vinasp wrote:Did you know that your mind has the power to make something exist?
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then Ven. Radha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up1 there, tied up2 there, one is said to be 'a being.'3
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications...
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'
"Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles:4 as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.
"In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness — for the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding."
4. Lit.: "dirt houses."
Sobeh wrote:In these cases a better translation of the Pali word atthi might be "obtains" (as in Logic) as opposed to "exists" (as in Ontology).
vinasp wrote:Greetings Venerable,
That is most interesting! I did not realise that 'atthi' was from the same root as 'sat'. I thought that atthi meant impersonal existence, while 'satta' or 'bhava' meant personal existence. That explains why some thinkers at the time were using 'atthi' to mean personal existence. As in the talk about "the world exists" or "the world does not exist". The 'world' here seems to mean the self [ this might need further explanation ].
Best wishes, Vincent.
vinasp wrote: What did the Buddha say about 'existence' (atthi) according to the five Nikaya's? Let us begin by noting that suffering 'exists', as stated in SN 12.17 [ PTS: S ii 18]:
"Well then, good Gotama, is suffering non-existent?"
"No Kassapa: suffering is not non-existent. Suffering exists."
Link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .wlsh.html
Suffering 'exists', and yet, the whole purpose of the teachings is to explain to worldlings how to bring about the ending of this suffering. If suffering 'exists', how can it end? It can only end by going out of existence, by ceasing to exist.
Paññāsikhara wrote:Moreover, the Dharma is more about "bhava" and "nirodha" than "atthi" and "natthi". These are not necessarily cognates.
chownah wrote:If someone can show me a way that an external world can be proven or disproven using only the big six....then please post and let me know.
Yet, friend, without reaching the end of the world, I say, there is no ending of un Ý pleasantness. Yet friend, in this fathom long body, this perceptive form, I appoint the world, its arising, its ceasing and the path leading to its cessation.
"The end of the world cannot be reached by traveling.
Yet, without coming to the end of the world,
there's no release from unpleasantness.
Therefore be wise, know the nature of the world.
Lead the holy life to the end of the world.
The appeased, know the end of the world.
And do not wish for, this or the other world."
chownah wrote:All we have to actually experience are the six sense doors, their object, and their associated consciousnesses.....with these tools it is impossible to either prove or disprove the existence of an external world.....the external world is therefore a conjecture or construel on our part.
retrofuturist wrote:The Buddha defined the world by the six senses.
Ven. Kaccayana Gotta approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?"
"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come......
vinasp wrote:Hi chownah,
The six sense spheres, their objects, and their associated consciousnesses, are all said to cease. This is why I do not think that the actual senses are what is meant by these teachings. How does the actual eye cease when ignorance ceases?
I understand the philosophical point that you are making. With regard to the actual senses, we can not have absolute proof of an external world ( Descartes demon). However, most of us do not demand absolute proof.
Best wishes, Vincent.
Users browsing this forum: Travis, Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests