Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I'm at peace with myself --- what I'm not at peace with are fools. You invoked the Kalama Sutta in a way that was entirely inappropriate. It's behavior like that which gives the sutta a bad rap in the first place. In other words, you have done a disservice to all critical thinkers.
Cinorjer, just take all your time to meditate, ponder and reflect on any new discoveries.
Do not rush to find your answers for it.
Tell you what, I'll read through everything tonight, if you think about and answer several questions I already have. This is a posting about skeptical Buddhism, after all. So let's apply skeptical thinking to your work.
First, what evidence or proof or observation can you point to that tells us this is actually correct? Second, where is the mind in all this and how is it reborn? Using your scientific language, the mind is information. Information is not the same as energy. How is information reborn?
I'd like to hear your answer and thoughts, not see more pages from your work. Do you have it on a website somewhere? That way you can selectively quote from it or link to it.
Meditate and keeps meditate to look for your answers. Do not be bother too much on what has been commented here. Complete silence will bring out the truth. Have patience and peace in yourself.
And again you don't answer a challenge to your postings --- as Cinorjer asked, what evidence or proof or observation can you point to that tells us this is actually correct? Hmmm... maybe something more than faith or meditation this time?
Proper dialectical form means that you have lost a debate if you have fallen into any of these shortcomings:
- annihilation of one's own thesis by an unsuitable example
- shifting to another thesis during the same debate
- a contradictory thesis
- abandoining one's own thesis
- changing the reason or the topic
- a meaningless, unintelligible, incoherent or inopportune argument
- insufficiency or redundancy in expression
- repetition
- silence
- confession of ignorance
- failing to understand the question
- stopping the debate when seeing future defeat is inevitable
- indirect admission of a charge
- neglecting to rebuke the questioner when it is necessary
- rebuking the questioner when it is not necessary
- not keeping faithfully to one's own principles
- fallacious logical reasons
Sorry, my friend, but I'm going to hold your feet to the fire in regard to this.
And again you don't answer a challenge to your postings --- as Cinorjer asked, what evidence or proof or observation can you point to that tells us this is actually correct?
Proper dialectical form means that you have lost a debate if you have fallen into any of these shortcomings:
- annihilation of one's own thesis by an unsuitable example
- shifting to another thesis during the same debate
- a contradictory thesis
- abandoining one's own thesis
- changing the reason or the topic
- a meaningless, unintelligible, incoherent or inopportune argument
- insufficiency or redundancy in expression
- repetition
- silence
- confession of ignorance
- failing to understand the question
- stopping the debate when seeing future defeat is inevitable
- indirect admission of a charge
- neglecting to rebuke the questioner when it is necessary
- rebuking the questioner when it is not necessary
- not keeping faithfully to one's own principles
- fallacious logical reasons
Sorry, my but I'm going to hold your feet to the fire in regard to this.
Try not to be foolish and childish here. May I repeat and repeat! Meditate, meditate and meditate! You will find your answers to it.
The short answer is energy. No one can kill energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed and the total sum of all energies in a system is a constant or never changes as per the Law of Conservation of Energy acknowledged by modern scientists.
Energy would only transform. To transform is to change. To change is to become. To become is to reborn. So energy is ever ‘reborn’ all the times in this dependent nature.
All consciousness, mental activities, minds, souls, spirits, ghosts, memories, dreams, illusions, emotions, affections are part of energy aggregates. When we talk about energy, we talk about the ability to change or do work. So without energy, there is no chance for such ability to arise and no chance for change at all.
Science describes 8 types of energy: http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/energy2.html They don't include consciousness, mind, soul etc, so applying scientific principles of energy conservation and transformation to them seems quite speculative.
Cinorjer, information means a collection of facts. No energy = no collection.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@buddhitakso You're previous posts about karma didn't really answer my questions they just explained more your views. Again my questions are how do you square the notion of an individuals karma passing from life to life, in your description people would be suffering from the effects of others actions. Also how can one progress towards enlightenment if it takes more than one life? For example a stream enterer is said to be certain to achieve liberation within 7 lifetimes, if his karmic seeds are scattered at death and arise in others how could this be so?
According to Buddhism, suffering arises out of ignorance. But ignorance could not arise out of nowhere or out of thin air. Definitely, it needs to arise out of something that has happened beforehand. In this case, we would conclude that ignorance arises out of memory.
The traditional Buddhist answer for the source of the arising of ignorance is a previous moment of ignorance, meaning there is no beginning to our ignorance.
Also, are you saying that a someone who attains enlightenment has no memory, since memory comes after aggregate activity in your 25 links of dependent origination?
Person, as mentioned many times, one needs to scrutinise whatever that is mentioned in the sutras, doctrines about Buddhism. Even the words of the Buddha needed examination. There are many enlightened beings during the time of the Buddha. Supposedly, the Buddha doesn't exist 2550 years back, do you mean these stream enterers just miss the chance to be enlightened forever, even though they have accumulated sufficient merit?
Ignorance can't be independent in this dependent nature. Otherwise, we would named ignorance as inherent existence, much on the contrary to the principle of emptiness mentioned by the Buddha.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited May 2012
Person, as mentioned many times, one needs to scrutinise whatever that is mentioned in the sutras, doctrines about Buddhism. Even the words of the Buddha needed examination. There are many enlightened beings during the time of the Buddha. Supposedly, the Buddha doesn't exist 2550 years back, do you mean these stream enterers just miss the chance to be enlightened forever, even though they have accumulated sufficient merit?
Essentially. How does one attain enlightenment across more than one life if the karma/merit is dispersed at death?
So we can't rely just upon scripture to say a stream enterer needs a few more lives to attain liberation. On the same token though, we need to examine your doctrine and it differs from that of the Buddhadharma.
Ignorance can't be independent in this dependent nature. Otherwise, we would named ignorance as inherent existence, much on the contrary to the principle of emptiness mentioned by the Buddha.
Beginningless isn't the same as eternal or independent. Also, you don't really explain how ignorance arises from memory, can't someone have memory without ignorance? And does then an enlightened person have no memory?
@buddhitakso I went back through your posting like I promised, and I admire the thought and work you put into it. But, I do have to say, from both a skeptical and a Zen Buddhist perspective, I don't see where it answers the questions that matter, and more importantly, your theory can't be observed or tested. If the mind is energy, what does that mean? The ability to do work? What is doing the work? Energy is not a thing, it is a property something has. You're still handwaving the vital question of "What am I?"
You didn't really address my own questions directly, but I wish you well with your project. Your energy model is just as valid as a traditional "subtle consciousness" model and has the same failures to satisfy a skeptical mind, only that one has been around longer and taught to more people. That's skepticism applied to our practice. Thanks for the interesting read and peace be with you.
@buddhitakso If the mind is energy, what does that mean? The ability to do work? What is doing the work? Energy is not a thing, it is a property something has. You're still handwaving the vital question of "What am I?"
You are correct. Energy is not a thing. Energy is a quality. Mind = energy = ability = quality = characteristics. This is a straightfoward fact. Whether you are able to comprehend it or choose to comprehend it - the choice is yours ultimately. This is thus far I could help in your skepticism. Skeptical mind is good but do not go into the extreme level for it would bring madness and vexation. Be moderate, be balance, at least be kind to your mind. Have patience, keep up with meditation, be in complete silence, the mind would ease and seeing into matters would be clear and direct.
I wish you a fruitful journey in searching the real truth!
How does one attain enlightenment across more than one life if the karma/merit is dispersed at death?
Here is my straightforward answer…..
Stream-enterer (Sotāpanna)
It is also known as the first stage of enlightenment and is said to have ‘opened the eye of the Dharma’ and would reach arahantship within seven rebirths.
Let us look at the following illustration on the seven rebirths of stream-enterer: -
For an ignorant being
During a disintegration process, the conscious aggregate or so-called the ‘chain of conscious’ aggregate would die out and the force of Ignorance would overcome the force of Awakening. Subsequently, the sub-conscious aggregate would liberate into fragments. The amount of liberated fragments is very much dependent on the level of Ignorance or Awakening within the being.
For an ignorant being, the level of Ignorance would surpass the level of Awakening and this would mean the intensity of Ignorance is higher than the intensity of Awakening. Higher intensity of Ignorance would mean higher intensity of becoming. Higher intensity of becoming would mean higher amount of liberated fragments.
For an awaken being
During a disintegration process, the conscious aggregate or so-called the ‘chain of conscious’ aggregate would die out and the force of Ignorance would still overcome the force of Awakening. Subsequently, the sub-conscious aggregate would liberate into fragments. However, the amount of liberated fragments is much lesser than an ignorant being because there is lower intensity of Ignorance as compared with the intensity of Awakening. Also, the dispersion of liberated fragments is more confined and restricted to much fewer new individuals.
Supposedly, Individual A, Individual B, Individual C are three different beings that have reached the stage of stream-enterer in the same or different life time.
Let say, 65 points of realised elements is a minimum benchmark for a qualified stream-enterer, 100 points of realised elements is for a qualified Arahant.
Note : RN = element of realisation IG = element of ignorance SC = sub-conscious aggregate
In Buddhism, rebirth refers to evolving consciousness or stream of consciousness of a person upon death and the consciousness arising in the new person is neither identical to, nor entirely different from, the old consciousness, but forms part of a causal continuum or stream with it. The basic cause for this persistent re-arising of personality is the abiding of consciousness in ignorance; when ignorance is uprooted, rebirth ceases. [Source : ]
Beginningless isn't the same as eternal or independent. Also, you don't really explain how ignorance arises from memory, can't someone have memory without ignorance?
Beginning refers to an act or circumstance of entering upon an action or state. Therefore, beginning-less refers to an absence in the act or circumstance of entering upon an action or state. This means there is no change or becoming process. When there is no change or becoming process, it means anything is ever ready existed i.e. inherent existence.
Ignorance means the condition of being uneducated, unaware, uninformed or lack of knowledge, education, awareness. So, when one is proclaimed as an ignorant being, what does it mean? It means the person is uneducated, unaware, uninformed or lack knowledge, education, awareness on some kind of things or happenings. Therefore, ignorance simply could not arise out of nowhere or out of thin air. Definitely, it has to arise out of some kind of things or happenings or so-called ‘memorised’ events that have taken place beforehand.
And does then an enlightened person has no memory?
When the Buddha has gained enlightenment at age 35, he still has his awaken mind working for the next 45 years i.e. the Buddha still has his mind, memory and body remained intact until the one last time of disintegration process i.e. the passing into parinibbana. Only then, could the mind be liberated ultimately.
In other words, when one has gained enlightenment while sustaining with a living body, the mind would still exist but with a paradigm shift towards seeing all things or happenings in ultimate reality without delusion or hesitation. The mind has not gained with complete liberation yet and this circumstance is also known as cessation with remainder. The ultimate liberation or cessation without remainder can only be achieved without sustaining a living body.
Arahant is the fourth stage of enlightenment that is also known as the stage of cessation with remainder in contrast with parinibbana that is known as cessation without remainder.
Energy is a quality. Mind = energy = ability = quality = characteristics. This is a straightfoward fact.
I don't see how equating "energy" with mind, ability and charactistics is a straightforward fact, it seems very woolly to me.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@buddhitakso In your illustration of how a stream enterer would still attain liberation across lives you claim that the fragmented consciousness would only recombine with other fragments at the same stage of karma. Is that how it works for everyone, that our fragments can only combine with those with the same kind of karma?
Regarding beginninglessness. The problem is positing a first cause, in your model what is the very first cause for phenomena to come into balance. In terms of the material universe what is the first cause for the start of the universe, or how does something arise from nothing?
I guess I still see some internal logical consistency problems in your hypothesis. At any rate there are differences in what you say from the Buddhadharma, so for now I think I'll stick with Buddhism until I'm able to look within and see for myself the deepest fact of things.
Just take your time to see into the reality. Simply, all you need is to always examine, dissect and analyse any raised problems – piece by piece, layer by layer until you could see into the deepest facts. Do not rush into things, do not swallow on things – for one may need many life cycles to accumulate sufficient merit to see into the ultimate reality.
In your illustration of how a stream enterer would attain liberation across lives you claim that the fragmented consciousness would only recombine with other fragments at the same stage of karma. Is that how it works for everyone that our fragments can only combine with those with the same kind of karma?
Perhaps, you have heard of the natural Law of Attraction i.e. “Like attracts Like.” Our thoughts, feelings, words, and actions produce energies which, in turn, attract like energies. For instance, if you initiate with positive thoughts all the time, it would attract favourable energies and things or happenings would turn out positively. This is what we called the influence of Mind over Matter. And this is how the calling of prayers onto someone works – transference of merit.
Therefore, similar characteristics of sub-conscious fragments among different individuals would attract with each other – just like the phrase, ‘Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.’
Regarding begininglessness. The problem is positing a first cause, in your model what is the very first cause for phenomena to come into balance. In terms of the material universe what is the first cause for the start of the universe, or how does something arise from nothing?
Let us regard that the world of nature is universal that bears with both the inherent and dependent qualities – on whether it is a fact or otherwise, I’ll leave it for you to investigate. Anything that inherently exists would not involve change and created objects cannot inherently exist since that would involve change. An enlightened mind would see and realise into this fact without hesitation.
Buddhism advocates emptiness as a quality that exists everywhere in the dependent nature. Whereas, modern scientists acknowledge that energy is a quality that can neither be created nor destroyed and the sum of all energies in a system is a constant or never changes. In other words, energy is everywhere as well because it is forever existed in a system. Therefore, we could conclude that both emptiness and energy are fundamental qualities because every single thing or happening would involve emptiness and energy aggregates in the dependent nature.
For general understanding, conditional phenomenon is a necessary pre-requisite for energy to exist; without it, existence would be impossible. On another front, emptiness is a necessary pre-requisite for any object to exist; without it, the object would be impossible.
Now, how does something arise from nothing? Frankly speaking, the something that arises as in object is not out of nothing. In the Universe, there are plenty of existences or activities that can’t be discerned by our naked eyes. When we mention that emptiness and energy aggregates are everywhere in a system of dependent nature, it means that both of these qualities have fully occupied the system of dependent nature. As such, we could conclude the something as in object would arise out of energy aggregates that have been forever existed in a system. This is because energy or matter is actually the same thing, both reflected in a different form (as in Einstein’s formula, E = mc2). And since we can’t see energy with our naked eyes, we would call it empty instead of nothing.
Then, what is the first cause for the start of the Universe? Frankly speaking, the ultimate first cause for anything or everything is the nature. Without the nature, nothing would ever exist – no things or happenings would arise. The world of nature can be categorised into inherent and dependent qualities. And dependent phenomenon is a necessary pre-requisite for the Universe to exist; without it, Universe would be impossible. Dependent phenomenon is also known as conditional phenomenon – that consists of two terms i.e. balance and imbalance.
Under balance phenomenon, aggregate activities would rise and one could witness multiple shapes or forms arise. Under imbalance phenomenon, segregate activities would rise and one could see no shapes or forms arise. The cycle of conditional phenomena continues repeatedly depicting the rising and falling activities in continuum.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
1) Ok, it wasn't clear to me that consciousness fragments only combine with like fragments in your previous posts. This still means that a subsequent person would reap the effects of anothers actions. Another question is why doesn't consciousness disperse entirely at death, why into discrete fragments?
2) It doesn't seem to me that you expain a first cause, you only explain how phenomena exist. In other words that things exist because its in their nature to do so, it couldn't be any other way. Why is there something instead of nothing? If there is a first cause and things aren't beginningless then there must be an initial cause. You say that its the nature, I guess I don't really understand what that means.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@buddhitakso Rereading some of you original posts I see that you view energy or the deepest nature of things as being eternal and inherently existing. That dependent phenomena arise out of this sub-layer of reality. Do I understand your view correctly or is it different than that?
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
I actually find this interesting and can see how the dharma could be interpreted this way, so I hope it's ok if I tackle a couple of questions just for exercise.
1) Ok, it wasn't clear to me that consciousness fragments only combine with like fragments in your previous posts. This still means that a subsequent person would reap the effects of anothers actions. Another question is why doesn't consciousness disperse entirely at death, why into discrete fragments?
In essence, we all reap what others sow as well as what we sow because of interbeing and causation. I don't see karmic rebirth in terms of punishment or reward but just one circumstance leading to another.
I think consciousness is also a quality and as such always has the potential to manifest. There is no beginning to consciousness and no end. It is always here right now. If the conditions are right it will manifest and if not it stays hidden.
2) It doesn't seem to me that you expain a first cause, you only explain how phenomena exist. In other words that things exist because its in their nature to do so, it couldn't be any other way. Why is there something instead of nothing? If there is a first cause and things aren't beginningless then there must be an initial cause. You say that its the nature, I guess I don't really understand what that means.
I don't see where he suggests a first cause or beginning but it seems to me he posits potential transforming into realised energy and back again.
I could be wrong but it's the only way it makes sense to me.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
What if all is action with no "true" distinctions between what is acting and what is acted upon?
Why discrete fragments? Because there is element of grasping among ignorant beings.
On Karma reaping among individuals, one needs an in-depth understanding into the principle of emptiness. If truely one is only to one, an eye is only for an eye, then there is no need rebirth, just trans-migration. Can things be in absolute discrete orientation? Refer back to the real meaning of emptiness.
First cause in dependent phenomenon? Because we are all deluge within the sea of dependent nature, our point of view would naturally be in the scope of duality. But there is another face of nature i.e. non-dependent or inherent nature. Within inherent nature, multiplicity and duality do not exist. There is no first cause, no last cause i.e. beginingless and endless.
What is dharma? Seeking dharma or ultimate truth is not about stereotyping one's view scope. Be open-minded and it would open up to new horizon of things. Buddhism is all about direct experience and recognition. Buddhism is not about what the Buddha has said, what the sutras have mentioned. Reality is never be limited by words or texts. Remember, tools would remain as tools.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited May 2012
Why discrete fragments? Because there is element of grasping among ignorant beings.
I agree that it is grasping that acts as a sort of glue that binds the skandhas together. But why then in the other direction, if grasping holds some of the fragments together, does not the whole consciousness of the being stay together?
On Karma reaping among individuals, one needs an in-depth understanding into the principle of emptiness. If truely one is only to one, an eye is only for an eye, then there is no need rebirth, just trans-migration. Can things be in absolute discrete orientation? Refer back to the real meaning of emptiness.
My understanding of rebirth vs reincarnation is that rebirth is like a stack of blocks, each one standing upon the last one, whereas reincarnation is like a strand of beads, held together by a string (soul). The blocks don't have a 'discrete orientation' tying them together but neither are they composed of disparate consciousnesses.
First cause in dependent phenomenon? Because we are all deluge within the sea of dependent nature, our point of view would naturally be in the scope of duality. But there is another face of nature i.e. non-dependent or inherent nature. Within inherent nature, multiplicity and duality do not exist. There is no first cause, no last cause i.e. beginingless and endless.
This thread of debate arose about ignorance and it having a first cause. I'm not arguing that there is a first cause to everything, I don't agree with that. But in Buddhism ignorance also falls into this category of not having a first cause.
What is dharma? Seeking dharma or ultimate truth is not about stereotyping one's view scope. Be open-minded and it would open up to new horizon of things. Buddhism is all about direct experience and recognition. Buddhism is not about what the Buddha has said, what the sutras have mentioned. Reality is never be limited by words or texts. Remember, tools would remain as tools.
I agree, I don't have a deep experience of the true nature of things though so I am still pretty reliant on reason and scripture, as well as trust in the words of those who do have direct experience. I don't know you or your level of direct experience, I do know though that Buddhist philosophy and logic has stood the test of time against many opponents. Some of your ideas are new and haven't been tested. So I feel I have to disect and ask questions to gain some level of confidence in what you are saying.
As a living being, we have intact with both conscious and sub-conscious mind. When we concentrate or do focusing on matter, we engage with our conscious mind. When the mind is in roaming state as in day-dreaming, we engage with our sub-conscious aggregates. Conscious mind is like mind-in-command - the mind tha can lead and convey action. However, sub-conscious mind is like herd of wild horses - roaming in discrete directions and needed domestication.
In a departed being, the conscious mind that acts as guarding chain to the wild sub-conscious mind would die out. Subsequently, the sub-conscious mind would break free and stay behind roaming freely in discrete directions.
In other words, while being alive, we have our conscious mind to take charge, to lead, to concentrate and contain our sub-conscious mind but not after the demise period. By then, the sub-conscious mind that remains as souls or spirits would continue with its wilderness characteristics. Only when a being has progressed into more awaken state could the wilderness be tamed or less dispersion into more directions or new individuals.
Returning to the OP, is Skeptical Buddhism also skeptical about basic teachings like the Four Noble Truths and the 3 characteristics? And is it skeptical about the possibility of enlightenment? Is everything questioned, or are some basic assumptions made?
Watch 'Little Buddha' a 1994 movie, directed by Bernardo Bertolucci, starring Keanu Reeves as the Buddha. You would understand more on how rebirth works according to Buddhism.
Nowadays, the essence of Buddhadhamma still remain intact but its interpretation is not. Do watch this movie and get deeper insight on rebirth matters as per Buddhism.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
Returning to the OP, is Skeptical Buddhism also skeptical about basic teachings like the Four Noble Truths and the 3 characteristics? And is it skeptical about the possibility of enlightenment? Is everything questioned, or are some basic assumptions made?
I'm skeptical and Buddhist but not sure if I fall under the label "Skeptical Buddhist".
When I first started to study I was skeptical about everything. To be skeptical about a certain teaching means that I have to suspend my disbelief as if I am enjoying a fictional work.
The 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path seem quite basic, forthcoming and logical and did so the first time I heard them so there was nothing to be skeptical about.
Returning to the OP, is Skeptical Buddhism also skeptical about basic teachings like the Four Noble Truths and the 3 characteristics? And is it skeptical about the possibility of enlightenment? Is everything questioned, or are some basic assumptions made?
Getting back to the OT, there are no sacred cows in a skeptical mind. In fact, everyone is a skeptic when it comes to other people's beliefs and religions, but then they turn around and fail to apply the same standards to their own beliefs.
Having said that, skepticism does not mean I doubt everything constantly or automatically. You accept what seems to be true on face value unless some other evidence crops up to examine. It just means something like the Noble Truths has to stand and fall on the power of its message to describe reality as I experience it, not because the Buddha said it or that's what I was taught by my parents or a lot of people believe it.
That there are a lot of Skeptical Buddhists and our number is growing (or more likely more of us are coming out of the closet) shows the power of the Noble Truths, because every skeptical Buddhist I've talked to has said it was reading those words that told them here was a religion that finally "got it".
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
Returning to the OP, is Skeptical Buddhism also skeptical about basic teachings like the Four Noble Truths and the 3 characteristics? And is it skeptical about the possibility of enlightenment? Is everything questioned, or are some basic assumptions made?
Getting back to the OT, there are no sacred cows in a skeptical mind. In fact, everyone is a skeptic when it comes to other people's beliefs and religions, but then they turn around and fail to apply the same standards to their own beliefs.
Having said that, skepticism does not mean I doubt everything constantly or automatically. You accept what seems to be true on face value unless some other evidence crops up to examine. It just means something like the Noble Truths has to stand and fall on the power of its message to describe reality as I experience it, not because the Buddha said it or that's what I was taught by my parents or a lot of people believe it.
That there are a lot of Skeptical Buddhists and our number is growing (or more likely more of us are coming out of the closet) shows the power of the Noble Truths, because every skeptical Buddhist I've talked to has said it was reading those words that told them here was a religion that finally "got it".
...You would understand more on how rebirth works according to Buddhism.
...and get deeper insight on rebirth matters as per Buddhism.
I've read quite a few of your long posts where you talk as if you KNOW the truth.
But then it REALLY gets down to what you said above.
Rebirth either is or isn't. It has nothing to do with "according to Buddhism" (unless you're saying that maybe it is and maybe it isn't. It has nothing to do with "as per Buddhism" (unless you're saying that maybe it is and maybe it isn't".
Getting back to the OT, there are no sacred cows in a skeptical mind. In fact, everyone is a skeptic when it comes to other people's beliefs and religions, but then they turn around and fail to apply the same standards to their own beliefs.
Having said that, skepticism does not mean I doubt everything constantly or automatically. You accept what seems to be true on face value unless some other evidence crops up to examine. It just means something like the Noble Truths has to stand and fall on the power of its message to describe reality as I experience it, not because the Buddha said it or that's what I was taught by my parents or a lot of people believe it.
That there are a lot of Skeptical Buddhists and our number is growing (or more likely more of us are coming out of the closet) shows the power of the Noble Truths, because every skeptical Buddhist I've talked to has said it was reading those words that told them here was a religion that finally "got it".
This is probably the best post in the entire thread.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
What is the earliest existence since the dawn of time? It would be the 1st cause in the dependent nature.
Can you explain more about what you mean here about the dawn of time and the first cause? Earlier you said that energy and emptiness don't have a beginning. There is a logic problem with positing a first cause. I don't really understand what your view is here.
What is the earliest existence since the dawn of time? It would be the 1st cause in the dependent nature.
Can you explain more about what you mean here about the dawn of time and the first cause? Earlier you said that energy and emptiness don't have a beginning. There is a logic problem with positing a first cause. I don't really understand what your view is here.
The dawn of time means the earliest period of time. Now, let us analyse into time. Some people may say time is an illusion and does not exist after all. So, what is time?
Frankly speaking, time is something that is created, not born (a non-natural existence). Time is an indicator for event; whereas length, width and height are indicators for size and volume. All of these indicators belong to a category named as dimension. In other words, dimension is created for the task of measurement per se and therefore, not something that arises out naturally.
Also, time is a scalar factor. A scalar refers to a quantity or phenomenon that exhibits magnitude only, with no specific direction. Example of scalars include speed, mass, electrical resistance, and hard-drive storage capacity. Any interval of time is also scalar - it has magnitude only.
Time dilation?
When an object is set under accelerating motion, the becoming process of the object would be stretched as compared with a relative object that is set under constant or decelerating motion. In other words, the becoming process of the object has been slowed down comparatively, not the time has been dilated or slowed down. Time would only assume the expression that the becoming process has slowed down and not the other way round. Similarly, the word of time has been used frequently for expressing different scenario of becoming processes, such as follows: -
NO TIME = an expression of no opportunity for a new becoming process to begin.
TIME TO TIME = an expression of moving from past to present becoming process; present to future becoming process.
TIME PASSED SLOWLY = an expression of hoping for a faster becoming process.
TIME DILATION = an expression that becoming process slows down.
Time arising in the Dependent Nature
There is time in the dependent nature but not in the inherent nature. This is because there are rising and falling events in continuum in the dependent nature. As for the inherent nature, there is no existence of time because nothing has ever changed – beginning-less and end-less.
Right now, is there a first cause in the dependent nature? Yes, there is. The first cause in the dependent nature is the dependent nature itself. Without the dependent nature, no things or events would arise. In other words, dependent nature is the earliest existence since the dawn of time.
Observation tip for Truth/Reality
One has to realise that both the Conventional Truth and Ultimate Truth do exist. When addressing a problem, in the first place, one needs to ensure whether the point of view is from the Conventional perspective or from the Ultimate perspective.
For example, if from the Conventional perspective, we agree that duality or multiplicity does exist. Therefore, Nirvana is a phenomenon because we are speaking as a subject on the other side of the object or matter. In other words, the subject is pondering on the object or matter - phenomenon arises.
However, if from the Ultimate perspective, then we agree that no duality or multiplicity arises. Therefore, Nirvana is not a phenomenon (also applies on all other things) because there is no subject to ponder on the object or matter. In other words, no phenomenon arises if we speak from the Ultimate perspective.
The principle in effect: -
If one stays on with seeing Conventional Truth only, one would remain in Samsara. If one stays on with seeing both Conventional Truth & Ultimate Truth, one has the choice of remaining either in Samsara or Nirvana. If one stays on with seeing Ultimate Truth only, one would remain in Nirvana.
The Characteristics of Emptiness and Energy
Both emptiness and energy are universal qualities. It means that emptiness and energy are inherent and dependent arising concurrently.
Firstly, let us analyse into emptiness. Emptiness corresponds to two distinct scenarios:
1. It corresponds to the inherent existence (due to unchanging nature) that all conventional phenomena lack.
It means that if we focus purely on seeing emptiness as a quality, it cannot be segmented or dissected further to see the real origin. Emptiness exists in the way it appears in direct perception and does not constitute some false appearance concealing a lack of inherent existence. Therefore, it has unchanging nature that all conventional phenomena lack. This conclusion is made from the Ultimate perspective - seeing into the within of the within.
2. It corresponds to dependent arising (a conditional phenomenon) i.e. subject to the same lack of inherent existence as every other object or phenomenon. This is referred to as the emptiness of emptiness.
It means that emptiness would not exist without a dependent partner. If there were no objects to analyse, then emptiness as such could not be realised. Without objects, there can be no emptiness - a circumstance that points to emptiness of emptiness. This conclusion is made from the Conventional perspective - seeing as a subject on the other side of the object or matter.
Reflection of Emptiness
Emptiness can be realised into stages as below: -
Stage 1 Elementary Realisation • All things and phenomena are lack of core essence. • Nothing is unchanging and permanent. • Everything is inter-related.
Stage 2 Intermediary Realisation • Ability to differentiate the way things are perceived to exist and the way things really exist. • Only seeing without believing.
Stage 3 Advance Realisation • No dualism of the subject and object, and no appearance of multiplicity. • All things and phenomena rise and fall within a singular condition. • Only uniformity exists.
Stage 4 Ultimate Realisation • All dependent arising are completely blown off or extinguished. • No string attached; nothing is left remaining. • Infinite, unchanging, permanent and unconditional. • Exists beyond all phenomena.
As for energy, it corresponds to the same distinct scenarios: -
1. It corresponds to inherent existence (due to unchanging nature) – the sum of all energies in a system is a constant or never changes.
2. It corresponds to dependent arising (a conditional phenomenon) – energy is ever transforming (changing nature) but neither can it be created nor destroyed.
In summary, the Buddha has laid emphasis that one should see in all angles of things or matters while searching for ultimate truth/reality. Without it, any conclusions made out of one’s observation would not be balance or in wholesome nature.
I'd say that anyone who has equally studied more than one form of Buddhism and chose one over the other would be a skeptical Buddhist.
Or perhaps different streams of Buddhism have developed different skillful means? ... and these different approaches may be more or less appropriate for different people. For instance some forms of Buddhism require a one pointed monastic focus, like some of the Burmese style Theravada... ( at least what I am familiar with) while others are more workable for a non-monastic situation, like Bankei's unborn Zen. It isn't a matter of picking this over that, but finding what is works for the practitioner..
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Thanks for the explanation, really well thought out. I think the question still remains to me, what was the cause for the first moment of ignorance to arise? Or maybe in your scenario, balance phenomena. Doesn't everything have a cause? Therefore what is the cause for the very first moment of dependent phenomena, why didn't it arise earlier or later than it did?
Thanks for the explanation, really well thought out. I think the question still remains to me, what was the cause for the first moment of ignorance to arise?
I don't think ignorance is ignorance until it is.. it sneaks up. A snake's skin isn't too tight until it is too tight, until then it is just skin... a given, no problem. The troublesome dualistic perception and self-view that is now a problem, is a problem because it is. Maybe at one point we were in an undifferentiated infantile murk, and self-view/individuation was a liberation, not to mention an evolutionary advantage (which it no longer is).
She's ten now and hasn't eaten meat since. Her parents are very good about it and make sure she gets her protein. She tried to say she didn't want veggies either but that didn't fly, haha.
I guess that's now off topic, sorry.
Are you kidding?
"Off topic" is one of the most natural and interesting part of the discussions.
Comments
Proper dialectical form means that you have lost a debate if you have fallen into any of these shortcomings:
- annihilation of one's own thesis by an unsuitable example
- shifting to another thesis during the same debate
- a contradictory thesis
- abandoining one's own thesis
- changing the reason or the topic
- a meaningless, unintelligible, incoherent or inopportune argument
- insufficiency or redundancy in expression
- repetition
- silence
- confession of ignorance
- failing to understand the question
- stopping the debate when seeing future defeat is inevitable
- indirect admission of a charge
- neglecting to rebuke the questioner when it is necessary
- rebuking the questioner when it is not necessary
- not keeping faithfully to one's own principles
- fallacious logical reasons
Sorry, my friend, but I'm going to hold your feet to the fire in regard to this.
Sorry, but I suspect most of us here have more important things to meditate on, such as the teachings that are actually attributed to the Buddha.
http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/energy2.html
They don't include consciousness, mind, soul etc, so applying scientific principles of energy conservation and transformation to them seems quite speculative.
Also, are you saying that a someone who attains enlightenment has no memory, since memory comes after aggregate activity in your 25 links of dependent origination?
So we can't rely just upon scripture to say a stream enterer needs a few more lives to attain liberation. On the same token though, we need to examine your doctrine and it differs from that of the Buddhadharma. Beginningless isn't the same as eternal or independent. Also, you don't really explain how ignorance arises from memory, can't someone have memory without ignorance? And does then an enlightened person have no memory?
You didn't really address my own questions directly, but I wish you well with your project. Your energy model is just as valid as a traditional "subtle consciousness" model and has the same failures to satisfy a skeptical mind, only that one has been around longer and taught to more people. That's skepticism applied to our practice. Thanks for the interesting read and peace be with you.
I wish you a fruitful journey in searching the real truth!
Here is my straightforward answer…..
Stream-enterer (Sotāpanna)
It is also known as the first stage of enlightenment and is said to have ‘opened the eye of the Dharma’ and would reach arahantship within seven rebirths.
Let us look at the following illustration on the seven rebirths of stream-enterer: -
For an ignorant being
During a disintegration process, the conscious aggregate or so-called the ‘chain of conscious’ aggregate would die out and the force of Ignorance would overcome the force of Awakening. Subsequently, the sub-conscious aggregate would liberate into fragments. The amount of liberated fragments is very much dependent on the level of Ignorance or Awakening within the being.
For an ignorant being, the level of Ignorance would surpass the level of Awakening and this would mean the intensity of Ignorance is higher than the intensity of Awakening. Higher intensity of Ignorance would mean higher intensity of becoming. Higher intensity of becoming would mean higher amount of liberated fragments.
For an awaken being
During a disintegration process, the conscious aggregate or so-called the ‘chain of conscious’ aggregate would die out and the force of Ignorance would still overcome the force of Awakening. Subsequently, the sub-conscious aggregate would liberate into fragments. However, the amount of liberated fragments is much lesser than an ignorant being because there is lower intensity of Ignorance as compared with the intensity of Awakening. Also, the dispersion of liberated fragments is more confined and restricted to much fewer new individuals.
Supposedly, Individual A, Individual B, Individual C are three different beings that have reached the stage of stream-enterer in the same or different life time.
Let say, 65 points of realised elements is a minimum benchmark for a qualified stream-enterer,
100 points of realised elements is for a qualified Arahant.
Note :
RN = element of realisation IG = element of ignorance SC = sub-conscious aggregate
[ORIGINAL BASE]
Individual A Individual B Individual C
RN65 IG35 RN65 IG35 RN65 IG35
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5
SC-A2 rn20 ig5 SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5
SC-A3 rn10 ig10 SC-B3 rn10 ig10 SC-C3 rn10 ig10 END CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5
SC-A5 rn5 ig10 SC-B5 rn5 ig10 SC-C5 rn5 ig10
[1ST REBIRTH]
Individual A-B-C Individual B-A-C Individual C-A-B
RN65 IG35 RN65 IG35 RN65 IG35
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-A2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5
SC-A3 rn10 ig10 SC-C3 rn10 ig10 SC-B3 rn10 ig10 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-A4 rn10 ig5
SC-C5 rn5 ig10 SC-B5 rn5 ig10 SC-A5 rn5 ig10
RN70 IG30 RN70 IG30 RN70 IG30
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-A2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5
SC-A3 rn10 ig10 SC-C3 rn10 ig10 SC-B3 rn10 ig10 END CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-A4 rn10 ig5
SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
[2ND REBIRTH]
Individual A-C-B Individual B-C-A Individual C-B-A
RN70 IG30 RN70 IG30 RN70 IG30
SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5 SC-A2 rn20 ig5
SC-A3 rn10 ig10 SC-B3 rn10 ig10 SC-C3 rn10 ig10 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5
SC-A5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5
RN75 IG25 RN75 IG25 RN75 IG25
SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5 SC-A2 rn20 ig5
SC-A3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 SC-C3 rn15 ig5 END CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5
SC-A5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5
[3RD REBIRTH]
Individual A-BC Individual B-AC Individual C-AB
RN75 IG25 RN75 IG25 RN75 IG25
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn20 ig5 SC-A2 rn20 ig5 SC-C2 rn20 ig5
SC-C3 rn15 ig5 SC-A3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5
SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
RN80 IG20 RN80 IG20 RN80 IG20
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25
SC-C3 rn15 ig5 SC-A3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 END CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5
SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
[4TH REBIRTH]
Individual A-CB Individual B-CA Individual C-BA
RN80 IG20 RN80 IG20 RN80 IG20
SC-B1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-A1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25
SC-C3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 SC-A3 rn15 ig5 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn10 ig5 SC-C4 rn10 ig5 SC-B4 rn10 ig5
SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
RN85 IG15 RN85 IG15 RN85 IG15
SC-B1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-A1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25
SC-C3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 SC-A3 rn15 ig5 END CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn15 SC-C4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
[5TH REBIRTH]
Individual AB-C Individual BA-C Individual CA-B
RN85 IG15 RN85 IG15 RN85 IG15
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-C3 rn15 ig5 SC-B3 rn15 ig5 SC-A3 rn15 ig5 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn15 SC-A4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
RN90 IG10 RN90 IG10 RN90 IG10
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-C3 rn20 SC-B3 rn20 SC-A3 rn20 END CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn15 SC-A4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
[6TH REBIRTH]
Individual BA-C Individual AB-C Individual AC-B
RN90 IG10 RN90 IG10 RN90 IG10
SC-A1 rn20 ig5 SC-B1 rn20 ig5 SC-C1 rn20 ig5
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-A3 rn20 SC-B3 rn20 SC-C3 rn20 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn15 SC-A4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
RN95 IG5 RN95 IG5 RN95 IG5
SC-A1 rn25 SC-B1 rn25 SC-C1 rn25
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-A3 rn20 SC-B3 rn20 SC-C3 rn20 END CHAPTER
SC-C4 rn15 SC-A4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-C5 rn10 ig5 SC-B5 rn10 ig5 SC-A5 rn10 ig5
[LAST REBIRTH]
Individual A-E Individual B-E Individual C-E
RN95 IG5 RN95 IG5 RN95 IG5
SC-A1 rn25 SC-C1 rn25 SC-B1 rn25
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-A3 rn20 SC-B3 rn20 SC-C3 rn20 EARLY CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn15 SC-C4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-C5 rn10 SC-B5 rn10 SC-A5 rn10
RN100 RN100 RN100
SC-A1 rn25 SC-C1 rn25 SC-B1 rn25
SC-B2 rn25 SC-C2 rn25 SC-A2 rn25
SC-A3 rn20 SC-B3 rn20 SC-C3 rn20 FINAL CHAPTER
SC-A4 rn15 SC-C4 rn15 SC-B4 rn15
SC-C5 rn15 SC-B5 rn15 SC-A5 rn15
In Buddhism, rebirth refers to evolving consciousness or stream of consciousness of a person upon death and the consciousness arising in the new person is neither identical to, nor entirely different from, the old consciousness, but forms part of a causal continuum or stream with it. The basic cause for this persistent re-arising of personality is the abiding of consciousness in ignorance; when ignorance is uprooted, rebirth ceases. [Source : ]
Beginning refers to an act or circumstance of entering upon an action or state. Therefore, beginning-less refers to an absence in the act or circumstance of entering upon an action or state. This means there is no change or becoming process. When there is no change or becoming process, it means anything is ever ready existed i.e. inherent existence.
Ignorance means the condition of being uneducated, unaware, uninformed or lack of knowledge, education, awareness. So, when one is proclaimed as an ignorant being, what does it mean? It means the person is uneducated, unaware, uninformed or lack knowledge, education, awareness on some kind of things or happenings. Therefore, ignorance simply could not arise out of nowhere or out of thin air. Definitely, it has to arise out of some kind of things or happenings or so-called ‘memorised’ events that have taken place beforehand.
And does then an enlightened person has no memory?
When the Buddha has gained enlightenment at age 35, he still has his awaken mind working for the next 45 years i.e. the Buddha still has his mind, memory and body remained intact until the one last time of disintegration process i.e. the passing into parinibbana. Only then, could the mind be liberated ultimately.
In other words, when one has gained enlightenment while sustaining with a living body, the mind would still exist but with a paradigm shift towards seeing all things or happenings in ultimate reality without delusion or hesitation. The mind has not gained with complete liberation yet and this circumstance is also known as cessation with remainder. The ultimate liberation or cessation without remainder can only be achieved without sustaining a living body.
Arahant is the fourth stage of enlightenment that is also known as the stage of cessation with remainder in contrast with parinibbana that is known as cessation without remainder.
Regarding beginninglessness. The problem is positing a first cause, in your model what is the very first cause for phenomena to come into balance. In terms of the material universe what is the first cause for the start of the universe, or how does something arise from nothing?
I guess I still see some internal logical consistency problems in your hypothesis. At any rate there are differences in what you say from the Buddhadharma, so for now I think I'll stick with Buddhism until I'm able to look within and see for myself the deepest fact of things.
In your illustration of how a stream enterer would attain liberation across lives you claim that the fragmented consciousness would only recombine with other fragments at the same stage of karma. Is that how it works for everyone that our fragments can only combine with those with the same kind of karma?
Perhaps, you have heard of the natural Law of Attraction i.e. “Like attracts Like.” Our thoughts, feelings, words, and actions produce energies which, in turn, attract like energies. For instance, if you initiate with positive thoughts all the time, it would attract favourable energies and things or happenings would turn out positively. This is what we called the influence of Mind over Matter. And this is how the calling of prayers onto someone works – transference of merit.
Therefore, similar characteristics of sub-conscious fragments among different individuals would attract with each other – just like the phrase, ‘Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.’
Regarding begininglessness. The problem is positing a first cause, in your model what is the very first cause for phenomena to come into balance. In terms of the material universe what is the first cause for the start of the universe, or how does something arise from nothing?
Let us regard that the world of nature is universal that bears with both the inherent and dependent qualities – on whether it is a fact or otherwise, I’ll leave it for you to investigate.
Anything that inherently exists would not involve change and created objects cannot inherently exist since that would involve change. An enlightened mind would see and realise into this fact without hesitation.
Buddhism advocates emptiness as a quality that exists everywhere in the dependent nature. Whereas, modern scientists acknowledge that energy is a quality that can neither be created nor destroyed and the sum of all energies in a system is a constant or never changes. In other words, energy is everywhere as well because it is forever existed in a system. Therefore, we could conclude that both emptiness and energy are fundamental qualities because every single thing or happening would involve emptiness and energy aggregates in the dependent nature.
For general understanding, conditional phenomenon is a necessary pre-requisite for energy to exist; without it, existence would be impossible. On another front, emptiness is a necessary pre-requisite for any object to exist; without it, the object would be impossible.
Now, how does something arise from nothing? Frankly speaking, the something that arises as in object is not out of nothing. In the Universe, there are plenty of existences or activities that can’t be discerned by our naked eyes. When we mention that emptiness and energy aggregates are everywhere in a system of dependent nature, it means that both of these qualities have fully occupied the system of dependent nature. As such, we could conclude the something as in object would arise out of energy aggregates that have been forever existed in a system. This is because energy or matter is actually the same thing, both reflected in a different form (as in Einstein’s formula, E = mc2). And since we can’t see energy with our naked eyes, we would call it empty instead of nothing.
Then, what is the first cause for the start of the Universe? Frankly speaking, the ultimate first cause for anything or everything is the nature. Without the nature, nothing would ever exist – no things or happenings would arise. The world of nature can be categorised into inherent and dependent qualities. And dependent phenomenon is a necessary pre-requisite for the Universe to exist; without it, Universe would be impossible. Dependent phenomenon is also known as conditional phenomenon – that consists of two terms i.e. balance and imbalance.
Under balance phenomenon, aggregate activities would rise and one could witness multiple shapes or forms arise. Under imbalance phenomenon, segregate activities would rise and one could see no shapes or forms arise. The cycle of conditional phenomena continues repeatedly depicting the rising and falling activities in continuum.
2) It doesn't seem to me that you expain a first cause, you only explain how phenomena exist. In other words that things exist because its in their nature to do so, it couldn't be any other way. Why is there something instead of nothing? If there is a first cause and things aren't beginningless then there must be an initial cause. You say that its the nature, I guess I don't really understand what that means.
I think consciousness is also a quality and as such always has the potential to manifest. There is no beginning to consciousness and no end. It is always here right now. If the conditions are right it will manifest and if not it stays hidden. I don't see where he suggests a first cause or beginning but it seems to me he posits potential transforming into realised energy and back again.
I could be wrong but it's the only way it makes sense to me.
Why discrete fragments? Because there is element of grasping among ignorant beings.
On Karma reaping among individuals, one needs an in-depth understanding into the principle of emptiness. If truely one is only to one, an eye is only for an eye, then there is no need rebirth, just trans-migration. Can things be in absolute discrete orientation? Refer back to the real meaning of emptiness.
First cause in dependent phenomenon? Because we are all deluge within the sea of dependent nature, our point of view would naturally be in the scope of duality. But there is another face of nature i.e. non-dependent or inherent nature. Within inherent nature, multiplicity and duality do not exist. There is no first cause, no last cause i.e. beginingless and endless.
What is dharma? Seeking dharma or ultimate truth is not about stereotyping one's view scope. Be open-minded and it would open up to new horizon of things. Buddhism is all about direct experience and recognition. Buddhism is not about what the Buddha has said, what the sutras have mentioned. Reality is never be limited by words or texts. Remember, tools would remain as tools.
In a departed being, the conscious mind that acts as guarding chain to the wild sub-conscious mind would die out. Subsequently, the sub-conscious mind would break free and stay behind roaming freely in discrete directions.
In other words, while being alive, we have our conscious mind to take charge, to lead, to concentrate and contain our sub-conscious mind but not after the demise period. By then, the sub-conscious mind that remains as souls or spirits would continue with its wilderness characteristics. Only when a being has progressed into more awaken state could the wilderness be tamed or less dispersion into more directions or new individuals.
Nowadays, the essence of Buddhadhamma still remain intact but its interpretation is not. Do watch this movie and get deeper insight on rebirth matters as per Buddhism.
When I first started to study I was skeptical about everything. To be skeptical about a certain teaching means that I have to suspend my disbelief as if I am enjoying a fictional work.
The 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path seem quite basic, forthcoming and logical and did so the first time I heard them so there was nothing to be skeptical about.
Having said that, skepticism does not mean I doubt everything constantly or automatically. You accept what seems to be true on face value unless some other evidence crops up to examine. It just means something like the Noble Truths has to stand and fall on the power of its message to describe reality as I experience it, not because the Buddha said it or that's what I was taught by my parents or a lot of people believe it.
That there are a lot of Skeptical Buddhists and our number is growing (or more likely more of us are coming out of the closet) shows the power of the Noble Truths, because every skeptical Buddhist I've talked to has said it was reading those words that told them here was a religion that finally "got it".
But then it REALLY gets down to what you said above.
Rebirth either is or isn't. It has nothing to do with "according to Buddhism" (unless you're saying that maybe it is and maybe it isn't. It has nothing to do with "as per Buddhism" (unless you're saying that maybe it is and maybe it isn't".
Frankly speaking, time is something that is created, not born (a non-natural existence). Time is an indicator for event; whereas length, width and height are indicators for size and volume. All of these indicators belong to a category named as dimension. In other words, dimension is created for the task of measurement per se and therefore, not something that arises out naturally.
Also, time is a scalar factor. A scalar refers to a quantity or phenomenon that exhibits magnitude only, with no specific direction. Example of scalars include speed, mass, electrical resistance, and hard-drive storage capacity. Any interval of time is also scalar - it has magnitude only.
Time dilation?
When an object is set under accelerating motion, the becoming process of the object would be stretched as compared with a relative object that is set under constant or decelerating motion. In other words, the becoming process of the object has been slowed down comparatively, not the time has been dilated or slowed down. Time would only assume the expression that the becoming process has slowed down and not the other way round. Similarly, the word of time has been used frequently for expressing different scenario of becoming processes, such as follows: -
NO TIME = an expression of no opportunity for a new becoming process to begin.
TIME TO TIME = an expression of moving from past to present becoming process; present to future becoming process.
TIME PASSED SLOWLY = an expression of hoping for a faster becoming process.
TIME DILATION = an expression that becoming process slows down.
Time arising in the Dependent Nature
There is time in the dependent nature but not in the inherent nature. This is because there are rising and falling events in continuum in the dependent nature. As for the inherent nature, there is no existence of time because nothing has ever changed – beginning-less and end-less.
Right now, is there a first cause in the dependent nature? Yes, there is. The first cause in the dependent nature is the dependent nature itself. Without the dependent nature, no things or events would arise. In other words, dependent nature is the earliest existence since the dawn of time.
Observation tip for Truth/Reality
One has to realise that both the Conventional Truth and Ultimate Truth do exist. When addressing a problem, in the first place, one needs to ensure whether the point of view is from the Conventional perspective or from the Ultimate perspective.
For example, if from the Conventional perspective, we agree that duality or multiplicity does exist. Therefore, Nirvana is a phenomenon because we are speaking as a subject on the other side of the object or matter. In other words, the subject is pondering on the object or matter - phenomenon arises.
However, if from the Ultimate perspective, then we agree that no duality or multiplicity arises. Therefore, Nirvana is not a phenomenon (also applies on all other things) because there is no subject to ponder on the object or matter. In other words, no phenomenon arises if we speak from the Ultimate perspective.
The principle in effect: -
If one stays on with seeing Conventional Truth only, one would remain in Samsara.
If one stays on with seeing both Conventional Truth & Ultimate Truth, one has the choice of remaining either in Samsara or Nirvana.
If one stays on with seeing Ultimate Truth only, one would remain in Nirvana.
The Characteristics of Emptiness and Energy
Both emptiness and energy are universal qualities. It means that emptiness and energy are inherent and dependent arising concurrently.
Firstly, let us analyse into emptiness. Emptiness corresponds to two distinct scenarios:
1. It corresponds to the inherent existence (due to unchanging nature) that all conventional phenomena lack.
It means that if we focus purely on seeing emptiness as a quality, it cannot be segmented or dissected further to see the real origin. Emptiness exists in the way it appears in direct perception and does not constitute some false appearance concealing a lack of inherent existence. Therefore, it has unchanging nature that all conventional phenomena lack. This conclusion is made from the Ultimate perspective - seeing into the within of the within.
2. It corresponds to dependent arising (a conditional phenomenon) i.e. subject to the same lack of inherent existence as every other object or phenomenon. This is referred to as the emptiness of emptiness.
It means that emptiness would not exist without a dependent partner. If there were no objects to analyse, then emptiness as such could not be realised. Without objects, there can be no emptiness - a circumstance that points to emptiness of emptiness. This conclusion is made from the Conventional perspective - seeing as a subject on the other side of the object or matter.
Reflection of Emptiness
Emptiness can be realised into stages as below: -
Stage 1 Elementary Realisation
• All things and phenomena are lack of core essence.
• Nothing is unchanging and permanent.
• Everything is inter-related.
Stage 2 Intermediary Realisation
• Ability to differentiate the way things are perceived to exist and
the way things really exist.
• Only seeing without believing.
Stage 3 Advance Realisation
• No dualism of the subject and object, and no appearance of multiplicity.
• All things and phenomena rise and fall within a singular condition.
• Only uniformity exists.
Stage 4 Ultimate Realisation
• All dependent arising are completely blown off or extinguished.
• No string attached; nothing is left remaining.
• Infinite, unchanging, permanent and unconditional.
• Exists beyond all phenomena.
As for energy, it corresponds to the same distinct scenarios: -
1. It corresponds to inherent existence (due to unchanging nature) – the sum of all energies in a system is a constant or never changes.
2. It corresponds to dependent arising (a conditional phenomenon) – energy is ever transforming (changing nature) but neither can it be created nor destroyed.
In summary, the Buddha has laid emphasis that one should see in all angles of things or matters while searching for ultimate truth/reality. Without it, any conclusions made out of one’s observation would not be balance or in wholesome nature.
Be wise, be wholesome, be neutralised!
It's not like we fell from grace.
Make sure you are also then skeptical about your skepticism, doubt your doubts.
It would only be fair after all.
The rest of this thread is too long for an imbecile like me
BW,
Abu
"Off topic" is one of the most natural and interesting part of the discussions.
What a wonderful relay!
Thankyou so much @ourself