Dhamma Wheel

From what has been said above, I am just adding these two links: - One about how to breathe in Ānāpānasati, from this new perspective: https://justpaste.it/7296c Having folded one's legs crosswise, and straightened one's body. Secluded from sensual pleasures (vivicceva kāmehi) and secluded from unpr...

. https://i.imgur.com/DmQHvqA_d.jpg?maxwidth=300 . I think it's time to close this forum. As Mr. Bean and Sabbe-dhamma-anatta have definitely proved that all this can't be proven . Don't see any scientific bigotry into that. It has just been empirically proven that there is "no way to prove" . .. N...

... Indeed. No "whys" have ever been really proven. They remain just pure theories. Even if these theories are not truly "scientific", they have to move forward. The "heliocentric" ("scientific") model that replaced the "geocentric" model, is still just a computational model [angular momentum, heli...

Correct lexicography of paṭigha: Paṭighasaññānaṃ atthaṅgamā, With the vanishing of perceptions of (based upon) the organs of senses (ajjhattikāni āyatanāni (particularly mano - as the following verse is: "not striving with the mind (manasa/mano) to perceptions of manifoldness (lit. (what is) differe...

It is not Fenwick's idea. It is Chalmers' idea. The question is: In Chalmers' video, did Penrose prove anything when he said that quantum mechanical collapse IS consciousness? Did he prove scientifically the why? Isn't this just the apparent law of the how? Just an apparent law of the how, and still...

pyluyten wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 30, 2019 1:19 pm

Probablilty is different than real randomness.

Indeed.

in Buddhism, the arising of consciousness is dependent upon sense organs, including mano. Arising of sense -consciousness. Nuance. https://justpaste.it/1bzye Chalmers, was the first proponent of a theory of a consciousness as a law, like gravity - He says that consciousness might influence body; an...

There is in science the how - the laws that explains how something happens. But laws don't tell us why things happen. Theories do. Newton's law tell us how gravity works, but not why. Einstein's theory of general relativity explains why. Definition of Theory in the Cambridge dictionary Something sug...

Establishment of conciousness, maybe?

SN 42.12 is an interesting sutta for that matter.
Interesting also, is the parallel in SA 912.
.

Macroscopic objects average out microscopic quantum uncertainties and probabilities to accomodate a somewhat satisfactory "determinism" that appears in the visible "Laws of Nature." For the purpose of simplifying physics - to allow mathematical and logical methodologies like differential equations -...

.... In my quote to which you are just referring, you have forgotten this part. A lofty blank out, I suppose ? What the suttas are saying clearly - (that is to say, what the Buddha said clearly ) - is that you don't let everything in. https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/sn35.245/14-15 Also MN 19 "or...

A possibility . In the case of the verbs assasanto & passasanto, the Sanskrit considers dīgha (दीर्घ dīrgha) and rassa (ह्रस्व hrasva [hras-va]), as adverbs - whose translation is far (lofty) & close (low) - and not long & short (as adjective). Another possibility: In Anapanasati, Paṇidhāya parimuk...

Either experience continues or it does not. Be more precise on what you ask. This is an old note on asavas. It certainly has to be reviewed and canvassed again (as far as // and lexicography are concerned): https://justpaste.it/q4ki Once you've read it, go for these suttas https://legacy.suttacentr...

cappuccino wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 27, 2019 4:49 pm

ToVincent wrote: So no, I am not saying "there is no self"
Buddha is saying it

Buddha was silent.

Oh, darn - I thought you had just written:
"Buddha was silent not to imply that there was no self".

You changed your mind for a shorter, more potent haïku, I suppose.
Ouch!
.