Sherab wrote:acinteyyo wrote:I wouldn't, because your statement depends on assumptions which lie beyond range, see Sabba Sutta: The All SN 35.23.
Would this sentence be more agreeable to you? : "The All" refers to all things/phenomena that can be sensed and anything beyond the realm of senses is mere speculation and irrelevant.
I would prefer if you insist on reformulating what is stated in sutta SN35.23: "'The All' refers to the six sense bases as well as to their corresponding sense objects."
The rest of your sentence is irrelevant, because "the All" is already containing everything there is and talking about another "All" lies beyond range.
Sherab wrote:If so, how would you regard those things that man cannot sense? For example, magnetic fields? Note that the teachings only talked about the five senses.
If you examine Sutta
SN35.23 carefully again you will notice that the teachings are talking about the six senses and define the six senses and their corresponding objects as "the All" (and in
SN 35.82 as "the world").
SN35.23
"What is the All? Simply the
1. eye & forms,
2.ear & sounds,
3.nose & aromas,
4.tongue & flavors,
5.body & tactile sensations,
6.intellect & ideas."
A magnetic field is part of "the All". We can talk about it, think about the idea of magnetic fields and so on because it lies within the sphere of our senses. But I don't want to go in for further discussion in that particular direction. Please keep in mind that it's just suffering and the ending of suffering which the Buddha was concerend with and not physics.
Sherab wrote:And how would you regard hypotheses and theories that are useful but cannot be proven, let alone sense, and would be beyond the comprehension of most people?
It depends, something which is useful for you needn't to be useful for anyone else and vice versa. But if you don't comprehend a hypotheses, theorie, idea or what ever, if you don't understand it, don't grasp it how can it be useful?
Sherab wrote:Also if you accept that free will/choice exists in the present, then you will have to advocate a multiverse theory since there will be many different paths that the future can take depending on the choices that you make in the present.
There are many different paths that the future can take depending on the choices that you make in the present, don't you think? Things aren't completely determined but they aren't also completely independent. There is only the present moment, the here and now. Future is nothing else but an idea in the present about how the present could become next. Which doesn't need to have anything to do with the present which actually became next. When a "future"(-idea) becomes reality we call it present. But the present can certainly change in a way no one expected and still can become real. The past is also just an idea in the present about how the present which has already changed could have been before. This idea of the past present also doesn't need to have anything to do with the past present which really was when it was actually present. This is the way I see it, but btw I don't consider such thoughts important for liberation from suffering.
Sherab wrote:All these futures have to exist side by side with one another in the present don't they?
All ideas which are thought toghether about how the present could probably become next exist (more or less) with one another in the present.
Sherab wrote:acinteyyo wrote:Past and future (as well as present) exist in the present; but they exist as past and as future.
Is this what the Buddha taught?
I'm not quite sure about that... maybe, maybe not. It's what Ven. Ñanavira Bhikkhu said about past, present and future.
But I wouldn't ponder much about it, what the Buddha taught is this:
MN 131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta: An Auspicious Day
"You shouldn't chase after the past or place expectations on the future. What is past is left behind. The future is as yet unreached. Whatever quality is present you clearly see right there, right there. [...]"
"And how, monks, does one chase after the past? One gets carried away with the delight of 'In the past I had such a form (body)'... 'In the past I had such a feeling'... 'In the past I had such a perception'... 'In the past I had such a thought-fabrication'... 'In the past I had such a consciousness.' This is called chasing after the past.
"And how does one not chase after the past? One does not get carried away with the delight of 'In the past I had such a form (body)'... 'In the past I had such a feeling'... 'In the past I had such a perception'... 'In the past I had such a thought-fabrication'... 'In the past I had such a consciousness.' This is called not chasing after the past.
"And how does one place expectations on the future? One gets carried away with the delight of 'In the future I might have such a form (body)'... 'In the future I might have such a feeling'... 'In the future I might have such a perception'... 'In the future I might have such a thought-fabrication'... 'In the future I might have such a consciousness.' This is called placing expectations on the future.
"And how does one not place expectations on the future? One does not get carried away with the delight of 'In the future I might have such a form (body)'... 'In the future I might have such a feeling'... 'In the future I might have such a perception'... 'In the future I might have such a thought-fabrication'... 'In the future I might have such a consciousness.' This is called not placing expectations on the future.
"And how is one taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person who has not seen the noble ones, is not versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is not trained in the teachings of the noble ones, sees form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.
"He/she sees feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.
"He/she sees perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.
"He/she sees thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as in thought-fabrications.
"He/she sees consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called being taken in with regard to present qualities.
"And how is one not taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones who has seen the noble ones, is versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is well-trained in the teachings of the noble ones, does not see form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.
"He/she does not see feeling as self, or self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.
"He/she does not see perception as self, or self as possessing perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception.
"He/she does not see thought-fabrications as self, or self as possessing thought-fabrications, or thought-fabrications as in self, or self as in thought-fabrications.
"He/she does not see consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. This is called not being taken in with regard to present qualities.
best wishes, acinteyyo