Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?

Do you agree with the test ?

Yes
3
19%
No
13
81%
 
Total votes: 16

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:44 pm

Vastly outnumbered here or at suttacentral ? The existentialist buddhist sect is very small and criticized by all who are not part of it. It is so small nobody even took it seriously among famous monks. Only B.Bodhi bothered to write a letter of criticism about it. Most people also accuse it of solipsism, besides the more proeminent accuses regarding the 1 life interpretation of patticasamupada: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/ve ... m/2990/126

Since it's own name is "existentialist buddhism" or "phenomenological existentialism" - it's hard to escape the label of solipsism if we use the english dictionary deffinition for it, not the Retrofuturist definition for solipsism. Note the highlighed part. It does not say "believes other people don't exists", it says "claims you can never be sure".
British Dictionary definitions for solipsism Expand
solipsism
/ˈsɒlɪpˌsɪzəm/
noun
1.
(philosophy) the extreme form of scepticism which denies the possibility of any knowledge other than of one's own existence
Again, it's just like the postmodern issue with the label and hatred of dictionaries:

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:50 pm

Appearently there is even a topic here about weather there is a difference between existentialism and solipsism:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-diffe ... of-reality
And many more topics like that on quora.

Reading what people write there is just like reading Nanananda view of things. It's pure existentialism, not buddhism. It just has a buddhist label on top of it, like "secular buddhism".
Last edited by Circle5 on Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:51 pm

Greetings Circle5,
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:44 pm
The existentialist buddhist sect is very small and criticized by all who are not part of it.
:strawman:

No one is talking about Existentialist Buddhism here (except you).
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:44 pm
Most people also accuse it of solipsism
So "most people also accuse [existentialist buddhism] of solipsism", do they? Or do you mean that most of your sock-puppet accounts accuse existentialist buddhism of solipsism?

:toilet:
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:44 pm
Since it's own name is "existentialist buddhism" or "phenomenological existentialism" - it's hard to escape the label of solipsism if we use the english dictionary deffinition for it, not the Retrofuturist definition for solipsism.
:strawman: :redherring: :toilet:
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:50 pm
Appearently there is even a topic here about weather there is a difference between existentialism and solipsism:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-diffe ... of-reality
And many more topics like that on quora.
There's nothing wrong with being interested in Philosophy, but my perspective is not founded upon Western principles like existentialism, solpsism, post-modernism etc... it is founded in the suttas. If you prefer Philosophy to Dhamma, maybe you might wish to frequent Quora more often? Maybe your inane ramblings might get more traction there? Maybe?...

All in all, if this constitutes your best efforts at making an argument in favour of your position, I hope you'll excuse me in saying it's rather weak, to say the least. Just more "distortions, manoeuvres, and contortions"...

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by SDC » Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:54 pm

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:34 pm
It's hard to fit a kilometer of the modern exisitentialist buddhist sect ideas into them no matter how hard we might try. If you know more suttas about the existence of things that you feel can be twisted other than those 2 please let me know.
Do you realize the primacy you grant these ideas by constantly trying to criticize them? You and you alone gave them the name "existential Buddhist". All that was ever said in the slogan for Path Press is "an existential approach...". You started calling it a sect when barely anyone follows these ideas. You make it so much more than it is. You are a card player: you are overplaying your hand. It is almost as if you are an undercover supporter of these ideas and you go around pretending to "debunk" them so you can advertise their availability. Has that ever occurred to you that you are marketing these ideas and keeping them relevant? You keep it in the spotlight.

If all you do is repeat yourself, people are going to stop listening.

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:01 pm

From what I read in that topic, existentialism is similar in some ways to buddhism regarding it's conclusions, but very far apart regarding the ways to reach those conclusions and what they actually mean by them.
In some ways existentialism is a little like mysticism in that it strips away layers of assumptions to see things "as they are." The conclusions may be different, but to read the famous park bench scene in Sartre's La Nausée is to encounter a mystical apprehension of unadorned reality. That unadorned reality does exist outside and beyond the self...but at the same time the self can dissolve into it, as just one more component of the gnarled, brutal mess of existence. And that's precisely why Sartre incurs nausea in that apprehension: the hugeness, the lostness, the utter annihilation of significance of the self in that moment, as it is so obviously just an arbitrary part of the whole - like a tangle of roots or a clump of dirt - that the disorientation is overwhelming.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-diffe ... of-reality
So we have "life is meaningless" that is a conclusion shared by buddhism and we also have "ego has to be annihilated" and the mergence of the self within the big mess of existence. This is an idea different than buddhism, but it's not necessarily hinduist monism as ToVicent said. It is only standard existentialism.

So how can we make this look like buddhism, while being the same existentialist stuff with all of it's tenets ? We just claim Buddha said all of this too but people misinterpreted him for 2000 years because of the 3life interpreation of pattica that actually should have been 1life. Then we say that who ever reads and agrees with this existentialist stuff becomes a sotapanna. And then we say that who ever merges the ego with the rest of existence, destroying the boundaries between internal and external (as the other topic in general discussion is debating) attains nibbana.

It's so standard existentialist stuff only with a buddhist label, same as "secular buddhism". And of course we have the belief that there is a self, cause how else can we have this mergence between internal and external ? We even have the most fundamental Buddha teaching, repeated countless times throughout 10.000 pag of sutta pitakka totally ignored cause we don't really need buddhism, we need existentialism + the pleasure of considering ourselves sotapannas.

How exactly is Nanananda different than existentalism when it comes to fundamental tenets ? It's the same stuff. No wonder this is called "existentialism buddhism".
Last edited by Circle5 on Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:02 pm

Greetings Circle5,
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:01 pm
No wonder this is called "existentialism buddhism".
By no one other than you it seems.

Are you OK?

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:07 pm

SDC wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:54 pm
Do you realize the primacy you grant these ideas by constantly trying to criticize them? You and you alone gave them the name "existential Buddhist". All that was ever said in the slogan for Path Press is "an existential approach...". You started calling it a sect when barely anyone follows these ideas. You make it so much more than it is. You are a card player: you are overplaying your hand. It is almost as if you are an undercover supporter of these ideas and you go around pretending to "debunk" them so you can advertise their availability. Has that ever occurred to you that you are marketing these ideas and keeping them relevant? You keep it in the spotlight.

If all you do is repeat yourself, people are going to stop listening.
If nobody brings any criticism to an idea, that idea will grow. Even on suttacentral where there is much more awareness and criticism of this, there are still some existentialist buddhist over there, quite a lot I would say giving the opposition it has from resident monks on that forum that people generally tend to follow. On DW, there has been some long criticism in the past, 20+ pag topics, but that was years ago. If people don't see an idea criticized, they will never have a chance to drop it if it is wrong. If the idea is correct, then it should not be afraid of criticism. Criticism brought to it will only strengthen it. I do not see a reason for Nanananda criticism to be censored.

Why are you acting like I focused too much on this ? I focused just as much on Mahasi and a little less on abbhidhabama and vissudimagga but I will come back to that. There will be a long and well argumented topic of mine about criticism to momentariness in the near future. It's just that discussion last 3 days has been mostly about existentialism buddhism.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by SDC » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:14 pm

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:07 pm
SDC wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:54 pm
Do you realize the primacy you grant these ideas by constantly trying to criticize them? You and you alone gave them the name "existential Buddhist". All that was ever said in the slogan for Path Press is "an existential approach...". You started calling it a sect when barely anyone follows these ideas. You make it so much more than it is. You are a card player: you are overplaying your hand. It is almost as if you are an undercover supporter of these ideas and you go around pretending to "debunk" them so you can advertise their availability. Has that ever occurred to you that you are marketing these ideas and keeping them relevant? You keep it in the spotlight.

If all you do is repeat yourself, people are going to stop listening.

If nobody brings any criticism to an idea, that idea will grow. Even on suttacentral where there is much more awareness and criticism of this, there are still some existentialist buddhist over there. On DW, there has been some long criticism in the past, 20+ pag topics, but that was years ago. If people don't see an idea criticized, they will never have a chance to drop it if it is wrong. If the idea is correct, then it should not be afraid of criticism. Criticism brought to it will only strengthen it.

Why are you acting like I focused too much on this ? I focused just as much on Mahasi and a little less on abbhidhabama and vissudimagga but I will come back to that. There will be a long and well argumented topic of mine about criticism to momentariness in the near future. It's just that discussion last 3 days has been mostly about existentialism buddhism.
Dude, you dilligently sent us everything you wrote on sutta central, so you don't have to try an convince me about what you think was happening over there.

All I am trying to tell you is that you are bolstering the relevance of these ideas. I am very sorry of you think anything else is happening, but there is no revolution being created by you against these ideas. And do you want to know why? Because there is no momentum in favor of these ideas. You said it yourself: these ideas are not very well know, they are not very influential. But here you are making them a big deal and then trying to break down the big deal. And it is falling flat because there is literally no opposition to you.

The only "real" fight you are going to get is from the main nerve and you know that Nv is not the main nerve. If you want a fight, become a Mahayanist and go argue with the pillars on DWM. They are a force. They'll give you a thrill.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:22 pm

Greetings,
SDC wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:14 pm
If you want a fight, become a Mahayanist and go argue with the pillars on DWM. They are a force. They'll give you a thrill.
Or, if the incessant urge to be argumentative can be briefly curtailed, existing topics can be read. Like this one for example...

:reading:

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:25 pm

Why the need for a revolution ? People criticize different ideas on buddhist forums all the time, people debate things all the time. There is no need for any revolution. It's just the normal stuff that has been going on since forever. It just so happens that for the last 3 days, I happened to criticize these ideas. It might look like a revolution for you if you are not used to getting your views criticized, but it's just normal debating happening on buddhist forums.

Why are you asking me to stop criticizing Nanananda ? People criticize all different things on buddhist forums. It just so happens that the views you are holding got more criticized than usual these last 3 days. Chill out.
The only "real" fight you are going to get is from the main nerve and you know that Nv is not the main nerve. If you want a fight, become a Mahayanist and go argue with the pillars on DWM. They are a force. They'll give you a thrill.
I have no idea what DWM or NV means and I am sure whoever they are, they are not claiming these ideas are based on the suttas. So they are not my problem.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by SDC » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:27 pm

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:25 pm
Why the need for a revolution ? People criticize different ideas on buddhist forums all the time, people debate things all the time. There is no need for any revolution. It's just the normal stuff that has been going on since forever. It just so happens that for the last 3 days, I happened to criticize these ideas. It might look like a revolution for you if you are not used to getting your views criticized, but it's just normal debating happening on buddhist forums.

Why are you asking me to stop criticizing Nanananda ? People criticize all different things on buddhist forums. It just so happens that the views you are holding got more criticized than usual these last 3 days. Chill out.
Dude you can do whatever you want. I just want you to know how you look when you keep repeating the same thing over and over. Just letting you know that you are watering down your own arguments. Carry on, buddy...

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by SDC » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:28 pm

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:25 pm

I have no idea what DWM or NV means and I am sure whoever they are, they are not claiming these ideas are based on the suttas. So they are not my problem.
DWM= Dharmawheel
Nv = Nanavira

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:30 pm

Or, if the incessant urge to be argumentative can be briefly curtailed, existing topics can be read. Like this one for example...
Jesuz Christ that's where you're sending me ? I have no idea about mahayana sects but still I know about those guys. There exists a redit critical of buddhist forums censorship and the Dzogchen guys from the sister site are pretty famous there. Probably most famous in the online buddhist world. I think they are the same guys who also ruled e-shanga.
Last edited by Circle5 on Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:30 pm

Greetings Circle5,

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:25 pm
Why are you asking me to stop criticizing Nanananda ?
Is anyone actually doing this?

:shrug:

Or are they telling you that your representations of Nanananda (and others) are strawmen, misrepresentations, unsubstantiated accusations etc.? And thus, that they are pointless, boring, and that they all too often send topics off-topic? I mean, you've even sent your own topic off-topic with your conceptual proliferation! I'd normally tell people to get back on topic at this point, but if you want to derail your own topics, that's another matter altogether...

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:35 pm

I mean, you've even sent your own topic off-topic with your conceptual proliferation! I'd normally tell people to get back on topic at this point, but if you want to derail your own topics, that's another matter altogether...
Maybe you have not read the topic too well. It is SDC that sent it offtopic with this message: viewtopic.php?f=16&p=442491#p442479
Moving the discussion from existentialism and solipsism to why am I criticizing existentialism and weather I want to start a revolution or something, starting to discuss me instead of discussing the topic. Maybe these lasts post should be moved into a "is it useful to criticize Nanananda on dhammawheel ?" starting with SDC message.
Last edited by Circle5 on Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:39 pm

Greetings Circle5,

Actually, the topic is "Is this a proper test for solipsism?"

It has been demonstrated by different people, via different means, that the test fails. It has even been explained to you in quite comprehensive detail why it fails. This includes debunking your speculative theories that Nanananda's views are solipsist.

Debunking your frequent stated misconceptions may help you identify the cause of failure and improve your broken test.

If you pay them no heed however, you will just continue to fall into error, as you've done here and elsewhere. So, in the end, what do you expect us to do about that?

:shrug:

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by SDC » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:40 pm

Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:35 pm
Maybe you have not read the topic too well. It is SDC that sent it offtopic with this message: viewtopic.php?f=16&p=442491#p442479
Moving the discussion from existentialism and solipsism to why am I criticizing existentialism and weather I want to start a revolution or something, starting to discuss me instead of discussing the topic.
Yes it was me.

You've been doing this for over a year on DW and SC (you sent us your threads remember?). Just want you to know how it looks. I used to be interested: Janalanda and Twilight were fresh arguments, but now it is just getting very repetitive and I really don't know what you think is happening.

"Revolution" was your word, not mine. Maybe you meant it about something else, but you said it, and I thought it was about this. Whatever.

EDIT - And please do not play coy...you are the one who piggybacked me in the suicide thread and then called me out by name in another thread. Feel free to call me out, dude, but don't act all surprised when I finally start talking to you. Been too many years for it to go like that. Unreal.

Circle5
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by Circle5 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:41 pm

It has been demonstrated by different people, via different means, that the test fails. It has even been explained to you in quite comprehensive detail why it fails.

Debunking your frequent stated misconceptions may help you identify the cause of failure and improve your broken test.
Your only response was the usual twisting of the SN 12:15 sutta, a problem adressed countless times by me including in this topic. I am still waiting for B.Dhammamundo reply cause he is the only other person who made an effort to give me an opinion about the test.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18626
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:45 pm

Greetings Circle5,
Circle5 wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:41 pm
It has been demonstrated by different people, via different means, that the test fails. It has even been explained to you in quite comprehensive detail why it fails.

Debunking your frequent stated misconceptions may help you identify the cause of failure and improve your broken test.
Your only response what the usual twisting of the SN 12:15 sutta, a problem adressed countless times by me including in this topic. I am still waiting for B.Dhammamundo reply cause he is the only other person who made an effort to give me an opinion about the test.
He already addressed SN 12.15 etc. here...
Dhammanando wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:17 pm
Since it seems you are only allowing "yes", "no" or "don't know" as admissible answers, clearly the test is useless. All three of these answers will show that the person is not a solipsist:

"Yes" = My family do exist now and will continue to exist after I die.
"No" = My family do exist now but will cease to exist after I die.
"Don't know" = "My family do exist now, but I don't know whether they will continue to exist after I die.

Might we then say that a solipsist is anyone who declines to give one of these three answers?
Unfortunately no, for there are other possible grounds for rejecting the question than solipsistic ones.
Follow his link.

I find it odd that you expect a bhikkhu to devote any further time to your folly.

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)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
samseva
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Is this a proper test for solipsism ?

Post by samseva » Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:58 pm

DhammaWheel TOS wrote: 2.
d. Unsubstantiated allegations against individuals or traditions - including psychoanalyzing other members, and predictions or threats of kammic retribution
e. Disruptive meta-discussion (i.e. discussion about discussion)
f. Ad-hominem attacks, including the vilification of individuals based on any attributes - whether related to their personal attributes (e.g. gender, nationality, sexuality, race, age) or their approach to the Dhamma (e.g. their practices, level of experience, or chosen tradition)
Doesn't this whole charade go against multiple points of the TOS?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests