Dhamma and causality

[Cittasanto]

I don't believe no-self, nor the go with the flow thing, are Buddhist teachings.

I do not believe this has any relevance to any discussion here!

[contemplans]

I don't believe no-self, nor the go with the flow thing, are Buddhist teachings.

I do not believe this has any relevance to any discussion here!

I stated the truth in goodwill. I highlight what I responded to, my friend.

If there is no-self, it's a bit of a silly question to ask if you have the freedom to choose. You are just a soup of 5 aggregates, body, feeling, perception, volition, consciousness. The will can be seen as part of the volitions. Therefore you have no will, but you are party will.

At times it may be quite clear that we have no freedom of choice, often we don't even have the power to stop your mind from thinking... See deep and you may see will comes after an action. You do/think something and then afterwards the will kicks in claiming it was voluntary.. which it wasn't.

I personally like this simile:
http://media.bswa.org/documents/Brahm60.pdf
Page 39. (for some reason I can't copy/paste it here)

Freedom from will is better than 'free of will'. It's very peaceful to let yourself be taken by the river of life. Also, it makes forgiving yourself and others much more easy.

However, fully embracing this is not so easy, so maybe don't bend your mind too much over this, you may go crazy. When I once asked a monk, he replied by saying something in the lines of "it does not matter whether there is free will or not, as long as you practice".

With metta,
Reflection

[Cittasanto]

I don't believe no-self, nor the go with the flow thing, are Buddhist teachings.

I do not believe this has any relevance to any discussion here!

I stated the truth in goodwill. I highlight what I responded to, my friend.

please have a look at the terms of service particularly #2, and this subforums spectrum.

[reflection]

I don't believe no-self, nor the go with the flow thing, are Buddhist teachings.

Ok, that's perfectly possible. But no-self is a very Buddhist teaching, it was the second sermon of the Buddha. You can also call it non-self, anatta, no-soul, whatever, the idea is the same. According to that sutta, the will must be seen as "This is not me, this is not mine, this is not who I am".

The river of live is just a simile just like the driverless bus by Ajahn Brahm I quoted.

[Dmytro]

Hi Jack,

If all things arise because of their causes

The model Buddha explained - Conditioned Arising - works differently.

There are requisite conditions (paccaya) for all things. So even through things are conditioned, we can change the exact outcomes, or - by removing requisite conditions - make things cease altogether.

http://dhamma.ru/lib/paticcas.htm

Regards, Dmytro