chownah wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:09 pm
Also, you really didn't clarify what I requested.
I think it was included in your previous answer:
I know how some magic tricks work but they still deceive me in that there is the appearance of impossible things happening.....but I wouldn't say that I am impressed.
Would the same thing apply to the Arhahant?
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
Bundokji wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:55 pm
I know this might be a silly question, but is it possible that Arahants get deceived by a magic trick?
What i mean is: they do not necessarily get impressed by it, but can the trick work on them without knowing how it works?
Do list at least three situations where this would be relevant.
In what situations would an arahant and a magician/conman meet?
Relevant to what?
The situation of which two people can meet vary.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
Bundokji wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:28 amRelevant to what?
The situation of which two people can meet vary.
My point is that you're describing a situation that, as a matter of principle, never happens. An arahant doesn't interact with magicians and conmen, at least not on the terms of the magicians and conmen.
Last edited by binocular on Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
dhammacoustic wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:32 pm
the arahant by definiton is a realized-philosopher, as he has reached the goal of philosophy, which is perfect wisdom. and not through epistemological means —which would be impossible— but through the discipline of the dhamma.
yes, the arahant is supposed to be omniscient, but as the buddha points out in the parable of the poisoned arrow, there can be no such thing as “epistemological omniscience”, considering that an epistemological unit always has to be accompanied by a lack of knowledge, which is actually the generation of “episteme”, ie, something becoming known and visible in the ocean of the unknown. therefore ; the arahant's omniscience need not have anything to do with any kind of epistemological structure, simply because epistemology is established on [the basis of] language, and the brain receives its information through the [limitations of] the senses..
on the whole, the arahant would directly know whether “being” is immanent (sassatavada/ucchedavada) or transcendent (nibbana), even if he didn't know a thing about the world.
I agree with your input, but one interpretations i encountered about the limits of the Buddha's knowledge that he cannot know everything at the same time, but he can know anything in the present. If i remember correctly, i read this in a post by Ven Dhammanando years ago. It seems to acknowledge the limitations of worldly knowledge as stated in your post and maintain the omniscience status of the Buddha considering that his knowledge is timeless.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
binocular wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:37 am
My point is that you're describing a situation that, as a matter of principle, never happens.
Why? The fact that the Buddha provided a simile using magician or magician's apprentice (SN 22.29) shows that it is not logically impossible. As in the case when any two people meet!
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
Bundokji wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:41 amWhy? The fact that the Buddha provided a simile using magician or magician's apprentice (SN 22.29) shows that it is not logically impossible. As in the case when any two people meet!
I added a bit just when you were replying:
binocular wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:37 amMy point is that you're describing a situation that, as a matter of principle, never happens. An arahant doesn't interact with magicians and conmen, at least not on the terms of the magicians and conmen.
"Now suppose that a magician or magician's apprentice were to display a magic trick at a major intersection, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it.
To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a magic trick?
binocular wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:52 am
If the Buddha thinks that already an ordinary person can recognize a magic trick as being without substance, then surely so can the arahant.
The ordinary person knows in theory that a magic trick is without a substance and still gets impressed by it. Why? because his/her lack of certainty that are constructed phenomena are without a substance. This is why i ruled out the possibility that the Arahant would be impressed by a magic trick from the outset.
However, does knowing that all phenomena are a construct imply knowing how each particular phenomena is constructed? If the answer is yes, then it would be impossible that an Arahant would not be deceived by the magician trick. If the answer is no, then the Arahant senses might get deceived by the magician trick, but that would not affect his/her equanimity.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
binocular wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:02 am
Do you really think that an arahant would stop at an intersection and watch a magician perform tricks?
Not necessarily, but your emphasis on this is missing the point.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
chownah wrote: ↑Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:12 pm
What kind of a real thing is it?.....in other words what do you mean by "a real thing"?
chownah
Chownah, a temporary thing manifested in this temporary world but there in this world by it's means in whichever way it is practiced by people.
I don't understand "there in this world by it's means in whichever way it is practiced by people." Does this mean that any thought or idea arising in an individual is a real thing?
If there are "real things" it seems that there must be "unreal things". Can you tell me about some things that are "unreal things"?......I think this would help clarify what you mean by "real thing".
chownah
Well, ultimately magic can be both in the realm of the real and unreal. An illusion, if you understand what a real illusion is, in reality, is unreal. Such as a phantom city or a thing that isn't really happening, though it seems like it is. I'm not talking about parlor trick magic here but the workings of the illusions in the material world, or Maya for example. We are urged not to get caught in the illusions of this world.
That sage who has perfect insight,
at the summit of spiritual perfection:
that’s who I call a brahmin. -Dhammapada.
Chownah, a temporary thing manifested in this temporary world but there in this world by it's means in whichever way it is practiced by people.
I don't understand "there in this world by it's means in whichever way it is practiced by people." Does this mean that any thought or idea arising in an individual is a real thing?
If there are "real things" it seems that there must be "unreal things". Can you tell me about some things that are "unreal things"?......I think this would help clarify what you mean by "real thing".
chownah
Well, ultimately magic can be both in the realm of the real and unreal. An illusion, if you understand what a real illusion is, in reality, is unreal. Such as a phantom city or a thing that isn't really happening, though it seems like it is. I'm not talking about parlor trick magic here but the workings of the illusions in the material world, or Maya for example. We are urged not to get caught in the illusions of this world.
There are two ways they can cause illusion, one is by affecting the consciousness of another, another way is by directly affecting the form.
chownah wrote: ↑Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:12 am
I don't understand "there in this world by it's means in whichever way it is practiced by people." Does this mean that any thought or idea arising in an individual is a real thing?
If there are "real things" it seems that there must be "unreal things". Can you tell me about some things that are "unreal things"?......I think this would help clarify what you mean by "real thing".
chownah
Well, ultimately magic can be both in the realm of the real and unreal. An illusion, if you understand what a real illusion is, in reality, is unreal. Such as a phantom city or a thing that isn't really happening, though it seems like it is. I'm not talking about parlor trick magic here but the workings of the illusions in the material world, or Maya for example. We are urged not to get caught in the illusions of this world.
There are two ways they can cause illusion, one is by affecting the consciousness of another, another way is by directly affecting the form.
That's a very intelligent reply. I shall meditate on the subject. Thank you.
That sage who has perfect insight,
at the summit of spiritual perfection:
that’s who I call a brahmin. -Dhammapada.
Well, ultimately magic can be both in the realm of the real and unreal. An illusion, if you understand what a real illusion is, in reality, is unreal. Such as a phantom city or a thing that isn't really happening, though it seems like it is. I'm not talking about parlor trick magic here but the workings of the illusions in the material world, or Maya for example. We are urged not to get caught in the illusions of this world.
There are two ways they can cause illusion, one is by affecting the consciousness of another, another way is by directly affecting the form.
That's a very intelligent reply. I shall meditate on the subject. Thank you.
Your reply already shows u are a particular type of Buddha students, the type that is capable of getting answers from meditation.
I am not saying certain types are superior, but not all know about this area.
The Buddha and His Disciples themselves had great Transcendental powers, such as levitation, and the Buddha Himself would sometimes travel to other planets to get fruit for His Disciples. I am sure that there was a peaceful process in which the Sangha overcame bad witchcraft, in the forest there are a lot of obstacles. Though there are good witches too. The Buddha did ask for one thing though, however, and that was that those in the Sangha didn't show off their Transcendental powers, but instead taught Spiritual principles, saying that those who used their Magical or Transcendental powers to gain followers would be no companions of His.
That sage who has perfect insight,
at the summit of spiritual perfection:
that’s who I call a brahmin. -Dhammapada.