Theravada against Logic

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
thang
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:37 pm

Theravada against Logic

Post by thang »

Some says logical understanding of Dhamma facts is impossible while some says it is needed.
What is the real meaning of 'Atakkavacara' ?
Atakkavacara: Beyond logic What the Buddha Taught
"Atthi bhikkhave anneva dhamma gambhira duddasa duranubodha santa panita atakkavacara nipuna pandita-vedaniya, ye Tathagato sayam abhinna sacchikatva pavedeti, yehi Tathagatassa yatha-bhuccam vannam samma vadamana vadeyyum."

There are other principles—deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of reason, subtle, comprehensible to the astute—which the Realized One makes known after realizing them with his own insight. Those who genuinely praise the Realized One would rightly speak of these things.
[Brahmajala - The Prime Net]
Is this 'beyond the logic' nature applied only to a certain set of (deep) Dhammas or to all Dhammas ?
Nanavira Thera- Notes on Dhamma:
ATAKKĀVACARA
Sometimes translated as 'unattainable by reasoning' or 'not accessible to doubt'. But the Cartesian cogito ergo sum is also, in a sense, inaccessible to doubt; for I cannot doubt my existence without tacitly assuming it. This merely shows, however, that one cannot get beyond the cogito by doubting it. And the Dhamma is beyond the cogito. The cogito, then, can be reached by doubt—one doubts and doubts until one finds what one cannot doubt, what is inaccessible to doubt, namely the cogito. But the Dhamma cannot be reached in this way. Thus the Dhamma, though certainly inaccessible to doubt, is more than that; it is altogether beyond the sphere of doubt. The rationalist, however, does not even reach the inadequate cogito, or if he does reach it[a] he overshoots the mark (atidhāvati—Itivuttaka II,ii,12 <Iti. 43>); for he starts from the axiom that everything can be doubted (including, of course, the cogito). Cf. also Majjhima xi,2 <M.ii,232-3> & i,2 <M.i,8>.

Footnotes:

[a] When he is being professional, the rationalist will not allow that what is inaccessible to doubt is even intelligible, and he does not permit himself to consider the cogito; but in his unprofessional moments, when the personal problem becomes insistent, he exorcizes the cogito by supposing that it is a rational proposition, which enables him to doubt it, and then to deny it. 'Les positivistes ne font qu'exorciser le spectre de l'Absolu, qui reparaît cependant toujours et vient les troubler dans leur repos.' -- - J. Grenier, op. cit., p. 44. ('The positivists do nothing but exorcize the spectre of the Absolute, which however always reappears and comes to trouble them in their sleep.') For Grenier, the Absolute is not (as with Bradley) the totality of experiences, but is to be reached at the very heart of personality by a thought transcending the relativity of all things, perceiving therein a void (pp. 100-1). Precisely—and what, ultimately, is this Absolute but avijjā, self-dependent and without first beginning? And what, therefore, does the Buddha teach but that this Absolute is not absolute, that it can be brought to an end? See A NOTE ON PATICCASAMUPPĀDA §§24 & 25.
"Bhikkhus, whatever the Tathāgata speaks, _ all that is just so and NOT otherwise."

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 4468
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by cappuccino »

thinking and reasoning is not enough

you should have insight into the nature of reality

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by budo »

There is a sutta on how to judge a person or teacher. It says not based on logic or authority, reputation, etc.. but based on wholesome deeds and qualities. This implies that there is something beyond logic, because at the end of the day logic is limited to experience.

If you see and experience many rebirths and lives then you will see how karma works. However someone who cannot see and experience their past lives and or beings arising and passing away, cannot fully know how karma works, so therefore faith is more important than logic.

However, even then, the Buddha is still logical as in some suttas he says "even if there's no rebirth or another world, having virtue gives you reassurances in this life".

So at the end of the day, one needs faith until they attain first hand experience. Nibbana cannot be completely rationalized.

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 463
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by Germann »

The concept of "truth" is based on the law of the excluded middle. Without logic, there are no true descriptions of reality.

Srilankaputra
Posts: 981
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by Srilankaputra »

Germann wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 6:51 pm
The concept of "truth" is based on the law of the excluded middle. Without logic, there are no true descriptions of reality.
Reason and logic is, but a part of this world. The world does not spring forth from reason. Man can only but make sense of, little he has seen with it.

Reason cannot move mountains, it can lay the plans but exertion gets the task done. There are things men have found out by their manly vigor and exertion that is beyond logic.
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 463
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by Germann »

Srilankaputra wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 7:29 pm
Germann wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 6:51 pm
The concept of "truth" is based on the law of the excluded middle. Without logic, there are no true descriptions of reality.
Reason and logic is, but a part of this world. The world does not spring forth from reason. Man can only but make sense of, little he has seen with it.

Reason cannot move mountains, it can lay the plans but exertion gets the task done. There are things men have found out by their manly vigor and exertion that is beyond logic.
Buddha could not teach the absurd. Dhamma is perfect at the beginning, in the middle and at the end.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8200
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by DooDoot »

Germann wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 7:32 pm
The concept of "truth" is based on the law of the excluded middle. Without logic, there are no true descriptions of reality.... Buddha could not teach the absurd. Dhamma is perfect at the beginning, in the middle and at the end.
The Buddha literally said to not rely on "logic".
Please, Kālāmas, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned contemplation, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after consideration, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’

Etha tumhe, kālāmā, mā anussavena, mā paramparāya, mā itikirāya, mā piṭakasampadānena, mā takkahetu, mā nayahetu, mā ākāraparivitakkena, mā diṭṭhinijjhānakkhantiyā, mā bhabbarūpatāya, mā samaṇo no garūti.

But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’, then you should give them up.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.65/en/sujato
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 1044
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by Nicolas »

The Dhamma is logical, but it can't be fully realized unless one develops the mind. Not developing the mind, not practicing, but only engaging in coherent intellectual discourse with logic by one's side, is not enough to fully awaken. One can have logic and intelligence, but not sila, samadhi, panna.

binocular
Posts: 7761
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by binocular »

It would help if people would define what exactly they mean by "logic". The word has different meanings.
“One man’s “magic” is another man’s engineering. “Supernatural” is a null word.”
- Robert Heinlein

thang
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:37 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by thang »

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 7:43 pm
But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’, then you should give them up.
https://suttacentral.net/an3.65/en/sujato
It is obvious that we can't realize many things by logical reasoning.

But after having something known for ourselves, it seems logic is needed again.
IF 'we know for ourselves as skillful ' THEN 'involve'
IF 'we known for ourselves as unskillful' THEN 'give up'

So 'logic' seems to have very important role ??
Is that so ?
"Bhikkhus, whatever the Tathāgata speaks, _ all that is just so and NOT otherwise."

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 13131
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by DNS »

Soma Thera's translation:
"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
Logic is good, it is specious reasoning that one is not to go by. Specious reasoning is superficially plausible, but actually wrong, misleading reasoning.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 13131
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by DNS »

"Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."

SarathW
Posts: 14096
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by SarathW »

Perhaps the path (Magga) is logic and the fruit (Phala) is not logic.
Right knowledge (logic) right release (not logic)
:shrug:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

thang
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:37 pm

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by thang »

SarathW wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:24 pm
Right knowledge (logic) right release (not logic)
Is Samma Nana (Right knowledge) logic?
Is 'known for ourselves' logic?
Is wisdom logic?
"Bhikkhus, whatever the Tathāgata speaks, _ all that is just so and NOT otherwise."

Srilankaputra
Posts: 981
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Theravada against Logic

Post by Srilankaputra »

Germann wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 7:32 pm
Srilankaputra wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 7:29 pm
Germann wrote:
Fri Mar 08, 2019 6:51 pm
The concept of "truth" is based on the law of the excluded middle. Without logic, there are no true descriptions of reality.
Reason and logic is, but a part of this world. The world does not spring forth from reason. Man can only but make sense of, little he has seen with it.

Reason cannot move mountains, it can lay the plans but exertion gets the task done. There are things men have found out by their manly vigor and exertion that is beyond logic.
Buddha could not teach the absurd. Dhamma is perfect at the beginning, in the middle and at the end.
What if there is a man imprisoned in darkness from birth. No amount of words may explain to him of colours. but he may be led in to the light to see for himself.
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.

Post Reply