Free will vs. determinism

mynameisuntz

I am trying to learn more about the Buddhist perspective of free will. From my understanding, Buddhism basically states we are not independent/distinct entities but rather interrelated parts of an impermanent universe. If that is correct, then what is the implication regarding free will vs. determinism.

Thanks, all!

Zero

you have free will before you do something and an eternity to ponder whether it was pre-determined when you've done it.... :buck:

taiyaki

Free will is replaced by dependent origination and volitional action.

In this moment what arises is due to causes and conditions. We cannot change what arises in this moment, but we can respond accordingly which plants karmic seeds to rise in the future.

So what we have control over is planting in the moment good, neutral, or bad seeds, which come into play for future arisings.

Present arising = karma.

Respond to present arising = redirecting the flow of karma.

Future arising = karma.

No agent, no doer, but a dynamic process of dependent origination.

This arising sound, thought, smell, taste, form (shape, color), and sensation. These arise due to infinite causes/conditions which are at play.

Happening to no one, happening no where, and happening in no time. Unless it is asserted.

patbb

I would approach this in term of

free will vs karma.


karma in the sense of: How can you become an electrical engineer if you've never herd of a university?
How lucky we are to have had the dharma introduce in our lives, and had the very precise set of preconditioned ideas that allowed us to have an open mind to it...

mynameisuntz

@taiyaka - can you elaborate beyond that at all? Between your response and patbb's response, I get the impression of the following:

We act based on current conditions which are not controlled by us, and those actions plant karmic seeds. Could this be seen as, approaching a "predestined" fork in the road with many possible routes, choosing one, and having a new "predestined" road? Where we will come to many more roads, and many more forks, and thus many more choices based on predestined conditions which arose by choice?

Am I way off?

taiyaki

I'd personally throw away of all ideas of predestination, free will, determinism.

As these are primarily Christian or theology in outlook.

Buddhism is cut and dry cause and effect. Everything is conditional.

Yet by seeing that everything is conditional, we can see infinite potentiality through emptiness. We do not have to react based on previous conditioning. We can be fresh, alive, spontaneous! Because the response or volitional movement is infinite in its responses.

But such vision is only possible when there is a direct perception of emptiness. The limitless vision of appearance-emptiness.

Not sure if this is clear.

It really comes down to what POV we are looking from.

jll

consider this, when you are attracted to someone of the opposite sex, is it freewill or predetermined?
buddha said it is due to your past karma.

taiyaki

consider this, when you are attracted to someone of the opposite sex, is it freewill or predetermined?
buddha said it is due to your past karma.

Its always interesting to be in a bar or some social place...and to see how the eyes automatically move to check females out.

They just move on their own.

Sabre

Free will and determinism are not opposites. True, if everything is determined, there can be no free will. However, the other way around is not true. If there is no free will, this does not imply determinism. There could be something outside of free will 'causing' the indeterminism. Do you see?

Determinism means there can only be one possible future. We might never figure out if this is true, but quantum mechanics seems to show the opposite. Some say this proves free will. However, be careful when reasoning (people often go wrong here); if there is no determination, this doesn't say anything about free will. Again, free will and determinism are not opposites.

However, enough philosophising ..

Sit down and meditate. Does the mind do what 'you' want, or does it move by itself? If you watch closely you'll see that the 'will' comes after a decision.. And nobody makes the decision.

So I can give you something: Free will exists... but it is not will free from conditions, but it is will free from a self. This second type of free will is real freedom. As sometimes said: No self, no problem.

Arthurbodhi

Maybe this can help:

Three sectarian views that are rebuked by wise people:
1. There are priests and contemplatives who hold this teaching, hold this view: 'Whatever a person experiences — pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful — that is all caused by what was done in the past.'
2. There are priests and contemplatives who hold this teaching, hold this view: 'Whatever a person experiences — pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful — that is all caused by a supreme being's act of creation.'
3. There are priests and contemplatives who hold this teaching, hold this view: 'Whatever a person experiences — pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful — that is all without cause and without condition.

Here is the complete sutta:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html

Blessings.

jll

we have some will, but its not free, they all come with conditions or pre-conditions....

Tosh

The doctrine of dependant arising says that everything in existence depends on causes and conditions. Therefore, if there is free will, it must also depend on causes and conditions, which means it can't possibly be 100% totally free, it's got to be conditional will, not 'free will'.

This kinda accords with my experience too; I know we all have 'addictions', but my gross addiction is alcoholism and prior to A.A. I just could not stop drinking for any length of time. My will power would burn out; it's like Japanese water torture being sober; and I'd get ground down by the way I was feeling and I'd drink.

Then I went to A.A. and they showed me via a 12 Step program how to create the causes and conditions for me to be able to stay sober; and indeed I have (serious; even though some of my posts may look dodgy. ).

So I reckon there is conditional will, not free will.

Jason

I am trying to learn more about the Buddhist perspective of free will. From my understanding, Buddhism basically states we are not independent/distinct entities but rather interrelated parts of an impermanent universe. If that is correct, then what is the implication regarding free will vs. determinism.

Thanks, all!

It's an interesting question, and there are a wide range of opinions on the matter.

For example, from the conventional point of view, we definitely seem to have at least some level of functional choice via intention (cetana) operating within the broader framework of causality that conditions the choices available to us at any given point in time. As one erudite poster from dhammawheel.com put it:

Functional choice isn't independent of other causes and conditions — it operates within the same conditioned mind-stream. But it does operate, and it does so in consort with desire and attention, etc. Hence there is no need for Cartesian notions of free will or Upanisadic notions of a permanent, unchanging Self for there to be functional choice. In fact, these non-Buddhist systems are not sustainable precisely because of the interdependence of phenomena: i.e. an unchanging agent cannot engage in actions, etc.

This is somewhat similar to how many teachers approach the issue of free will, particularly from a predominately Sutta-based point of view, such as the Venerable Thanissaro, e.g.,:

In the course of his Awakening, the Buddha discovered that the experience of the present moment consists of three factors: results from past actions, present actions, and the results of present actions. This means that kamma acts in feedback loops, with the present moment being shaped both by past and by present actions; while present actions shape not only the present but also the future. This constant opening for present input into the causal processes shaping one's life makes free will possible. In fact, will — or intention — forms the essence of action. Furthermore, the quality of the intention determines the quality of the act and of its results. On the mundane level there are three types of intentions: skillful, leading to pleasant results; unskillful, leading to painful results; and mixed, leading to mixed results, all these results being experienced within the realm of space and time. However, the fact that the experience of space and time requires not only the results of past actions but also the input of present actions means that it is possible to unravel the experience of space and time by bringing the mind to a point of equilibrium where it contributes no intentions or actions to the present moment. The intentions that converge at this equilibrium are thus a fourth type of intention — transcendent skillful intentions — which lead to release from the results of mundane intentions, and ultimately to the ending of all action. (Introduction to the Itivuttaka)

For the early Buddhists, karma was non-linear. Other Indian schools believed that karma operated in a straight line, with actions from the past influencing the present, and present actions influencing the future. As a result, they saw little room for free will. Buddhists, however, saw that karma acts in feedback loops, with the present moment being shaped both by past and by present actions; present actions shape not only the future but also the present. This constant opening for present input into the causal process makes free will possible. This freedom is symbolized in the imagery the Buddhists used to explain the process: flowing water. Sometimes the flow from the past is so strong that little can be done except to stand fast, but there are also times when the flow is gentle enough to be diverted in almost any direction. ("Karma")

Although the precise working out of the kammic process is somewhat unpredictable, it is not chaotic. The relationship between kammic causes and their effects is entirely regular: when an action is of the sort that it will be felt in such and such a way, that is how its result will be experienced [§13]. Skillful intentions lead to favorable results, unskillful ones to unfavorable results. Thus, when one participates in the kammic process, one is at the mercy of a pattern that one's actions put into motion, but that is not entirely under one's present control. Despite the power of the mind, one cannot reshape the basic laws of cosmic causality at whim. These laws include the physical laws, within which one's kamma must ripen and work itself out. This is the point of passage [§14], in which the Buddha explains that present pain can be explained not only by past kamma but also by a host of other factors; the list of alternative factors he gives comes straight from the various causes for pain that were recognized in the medical treatises of his time. If we compare this list with his definition of old kamma in [§15], we see that many if not all of the alternative causes are actually the result of past actions. The point here is that old kamma does not override other causal factors operating in the universe — such as those recognized by the physical sciences — but instead finds its expression within them.

However, the fact that the kammic process relies on input from the present moment means that it is not totally deterministic. Input from the past may place restrictions on what can be done and known in any particular moment, but the allowance for new input from the present provides some room for free will. This allowance also opens the possibility for escape from the cycle of kamma altogether by means of the fourth type of kamma: the development of heightened skillfulness through the pursuit of the seven factors for Awakening and the noble eightfold path — and, by extension, all of the Wings to Awakening [§§16-17].

The non-linearity of this/that conditionality explains why heightened skillfulness, when focused on the present moment, can succeed in leading to the end of the kamma that has formed the experience of the entire cosmos. All non-linear processes exhibit what is called scale invariance, which means that the behavior of the process on any one scale is similar to its behavior on smaller or larger scales. To understand, say, the large-scale pattern of a particular non-linear process, one need only focus on its behavior on a smaller scale that is easier to observe, and one will see the same pattern at work. In the case of kamma, one need only focus on the process of kamma in the immediate present, in the course of developing heightened skillfulness, and the large-scale issues over the expanses of space and time will become clear as one gains release from them. (Wings to Awakening)

This view is based on a very simplistic understanding of fabricated reality, seeing causality as linear and totally predictable: X causes Y which causes Z and so on, with no effects turning around to condition their causes, and no possible way of using causality to escape from the causal network. However, one of the many things the Buddha discovered in the course of his awakening was that causality is not linear. The experience of the present is shaped both by actions in the present and by actions in the past. Actions in the present shape both the present and the future. The results of past and present actions continually interact. Thus there is always room for new input into the system, which gives scope for free will. There is also room for the many feedback loops that make experience so thoroughly complex, and that are so intriguingly described in chaos theory. Reality doesn't resemble a simple line or circle. It's more like the bizarre trajectories of a strange attractor or a Mandelbrot set. ("Samsara Divided by Zero")

And I think this approach to the issue is especially helpful from a pragmatic standpoint when it comes to the practice itself.

Jason

On a deeper, more theoretical level, however, one might ask how volition/intention/will/etc. is possible without a self, especially when it's argued that there must be some kind active agency for free will to exist. This, of course, conflicts with the Abhidhammic position, which labels volition (cetana) as one of the 52 mental factors "common to all classes of consciousness," but rejects the existence of any kind of self or independent agency whatsoever.

It seems like a paradox, but only from the Western philosophical idea of 'free will.' Classical Theravada, on the other hand, views free will more or less as an illusion, and instead takes a more casually determined view of volition.

Conventionally speaking, we appear to have functional choice via intention operating within a broader framework of causality that conditions the choices available to us at any given time. However, on a deeper level, intention itself is a product of the aggregate of mental formations (sankharakhandha). Therefore, being a product or process within one of the aggregates, which themselves are types of processes and not-self (anatta), this type of internal decision maker or will-to-do, if you will, has its own requisite conditions and is also not-self, since whatever is conditioned and subject to change can't be said to have an unchanging essence or being.

In essence, volition itself isn't an illusion, it's simply not the result of an independent agent or self; and it, like everything else in the world, is ultimately the result of causally determined processes. True free will requires an independent agent, and Buddhism effectively rejects such an agency. And while I tend to take a more moderate position myself, Buddhism is entirely compatible with causal determinism.

For example, Dhammanando Bhikkhu once gave me the example of a mosquito biting you on the nose: first you feel annoyed and want to squash it, but then you recall that you're a precept-observing Buddhist and so restrain yourself.

He explained that when this event is described in conventional terms, or according to the Sutta method, it might be said that you had a choice to kill the mosquito or to refrain, and that you chose the latter. But when it's described according to the Abhidhamma method, your abstention from killing wasn't due to choice but to the arising of kusala cetasikas (wholesome mental factors) such as moral shame and fear of wrong-doing (hiri & ottappa), and abstinence (virati), i.e., it was causally determined.

And then there are passages like this from the Dhammasangani (pp. 7-8):

What on that occasion is volition (cetana)? The volition, purpose, purposefulness, which is born of contact with the appropriate element of representative intellection - that is the volition that there then is.

And the Atthasalini, pp.147-148:

Volition is that which co-ordinates, that is, it binds closely (abhisandahati) to itself associated states as objects. This is its characteristic; its function is conation. There is no such thing as volition in the four planes of existence without the characteristic of co-ordinating; all volition has it. But the function of conation is only in moral and immoral states; as regards activity in moral and immoral acts, the remaining associated states play only a restricted part. But volition is exceedingly energetic. It makes double effort, double exertion. Hence the Ancients said: 'Volition is like the nature of a landowner, a cultivator who, taking fifty-five strong men, went down to the fields to reap. He was exceedingly energetic and exceedingly strenuous; he doubled his strength, he doubled his effort, and said, "Take your sickles," and so forth, pointed out the portion to be reaped, offered them drink, food, scent, flowers, etc., and took an equal share of the work.' Volition is like the cultivator; the fifty-five moral states which arise as factors of consciousness are like the fifty-five strong men; like the time of doubling strength, doubling effort by the cultivator is the doubled strength, double effort of volition as regards activity in moral and immoral acts. Thus should conation as its function be understood.

It has directing as manifestation. It arises directing associated states, like the chief disciple, the chief carpenter, etc., who fulfil their own and others' duties... even so, when volition starts work on its object, it sets associated states to do each its own work. For when it puts forth energy, they also put forth energy... It is also evident that it arises by causing associated states to be energetic in such things as recollecting an urgent work and so forth.

Incidentally, I think the Abhidhammic position accords well with what neuroscientist Sam Harris has to say about the illusion of free will here, here, here, here, and here. And even in the Suttas, there are teachings that evidence elements of casual determinism, lending support to the Abhidhammic position. I find AN 11.2 interesting, for example, in that it seems to show how certain wholesome mental factors (kusala cetasikas) condition certain wholesome qualities and experiences.

In the end, however, I don't feel that I'll ever have a satisfactory understanding of the issue; but I do see how each view can be useful depending upon where one is along the path, and what tools will be the most effective at that stage. Ultimately, the Buddha's approach to life's problems is pragmatic, serving a practical purpose that's subjectively beneficial regardless of their objective validity, and I think that point should always be kept in mind unless one becomes hopelessly lost within the proverbial 'thicket of views.'

gassho

Jason, thank you for sharing. That was wonderful.

David

I would have to define free will as the ability to effect change through decision making. In that sense we have free will sure enough.

I'm not sure I understand the conflict with determinism because causation is karma and our only true possessions are our actions.

Even if there was a pre-determined plan, it could have just been to go and see what happens but my logic won't allow for a "first" cause... All causes are also the effects of causes.

Jeffrey

Free will and karma are conceptual overlays. The moment is. We can say we'll create good karma and have future good births. But the moment is. We can't fix it.

Jeffrey

The heisenberg uncertainty principle shoots down determinism. We can't know where an electron is. Since we can't know where the foundational units of matter are where does that leave conditionality?

We can develope technology though with chemistry and creativity. And we can also create mind technology.

David

Thanks Jeffrey. I had a brain fart there. I forgot the main point to determinism isn't causation but prediction of future events. We can make a good guess if we pay attention to the cycles but it's all probability.

Jason

The heisenberg uncertainty principle shoots down determinism. We can't know where an electron is. Since we can't know where the foundational units of matter are where does that leave conditionality?

I wouldn't necessarily go that far. While it does seem to shoot down traditional determinism, it can be seen to suggest a new form of determinism, that of determined probabilities. For example, Stephen Hawking writes in his book, The Grand Design, "Quantum physics might seem to undermine the idea that nature is governed by laws, but that is not the case. Instead it leads us to accept a new form of determinism: Given the state of a system at some time, the laws of nature determine the probabilities of various futures and pasts rather than determining the future and past with certainty. Though that is distasteful to some, scientists must accept theories that agree with experiment, not their own preconceived notions" (72).

Biological process, however, are all but certainly determined by the laws of physics and chemistry, according to Hawking. From the same book, "Though we feel that we can choose what we do, our understanding of the molecular basis of biology shows that biological processes are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry and are therefore as determined as the orbits of the planets. Recent experiments in neuroscience support the view that it is our physical brain, following the known laws of science, that determines our actions, and not some agency that exists outside those laws. For example, a study of patients undergoing awake brain surgery found that by electrically stimulating the appropriate regions of the brain, one could create in the patient the desire to move the hand, arm, or foot, or to move the lips and talk. It is hard to imagine how free will can operate if our behavior is determined by physical law, so it seems that we are no more than biological machines and that free will is just an illusion" (32).

Just some food for thought.

Jeffrey

Jason, my point was that we cannot determine the state of the system due to the heisenberg uncertainty principle. Thus at no time in the future will we know the state of the system. It's kind of a technicality just to make a point. We are able to know all sorts of things about chemistry and matter/physics.

The yogic experience of breath is more alive. Not just a label.

The point is that we don't know what this moment is. We are just labeling it. We say 'breath.' and that is true. But we don't know the totality of our experience of course. We just point out things and label them. 12 links.

Thanks for the food for thought though. Our brains and food are both made of molecules also.

I wonder if science will ever be able to provide an electrical therapy. Can dukkha be overcome by influence of science?

Lostie

@taiyaki are you saying things ALWAYS happen for a reason?

Can something happen for no rhyme or reason? Randomness?

I'd personally throw away of all ideas of predestination, free will, determinism.

As these are primarily Christian or theology in outlook.

Buddhism is cut and dry cause and effect. Everything is conditional.

Yet by seeing that everything is conditional, we can see infinite potentiality through emptiness. We do not have to react based on previous conditioning. We can be fresh, alive, spontaneous! Because the response or volitional movement is infinite in its responses.

But such vision is only possible when there is a direct perception of emptiness. The limitless vision of appearance-emptiness.

Not sure if this is clear.

It really comes down to what POV we are looking from.

Jason

Jason, my point was that we cannot determine the state of the system due to the heisenberg uncertainty principle. Thus at no time in the future will we know the state of the system.

Thanks for the food for thought though. Our brains and food are both made of molecules also.

I wonder if science will ever be able to provide an electrical therapy. Can dukkha be overcome by influence of science?

Well, my rudimentary understanding of the uncertainty principle is that we can't observe a particle like an electron without disturbing it, since to view it we'd have to hit it with something else, like another particle (e.g., a photon), thereby transferring energy to the observed particle and quantum high jinks ensue.

The uncertainty, then, arise from the inability to make two separate measurements accurately (e.g., the position and momentum of a particle) at the same time, since each measurement will disturb the system and change the quantities being measured. And all of this somehow means that there aren't determined outcomes at the quantum level, but that there are determined probabilities that can be predicted. As Hawking puts it, "What science demands of a theory is that it be testable. If the probabilistic nature of the predictions of quantum physics meant it was impossible to confirm those predictions, then quantum theories would not qualify as valid theories. But despite the probabilistic nature of their predictions, we can still test quantum theories. For instance, we can repeat and experiment many times and confirm that the frequency of various outcomes conforms to the probabilities predicted" (72-73).

I'm not going to pretend like I truly understand anything about quantum mechanics and its implications. But the sense that I get is that some things are determined by physical laws (e.g., biological processes), whereas in the quantum world, the laws are a bit different in that you're working with probabilities rather than given outcomes. All in all, this does seem to conflict with strict determinism, but not necessarily with, say, Hawking's probabilistic determinism.

*shrugs*

Jeffrey

Wikipedia:

The reason for the uncertainty principle arises from the differing eigenstates of non-commuting observables. The eigenstates of an observable represents the state of the wavefunction for a certain measurement value (the eigenvalue). For example, if a measurement of an observable A is taken then the system is in a particular eigenstate \Phi of that observable. The particular eigenstate of the observable A may not be an eigenstate of another observable B. If this is so, then it does not have a single associated measurement as the system is not in an eigenstate of the observable.[3]

It's not just the limits of measurement, but it is a part of the Schrodinger equation which models quantum behaviour.

Which brings up the point that all of science is modeling and observations.

Jason

That Schrodinger was one crazy cat.

David

@taiyaki are you saying things ALWAYS happen for a reason?

Can something happen for no rhyme or reason? Randomness?

I'd personally throw away of all ideas of predestination, free will, determinism.

As these are primarily Christian or theology in outlook.

Buddhism is cut and dry cause and effect. Everything is conditional.

Yet by seeing that everything is conditional, we can see infinite potentiality through emptiness. We do not have to react based on previous conditioning. We can be fresh, alive, spontaneous! Because the response or volitional movement is infinite in its responses.

But such vision is only possible when there is a direct perception of emptiness. The limitless vision of appearance-emptiness.

Not sure if this is clear.

It really comes down to what POV we are looking from.

I know you weren't asking me but I don't believe in a causeless effect. That's basically what a first cause would have to be.

DairyLama

Its always interesting to be in a bar or some social place...and to see how the eyes automatically move to check females out.

They just move on their own.

True, but once you become aware of it you can decide not to look...I think traditionally this is is called guarding the senses

DairyLama

The heisenberg uncertainty principle shoots down determinism. We can't know where an electron is. Since we can't know where the foundational units of matter are where does that leave conditionality?

But that applies to the quantum level, not to everyday experience. It's probably more relevant to look at chaos theory.

person

To me it comes down to awareness. Awarness occurs only in the present moment. Differing mental states will arise in the mind and to the degree we are aware of these arisings the present moment of awareness can condition alternate directions, or choice.

I wonder if there has ever been an experiment that trys to see if the brain can have knowledge of what appears in awareness. There are experiments that show that the brain is responsible for decisions and that the brain processes occur prior to awareness. But not every process that occurs in the brain also occurs in awarness. Since what occurs in awarness isn't a %100 translation of what appears in the brain it seems its not exactly the same thing even if it is produced by the brain. So if the brain can then gain knowledge of the particular events that happen within awareness it could use that information for further decision making. It seems to me that this would then be downward causality which conflicts with reductionism and linear determinism. Anyway, this seems like it would be a scientifically testable hypothesis, anyone know if its been done?

Sabre

you can decide

Who can decide?..

Decisions are free of a self. Nobody makes the decision, it makes itself.

taiyaki

@taiyaki are you saying things ALWAYS happen for a reason?

Can something happen for no rhyme or reason? Randomness?

I'd personally throw away of all ideas of predestination, free will, determinism.

As these are primarily Christian or theology in outlook.

Buddhism is cut and dry cause and effect. Everything is conditional.

Yet by seeing that everything is conditional, we can see infinite potentiality through emptiness. We do not have to react based on previous conditioning. We can be fresh, alive, spontaneous! Because the response or volitional movement is infinite in its responses.

But such vision is only possible when there is a direct perception of emptiness. The limitless vision of appearance-emptiness.

Not sure if this is clear.

It really comes down to what POV we are looking from.

Three world views:

Randomness or nihilism.

Predetermined, no free will.

or Causality.

One of them is 100% and it is causality.

There is no such thing as randomness. Things appear to happen randomly because there is a gap between when the seed was planted and when the seed sprouts and flowers.

DairyLama

you can decide

Who can decide?..

Decisions are free of a self. Nobody makes the decision, it makes itself.

But still choices occur...

taiyaki

Choices can occur without an agent.

Sabre

you can decide

Who can decide?..

Decisions are free of a self. Nobody makes the decision, it makes itself.

But still choices occur...

Yup. But they are not free. Choices are based on causality, not on someone who picks a choice based on some free will. If choices were free, why would someone make one instead of the other?

DairyLama

Choices are based on causality, not on someone who picks a choice based on some free will.

I agree, choices are dependently arisen, and usually connected to craving and aversion.

Sabre

I like this simile:

Often when you start to delve into non-self, there comes a time when you don't want to go any further because you're afraid. I'm not talking about ordinary fear; I'm talking about fear that goes to what you take to be your very "core". You're challenging all you ever thought about yourself, and you're undermining your whole essence of existence. Your whole reason to be is being challenged by imagining what it would be like if there were nothing there. If you have the courage and the faith to go through that fear and find that what you were afraid of was nothing, you will receive the most beautiful gift - the gift of freedom. The gift of the ending of things, of the work being finished.

Years ago I gave the simile of "the driverless bus". It's like you're driving through life in a bus, and you get pleasant experiences and unpleasant experiences. You think it's your fault; or you think that it's the driver's fault. "Why is it that the driver doesn't drive into pleasant country and stay there for a long time? Why does he always drive into unpleasant territory and stay there a long time?" You want to find out who is controlling this journey called "my life". Why is it that you experience so much pain and suffering? You want to find out where the driver is, the driver of these five aggregates (Khandhas): body, feeling, perception, mentality and consciousness - the driver of you. After doing a lot of meditation and listening to the Dhamma, you finally go up to where the driver's seat is in the bus, and you find it's empty!

It shocks you at first, but it gives you so much relief to know there's no one to blame. How many people blame somebody when there is suffering? They either blame God, or they blame their parents, or they blame the government, or they blame the weather, or they blame some sickness they have, and in the last resort if they can't find anyone else to blame, they blame themselves. It's stupidity. There is no one to blame! Look inside and see it's empty, "a driverless bus". When you see non-self (Anatta), you see there is no one to blame; it's Anatta. The result is that you go back into your seat and just enjoy the journey. If it's a driverless bus, what else can you do? You sit there when you go through pleasant experiences, "just pleasant experiences that's all". You go through painful experiences, "just painful experiences, that's all". It's just a driverless bus.

http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Ajahn_Brahm_The_Ending_of_Things.htm

Alltough our discussion is interesting, the fear Brahm mentiones is what causes it to actually be quite fruitless. Through reasoning, the mind will not see the absence of free will, mainly because it's afraid. But meditative absorptions make the absence of free will clear, because at those times there is no decision process at all.

DairyLama

Choices can occur without an agent.

How so?

taiyaki

Pepsi or coke?
Weigh the opinions. Coke it is. Choice.
Is there an agent behind making such choice? No because it is dependently arisen.
There is no maker of thoughts, thoughts arise.

I suppose maybe the word choicing is better than choice.

Sabre

This is interesting as well at 23:44:

DairyLama

Pepsi or coke?
Weigh the opinions. Coke it is. Choice.
Is there an agent behind making such choice? No because it is dependently arisen.
There is no maker of thoughts, thoughts arise.

I suppose maybe the word choicing is better than choice.

But a choice being dependently arisen doesn't necessarily mean that nobody is making it.

DairyLama

Years ago I gave the simile of "the driverless bus".

Though a driverless bus would quickly crash, so I'm not sure how well this one works.

taiyaki

Pepsi or coke?
Weigh the opinions. Coke it is. Choice.
Is there an agent behind making such choice? No because it is dependently arisen.
There is no maker of thoughts, thoughts arise.

I suppose maybe the word choicing is better than choice.

But a choice being dependently arisen doesn't necessarily mean that nobody is making it.

Once the choice is made, gone. Just like that.

Who made the choice? Doesn't reference back to anyone unless we grasp onto an entity or reference point.

Conventionally we can say, yes I made that choice. But the "I" is just a thought or a grouping of sensations, which we project "I" onto.

person

To me it comes down to awareness. Awarness occurs only in the present moment. Differing mental states will arise in the mind and to the degree we are aware of these arisings the present moment of awareness can condition alternate directions, or choice.

I wonder if there has ever been an experiment that trys to see if the brain can have knowledge of what appears in awareness. There are experiments that show that the brain is responsible for decisions and that the brain processes occur prior to awareness. But not every process that occurs in the brain also occurs in awarness. Since what occurs in awarness isn't a %100 translation of what appears in the brain it seems its not exactly the same thing even if it is produced by the brain. So if the brain can then gain knowledge of the particular events that happen within awareness it could use that information for further decision making. It seems to me that this would then be downward causality which conflicts with reductionism and linear determinism. Anyway, this seems like it would be a scientifically testable hypothesis, anyone know if its been done?

You can also take the example of response priming, a type of subliminal suggestion that effects a persons behavior. These cues don't occur within awarness and we seemingly have no control over our behavior in response to them.

The way choice appears in my mind is that say I see some ice cream (visual stimulus), this triggers an arising of past feelings and memories of eating ice cream and my habit of craving ice cream arises. I'm aware of my craving and maybe some past memories, then arises my knowledge that I have to watch my cholesterol and information of how sugar is bad for me. My craving is still there and so is my desire to do what is good for myself. These two competing desires are both in my mind, the strength of one or the other seems to depend upon my past habituation with behavior or contemplation. One of them wins out and my volition moves to that one and that is the choice I make.

Why does one win out over the other? Maybe it was sunny or rainy outside and that influenced my mood to one or the other. I guess I can't fathom all the subtle causes that allows one to win out but awareness of these arisings seems to give some space and additional conditions for a choice to occur.

Sabre

Years ago I gave the simile of "the driverless bus".

Though a driverless bus would quickly crash, so I'm not sure how well this one works.

hehe. It's not like people never make mistakes.. :P

mynameisuntz

Man, I'm still just as confused as I was when I made this thread.

Womp womp.

Jeffrey

IF scientists had electrodes hooked to your brain and they told you that you were thinking of an elephant. But you really were thinking of a nice glass of Pepsi cola.

Would you believe the scientists or your own experience?

What do you think that says about the foundations of reality? Maybe not foundations, but I mean where is the refuge, significance, and meaning?

Thought experiment.

Jeffrey

@taiyaki

If there is no reference points there is no cause and effect. Because an effect is relative to a cause.

It's like collapse of the three times. Past and future are defined relational to present. Since the present is dependent on these two it is also insubstantial.

Cause is relative to effect thus it is empty. And unreal in the sense that 'cause' is neither true or false, but rather relationsal

DairyLama

Conventionally we can say, yes I made that choice. But the "I" is just a thought or a grouping of sensations, which we project "I" onto.

Yes, I think we identify with thoughts and feelings and develop a sense of ownership, eg "my thoughts".
But I'm still not sure we've got to the bottom of it.

DairyLama

Would you believe the scientists or your own experience?

Would you believe Buddhist teachings or your own experience?

xabir

Something I wrote quite recently: No-self does not imply determinism or fatalism. In my experience the establishment of right view, the path of practice and contemplation had all contributed to my awakening. ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/12/experience-realization-view-practice.html )

As I wrote to someone:

............

Yes but not to be mistaken that will has no part in all these. The teaching of anatta or no self does not deny will or the aggregates... The buddha teaches that a sentient being is simply a convention for five aggregates: matter/body, feelings, perception, volition, consciousness. Notice that volition is part of it. This will/volition can be directed towards a wholesome or unwholesome path. However, also remember that the five aggregates are empty of self - and are without agent. Does that mean there is no free will? In a sense yes, but neither does it imply determinism: another dualistic extreme. Free will means subjective controller determines action, determinism means objective world determines subjective experience. In reality there is no subject and object - in thinking just thought, in hearing just sound. But there are requisite conditions for every manifestation. Those conditions can be changed if there is a correct path.

A concrete example: if you ask a beginner to run 2.4km in 9 minutes with an unfit body, that is asking for the impossible. No matter how hard willed is he, he is never going to make it. Why? The current requisite conditions of his body is such that the result of running 9 minutes is impossible. Control, agency, doesn't apply when manifestation always arise due to conditions.

It however also means that if you exercise regularly for months or years, there is no reason the body (conditions) cannot be improved to the degree that running 9 mins is definitely possible. This is what I mean by working with conditions.

So those teachers who say meditation are useless are not understanding latent tendencies and conditions. They mistook no doership with some kind of fatalism. Every proper practice has its place in working with one's conditions.

Just because there is no self, no doer, doesn't mean my body is fated to be unfit and I can't reach the 9 min. Just because I exercise regularly doesn't mean I am reinforcing the notion of self or doership. In any case, action is always without self.

It also does not mean that "will" has no place at all. "Will" is often misunderstood to be linked to a self or agent that has full control over things, whereas it is simply more manifestation and conditions. Yes, sheer will going against conditions isn't going to work – this is not understanding no-self and dependent origination. But if will is directed properly with correct understanding of no-self and conditionality, at a proper path and practice, it can lead to benefits.

That is why the first teaching of Buddha is the four noble truths: the truth of suffering, the cause of suffering, the end of suffering, the way to end suffering. This path arises as a result of his direct insight into no-self and dependent origination.

Like a doctor, you don't tell your patients "you are fated to be ill and sick and in pain, because there is no individual controller, everything is the will of God". That is nonsense. Instead, you diagnose the illness, you seek the cause of illness, you give a treatment that eliminates the cause of illness. There is no self, there is no controller, but there is conditions and manifestation and a way to treat bad conditions. This is the way of the four noble truths.

xabir

Just found a conversation in November 2010 with Thusness:

(4:49:42 PM) Thusness: therefore i do not want u to misunderstand and falls into fox zen
(4:50:03 PM) Thusness: there must be clear understanding of the supporting conditions...
(4:50:17 PM) Thusness: not everything is the universe causing it...
(4:50:29 PM) Thusness: u have no choice...knock ur head
(4:50:34 PM) AEN: haha
(4:50:50 PM) Thusness: in fact that is one of the disease of non-dual and desync of views
(4:51:00 PM) AEN: so there is choice?
(4:51:07 PM) AEN: there is intentions right
(4:51:09 PM) AEN: and choice
(4:51:11 PM) Thusness: yes
(4:51:14 PM) AEN: ic..
(4:51:16 PM) Thusness: there is no control
(4:51:30 PM) Thusness: there is influences of the outcome
(4:51:40 PM) Thusness: no perfect control...
(4:52:08 PM) Thusness: it is no different from having a self
(4:52:17 PM) Thusness: except that there is no division
(4:52:36 PM) Thusness: no someone standing out apart from the flow of phenomenality
(4:53:05 PM) Thusness: the inter-dependencies are too complex and subtle to penetrate
(4:53:26 PM) Thusness: and this moment of whatever arises are the result of such dependencies
(4:53:58 PM) Thusness: chanting has its effect
(4:54:05 PM) Thusness: do merit has its effect
(4:54:33 PM) Thusness: insights are transformational
(4:54:51 PM) Thusness: the path of practice has their effect
(4:55:03 PM) Thusness: self enquiry help u to realize "I AM"
(4:55:14 PM) Thusness: no-self lead u to realize non-division and anatta
(4:55:30 PM) Thusness: allow the direct experience
(4:55:35 PM) Thusness: of the transient
(4:56:15 PM) Thusness: what you wrote and ur summary provide u the penetrating insight of non-duality
(4:56:22 PM) Thusness: and insight into anatta.
(4:56:38 PM) Thusness: how is it that there is no way to impact?
(4:57:22 PM) Thusness: it just does not manifest the way the dualistic and inherent mind perceive it to be
(4:57:54 PM) Thusness: means reality is not what it seems to be
(4:58:08 PM) Thusness: not the way dualistic and inherent mind sees it
(4:58:24 PM) Thusness: DO and emptiness is the way to correctly understand it
(5:00:32 PM) AEN: oic.. yeah everything impacts everything... even right view is important and the right practice... the notion that 'theres nothing to do for enlightenment' or that enlightenment is some random event is really off the mark
(5:02:31 PM) Thusness: if u practice chanting a billion times, ur consciousness in the 3 states will be affected
(5:03:35 PM) Thusness: mere will in the conscious state will be able to stop the momentum
(5:03:43 PM) Thusness: that is self view...get it?
(5:05:18 PM) AEN: yeah
(5:05:28 PM) Thusness: even in deep dreamless sleep
(5:05:30 PM) AEN: u mean 'will not'
(5:05:39 PM) Thusness: yeah
(5:05:47 PM) AEN: yea
(5:05:52 PM) AEN: what do u mean by even in deep dreamless sleep
(5:06:14 PM) Thusness: even in deep dreamless sleep...ur mind/body rhythm, heart beats are affected by this practice
(5:08:20 PM) Thusness: if penetrate anatta deeply...from moment to moment...thoroughly letting go of self and grasping and vivid presence, how is it that such practice will not affect the 3 states?
(5:14:39 PM) AEN: hmm
(5:14:53 PM) AEN: but in deep dreamless sleep if there is no conscious awareness how can there be an ongoing practice?
(5:16:26 PM) Thusness: the entire movement is not a matter of conscious awareness
(5:17:13 PM) Thusness: the momentum continues...the body, the cells are imprinted too. :P
(5:17:19 PM) AEN: oic..
(5:17:35 PM) Thusness: much like ur deep held attachments
(5:17:47 PM) Thusness: all inter-penetrates
(5:18:37 PM) Thusness: ur body can contract unnecessarily. :P
(5:19:24 PM) AEN: ic..
(5:22:09 PM) Thusness: so u may have the experience but u have to refine ur understanding.
(5:22:24 PM) Thusness: there are still some good pointers
(5:23:12 PM) Thusness: when u practice dropping, it will help
(5:23:27 PM) Thusness: when ur insight deepens, it will help
(5:24:10 PM) Thusness: so the mind can be clear
(5:25:19 PM) AEN: oic..
(5:25:57 PM) Thusness: thoughts create fear... the mind engages in story has fear
(5:26:07 PM) Thusness: this is true
(5:26:43 PM) Thusness: and being thoughtless, fear does not arise at that moment when we do away with thoughts and stop engaging in stories
(5:26:55 PM) Thusness: but the cause is the 'attachment'
(5:27:33 PM) Thusness: if the holding is there, there is no overcoming of the problem
(5:27:52 PM) Thusness: get it?
(5:28:43 PM) Thusness: knowing that it is just a thought, engaging in stories helps as a form of practice... ultimately, that deep held tendency must be relinquished.
(5:30:25 PM) AEN: ic.. so u mean the main focus is not thoughtlessness but relinquishing the tendency of holding?
(5:30:44 PM) AEN: and thats by insight and dropping?
(5:31:16 PM) Thusness: yes
(5:32:12 PM) Thusness: and because there is no holding, no attachment, there is thoughtlessness
(5:33:12 PM) Thusness: as I said certain teachings are good to certain point... after u arise the insight, u have to have other pointers
(5:33:41 PM) Thusness: before that, it can be helpful to get u there...they are good 'supporting conditions'
(5:33:49 PM) AEN: oic..
(5:34:56 PM) Thusness: but some of the expressions are beautiful. Some times just few of these beautiful phrases help to articulate expressions...
(5:35:13 PM) Thusness: and that is what i look for because it is so hard to express.
(5:35:39 PM) AEN: ic..
(5:36:25 PM) AEN: "Learned Audience, when we use Prajna for introspection we are illumined within and without, and in a position
to know our own mind. To know our mind is to obtain liberation. To obtain liberation is to attain Samadhi of Prajna, which is 'thoughtlessness'. What is 'thoughtlessness'? 'Thoughtlessness' is to see and to know all Dharmas (things) with a mind free from attachment. When in use it pervades everywhere, and yet it sticks nowhere. What we have to do is to purify our mind so that the six vijnanas (aspects of consciousness) , in passing through the six gates (sense organs) will neither be defiled by nor attached to the six sense-objects. When our mind works freely without any hindrance, and is at liberty to 'come' or to 'go', we attain Samadhi of Prajna, or liberation. Such a state is called the function of 'thoughtlessness'. But to refrain from thinking of anything, so that all thoughts are suppressed, is to be Dharma-ridden, and this is an erroneous view."
(5:36:27 PM) AEN: - hui neng
(5:37:53 PM) Thusness: yes