I think the main confusion arises from the vast range of interpretation and, in particular, from the divergence of popular vs. philosophical or "educated" views. — Apollodorus
all philosophical or "educated" views are not in agreement. — praxis
If you had only one educated and one uneducated view, the options would be reduced to just two, making it much easier to choose. — Apollodorus
However, if Nirvana exists and is a permanent reality, then it may be argued that the state of Nirvana is "with self", i.e. with substance or existence and, by extension, one's real self. — Apollodorus
I think you misunderstand my comment. — Apollodorus
(If you're interested I'll pm you a link to the thesis I did on this topic if I haven't previously.) — Wayfarer
in my view many people act as though the answer was 'no' - that the Buddhist teaching is that there is no self. But that can't accomodate this verse. — Wayfarer
When there is the element of initiating, initiating beings are clearly discerned; of such beings, this is the self-doer, this, the other-doer.
I guess my point is that because religion is based on faith rather than reason, an uneducated but charismatic person could do just as well if not better than an educated person in establishing the "correct" view. — praxis
To me, this sounds like it confirms my suspicion. In which case the "no-self" doctrine may be a Buddhist doctrine, but not necessarily Buddha's own view, and this seems to bring Buddha much closer to Greek philosophy than generally assumed! — Apollodorus
Vaccha, the position that 'after death a Tathagata exists' is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, and fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding. 1
The Buddha frequently says that one that understands correctly doesn't believe, but sees the principle of dependent origination. — Wayfarer
The only evidence we could ever have for someone's "enlightenment" would be behavior that indicates a disposition of predominant concern for others.
— Janus
Why? — baker
I also want to stress that I am not closed-minded to the idea of being convinced by intellectual intuitions of metaphysical ideas for the individual, but I have never seen any convincing argument that such intuitions could ever form the basis of any open and unbiased inter-subjective discourse. — Janus
Riiight. Let's go to a slaughterhouse or an abortion clinic where we can observe the "the miraculous nature of everyday reality".
— baker
I eat meat, and I respect a woman's right to choose - if and when she commits to the economic life changing, body morphic trauma that is bringing another life into the world. — karl stone
I've worked in a slaughterhouse - chickens, but still, I eat chicken. There's nothing like hot chicken breast on brown bread with mayo. It produces a transcendent, almost orgasmic pleasure in me.
I think one has to respect a woman's right to choose, precisely because we are the only animals who cook, rather than simply eat. An animal killed in nature suffers a worse death by far than humane slaughter at the hands of humans; and there's a parallel to a child brought into the world unwanted - in that, your bleeding heart humanity would be the cause of greater suffering of which you'd wash your vegan pro-life hands.
And to achieve that, one need not be a Buddhist or follow any particular religious system .... — Apollodorus
And I think this brings us to the crux of the matter, because a lot of your statements seem to suggest that you haven’t yet decided in favor of truth and that despite your apparent disclaimers you are speaking from the perspective of someone who is at least in part psychologically committed to Buddhism as a belief system or religion. — Apollodorus
Again, one could argue that only Buddhists are capable of attaining the highest possible experience. But this hasn’t been demonstrated to be the case. So, the way I see it, it boils down to personal (and unproven) belief, i.e., exactly what Socrates and Plato (and, apparently, Buddha himself) are warning against.
Well, it may sound “theosophical” but I don’t believe in Krishnamurti as an incarnation of Jesus and Buddha — Apollodorus
From what I see, Buddhism isn’t really so different from Platonism. — Apollodorus
Both Buddhism and Platonism use terminology like “release” or “liberation” from conditioned existence. — Apollodorus
A crucial distinguishing feature of Buddhist thought is its concern with teaching individuals to see for themselves.
But something that remains unstated is: what is the mind that can see this? What faculty discerns the dependent nature of existent beings? Obviously, the Buddha perceives this – that, in fact, is what makes him ‘Buddha’.
To _deliberately_ achieve anything, one needs to follow a system. To follow a religious system, one has to become a member of a religion. — baker
Blimey, religious/spiritual people competing as to who is most exalted!! How ordinary. — baker
Clearly, then, something remains after “everything has been abandoned”. — Apollodorus
(admittedly well-written) — Apollodorus
Platonism uses several terms, one of them being lysis, i.e., liberation or release from conditioned existence, which is the equivalent of Hindu mokṣa. — Apollodorus
Liberation from ignorance and union with the Ultimate are central to Platonism. — Apollodorus
Lysis (/ˈlaɪsɪs/; Greek: Λύσις, genitive case Λύσιδος, showing the stem Λύσιδ-, from which the infrequent translation Lysides), is a dialogue of Plato which discusses the nature of philia (φιλία), often translated as friendship, while the word's original content was of a much larger and more intimate bond.
iberation from ignorance and union with the Ultimate are central to Platonism.
— Apollodorus
I think that language belongs much more to Plotinus than to Plato, and even more so to later Christian Platonism. Do you think you might tend to evaluate Platonism from a Christian Platonist perspective? — Wayfarer
"Unbiased" discourse? What is that?? — baker
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.