All is one. Change my view.

Casual discussion amongst spiritual friends.
zan
Posts: 505
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:57 pm

All is one. Change my view.

Post by zan » Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am

I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that, I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
I don't have much knowledge of the Dhamma, I'm just a beginner. Keep that in mind before you take anything I say too seriously :tongue:

paul
Posts: 1049
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Vietnam

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by paul » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:03 am

An extract from the essay (2800 words):

"Finally, in the domain of wisdom the Ariyan Dhamma and the non-dual systems once again move in contrary directions. In the non-dual systems the task of wisdom is to break through the diversified appearances (or the appearance of diversity) in order to discover the unifying reality that underlies them. Concrete phenomena, in their distinctions and their plurality, are mere appearance, while true reality is the One: either a substantial Absolute (the Atman, Brahman, the Godhead, etc.), or a metaphysical zero (Sunyata, the Void Nature of Mind, etc.). For such systems, liberation comes with the arrival at the fundamental unity in which opposites merge and distinctions evaporate like dew.

In the Ariyan Dhamma wisdom aims at seeing and knowing things as they really are (yathabhutananadassana). Hence, to know things as they are, wisdom must respect phenomena in their precise particularity. Wisdom leaves diversity and plurality untouched. It instead seeks to uncover the characteristics of phenomena, to gain insight into their qualities and structures. It moves, not in the direction of an all-embracing identification with the All, but toward disengagement and detachment, release from the All."---"Dhamma and Non-duality", Bikkhu Bodhi.
Last edited by paul on Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19521
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by retrofuturist » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:12 am

Greetings Zan,
zan wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am
I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that, I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
SN 12.48 is adequate to answer your question from the Dhammic point of view. If you wish to know something ontological or cosmological beyond that, such conjecture is not connected to dukkha & nirodha, and thus to the Dhamma.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

SarathW
Posts: 9175
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by SarathW » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:36 am

zan wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am
I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
This called Mana in Buddhism.
That is any form of measuring.
The thought higher, lower and equal are all come under Mana.
All is one is the thought all is equal.
By the way, if you have come so far you are an enlightened being but not necessarily an Ariya.
:thumbsup:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:41 am

[The Buddha:] "Yes, Ananda, you heard that correctly, learned it correctly, attended to it correctly, remembered it correctly. Now, as well as before, I remain fully in a dwelling of emptiness. Just as this palace of Migara's mother is empty of elephants, cattle, & mares, empty of gold & silver, empty of assemblies of women & men, and there is only this non-emptiness — the singleness based on the community of monks; even so, Ananda, a monk — not attending to the perception[1] of village, not attending to the perception of human being — attends to the singleness based on the perception of wilderness. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of wilderness.

"He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of village are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of village. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:50 am

zan wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am
I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that, I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
There's a very simple experiential argument for this:
Go to the toilet, do a nr. 2, and then look at it, smell it, *gasp* touch it, and think "This, too, is me. All is one."

:toilet:

(This is in the Lounge, so it's not against the ToS.)

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:58 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:50 am
zan wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am
I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that, I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
There's a very simple experiential argument for this:
Go to the toilet, do a nr. 2, and then look at it, smell it, *gasp* touch it, and think "This, too, is me. All is one."

:toilet:

(This is in the Lounge, so it's not against the ToS.)
Even more radically: if you are capable of doing a "number 2", then all can't be just one, can it?

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:00 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:58 am
Even more radically: if you are capable of doing a "number 2", then all can't be just one, can it?
The One is manifold, versatile, in flux.

:meditate:

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:06 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:00 am
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:58 am
Even more radically: if you are capable of doing a "number 2", then all can't be just one, can it?
The One is manifold, versatile, in flux.

:meditate:
If it's manifold, then it ain't one.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:15 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:06 am
If it's manifold, then it ain't one.
Achintya Bheda Abheda Tattva.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:19 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:15 am
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:06 am
If it's manifold, then it ain't one.
Achintya Bheda Abheda Tattva.
From the link:
Achintya-Bheda-Abheda (अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद, acintyabhedābheda in IAST) is a school of Vedanta representing the philosophy of inconceivable one-ness and difference.
Inconceivable being the key term here.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:33 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:19 am
Inconceivable being the key term here.
Heh. But nevertheless, the authors of the Achintya-Bheda-Abheda doctrine conceived of it ...


Anyway, the best objection against the idea that "All is one" is that "All is one" has no explanatory power, it's useless.

However, it seems that someone who already subscribes to "All is one" (like the OP, asking that we change their view) cannot move out of or away from it, because it frames all of their efforts and keeps them within "All is one". In that sense, "All is one" is a metaphysical straitjacket.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:51 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:33 am
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:19 am
Inconceivable being the key term here.
Heh. But nevertheless, the authors of the Achintya-Bheda-Abheda doctrine conceived of it ...
I'm of the opinion that the doctrine is eminently conceivable, in that one can say the words. It's the fact, the one-ness itself, which is inconceivable.
Anyway, the best objection against the idea that "All is one" is that "All is one" has no explanatory power, it's useless.
Agreed, but I'd call that the "second best objection". The best objection is that it doesn't lead to the end of suffering.
However, it seems that someone who already subscribes to "All is one" (like the OP, asking that we change their view) cannot move out of or away from it, because it frames all of their efforts and keeps them within "All is one". In that sense, "All is one" is a metaphysical straitjacket.
I don't think that ideas are so important or compelling that they can be a trap. It seems to me to be more of a cul-de-sac or dead end, rather than a straitjacket. Mountaineering, falling in love, or meditation are all sovereign remedies.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:21 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:51 am
It's the fact, the one-ness itself, which is inconceivable.
But how then can they write whole tomes about it?
Anyway, the best objection against the idea that "All is one" is that "All is one" has no explanatory power, it's useless.
Agreed, but I'd call that the "second best objection". The best objection is that it doesn't lead to the end of suffering.
In the "All is one" mentality, suffering and the end of suffering don't play important roles; someone with an "All is one" mentality does not strive to make an end to suffering. Instead, they've seemingly solved the problem of suffering with the thought-terminating cliche "All is one". (It's not possible to have an intelligible conversation with a proponent of "All is one". Then there is the issue of whether to analyze the situation from the perspective of the person holding "All is one", or from some other.)
I don't think that ideas are so important or compelling that they can be a trap. It seems to me to be more of a cul-de-sac or dead end, rather than a straitjacket. Mountaineering, falling in love, or meditation are all sovereign remedies.
Thank heavens for time!

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:36 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:21 am
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:51 am
It's the fact, the one-ness itself, which is inconceivable.
But how then can they write whole tomes about it?
:shrug: Papanca. Or, I might have comletely misunderstood it.
In the "All is one" mentality, suffering and the end of suffering don't play important roles; someone with an "All is one" mentality does not strive to make an end to suffering. Instead, they've seemingly solved the problem of suffering with the thought-terminating cliche "All is one". (It's not possible to have an intelligible conversation with a proponent of "All is one". Then there is the issue of whether to analyze the situation from the perspective of the person holding "All is one", or from some other.)
Yes, I have exactly the same feeling. I also suspect there are many different "All is one" mentalities, and the form of words alone is the same.

User avatar
binocular
Posts: 5281
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by binocular » Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:37 am

Meanwhile, my teeth rot.

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1477
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by Bundokji » Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:46 pm

To what extent we can consider the three marks of existence as seeing the universal in the particular?
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 812
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:40 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by aflatun » Sun Apr 15, 2018 3:05 pm

zan wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 4:23 am
I am curious as to whether or not there are any convincing arguments against this view?

Not necessarily just that the Buddha said that oneness is an extreme that he did not teach, I already know that, I am wondering if there are any actual arguments that directly refute the idea of "oneness", either from the canon or from anywhere else?
It depends on which flavor of "All is One" you are referring to. I know of a few: Plotinus, Shankara, New Age, etc.

The madhyamikas have a long tradition of rejecting sameness and difference, as well as unitary and plural intrinsic natures, in favor of dependent origination, much as SN12.48 that Retro posted does.

Also, are you referring to a theoretical construct that you find compelling...or an insight/meditative experience, or re ordering of your lived experience that you've noticed? If its the latter you might want to stay out of doctrinal disputes and proceed with personal investigation of your experience. Actually even if its the former you might want to go that way anyway :meditate:
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

dharmacorps
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by dharmacorps » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:08 pm

Thanissaro Bhikkhu has much to say on this:

https://tricycle.org/magazine/we-are-not-one/

User avatar
bodom
Posts: 6200
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: All is one. Change my view.

Post by bodom » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:45 pm

dharmacorps wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:08 pm
Thanissaro Bhikkhu has much to say on this:

https://tricycle.org/magazine/we-are-not-one/
:thumbsup:

Beat me to it.

:namaste:
To study is to know the texts,
To practice is to know your defilements,
To attain the goal is to know and let go.

- Ajahn Lee Dhammadharo


With no struggling, no thinking,
the mind, still,
will see cause and effect
vanishing in the Void.
Attached to nothing, letting go:
Know that this is the way
to allay all stress.

- Upasika Kee Nanayan

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], DooDoot, ryanM, Wizard in the Forest and 37 guests