Then Nibbana is unattainable for all who have not reached it in the infinite past.clw_uk wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:52 pmIn terms of infinity, could it be that extinquishment hasn't occurred for all beings since beings, hindered by ignorance, can only make choices within a narrow set of parameters unless they hear the Dhamma, thus limiting the number of potential outcomes? So, given infinite time everything that can happen has within a certain set of parameters. Nibbana, being outside this set of parameters, hasn't happened for all beings.

Just my two cents.

## Theravada against mathematics

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

If reality contrary to the Theravada doctrine, this is the problem of Theravada. For me, there is no problem that events are still happening, because I do not share the views of Pali Abhidhamma.budo wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:06 pmDebunking his argument is quite simple.

He claims in an infinite universe anything that could happen already has happened. Well, then by making that statement he already disproves himself, for an event has to happen at some point in time, and so there will be people experiencing that event as it is happening, but according to him that's not possible as it must have already happened. Therefore he puts himself in a logical paradox, in which case nothing ever happens.

The truth is that there are cyclical mechanisms aka rounds. That's why I asked him about the black holes taking in all matter, as according to his theory if everything that could happen already happened, then the Earth should have been swallowed by a black hole by now. He can't answer that, and until he does answer it, he won't be able to explain Nibbana, but that will never happen.

### The countable set of all possible lives

If there is no subject of free choice and there are no random events, then all events are totally deterministic. If the deterministic algorithm does not contain the achievement of Nibbana in an infinite set of steps, then Nibbana is unattainable. I do not argue with the fact that in this case the same cycles can be repeated an infinite number of times.Dan74-MkII wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 12:11 pmNo, Germann.Germann wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:36 amIn ancient India, the loser dispute became the pupil of the winner. Whoever this winner is.Pseudobabble wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am

Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.

You will not do anything with the mathematical fact that the countable set of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas (the countable set of all possible lives) fit in an infinite set of moments of the past. It does not matter if there are random events or there are no random events.

http://mymathforum.com/number-theory/34 ... ments.html

A countable set is the "smallest" among infinite sets.

In order to build up a mathematical argument, you need to proceed in logical steps from the start to the finish. You started with an 'infinite monkey' example that assumes random moves. Nicholas objected right away that actions and dhammas do not proceed randomly. Since then you have thrown many things into the mix - countability, probability of deterministic events (?), fitting and including... All of these are either irrelevant or sheer nonsense and none constitute an actual argument, a connected logical sequence that leads from the premise to conclusion.

Apart from your questionable assumptions, mathematically you have no proof. No argument. Because when it comes to causally connected events, which in probabilistic terms is dependence, there is simply no way to prove that a process that is run infinitely many times will include any given sequence of dhammas. We have tried to illustrate this to you many many times. But you are either not interested or not capable of understanding what we have said.

Many of us have tried to help, some have given you benefit of doubt that maybe you do have an idea behind it all and are just not expressing it well. But I don't think so.

I agree, it's time to shut this down and not waste any more time with it.

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

Germann

Nibbana isn't a dhamma, so its not part of the infinite set of possibilities within the "chain" (awkward word) of dhammas.Then Nibbana is unattainable for all who have not reached it in the infinite past.

- cappuccino
**Posts:**3023**Joined:**Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

### Re: The countable set of all possible lives

karma is based on intention (choice)Germann wrote: If there is no subject of free choice and there are no random events

If there is no free choice, then all events are either random or deterministic. If there are random events, the entire Path to Nibbana should be already “printed” for an endless past (the title post). If there are no random events, then all events are totally deterministic. Deterministic algorithm, whose steps have already been carried out in the infinite past. If Nibbana is possible, all steps towards it must be realized for an infinite past. If Nibbana is impossible, the algorithm infinitely repeats the events of samsara, there is no way out of samsara.Sherab wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:05 pmI was answering this part of your post: "If, however, we consider liberation (Nibbana) a simple cessation, any subject, regardless of his moral path, reaches Nibbana by death."

As regards free choice, I don't think there is such a thing. There is choice, but there is no free choice. Choice makes sense only in relation to sentient beings but not the Buddha.

- cappuccino
**Posts:**3023**Joined:**Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

### Re:

Germann wrote: If there is no free choice, then all events are either random or deterministic.

*there is free choice, you've chosen to come here and argue*

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

There is no difference, because reaching Nibbana is a sequence of combinations of dhammas.

- cappuccino
**Posts:**3023**Joined:**Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

wrongGermann wrote: because reaching Nibbana is a sequence of combinations of dhammas.

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

What?Germann wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:34 pmIf reality contrary to the Theravada doctrine, this is the problem of Theravada. For me, there is no problem that events are still happening, because I do not share the views of Pali Abhidhamma.budo wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:06 pmDebunking his argument is quite simple.

He claims in an infinite universe anything that could happen already has happened. Well, then by making that statement he already disproves himself, for an event has to happen at some point in time, and so there will be people experiencing that event as it is happening, but according to him that's not possible as it must have already happened. Therefore he puts himself in a logical paradox, in which case nothing ever happens.

The truth is that there are cyclical mechanisms aka rounds. That's why I asked him about the black holes taking in all matter, as according to his theory if everything that could happen already happened, then the Earth should have been swallowed by a black hole by now. He can't answer that, and until he does answer it, he won't be able to explain Nibbana, but that will never happen.

### It does not work out mathematically

Try to imagine mathematically how an event that has a probability other than zero (even if it is infinitely small) did not happen in an infinite period of time. If there is no subject of free choice who chooses events.

Try to imagine mathematically how a deterministic event (in the event that there is neither freedom of choice nor random events) did not happen in an infinite number of steps of the deterministic algorithm.

Post your theses on the math forum, and give here a link.

It does not work out mathematically.. This is just absurd.

Try to imagine mathematically how a deterministic event (in the event that there is neither freedom of choice nor random events) did not happen in an infinite number of steps of the deterministic algorithm.

Post your theses on the math forum, and give here a link.

It does not work out mathematically.. This is just absurd.

Last edited by Germann on Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

### Re: It does not work out mathematically

Germann wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:58 pmTry to imagine mathematically how an event that has a probability other than zero (even if it is infinitely small) did not happen in an infinite period of time. If there is no subject of free choice who chooses events.

Try to imagine mathematically how a deterministic event (in the event that there is neither freedom of choice nor random events) did not happen in an infinite number of steps of the deterministic algorithm.

Post your theses on the math forum, and give here a link.

It does not work out mathematically.. This is just absurd.

Didn't the Buddha teach that there is a choice involved within the system?

- cappuccino
**Posts:**3023**Joined:**Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

### Re: It does not work out mathematically

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anantarika-karmaGermann wrote: It does not work out mathematically. This is just absurd.

### Re: Theravada against mathematics

And what is real except the dhammas and their combinations?cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:53 pmwrongGermann wrote: because reaching Nibbana is a sequence of combinations of dhammas.

### Re: It does not work out mathematically

I am not talking here about the Buddha, but about the Pali school Abhidhamma.clw_uk wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:02 pmGermann wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:58 pmTry to imagine mathematically how an event that has a probability other than zero (even if it is infinitely small) did not happen in an infinite period of time. If there is no subject of free choice who chooses events.

Try to imagine mathematically how a deterministic event (in the event that there is neither freedom of choice nor random events) did not happen in an infinite number of steps of the deterministic algorithm.

Post your theses on the math forum, and give here a link.

It does not work out mathematically.. This is just absurd.

Didn't the Buddha teach that there is a choice involved within the system?

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: form, Google [Bot], thepea and 237 guests