Did the Buddha teach we have choice? (aka The Great Free Will v Determinism Debate)

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by mikenz66 »

Alex123 wrote: If that "agent" is totally part of cause-effect stream, then that agent and the choices are fully and totally conditioned. There is no free will.
No-one is saying that there is "free will" in the Cartesian or Upanishadic sense, they are saying that choices are made.
Alex123 wrote: That agent is like the puppet being moved by conditions. What has happened, has happened in the only possible way that it ever could have possibly happened. That is why it has happened in this as opposed to that way.
Yes, but the actions that the agent make, even though conditioned, do affect the future. From the article I quoted.
The fact that there is only one future may seem to imply that reality
controls agents, and that there is no real freedom.
However, Dennett argues, there is a substantial conceptual error in this argument.
Control is something agents do. Reality, not being an agent, does not control anything.
67 Arguments for inevitability usually overlook the fact that the one possible
future already includes the agent’s predictions, considerations, wishes, decisions,
and actions. These are usually inaccessible in advance simply because they are the
agent’s making.
I think a key point is the distinction between determinism and fatalism:
The Buddhist rejection
of [Makkhali’s view that purification happens without cause (hetu) or condition (paccaya)]
is not a rejection of a deterministic theory of causality but a rejection of
fatalism. The confusion between fatalism and determinism lies at the heart of the
above-mentioned objection (that determinism implies that agents are controlled by
causality).
It seems to me that that confusion over these distinctions can lead to a fatalistic attitude that "it's all predetermined so there's no point in trying to do anything". I agree with Goofaholix that this would be a mistake.

Finally, it's worth remembering that:
The Buddhist treatment of free will has to be extracted from the doctrine, as the
doctrine is by no means a systematic philosophical treatise. Nevertheless, it is clear
that the Buddha saw that freedom has a negative correlation with compulsions.
While the Western tradition tends to emphasize external compulsion and social freedom,
Buddhist doctrine tends to emphasize internal compulsions and psychological
freedom.
It is certainly interesting to pursue a philosophical enquiry into the doctrine, but I'm not convinced that it is particularly useful to one's progress. Particularly if the Buddha's instructions for development are misunderstood as encouraging fatalism.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Alex123 »

Goofaholix wrote: I think if one were to read some scriptures with a very literal mind then one can make a good case for determinism and that we have no choice.
Quite the opposite. IMHO it is too easy to read about Buddha and Arahants talking "I go, I think, etc" and forget about 5 aggregates, 12 sense bases, 18 elements, Dependent Origination, Anicca-Dukkha-Anatta and so on.

However I don't think the Buddha intended his teaching to be understood as a collection of doctrines to be believed, rather as a process of awakening to be followed.
Actually it is wisdom that liberates, not ritualistic actions. There were many cases where a non-Buddhist, such as Suppabuddha who stumbled upon a Buddha's lecture and became a stream-enterer in that seat.
have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Rajagaha at the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. Now at that time in Rajagaha there was a leper named Suppabuddha, a poor, miserable wretch of a person. And at that time the Blessed One was sitting surrounded by a large assembly, teaching the Dhamma. Suppabuddha the leper saw the large gathering of people from afar and thought to himself, "Without a doubt, someone must be distributing staple or non-staple food over there. Why don't I go over to that large group of people, and maybe I'll get some staple or non-staple food." So he went over to the large group of people. Then he saw the Blessed One sitting surrounded by a large assembly, teaching the Dhamma. On seeing this, he realized, "There's no one distributing staple or non-staple food over here. That's Gotama the contemplative, sitting surrounded by a large assembly, teaching the Dhamma. Why don't I listen to the Dhamma?" So he sat to one side right there, [thinking,] "I, too, will listen to the Dhamma."

Then the Blessed One, having encompassed the awareness of the entire assembly with his awareness, asked himself, "Now who here is capable of understanding the Dhamma?" He saw Suppabuddha the leper sitting in the assembly, and on seeing him the thought occurred to him, "This person here is capable of understanding the Dhamma." So, aiming at Suppabuddha the leper, he gave a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation."

Having seen the Dhamma, reached the Dhamma, known the Dhamma, gained a footing in the Dhamma, having crossed over & beyond doubt, having had no more perplexity, having gained fearlessness & independence from others with regard to the Teacher's message,
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bahiya became an Arahant through listening and deeply understanding Buddha's teaching.

Goofaholix wrote:
However to say everything comes down to causes and conditions and therefore we have no real choice to me is the antithesis of what the Buddhist path is trying to achieve, it's downgrading us to the level of animals living on instinct rather than upgrading us to enlightenment where we are no longer slaves to causes and conditions. If that were true Buddhist teaching then I wouldn't choose to be a Buddhist.
[/quote]

Suppubuddha the leper was not a Buddhist. He was looking for food and mistook the crowd for people receiving the food. He then decided to listen to the Buddha, and through the lecture he became a stream-enterer.


There are many suttas which talk about understanding of anicca-dukkha-anatta of 5 aggregates, 12 spheres, etc, leading to Awakening.
Seeing thus[alex: anicca-dukkha-anatta], Sona, the instructed noble disciple becomes disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with volitional constructions, disenchanted with consciousness. Being disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion (his mind) is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what
had to be done has been done, there is no more for this world.’”
SN22.49 (7) Sona (1) - Ven BB Transl.

Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu sees as impermanent form which is actually impermanent: that is his right view. Seeing rightly, he becomes disenchanted. With the destruction of delight comes the destruction of lust; with the destruction of lust comes the destruction of delight. With the destruction of delight and lust the mind is liberated and is said to be well liberated. [same for other aggregates]
SN22.51 (9) Destruction of Delight (1) - Ven BB Transl.
Again, it is knowledge that liberates.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Alex123 »

Hi Mike, all,
mikenz66 wrote: No-one is saying that there is "free will" in the Cartesian or Upanishadic sense, they are saying that choices are made.
If there is no free will, then the choice is fully conditioned and is not due to free-will. Choice and what is chosen occurs, but it arises due to impersonal causes. It is like choice of a leaf being blown by the wind. Except that if one hears the Dhamma and has some wisdom, those conditions will help the process to eventually become liberated. No fatalism here. In fact it is very good that once certain conditions are met, one has no choice but to become Awakened.
mikenz66 wrote: Yes, but the actions that the agent make, even though conditioned, do affect the future.
Of course kamma produces kammavipāka. I've never denied this. Wholesome kamma leads to wholesome vipāka, unwholesome kamma leads to unwholesome vipāka.


As for Makkhali Gosala, if we read his views we see that no knowledgeble Buddhist would hold them. Neither I, nor Robert accept the view of Makkhali Gosala below.
'there is no cause, no requisite condition, for the defilement of beings. Beings are defiled without cause, without requisite condition. There is no cause, no requisite condition, for the purification of beings. Beings are purified without cause, without requisite condition.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Makkhali's view above is not determinism. It is more of random chaos. According to the Buddha there are causes for defilement and purification of beings. "Beings are defiled without cause, without requisite condition....Beings are purified without cause, without requisite condition" - this is chaotic fatalism and terrible teaching of Makkhali. It is nothing that I was talking about and has nothing to do with cause-effect conditionality of the Buddha.


With metta,

Alex
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by mikenz66 »

Alex123 wrote: If there is no free will, then the choice is fully conditioned and is not due to free-will.
You don't seem to be listening. Let me reapeat:
No one is arguing for free will in the usual western or Upanishadic senses.
We are (at least I am) trying to understand the subtleties involved in making sense out of the apparently contradictory concepts of choice and determinism.

Your argument that "things are determined therefore only this particular approach to the Dhamma is correct" makes no logical sense to me. It seems to me a case of trying to use philosophical and logical analysis to filter the practical instructions that the Buddha gave us.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello Tilt, Mike, all,
tiltbillings wrote: If it made sense, maybe it would be, but pure determinism leaves us as leaves blowing in the winds, having no choice.
Is there something wrong with a statement because it doesn't sound life-affirming and nice? Maybe we need to redo the 1st NT. The Truth of Dukkha is just too sad to be taught by the Buddha. And the whole anatta thing is just too soulless. Well, Dhamma is "soulless" path without a heart (passion).
tiltbillings wrote:
What difference is there in what we do, since what we do is has nothing to do with anything I imagine I want, since imagining that I want anything and can do anything of my own accord is just an artifact, a side effect, of impersonal mechanical cause and effect, meaning there is not a thing I can do? Is that what the Buddha taught?
Kamma produces kammavipāka. Wholesome kamma leads to wholesome vipāka, unwholesome kamma leads to unwholesome vipāka. Wisdom (paññā) leads to wholesome results. Avijjā leads to Dukkha. So it does matter what occurs.
Mikenz66 wrote: No one is arguing for free will in the usual western or Upanishadic senses.
Good. The the choice is fully conditioned and there is no control over it, or what it will chose. The choice that has been chosen was the only choice possible given that internal/external situation.
Mikenz66 wrote: Your argument that "things are determined therefore only this particular approach to the Dhamma is correct"
I am not aware of saying that. What I think you may be referring to was my statement like "events happen the only possible way that they could have ever happened given those causes & conditions".


With metta,

Alex
Last edited by Alex123 on Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Guy
Posts: 762
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 4:05 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by Guy »

Hi All,

Regardless of whether will is "free" or conditioned (it appears to me to be conditioned) it can be useful to "pretend" that we have a choice so we can use that "choice" (whether that choice is real or delusion) to practice the Noble Eightfold Path. Whether or not there is free will, there is still the law of kamma. There are still good actions leading to good results and bad actions leading to bad results. So we should be careful, regardless of whether "being careful" is a result of our conditioning (e.g. hearing the Buddha's teachings on morality, etc.) or whether "being careful" is something that some independent "doer" decides on its own somehow.

Sorry, that was quite long-winded even though it was intended to be as short as possible.

Metta,

Guy
Four types of letting go:

1) Giving; expecting nothing back in return
2) Throwing things away
3) Contentment; wanting to be here, not wanting to be anywhere else
4) "Teflon Mind"; having a mind which doesn't accumulate things

- Ajahn Brahm
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello Guy, all,
Guy wrote:Hi All,
Regardless of whether will is "free" or conditioned (it appears to me to be conditioned) it can be useful to "pretend" that we have a choice so we can use that "choice" (whether that choice is real or delusion) to practice the Noble Eightfold Path.
The possible problem with pretending in being able to control a choice implies belief in possession, possession of that choice. Belief in self or possession of the Self is wrong view. Any "practice" under wrong view just leads to wrong result.
Guy wrote: Whether or not there is free will, there is still the law of kamma. There are still good actions leading to good results and bad actions leading to bad results.
Right. Kamma produces kammavipāka. Wholesome kamma leads to wholesome vipāka, unwholesome kamma leads to unwholesome vipāka. Wisdom (paññā) leads to wholesome results. Avijjā leads to Dukkha. So it does matter what happens. Bad action is bad. Don't do it. Good action is good! Do it. Hopefully all these statements made by me, the Buddha, or others, will brainwash you enough to condition wholesome behaviour. Wholesome behaviour not because of control, but because you had no other choice given the liberating knowledge that you have heard from others and considered well enough.


With metta,

Alex
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Nyana »

Alex123 wrote:So I understand that "and none can have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus." - SN22.59 and MN35 teaching on not being able to wield power over aggregates to include all kind of control. If there was control, then ALL would experience only what they want to experience, not what they don't want. Lack of control on other hand, could lead to unwanted things, which is stressful.
There is a difference between complete, unconditional autonomous control on the one hand, and functional choice on the other. Just because there is no permanent, satisfactory autonomous Self wielding power and unconditional control over the aggregates doesn't mean that there is no functional choice. Volitional intention (cetanā), which is functional choice, only ever occurs in the present. It occurs in consort with desire (chanda), attention (manasikāra), and so on. If there is the presence of fundamental attention (yoniso manasikāra), then there is the opportunity for skillful choices to occur, motivated by desire for the development of right effort (sammāvāyāma) and right exertion (sammappadhānā). All of these path factors occur in consort with functional choice and desire. Cf. the following brief survey of discourses which give clear injunctions for generating desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, the arousal of persistence, the exertion to guard, the exertion to abandon, the exertion to develop, the exertion to maintain, etc.
  • There are these four right exertions. Which four? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. These are the four right exertions.

    Just as the River Ganges flows to the east, slopes to the east, inclines to the east, in the same way when a monk develops & pursues the four right exertions, he flows to Unbinding, slopes to Unbinding, inclines to Unbinding. [SN.49.1]

    There are these four exertions. Which four? The exertion to guard, the exertion to abandon, the exertion to develop, & the exertion to maintain.

    And what is the exertion to guard? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which — if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye — evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the eye. (Similarly with the ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.) This is called the exertion to guard.

    And what is the exertion to abandon? There is the case where a monk does not acquiesce to a thought of sensuality that has arisen [in him]. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, wipes it out of existence. He does not acquiesce to a thought of ill will... a thought of violence... any evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen [in him]. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, wipes them out of existence. This is called the exertion to abandon.

    And what is the exertion to develop? There is the case where a monk develops the mindfulness factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in letting go. He develops the investigation of qualities factor for Awakening... the persistence factor for Awakening... the rapture factor for Awakening... the serenity factor for Awakening... the concentration factor for Awakening... the equanimity factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in letting go. This is called the exertion to develop.

    And what is the exertion to maintain? There is the case where a monk maintains a favorable theme of concentration — the skeleton perception, the worm-eaten perception, the livid perception, the festering perception, the falling-apart perception, the bloated perception. This is called the exertion to maintain. [AN 4.14]

    And how is a person ardent? There is the case where a monk thinks, 'The arising of unarisen evil, unskillful qualities would lead to what is unbeneficial,' and he arouses ardor. 'The non-abandoning of arisen evil, unskillful qualities... The non-arising of unarisen skillful qualities... The ceasing of arisen skillful qualities would lead to what is unbeneficial,' and he arouses ardor. This is what it means to be ardent.

    And how is a person concerned? There is the case where a monk thinks, 'The arising of unarisen evil, unskillful qualities would lead to what is unbeneficial,' and he feels concern. 'The non-abandoning of arisen evil, unskillful qualities... The non-arising of unarisen skillful qualities... The ceasing of arisen skillful qualities would lead to what is unbeneficial,' and he feels concern. This is what it means to be concerned. This is how a person ardent & concerned is capable of self-awakening, capable of Unbinding, capable of attaining the unexcelled security from bondage. [SN16.2]

    [W]hen an individual with an internal blemish discerns, as it actually is, that 'I have an internal blemish,' it can be expected of him that he will generate desire, endeavor, & arouse persistence for the abandoning of that blemish. [MN 5]

    If, on examination, a monk knows, 'I usually remain covetous, with thoughts of ill will, overcome by sloth & drowsiness, restless, uncertain, angry, with soiled thoughts, with my body aroused, lazy, or unconcentrated,' then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities, just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head.... [AN 10.51]
All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by robertk »

Dear guy,
I think what you say is basically correct except that there is no need to pretend there is an agent choosing to do this or that.
In fact it is because anatta is directly related to conditionality that kamma does bring results, and the more there is realization of the fact of this that naturally there should arise less inclination to evil.
This article is by sujin boriharnawanaket on kamma and result
http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index. ... 0&hl=Kamma" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by retrofuturist »

Very good post, Geoff.

:goodpost:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4015
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Goofaholix »

Alex123 wrote:
Goofaholix wrote: Again, it is knowledge that liberates.
If it were knowledge that liberates the Universities would be full of Arahants, it's wisdom that liberates, and wisdom goes beyond the digesting and regurgitating knowledge or scripture.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Alex123 »

Hi Geoff, all,
Ñāṇa wrote:There is a difference between complete, unconditional autonomous control on the one hand, and functional choice on the other. Just because there is no permanent, satisfactory autonomous Self wielding power and unconditional control over the aggregates doesn't mean that there is no functional choice.
-Is "functional choice" within or outside of aggregates? Within.
-Is there complete, unconditional autonomous control of any of the aggregates? As you said, no.
-Is there complete, unconditional autonomous control of "functional choice", cetanā, manasikāra, sammāvāyāma,sammappadhānā, etc?

If there is complete, unconditional autonomous control of "functional choice", etc, which is part of the aggregates (primarily saṅkhāra khandha), then why isn't there complete, unconditional autonomous control of the aggregates?

The aggregates (primarily saṅkhāra khandha) include "functional choice", cetanā, manasikāra, sammāvāyāma,sammappadhānā, etc.

So all the sutta quotes should be view with above in mind.

With metta,

Alex
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach strict determinism?

Post by Alex123 »

Goofaholix wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Goofaholix wrote: Again, it is knowledge that liberates.
If it were knowledge that liberates the Universities would be full of Arahants, it's wisdom that liberates, and wisdom goes beyond the digesting and regurgitating knowledge or scripture.
Wisdom (paññā) has to develop enough, and to cut the fetters. Mere lip reciting isn't wisdom.
Last edited by Alex123 on Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Alex,
Alex123 wrote:Is "functional choice" within or outside of aggregates? Within.
So you acknowledge "functional choice" then?

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

Post by Alex123 »

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Alex,
Alex123 wrote:Is "functional choice" within or outside of aggregates? Within.
So you acknowledge "functional choice" then?

Metta,
Retro. :)

I am just taking Geoff's terminology and asking him. In any case, every thing that arises has a "function" to do. So choice vs functional choice may not differ in essence (conditionality). I do wonder what Geoff has precisely meant by functional choice.


"Functional choice" as bunch of thoughts does arise. But it is fully conditioned, and so is its deliberations and outcome. It is conditioned like a leaf being blown by the wind, to use Tilt's expression. There is no Self that owns anything, include "functional choice".

With metta,

Alex
Post Reply