Page 8 of 68
Re: Free-will is it an illusion?
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:59 pm
by Goedert
Dharma Atma wrote:PeterB wrote:The Theravada does not in general recognize The Lankavatara Sutra or The Diamond Sutra as representing the teachings of the Buddha.
Really? Didn't know that.
PeterB wrote:There is a sister forum to this one called Dharma Wheel.
Thank you. Do you mean this -
http://www.dharmawheel.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ? I'll visit it
But as I had stated before (the thread "Hi from Russia") I am here with purpose to know the point of view of Theravada.
PeterB wrote:The Shunyata doctrine is not taught in the Theravada.
Does Theravada have to contradict to the common sense? I guess, it doesn't. So it'd be very interesting to know why Theravada rejects the Emptiness, the empty space in which all the objects exist? Anyone can explain (by logic... not by writings)?
Tathagata once said: "This kind of teaching only conduce to the reappearing in dimension of nothingness/emptiness" - He learned it with his first teacher, Alara Kalama.
Theravada focus in Anatta, the no self doctrine.
Ānanda, Buddha's attendant asked, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?" The Buddha replied, "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ānanda, that the world is empty." He goes on to explain that what is meant by "the world" is the six sense media and their objects, and elsewhere says that to theorize about something beyond this realm of experience would put one to grief.
This emptiness doctrine in fact comes from
Anatta by
Re: Free-will is it an illusion?
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:22 pm
by Rui Sousa
Dharma Atma wrote:Does Theravada have to contradict to the common sense? I guess, it doesn't. So it'd be very interesting to know why Theravada rejects the Emptiness, the empty space in which all the objects exist? Anyone can explain (by logic... not by writings)?
This is way off topic, and maybe it deserves thread on its own on the discovering Theravada sub-forum.
But I believe your source for the "common sense" issue to be the Kalama Sutta (
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html) namely the following passage:
Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.
I believe that the Kalama Sutta is widely misunderstood as a call for the use of "Common Sense", but in my interpretation that is not the case.
First I would note the difference between "common sense" and "good sense". Common sense is the same as popular knowledge, or shared knowledge, which is not always our best guide. Good sense is an exercise of a pondered use of our logical abilities, with a good outcome.
I believe the Buddha has invited to neither, instead he has invited the Kalamas to investigate reality in accordance the Dhamma, and determine which qualities are good and skilful, as well as praised by the wise (i.e. the Arahants -> Bala-Pandita Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html). In a more extensive understanding of who the wise are, you may include the four Aryan types, or even the ordained monks. But the bottom line is that whatever the results of our investigation it should be validated with the wise, in order to be sure that we are not eluding ourselves.
Re: Free-will is it an illusion?
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:24 pm
by tiltbillings
Dharma Atma wrote:PeterB wrote:The Theravada does not in general recognize The Lankavatara Sutra or The Diamond Sutra as representing the teachings of the Buddha.
Really? Didn't know that.
PeterB wrote:There is a sister forum to this one called Dharma Wheel.
Thank you. Do you mean this -
http://www.dharmawheel.net/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ? I'll visit it
But as I had stated before (the thread "Hi from Russia") I am here with purpose to know the point of view of Theravada.
PeterB wrote:The Shunyata doctrine is not taught in the Theravada.
Does Theravada have to contradict to the common sense? I guess, it doesn't. So it'd be very interesting to know why Theravada rejects the Emptiness, the empty space in which all the objects exist? Anyone can explain (by logic... not by writings)?
If you are serious about these questions, please start a new thread.
Re: Free-will is it an illusion?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:22 pm
by Dharma Atma
tiltbillings wrote:If you are serious about these questions, please start a new thread.
I'm on the top of seriousity
And am gonna follow your advise, sir...
Re: Free-will is it an illusion?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 4:23 pm
by PeterB
I would advise you tp repost your inquiry in the General Theravada Forum Dharma Atma. That way you will get a reply which is from a Theravada perspective. Posting in the Dhamma Free For All you may not.
Mindfulness & Autonomy: Buddhist Theory of Free Will
Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:37 pm
by Nibbida
An interesting talk on the topic:
http://www.youtube.com/user/aaaricuny#p ... aHtmm46OP0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The introductory explanation for the talk:
"I argued in my dissertation that the 'hard' metaphysical problem of free will may be explained in simple, metaphysically 'easy' causal/functional terms as a product of the mechanics of metacognitive mental causation: There seems to be a causal connection between the extent to which the mind can "go meta-", or loop back in reflectively on its own processes (e.g., think about its thoughts, prefer its desires, etc.), and self-regulation (autonomy, free will), evident in sensory-motor agility, biofeedback, and a host of related phenomena of an equally mundane nature.
The present research explores two new directions to this line of thought: (1) the extent to which mindfulness and other meditation practices increase self-regulation or autonomy, and (2) the extent to which one may develop a cogent version of a Buddhist theory of free will based on these ideas.
Re: Mindfulness & Autonomy: Buddhist Theory of Free Will
Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:46 pm
by Sobeh
Interesting, but I'm unable to locate the remain 5/6ths of the talk.
Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:34 am
by tiltbillings
In this thread
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=6234" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; in the general meditation section was a back and forth about the role of determinism within the Buddha's teachings. It is a battle better fought here for those who are interested.
Edit: Yes, the Buddha taught causilty, but to refine the question: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice within the causal context within which we find ourselves?
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:40 am
by retrofuturist
Greetings,
Strict determinism means complete predictability of events and only one possible future.
Source:
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/f ... inism.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:58 am
by Kim OHara
Strict determinism rules out free will.
The Buddha taught us to *choose* between skillful and unskillful actions.
Therefore the Buddha did not teach strict determinism.
... I think.
Kim
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:09 am
by alan
Obvious answer is no. But, this being a forum, I suppose we will hear from someone who insists on arguing the opposite. For what reason, I cannot conceive.
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:17 am
by Sherab
What does "free" in "free will" mean?
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:24 am
by tiltbillings
Sherab wrote:What does "free" in "free will" mean?
That is the question and it was discussed at length in this thread:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=6234#p98275" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:48 am
by Sherab
I noted that "free" was defined as unconditioned. So what does an unconditioned will mean?
Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:19 am
by octathlon
That thread was way too long and complex for me to catch up on, but what I did read was interesting. I thought one of the problems was people having different ideas of what free will means. I don't think saying that free will is an illusion means you are saying that there is strict determinism. IMO it's the same false dichotomy as eternalism vs. annihilationism. We make choices with our will, but the choices we make are based on our exact state and conditions at that moment. It's not free will nor is it strict determinism.
Any two beings with the same exact kamma-- same exact body, mind, and life history (if that were possible) in a given situation would react, feel, think, consider and deliberate in the same way and their resulting deliberate decision/action would be the same. For that not to be true would require something that could exist or act independently of causes and conditions.