non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 3520
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by cappuccino » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:18 am

DooDoot wrote: Allow me to quote the scholar-monk Ven. Sujato:
To be clear, the annihilationist view is that there is a self, but that self is destroyed (usually at the time of death). Clearly this is not what we mean when we say in English that “the self does not exist”
to say the self does not exist is to imply the annihilationist view

that is why the Buddha was silent
Last edited by cappuccino on Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 6028
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Ceisiwr » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:25 am

“There is no self” is a strong metaphysical claim. “All dhammas are not self” is not.
“Lust is a maker of signs. Aversion is a maker of signs. Delusion is a maker of signs.” MN 43

"Rooted in desire, friends, are all phenomena; originating in attention, are all phenomena”
— A. v. 106

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6862
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by DooDoot » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:08 am

Ceisiwr wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:25 am
“There is no self” is a strong metaphysical claim. “All dhammas are not self” is not.
Empty unsubstantiated words.
cappuccino wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:18 am
to say the self does not exist is to imply the annihilationist view
Its not. Myself & Ven. Sujato explained this.
cappuccino wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:18 am
that is why the Buddha was silent
The Buddha was not silent (except to Vachaggota). Please take care with our speech. Thanks :)
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
cappuccino
Posts: 3520
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by cappuccino » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:18 am

DooDoot wrote:
cappuccino wrote:that is why the Buddha was silent
The Buddha was not silent except to Vachaggota
right… Sujato has not yet understood

SteRo
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by SteRo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:52 am

Ceisiwr wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:25 am
“There is no self” is a strong metaphysical claim.
Not at all. If you look into your purse but can't find any money 'There is no money' isn't a strong metaphysical claim either.

SteRo
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by SteRo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:02 am

cappuccino wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:18 am
...

to say the self does not exist is to imply the annihilationist view
No but it might be an extreme view the Buddha rejected in Kaccānagotta Sutta. However looking at the mere words one cannot decide whether it actually is an extreme view since it might be just a case of mere conventional speech and one cannot know the mind of the speaker.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:17 am

SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:52 am
Ceisiwr wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:25 am
“There is no self” is a strong metaphysical claim.
Not at all. If you look into your purse but can't find any money 'There is no money' isn't a strong metaphysical claim either.
Looking into a purse and not finding money there is merely an empirical claim. Looking into a purse and saying that "there is no money" is a metaphysical claim, and moreover one based on an invalid induction. It is this distinction between "the existence of a self that is a dhamma" and "the existence of any self whatsoever" that Ceisiwr's comment addresses.

SteRo
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by SteRo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:27 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:17 am
SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:52 am
Ceisiwr wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:25 am
“There is no self” is a strong metaphysical claim.
Not at all. If you look into your purse but can't find any money 'There is no money' isn't a strong metaphysical claim either.
Looking into a purse and not finding money there is merely an empirical claim. Looking into a purse and saying that "there is no money" is a metaphysical claim, and moreover one based on an invalid induction.
Nonsense. It is common parlance to say "there is no money" after having looked into one's purse and not finding money. 'There' refer to the purse.
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:17 am
It is this distinction between "the existence of a self that is a dhamma" and "the existence of any self whatsoever" that Ceisiwr's comment addresses.
That's the view of the world.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:51 am

SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:27 am

Nonsense.
Could you please respond more courteously, rather than being dismissive, even if you don't agree with something?
It is common parlance to say "there is no money" after having looked into one's purse and not finding money. 'There' refer to the purse.
It might be common parlance, but the point about metaphysics raised here is that all that can be validly deduced from an observation of a purse is the fact that there is no money in that purse. The existence of money elsewhere, or in another form, is unaffected by that. The metaphysical aspect (which I take Ceisiwr to be raising) is that a claim that no self exists tout court is likewise unsupported by a claim that no self can be found. There are good reasons for asserting this (at least two of them, in fact) and it's a standard problem of Buddhist metaphysics.

User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:52 am

.


There is ...
  • No-Self
  • No-Soul
  • No-Ego
  • No-Spirit
  • No-Attā
  • No-Atman
  • No-“I”



overview


Not Nihilism nor Annihilationism (prerequisites)


No Self


:heart:
.


🅢🅐🅑🅑🅔 🅓🅗🅐🅜🅜🅐 🅐🅝🅐🅣🅣🅐

Self ...
  • "an entirely and perfectly foolish idea" :D ~ MN22

SteRo
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by SteRo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:06 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:51 am
SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:27 am

Nonsense.
Could you please respond more courteously, rather than being dismissive, even if you don't agree with something?
It is common parlance to say "there is no money" after having looked into one's purse and not finding money. 'There' refer to the purse.
It might be common parlance, but the point about metaphysics raised here is that all that can be validly deduced from an observation of a purse is the fact that there is no money in that purse. The existence of money elsewhere, or in another form, is unaffected by that. The metaphysical aspect (which I take Ceisiwr to be raising) is that a claim that no self exists tout court is likewise unsupported by a claim that no self can be found. There are good reasons for asserting this (at least two of them, in fact) and it's a standard problem of Buddhist metaphysics.
Sorry but I won't converse with you about that topic any further because you have shown earlier that you don't even follow the suttas but prefer the teachings of philosophers. That is why you are arguing on an utterly worldly level here.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:55 am

SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:06 am

Sorry but I won't converse with you about that topic any further because you have shown earlier that you don't even follow the suttas but prefer the teachings of philosophers. That is why you are arguing on an utterly worldly level here.
It's your prerogative to choose who you converse with, of course, but lest my silence be taken for agreement, I'll make a couple of points.

Nowhere have I shown that I "don't follow the suttas but prefer the teachings of philosophers".

Even if I had shown that, it has no bearing on this issue of what is a metaphysical claim and what is not. Ceisiwr's point that "there is no self" is a strongly metaphysical point seems to be entirely reasonable, and cannot be invalidated by an analogy with an empirical enquiry.

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 6499
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Aloka » Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:07 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:55 am

Nowhere have I shown that I "don't follow the suttas but prefer the teachings of philosophers".

Even if I had shown that, it has no bearing on this issue of what is a metaphysical claim and what is not. Ceisiwr's point that "there is no self" is a strongly metaphysical point seems to be entirely reasonable, and cannot be invalidated by an analogy with an empirical enquiry.
:goodpost:

SteRo
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by SteRo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:39 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:55 am
Even if I had shown that, it has no bearing on this issue of what is a metaphysical claim and what is not. Ceisiwr's point that "there is no self" is a strongly metaphysical point seems to be entirely reasonable, and cannot be invalidated by an analogy with an empirical enquiry.
Even asserting "this is a metaphysical claim" in the context of seeing mere words is an extreme view far off the middle way teachings of the Buddha and only shows that the one asserting such hasn't practiced enough yet and misconstrues the Buddha's middle way teaching as a philosophical view in the context of use of language.
the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition...
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: non-Theravada ideas about Viññanam Anidassanam

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:02 pm

SteRo wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:39 pm


Even asserting "this is a metaphysical claim" in the context of seeing mere words is an extreme view far off the middle way teachings of the Buddha and only shows that the one asserting such hasn't practiced enough yet and misconstrues the Buddha's middle way teaching as a philosophical view in the context of use of language.
Ah, you've rethought your earlier decision not to converse with me - good!

An assertion that a claim is metaphysical is merely a point about what sort of a claim it is. All such claims are in the context of "seeing mere words", and rely on nothing more than an understanding of what a metaphysical claim is. For example:

"Universal qualities are objectively real"

"Moral statements cannot be falsified"

"There is no God"


- these are all metaphysical claims, and asserting that has no bearing whatsoever on the "middle way teachings of the Buddha"; or how much practice one has done; or whether one has misconstrued any teaching of the Buddha whatsoever. Some philosophers rest a large part of their entire work on an ability to correctly discern metaphysics. Hume, Kant, and Ayer spring to mind. How is their ability to do so at all vitiated by their lack of Buddhist practice?

If you disagree, could you please state briefly what you consider a metaphysical claim to be, and what bearing you think an understanding of the Majjhimā-patipadā has on one's ability to correctly discern such a claim?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 291 guests