will probably be forever beyond our knowledge.
As for things not being solid, have you ever dropped a brick on your foot? We know theoretically about the sub-atomic world, but that is not the one we experience.

 

[Wibble]

Yes, it is, and it isn't. Note that many of us have an idea about what reality is, and we constantly differ about what that is, therefore the common idea of reality is just an idea. So even your idea of "plain old reality" is arbitrary and may not be an intersubjective experience. Therefore I use the term "ultimate reality" to describe that which is not merely my perception or your perception but that which is independent of what I or you for that matter believe it is.

The problem is that "ultimate reality" implies some objective thing that out there, something behind all the partial perceptions and knowledge. I don't think it's like that.

 

[Nasruddin]

The problem is that "ultimate reality" implies some objective thing that out there, something behind all the partial perceptions and knowledge. I don't think it's like that.

You might be interested to know that I don't think it's like that either. I think that our perceptions of reality are the illusion, not the dirt, the rocks, the trees and all that. When I practice mindfulness meditation I see everything as it is, and sometimes I learn that I am mistaken about the way things are. So when I was mistaken, was I seeing reality? The Buddha taught that we live and die in our own minds, and as a psych major I've seen the reality of that. Both philosophically and scientifically we know the eyes don't see and the ears don't hear. The senses transmit signals to the brain and we process that information through many filters to create knowledge of what is going on outside our skin, so to speak. Therefore, we have no real objective criteria, to know if our senses are functioning well, or our interpretation and processing of those signals is correct. That being the case, there is always a gap between what you perceive and what is really there. What is there beyond your thinking about it is the ultimate reality. No hocus pocus, no new-agey bullshit, just real reality apart from what you believe is true.