Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We often see comments in posts about Buddhism, but it is usually in generalities, unlike some of the other religions debated more in-depth on this forum.
This is from a particular teaching of the Buddha, described in Dr. Rahula's book, What the Budda taught.
This topic is much abstract than most of us think; it will not be possible to explain it using philosophy and logic only, but will have to use certain terminology if I were to explain it as a practising Buddhist. If you don't accept the terminology you will not be able to grasp its ultimate sense.
In Buddhism everything is measured by two parameters; viz. absolute Truth (Paramatta cissa) and relative Truth (Samudhi Cissa).
We live in a world where relativity is the key for comparison and description, and we know, understand and describe everything in relative terms, which is called Samudhi Cissa in Pali. It is only partially correct, but not perfect or cannot be bolied down to fit or applicable to everybody.
Whereas, Paramatta Cissa is hard to understand, but is the ultimate Truth that only a few could understand it properly. If one understands it properly one will accquire the Wisdom or will have overcome the primodal barrier of every life forms in the universe, including so-called Gods, Angels, and everyone else known to us. If one understands it by theory and practice one has overcome the first barrier of the ultimate Truth known as 'Avijja' in Pali. However, there are two more barriers ahead; viz. Tanha or enjoying sensual pleasures and Sankhara or reactions either positively or negatively before one becomes fully enlightened.
I will now continue trying to explain the unexplainable using relative Truth on Anatta, which is the topic in question, although I know that the majority in the loop will refute it.
Anatta, despite its popular usage, only a few will understand it properly due to the above reasons. I'm not going to repeat what have already been discussed. If we were to waterdown and analyse a person or a being into its basic and elementary components there are only five; viz. Rupa Khanda or the corporal, Vedana Khanda or sensations, Sanat Khanda or perceived senses, Sankhara Khanda or reactive components, and Vinana Khanda or the consciousness.
There is nothing called Atta or an unchanging soul in a being. However, in relative terms Atta is the consciousness that goes or transmigrates into another body after dying. This knowledge is the realtive Truth, but when one knows this phenomenon with ultimate Wisdom it is not Atta but the Vinana Khanda since the last consciousness or simply as a thought that disspiates immediately when a new thought emerges to continue with the next existence. This process goes on and on without interruption. That's why most religions regard it as the soul or Atta, but it has changed although it retains some information associated with the previous life.
Buddhism as we know, takes the middle path between the two extremes; viz. religions that accept Atta or soul and the other concept that we call it Atheism or Anatta in a relative sense that lacks Paramatta Cissa or ultimate Truth/Wisdom.
Therefore, those who follow religions and those we believe in atheism will never understand the True meaning of Anatta unless one follows and practices the method taught by the Buddha to understand and appreciate Anatta. I can give analogies and relate stories mentioned in the Buddhist canon but someone will refute them and put them as non-logical, irrelevant and non-sense since they live in the world of 'relativity'.
This topic is much abstract than most of us think; it will not be possible to explain it using philosophy and logic only, but will have to use certain terminology if I were to explain it as a practising Buddhist. If you don't accept the terminology you will not be able to grasp its ultimate sense.
In Buddhism everything is measured by two parameters; viz. absolute Truth (Paramatta cissa) and relative Truth (Samudhi Cissa).
We live in a world where relativity is the key for comparison and description, and we know, understand and describe everything in relative terms, which is called Samudhi Cissa in Pali. It is only partially correct, but not perfect or cannot be bolied down to fit or applicable to everybody.
Whereas, Paramatta Cissa is hard to understand, but is the ultimate Truth that only a few could understand it properly. If one understands it properly one will accquire the Wisdom or will have overcome the primodal barrier of every life forms in the universe, including so-called Gods, Angels, and everyone else known to us. If one understands it by theory and practice one has overcome the first barrier of the ultimate Truth known as 'Avijja' in Pali. However, there are two more barriers ahead; viz. Tanha or enjoying sensual pleasures and Sankhara or reactions either positively or negatively before one becomes fully enlightened.
I will now continue trying to explain the unexplainable using relative Truth on Anatta, which is the topic in question, although I know that the majority in the loop will refute it.
Anatta, despite its popular usage, only a few will understand it properly due to the above reasons. I'm not going to repeat what have already been discussed. If we were to waterdown and analyse a person or a being into its basic and elementary components there are only five; viz. Rupa Khanda or the corporal, Vedana Khanda or sensations, Sanat Khanda or perceived senses, Sankhara Khanda or reactive components, and Vinana Khanda or the consciousness.
There is nothing called Atta or an unchanging soul in a being. However, in relative terms Atta is the consciousness that goes or transmigrates into another body after dying. This knowledge is the realtive Truth, but when one knows this phenomenon with ultimate Wisdom it is not Atta but the Vinana Khanda since the last consciousness or simply as a thought that disspiates immediately when a new thought emerges to continue with the next existence. This process goes on and on without interruption. That's why most religions regard it as the soul or Atta, but it has changed although it retains some information associated with the previous life.
Buddhism as we know, takes the middle path between the two extremes; viz. religions that accept Atta or soul and the other concept that we call it Atheism or Anatta in a relative sense that lacks Paramatta Cissa or ultimate Truth/Wisdom.
Therefore, those who follow religions and those we believe in atheism will never understand the True meaning of Anatta unless one follows and practices the method taught by the Buddha to understand and appreciate Anatta. I can give analogies and relate stories mentioned in the Buddhist canon but someone will refute them and put them as non-logical, irrelevant and non-sense since they live in the world of 'relativity'.
Wow.. religions sure like to tell people there are all kinds of strange and mysterious things they will not understand.
This topic is much abstract than most of us think; it will not be possible to explain it using philosophy and logic only, but will have to use certain terminology if I were to explain it as a practising Buddhist. If you don't accept the terminology you will not be able to grasp its ultimate sense.
In Buddhism everything is measured by two parameters; viz. absolute Truth (Paramatta cissa) and relative Truth (Samudhi Cissa).
We live in a world where relativity is the key for comparison and description, and we know, understand and describe everything in relative terms, which is called Samudhi Cissa in Pali. It is only partially correct, but not perfect or cannot be bolied down to fit or applicable to everybody.
Whereas, Paramatta Cissa is hard to understand, but is the ultimate Truth that only a few could understand it properly. If one understands it properly one will accquire the Wisdom or will have overcome the primodal barrier of every life forms in the universe, including so-called Gods, Angels, and everyone else known to us. If one understands it by theory and practice one has overcome the first barrier of the ultimate Truth known as 'Avijja' in Pali. However, there are two more barriers ahead; viz. Tanha or enjoying sensual pleasures and Sankhara or reactions either positively or negatively before one becomes fully enlightened.
I will now continue trying to explain the unexplainable using relative Truth on Anatta, which is the topic in question, although I know that the majority in the loop will refute it.
Anatta, despite its popular usage, only a few will understand it properly due to the above reasons. I'm not going to repeat what have already been discussed. If we were to waterdown and analyse a person or a being into its basic and elementary components there are only five; viz. Rupa Khanda or the corporal, Vedana Khanda or sensations, Sanat Khanda or perceived senses, Sankhara Khanda or reactive components, and Vinana Khanda or the consciousness.
There is nothing called Atta or an unchanging soul in a being. However, in relative terms Atta is the consciousness that goes or transmigrates into another body after dying. This knowledge is the realtive Truth, but when one knows this phenomenon with ultimate Wisdom it is not Atta but the Vinana Khanda since the last consciousness or simply as a thought that disspiates immediately when a new thought emerges to continue with the next existence. This process goes on and on without interruption. That's why most religions regard it as the soul or Atta, but it has changed although it retains some information associated with the previous life.
Buddhism as we know, takes the middle path between the two extremes; viz. religions that accept Atta or soul and the other concept that we call it Atheism or Anatta in a relative sense that lacks Paramatta Cissa or ultimate Truth/Wisdom.
Therefore, those who follow religions and those we believe in atheism will never understand the True meaning of Anatta unless one follows and practices the method taught by the Buddha to understand and appreciate Anatta. I can give analogies and relate stories mentioned in the Buddhist canon but someone will refute them and put them as non-logical, irrelevant and non-sense since they live in the world of 'relativity'.
I do hope that your argument is not representative of the more elevated reasoning of Buddhist thinkers.
While we understand very well the only real and logical relativity of 'truth' - what actually is and what we can know or understand of it - 'Ultimate truth' as you describe seems ultimately to be just another Faith - claim. Once one believes, then the Truth is magically 'known'. Stock self - justification of any religion. Any mere human logical objections or queries are dismissed as the quibbles of those who do not 'understand'.
Setting aside the impressive - sounding Pali designations for various mental experiences which (like voices in the head and dreams) might as well be purely in the head as representing something outside it, we get again to this 'soul' idea.
It is a bit impolite to suggest that the idea of the human soul being purely a cultural delusion and our consciousness at death merely being dissipated amongst the other particles, energy or whatever is the stuff of which matter is made is too difficult for people to understand, and especially atheists, who tend to see that conclusion (given disbelief in a soul) as best according with the evidence we have - any truth beyond that, despite the best efforts the Buddha, Plantinga and Mystic Phd, simply not being substantiated if one does not uncritically accept the 'truth' of faith - based beliefs.
One would then suppose that ones deeds and memories (if indeed they were anything existent at all) would also be dissipated into the fabric of the cosmos, but Ohhh-noooo, these (in lieu of the soul or self - which - does - not - exist) are perpetuated by this Karma - idea inherited from a very myth -laden Hinduism with more gods, demigods and saints than one could shake a stick at as something which we should spend our lives turning positive so as to make sure they are reincarnated into a body with a Good Karma start.
While we beaver away at our good deeds, this Karma - entity supposedly sorts our deeds into good and bad piles rather like a potato - grader and decides which poor bastard gets saddles with all our bad Karma at their birth - because that poor bastard is not in any meaningful sense ourselves.
I have to mention again, this idea that the natural force of Karma can, without being an intelligence (which makes Buddhism a theism in my book), do this sorting out. The suggestion that we ourselves decide what is good and bad deeds is a dodgy one indeed as one only needs to believe that a ghastly evil done with the very best of intentions is worth a whole lot of good karma.
It's why I could not continue in Buddhism, though I still like it culturally, it does not stack up. Despite attempts by various Buddhists to explain the logic, I would say that they have been unable to, and that includes Sidney's post above which, once one has got past the litter of Pali technical terms, seems little more than an appeal to Faith in unsubstantiated beliefs which actually do not make much sense.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 05-09-2012 at 06:21 AM..
I do hope that your argument is not representative of the more elevated reasoning of Buddhist thinkers.
The suggestion that we ourselves decide what is good and bad deeds is a dodgy one indeed as one only needs to believe that a ghastly evil done with the very best of intentions is worth a whole lot of good karma.
I would say that they have been unable to, and that includes Sidney's post above which, once one has got past the litter of Pali technical terms, seems little more than an appeal to Faith in unsubstantiated beliefs which actually do not make much sense.
I just want to point out a few lines from the above quotation.
Buddhism is not about thinking, but a practice taught by a human who was enlightened. You really can't get enlightened just by reasoning and thinking. The Buddha clearly stated not to believe blindly in what he taught, but to practise it and see it for yourself if there is any (absolute) Truth in it. So, you may think, argue and reason out all your life, but without the practice you will never see its Truth.
I'm not surprised by your remarks as I have already mentioned beforehand that I have expected them. I just wish anyone who came across the post would be able to put it in practice to see it for yourself.
According to Stephen Batchelor, the Buddha didn't teach "no self", he taught a "Middle Way" between a static, permanent self (Eternalism) and no-self (Nihilism). He taught the self is ever-changing, ever-evolving.
What reincarnates is consciousness, the "seed consciousness" that carries the karmic imprint of our actions in this lifetime, and past lifetimes. In Tibetan Buddhism, this is called the "very, very subtle mind", or mind-stream. Whether or not this is just a semantic game, a way to get around saying there's a permanent soul while still accounting for reincarnation is a matter of opinion and great debate.
According to Stephen Batchelor, the Buddha didn't teach "no self", he taught a "Middle Way" between a static, permanent self (Eternalism) and no-self (Nihilism). He taught the self is ever-changing, ever-evolving.
What reincarnates is consciousness, the "seed consciousness" that carries the karmic imprint of our actions in this lifetime, and past lifetimes. In Tibetan Buddhism, this is called the "very, very subtle mind", or mind-stream. Whether or not this is just a semantic game, a way to get around saying there's a permanent soul while still accounting for reincarnation is a matter of opinion and great debate.
Consciousness, thought, mind, soul or whatever you call it is said to be very potent, and is the only agent that is capable of travelling back to the past and to the future, to reincarnate and even to perceive 'Nivarna' according to the most abstract and ultimate sayings of the Buddha in the Abhidhamma Pitaka: the 24 Pacchaya.
I just want to point out a few lines from the above quotation.
Buddhism is not about thinking, but a practice taught by a human who was enlightened. You really can't get enlightened just by reasoning and thinking. The Buddha clearly stated not to believe blindly in what he taught, but to practise it and see it for yourself if there is any (absolute) Truth in it. So, you may think, argue and reason out all your life, but without the practice you will never see its Truth.
I'm not surprised by your remarks as I have already mentioned beforehand that I have expected them. I just wish anyone who came across the post would be able to put it in practice to see it for yourself.
The problem about this is that it is a swindle. In fact a new 'evangelism package' to add to the list - 'Pray for God to enter your heart' (incorporating 'try it and see what a difference it makes to your life').
The fact is that meditation, prayer, chanting and a number of other physical and or mental efforts will produce results. The same can come from smoking stash, having electrodes stuck in your brain or swinging from hooks in a wickiup, apparently.
While the effects cannot be denied and I accept the reality of the 'Mystical experience' it is clear that what actually causes this and how it should interpreted is a matter that needs to be given consideration. Your post suggests that we just take it as practical evidence that what Buddhism teaches is true, just all all the other religions suggest that we put ourself is a prayer/meditational position directed in the way the evangelist wants us to go. If and when it produces the effect, then this is the 'proof' and no further evidence, far less reasoning is needed.
This is spiritual pump - priming and I do regard it an evangelical trick.
The problem about this is that it is a swindle. In fact a new 'evangelism package' to add to the list - 'Pray for God to enter your heart' (incorporating 'try it and see what a difference it makes to your life').
The fact is that meditation, prayer, chanting and a number of other physical and or mental efforts will produce results. The same can come from smoking stash, having electrodes stuck in your brain or swinging from hooks in a wickiup, apparently.
While the effects cannot be denied and I accept the reality of the 'Mystical experience' it is clear that what actually causes this and how it should interpreted is a matter that needs to be given consideration. Your post suggests that we just take it as practical evidence that what Buddhism teaches is true, just all all the other religions suggest that we put ourself is a prayer/meditational position directed in the way the evangelist wants us to go. If and when it produces the effect, then this is the 'proof' and no further evidence, far less reasoning is needed.
This is spiritual pump - priming and I do regard it an evangelical trick.
I wonder what you were thinking when you mentioned about the effects of meditation; please do your homework on meditation, how many types, what results can be expected and tell me so that I can answer them categorically. I am pretty sure the Buddha is more knowledgable than you as I have already thread the path and have seen it for myself!
I wonder what you were thinking when you mentioned about the effects of meditation; please do your homework on meditation, how many types, what results can be expected and tell me so that I can answer them categorically. I am pretty sure the Buddha is more knowledgable than you as I have already thread the path and have seen it for myself!
I am disinclined to do any more homework than I have done, I am not going to be distracted into trying to list types of meditation any more than I am going to compile an exhaustive index of dreams. I have reservations about the smarts of someone who never seemed to have wondered how a natural force (once the Hindu gods had been taken out of the equation) could sort good deeds from bad and finally, I am far from sure that the Buddha even existed.
If you have trod the path and it suits you sir, I am delighted for you. I have just given my reasons for doubting that it can be anything more than just another type of religious delusion and will leave it to others to decide whether to follow the eightfold path or join me in applying reason and evidence.
For those who say that karmic force cannot work without intelligence (I am Hindu, and maybe one of the few who sees Hinduism and Buddhism the same), consider this:
You do not exist.
The karmic force makes you think you exist.
Your bad actions (which you think you did) makes you exist (think you exist) in a bad manner at a different time.
This actually is the same in advaita of Hinduism. Vishnu is represented dreaming about this world.
The emptiness that happens in Buddhism when you know for sure nothing is real, except the emptiness, is called the atman or infinite conciousness in hinduism. The jiva (or individual soul) is the retain-able part of memory in the ever changing thought of budhism. The advaita branch of hinduism, actually denies this individual soul (non-duality) just like Buddhism, but says the universal reality is ataman.(the universal soul).
In other words hinduism says the "glass is half full" and budhism says the "glass is half empty" .
I believe in both Hinduism and Buddhism, when we disappear into this ataman, we achieve complete happiness. This is impossible to comprehend until we are actually there. If it is empty how can we experience anything? I believe just like we imagine happiness and sorrow in our current form, in nirvana (or moksha) there is just a singular form of eternal happiness, which unlike now, never does change and continues as part of the infinite atman.
Last edited by prasanna.ayer; 07-23-2012 at 01:28 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
