Did the Buddha teach that we have choice?

[tiltbillings]

As I see it, then, this question is improperly framed, in terms of self: You ask do "we" have choice, but there is no person to attribute or not attribute freedom to, nor did the Buddha outright support or oppose the idea of agenthood. But rather, your question should instead be, "Is there a practice leading to freedom?" And the answer is: Yes. The Noble Eightfold path.

That is playing with words. If there is no person, then there is no practice.

[Hanzze]

If there is no more person, one could quit practice. He fulfilled his tasks.

[tiltbillings]

If there is no more person, one could quit practice. He fulfilled his tasks.

No person in the first place, no need to practice.

[Hanzze]

If there is no more person, one could quit practice. He fulfilled his tasks.

No person in the first place, no need to practice.

Thats why he teaches sometimes that and sometimes that mind is tricky

[tiltbillings]

If there is no more person, one could quit practice. He fulfilled his tasks.

No person in the first place, no need to practice.

Thats why he teaches sometimes that and sometimes that mind is tricky

Damdifino what you just said.

[alan]

Hamzze serves as comic relief. A useful function.

[Hanzze]

Was something wrong?
Do you think a comic is less real than a movie with real people? The advantage of a comic is that the most will not take it as real. I like comics, not so much danger of delusion. Just a monkey quote.

[tiltbillings]

Hamzze serves as comic relief. A useful function.

It helps if the comic can be understood.

[alan]

Agreed. In this case, the comic is known to be a joker. No need to pay attention.

[tiltbillings]

Agreed. In this case, the comic is known to be a joker. No need to pay attention.

I am a moderator; I am supposed to pay attention.

[Hanzze]

Was something wrong? Just to help a comic figure...

[tiltbillings]

Was something wrong? Just to help a comic figure...

Relax. Nothing is wrong. I did not understand your msg above, but it is no big deal.

[Hanzze]

I admirer your sovereignty tiltbillings. Changing from a fox to a smart mouse.
I call you the greatest teacher her on board! That is like all the time, said honest!

[mikenz66]

No one is arguing in favour of an agent.

Not in the sense of a separate soul, but "agent" was the technical term used in the paper I and others quoted:
http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/3142/

Although the Buddha denied ultimate agency—the singular point from which soul
ultimately controls the body—he acknowledged moral choice and personal retribution.
The agent in this case is nothing but a collection of physical and mental processes,
but as such it can still choose what to do.

Mike

[Hanzze]

So study Buddhism is nothing else than to bring down a real peaceful democracy into the collections of all particles and influences one consist of. So we can call it "personal" Democratism.
Maybe someone can translate it, I guess my lack of language is real comic *haha*

[robertk]

That is playing with words. If there is no person, then there is no practice.

Actually there is not and never was any person. There is however dukkha and the path leading to the ending of dukkha.

[Hanzze]

Dear robertk,
Good quote! But do dukkha have a choice to end it?

[robertk]

________
I wrote this a while back based on the Dhammapada: The Buddha said (my translation): 279:

"Sabbe dhamma anattati, yada paaya passati; atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya"ti."

All dhammas are not-self: when one sees this with insight then one is detached (or disenchanted, nibbindati) from dukkha, This is the Path (magga)to Purity (visuddhi

).

The commentary says:

Tattha sabbe dhammati paakkhandha eva adhippeta.

Here(tattha)by all (sabbe) phenomena (dhammati), five aggregates (pancakkhandha) is meant (adhippeta).

Anattati "ma jiyantu ma miyantu"ti vase vattetum na sakkati
avasavattanatthena anatta attasua assamika anissarati attho.

Are not-self (anattati) because Birth(jiyantu), decay and death (miyantu) are not able to have power exercised over them (vase vattetum na). In the sense of powerlessness (avasavattanatthena) anatta, void of self (attasu~n~na).

RobertK

[Hanzze]

Dear robertk,

so does that insight comes by it self or is it forced/choose? Or is dukkha insight?

[tiltbillings]

That is playing with words. If there is no person, then there is no practice.

Actually there is not and never was any person. There is however dukkha and the path leading to the ending of dukkha.

Not quite true. For us unawakened folk there is a self with which we have to contend which does not completely go away until we are fully awakened. Even a mirage has a reality that may need to be dealt with. Also, practice and suffering have no essence.