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.
The Uncreate
After years of ruminating and having some of the Buddhist teachings in the back of my mind, I have recently started making progress in understanding more of them. I have this sincere question:
From what I have read, I understand that the Buddha states there is an "Uncreate," a realm where there is no change, neither existence nor non-existence.
The paragraphs on this Uncreated, at least in the material I have read, contrast with most other statements in that the only reasoning given seems to be: "There is an Uncreate. If there were no Uncreate, then escape from this world of change and suffering would not be possible; But since there is an Uncreate, escape from the world of the created, the born is possible."
For other postulates the texts usually present some sort of proof or at least an illustrative story or analogy to help the reader understand why the statement is plausible, but there is no reason given, no source, it is not stated how the Buddha arrived at the insight that there is such an immutable realm.
When I read about the Uncreate years ago, I had no problem with any of this, because at that time I looked at it as something other religions might call "God," and there is generally no proof or explanation whenever someone postulates the existence of God.
However, I am now seeing that Buddhism is much more precise and logical than any other religion I know. Nothing is just postulated "out of the blue", except for this one statement. It actually seems more like circular reasoning: "I want an escape from this world of suffering, and the only way such an escape is possible is if there is an Uncreate, therefore there must be an Uncreate, because otherwise what I want would not be possible."
Generally I am an idealist, so I have no problem believing in "unchangeable, unborn, uncreated ideas," but I am not sure I am understanding Buddhism correctly when I assume that this "Uncreate" is something like Plato's realm of ideas.
Is the existence of the Uncreate something that Buddha experienced in deep meditation, but has no rational explanation for, or have I just not found the explanation?
I'm not sure if I am making myself clear. For example, the Buddha says there is no "self" in the sense that there is nothing behind or within us that uses the body to interact with the world, but can exist and will exist without the body. One of the arguments he presents is, If there were such a self, then the eyes would be its windows to the world, so when you pluck out the eyes, the self should be able to see better. This argument may not be 100% scientifically sound, but I find it a useful illustration, even if you just understand it as an analogy or an oversimplification.
So why doesn't the Buddha say something like:
In short: How does the Buddha know there is an Uncreate?
From what I have read, I understand that the Buddha states there is an "Uncreate," a realm where there is no change, neither existence nor non-existence.
The paragraphs on this Uncreated, at least in the material I have read, contrast with most other statements in that the only reasoning given seems to be: "There is an Uncreate. If there were no Uncreate, then escape from this world of change and suffering would not be possible; But since there is an Uncreate, escape from the world of the created, the born is possible."
For other postulates the texts usually present some sort of proof or at least an illustrative story or analogy to help the reader understand why the statement is plausible, but there is no reason given, no source, it is not stated how the Buddha arrived at the insight that there is such an immutable realm.
When I read about the Uncreate years ago, I had no problem with any of this, because at that time I looked at it as something other religions might call "God," and there is generally no proof or explanation whenever someone postulates the existence of God.
However, I am now seeing that Buddhism is much more precise and logical than any other religion I know. Nothing is just postulated "out of the blue", except for this one statement. It actually seems more like circular reasoning: "I want an escape from this world of suffering, and the only way such an escape is possible is if there is an Uncreate, therefore there must be an Uncreate, because otherwise what I want would not be possible."
Generally I am an idealist, so I have no problem believing in "unchangeable, unborn, uncreated ideas," but I am not sure I am understanding Buddhism correctly when I assume that this "Uncreate" is something like Plato's realm of ideas.
Is the existence of the Uncreate something that Buddha experienced in deep meditation, but has no rational explanation for, or have I just not found the explanation?
I'm not sure if I am making myself clear. For example, the Buddha says there is no "self" in the sense that there is nothing behind or within us that uses the body to interact with the world, but can exist and will exist without the body. One of the arguments he presents is, If there were such a self, then the eyes would be its windows to the world, so when you pluck out the eyes, the self should be able to see better. This argument may not be 100% scientifically sound, but I find it a useful illustration, even if you just understand it as an analogy or an oversimplification.
So why doesn't the Buddha say something like:
There is a realm of the Unchanging, the Immortal. For example, even though no perfect circle or sphere has ever existed nor will ever exist in the universe, we can recognize the idea of a circle or sphere in different objects, and we can even recognize or measure to what extent any real object differs from an ideal, perfect circle or sphere. For example, you can say the Earth is a more perfect sphere than Mars, because there are higher mountains on Mars. The mere fact that our minds can have the concept of a perfect circle proves that there is such a thing as an "ideal" or "idea," something which we can somewhat relate to, even though it never changes and is therefore not part of the "materialistic realm" or our "world of birth and death and change." The Uncreate is the realm of ideas. They are not born, do not die, do not change, do not stand still. To the ideas there is no existence, nor non-existence.
Is this in essence what it is, and the reader is just supposed to fill in the blanks like I did? Did I just not read the right texts?In short: How does the Buddha know there is an Uncreate?
0
Comments