All is change

[Ground]

Originally Posted by sky123

Seeing as Buddhist Schools cannot agree on what Nirvana is then you shouldn't presume I don't have it right, that is just your opinion.
Chinese Buddhist say there are four types of Nirvana, others say three, others two so who is right or wrong.

Applying rational analysis shows that the theravadan understanding I referred to is the only rational one. However this understanding can also be found in mahayana schools. It is only when it comes to their 'buddhahood' that all mahayana schools drift off into irrational fantasies since they claim that what they attain as 'buddhahood' is far better than simple measly theravada nirvana.

Originally Posted by eputkonen

All is change...a flux and in-motion. Not accepting or resisting change is a primary cause of suffering and discontentment. I've found change has 5 facets that must also be accepted:

1) All is impermanent (can't hold onto anything)
2) All is uncertain (not knowing, no control)
3) All is interdependent (forms change, also all is relative)
4) All is timeless (not of past memory/future imagination)
5) All is impersonal (it's not about you)

Sometimes people can say they realize all is change...and yet take it personally...or overlook that change means not-knowing and uncertainty. I thought it was a good idea to try to figure out the various aspects or facets of change. Are there any aspects of change I might of missed?

All is love and love comes in many forms but is always love.

[Jeremy Bong]

Originally Posted by Ground

Applying rational analysis shows that the theravadan understanding I referred to is the only rational one. However this understanding can also be found in mahayana schools. It is only when it comes to their 'buddhahood' that all mahayana schools drift off into irrational fantasies since they claim that what they attain as 'buddhahood' is far better than simple measly theravada nirvana.

It seems which of them go to be more wilder or fallacy. Most Mahayana school practice in moderate manner but not Theravada side.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by eputkonen

All is change...a flux and in-motion. Not accepting or resisting change is a primary cause of suffering and discontentment. I've found change has 5 facets that must also be accepted:

1) All is impermanent (can't hold onto anything)
2) All is uncertain (not knowing, no control)
3) All is interdependent (forms change, also all is relative)
4) All is timeless (not of past memory/future imagination)
5) All is impersonal (it's not about you)

Sometimes people can say they realize all is change...and yet take it personally...or overlook that change means not-knowing and uncertainty. I thought it was a good idea to try to figure out the various aspects or facets of change. Are there any aspects of change I might of missed?

For me, change and emptiness go together in that the nature of emptiness is change. With that said, I post this quote which really sheds the beautiful aspect of it all.
"The Heart Sutra says, “all phenomena in their own-being are empty.” It doesn’t say “all phenomena are empty.” This distinction is vital. “Own-being” means separate independent existence. The passage means that nothing we see or hear (or are) stands alone; everything is a tentative expression of one seamless, ever-changing landscape. So though no individual person or thing has any permanent, fixed identity, everything taken together is what Thich Nhat Hanh calls “interbeing.” This term embraces the positive aspect of emptiness as it is lived and acted by a person of wisdom — with its sense of connection, compassion and love."

[Ground]

Originally Posted by BlueSky

"The Heart Sutra says, “all phenomena in their own-being are empty.” It doesn’t say “all phenomena are empty.” This distinction is vital.

When one says 'something is empty' there's always the implicit implication that it is either 'empty of something else' or 'empty of self'.

[BlueSky]

While I appreciate the comments on my post, I feel the need to clarify my intent as it relates to the OP.
The OP asked for different aspects of change and my intention was to show that I see change as the nature of which it arises from and returns to. I call that emptiness, source, void, divine or even god.
Just trying to keep the thread on track....thanks