[Buddha-l] Emptiness

[Curt Steinmetz]

Erik Hoogcarspel wrote:
>
> Hi Curt,
>
> ultimus is the superaltive of ulter and means last, nothing beyond, so 
> the dhamma's are ultimate in the sense that they the components of 
> everything, but have no components themselves. They are the ulitmate 
> components. No permanence or unchangingness is intended. I know that 
> some dhammas are composed of the four or five elements, but I'm not sure 
> if onecan call the elements real components, maybe one should call them 
> qualities. If not then the elements are the true ultimate components
>
>   

But are these "ultimates" eternal and unchanging? If not they must arise 
from nothing and pass away - return to nothing. This is an extraordinary 
claim that would require extraordinary evidence to support it. For one 
thing it violates the conservation laws that are fundamental to 
everything that we know, scientifically speaking, about the natural world.

A far more reasonable view, in my opinion, would be that the ultimate 
stuff of the physical universe is itself uncreated (and not subject to 
destruction). All apparent impermanence and change is just the constant 
rearrangement of this stuff. This requires neither creation out of 
nothing nor destruction into nothing - both of which are highly 
questionable ideas to say the least.

Reasonableness or unreasonableness are, of course, separate questions 
from what is generally accepted as Theravadin orthodox teaching on the 
matter. Do Theravadin's generally hold that (1) there are, in fact, 
"ultimate" "dhammas", and (2) that these arise and pass away?

Curt Steinmetz