Yeah. Already seen that quote. It’s a pretty impressive appeal to authority fallacy. Even more impressive when you consider that the authority is self asserted by the very same authors of the texts.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 10:21 amPondera wrote: ↑Sat Jun 19, 2021 9:39 am [
Oh. You want to get into “cognition”? That’s a laugh. Let’s look at the suttas. He tastes “bitter” he tastes “sweet” he tastes “pungent” he tastes “bland”. That is why they call it “cognition”.
Funny right? Well that is exactly what the Buddha said about “cognition”. What did he say about “perception”?
He perceives red. He perceives blue. Yellow. White. Thus it is called perception.
Probably not what you were looking for? Okay. I’ll take the bait.
Cognition of what? Let’s take something useful.
Cognition of the three marks upon the skhanda of perception.
A perception independently arises from an external object creating friction upon another external object. We call this “sound”. The mind cognizes “sound”. Within the “sound” the mind further cognizes further realities. It cognizes the mark of ill. It cognizes the mark of impermanence. It cognizes the mark of not-self. The sound disintergarates and the mind in samadhi turns it’s attention to other skhandas as they arise, persist, and fade.
I’ll just leave this here:
- The Expositor (Atthasālinī).And tradition has it that those bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma are true preachers of the Dhamma; the rest, though they speak on the Dhamma, are not preachers thereof. And why? They, in speaking on the Dhamma, confuse the different kinds of Kamma and of its results, the distinction between mind and matter, and the different kinds of states. The students of Abhidhamma do not thus get confused; hence a bhikkhu who knows Abhidhamma, whether he preaches the Dhamma or not, will be able to answer questions whenever asked. He alone, therefore, is a true preacher of the Dhamma.
You see this dogmatic tactic in the Bible and Prajnaparamita texts.
Ie.” Our documents are authoritative because there’s a verse in them which states something to that same effect.”
Utter dogmatic scare tactics which make the authors feel good about themselves.
Anyway. You wanted to talk “cognition”. That’s your best response? Why did you bring it up? So you could tell me the authors of the abhidamma are self proclaimed dhamma masters?
Cool man. Thanks for wasting my time.