Theravada against mathematics

[Srilankaputra]

The Abhidhamma describes a finite number of varieties of phenomena. Phenomena of previously known varieties are involved in all processes. It's like a typewriter key. Each dhamma from the list is like one of the buttons.

"Each dhamma from the list is like one of the buttons" ????

Do you think the dhammas described in abhidhamma are like elements in chemistry, where certain combination of them will produce a compound?

Abhidhamma does not talk about elemental imperishable dhammas. Each dhamma is dependently originated. That is the only analysis that is possible with dhammas.

It does not matter. It is important that we have two sets with a finite number of elements, where each element is a possible event (dhamma arises, a letter is printed). This makes the theorem applicable to the Abhidhamma.

"finite number of elements" - again you talk about a number of elements. This argument simply does not apply to dhammas.

[Srilankaputra]

There are only two options: either there is no beginning, or there is a beginning at the flow of dhammas. If the flow of dhammas has a beginning, then the first non-permanent dhammas in the flow arise without kammic reasons. The emergence of non-permanent dhammas without causes is impossible. The first moment of the flow of dhammas is impossible. So there is no beginning for the flow of dhammas. There are no other solutions.

I think you have missed the whole point of this teaching. This teaching is a method to go beyond all views and conceptions. For whatever views there are in the world are impermanent, dependently originated. If you cling to what is impermanent, suffering will be the result.

Buddha, possessing perfect wisdom, could not teach contradictions. Buddha could not teach that 2 + 2 = 5, etc.
Right views (without controversy) are needed for proper practice.

One does not hammer out views with logic to attain samma ditti. One becomes conscious of the truth by way of wisdom. What do the become conscious of ;

“yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamman”ti.

Whatever dhammas are subject to origination are all subject to cessation.

[Germann]

"Each dhamma from the list is like one of the buttons" ????

Do you think the dhammas described in abhidhamma are like elements in chemistry, where certain combination of them will produce a compound?

Abhidhamma does not talk about elemental imperishable dhammas. Each dhamma is dependently originated. That is the only analysis that is possible with dhammas.

It does not matter. It is important that we have two sets with a finite number of elements, where each element is a possible event (dhamma arises, a letter is printed). This makes the theorem applicable to the Abhidhamma.

"finite number of elements" - again you talk about a number of elements. This argument simply does not apply to dhammas.

The theorem applies to the Abhidhamma. Any list of dhammas consists of a finite number of elements.

For example:
http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/sangaha.htm
121 Types of Consciousness.

121 is not infinity. And so with any list of dhammas.

In the same way as the number of letters of the alphabet and punctuation marks is of course - of course the number of dhammas. The typewriter buttons correspond to non-permanent dhammas.

[suaimhneas]

This means that the complete passage of the Path, from beginning to end, does not lead to Nibbana. Such a Path is not a Path.

Exactly. The path is not a path but not the way you understand it.

What is conditioned cannot become unconditioned. When the conditioned ceases, there is the unconditioned because the unconditioned was there all along. That is why there is no path but yet Nibbana can be 'arrived' at.

This does not change anything. Nibbana should have already manifested itself, since in the infinity of the past, the entire Path, from beginning to end, must have already passed.

How about my Hilbert's Hotel point earlier? No matter how many check out the hotel always remains perfectly full. If you keep halving infinity day after day, well you are still left with infinity!

[Germann]

Exactly. The path is not a path but not the way you understand it.

What is conditioned cannot become unconditioned. When the conditioned ceases, there is the unconditioned because the unconditioned was there all along. That is why there is no path but yet Nibbana can be 'arrived' at.

This does not change anything. Nibbana should have already manifested itself, since in the infinity of the past, the entire Path, from beginning to end, must have already passed.

How about my Hilbert's Hotel point earlier? No matter how many check out the hotel always remains perfectly full. If you keep halving infinity day after day, well you are still left with infinity!

We have a set with a finite set of elements, but not an infinite set! The number of varieties of dhammas, the number of varieties of printed characters is a finite set. The number of guests arriving at a hotel with an infinite number of rooms is a set of a finite number of elements. The number of possible combinations of a finite number of elements is finite.

[Germann]

Shannon number great, but not infinite. The number of possible combinations of a finite number of elements is not infinite. The number of chess pieces is limited. The number of dhammas in the Abhidhamma is limited. The number of combinations can not be infinite.

One chess game corresponds to one life. (No one lives forever. The game ends.)

A life without reaching Nibbana corresponds to a lost chess game. Life with the achievement of Nibbana corresponds to the won chess game. If it is possible to win this game, then such a chess game - life with the achievement of Nibbana - is included in the final set of all possible games. All possible chess games - all possible lives, all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas - should already be played in the infinity of the past.

[robertk]

Shannon number great, but not infinite. The number of possible combinations of a finite number of elements is not infinite. The number of chess pieces is limited. The number of dhammas in the Abhidhamma is limited. The number of combinations can not be infinite.

But the elements in Abhidhamma come in varying degrees of intensity. Dosa can be extremely mild or extreme hatred, and any shade in between...And so with other elements.

[Srilankaputra]

It does not matter. It is important that we have two sets with a finite number of elements, where each element is a possible event (dhamma arises, a letter is printed). This makes the theorem applicable to the Abhidhamma.

"finite number of elements" - again you talk about a number of elements. This argument simply does not apply to dhammas.

The theorem applies to the Abhidhamma. Any list of dhammas consists of a finite number of elements.

For example:
http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/sangaha.htm
121 Types of Consciousness.

121 is not infinity. And so with any list of dhammas.

In the same way as the number of letters of the alphabet and punctuation marks is of course - of course the number of dhammas. The typewriter buttons correspond to non-permanent dhammas.

You are trying to use your scientific training where it does not apply. 121 types of consciousness is not like elementary particles of physics. I gave you a simile of a flame. A flame is never the same. But one may differentiate, that is a log flame, that is a grass flame and so on. Similarly, 121 types of consciousness may be differentiated through wisdom.

[Germann]

Shannon number great, but not infinite. The number of possible combinations of a finite number of elements is not infinite. The number of chess pieces is limited. The number of dhammas in the Abhidhamma is limited. The number of combinations can not be infinite.

But the elements in Abhidhamma come in varying degrees of intensity. Dosa can be extremely mild or extreme hatred, and any shade in between...And so with other elements.

But the number of new Dhammas, the cause of which will be Dosa, is limited. Dhammas are like chess pieces. The patterns of kamma are similar to the rules of the game. There is no infinite set of all possible moves of figures.

[Germann]

"finite number of elements" - again you talk about a number of elements. This argument simply does not apply to dhammas.

The theorem applies to the Abhidhamma. Any list of dhammas consists of a finite number of elements.

For example:
http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/sangaha.htm
121 Types of Consciousness.

121 is not infinity. And so with any list of dhammas.

In the same way as the number of letters of the alphabet and punctuation marks is of course - of course the number of dhammas. The typewriter buttons correspond to non-permanent dhammas.

You are trying to use your scientific training where it does not apply. 121 types of consciousness is not like elementary particles of physics. I gave you a simile of a flame. A flame is never the same. But one may differentiate, that is a log flame, that is a grass flame and so on. Similarly, 121 types of consciousness may be differentiated through wisdom.

Chess pieces are also different: some are made of wood, others are made of bone. But the number of all possible chess games is not infinite. Although it is very large. The number of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas in all possible lives is even greater (much more than the number of atoms in the universe we see) —but this number is not infinite.

[Srilankaputra]

The theorem applies to the Abhidhamma. Any list of dhammas consists of a finite number of elements.

For example:
http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/sangaha.htm
121 Types of Consciousness.

121 is not infinity. And so with any list of dhammas.

In the same way as the number of letters of the alphabet and punctuation marks is of course - of course the number of dhammas. The typewriter buttons correspond to non-permanent dhammas.

You are trying to use your scientific training where it does not apply. 121 types of consciousness is not like elementary particles of physics. I gave you a simile of a flame. A flame is never the same. But one may differentiate, that is a log flame, that is a grass flame and so on. Similarly, 121 types of consciousness may be differentiated through wisdom.

Chess pieces are also different: some are made of wood, others are made of bone. But the number of all possible chess games is not infinite. Although it is very large. The number of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas in all possible lives is even greater (much more than the number of atoms in the universe we see) —but this number is not infinite.

This is why I said you need to reconsider your understanding of dhamma. I gave you a simile of a flame but you insist on making it in to some thing static. Let's take a another example. Anger. How many times have you become angry in the past? You may recognise anger but it is never the same anger.

[atipattoh]

Theravada proposes to take on faith the mathematically impossible model of reality: its school Abhidhamma contradicts the theory of probability.

If you are to plot momentariness in space, representing momentariness by dots, how would you plot it?
Is the space finite or infinite?

[Dhammanando]

The thesis is mathematically correct. I brought it up for discussion by professionals.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/p ... em.967802/

UPD: "You have been banned for the following reason: Rules violations".
They are not interested in discussing religion.

And I see that your posts to the two maths forums have failed to elicit even a single reply. This isn't at all surprising, for rather than trying to meet the mathematicians halfway, by presenting your query in terms comprehensible to those with no prior acquaintance with the niceties of Abhidhamma, you've simply copied and pasted your opening post in this thread. No wonder you got booted out of the physics forum!

I wonder what's the probability of an online English-speaking maths enthusiast knowing what a satta-paññatti or an avijjamāna-paññatti might be?

[Germann]

The thesis is mathematically correct. I brought it up for discussion by professionals.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/p ... em.967802/

UPD: "You have been banned for the following reason: Rules violations".
They are not interested in discussing religion.

And I see that your posts to the two maths forums have failed to elicit even a single reply. This isn't at all surprising, for rather than trying to meet the mathematicians halfway, by presenting your query in terms comprehensible to those with no prior acquaintance with the niceties of Abhidhamma, you've simply copied and pasted your opening post in this thread. No wonder you got booted out of the physics forum!

I wonder what's the probability of an online English-speaking maths enthusiast knowing what a satta-paññatti or an avijjamāna-paññatti might be?

The main thing is that I am not at all afraid to discuss this all with mathematicians. I know that is right.

[Dan74-MkII]

The thesis is mathematically correct. I brought it up for discussion by professionals.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/p ... em.967802/

UPD: "You have been banned for the following reason: Rules violations".
They are not interested in discussing religion.

And I see that your posts to the two maths forums have failed to elicit even a single reply. This isn't at all surprising, for rather than trying to meet the mathematicians halfway, by presenting your query in terms comprehensible to those with no prior acquaintance with the niceties of Abhidhamma, you've simply copied and pasted your opening post in this thread. No wonder you got booted out of the physics forum!

I wonder what's the probability of an online English-speaking maths enthusiast knowing what a satta-paññatti or an avijjamāna-paññatti might be?

The question of whether in case of infinitely remote past (or infinite future), all possible events will have happened (will happen) is not new. Here, Germann is applying it to the Buddhadhamma. The case falls simply because it cannot be shown that all possible configurations will occur since the dhammas don't happen randomly but are causally related.

Chess has been offered as an analogy. Imagine infinitely many players playing on infinitely many boards. Will every configuration happen? No, of course not. Some are simply too ridiculous and chess player would not make moves leading to them. Some may be too clever and no human chess player is capable of such levels of play. Infinitely many players would also mean that since there are (according to the OP) finitely many dhammas, there will be only finitely many distinct players, others will be copies. So he should change his favourite example to go with unlimited time, instead. But even then, causal dependence between states kills it.

But the point is that he is not interested in discussing, but in convincing. "He knows that it is right."