How can Dependant Origination be established?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by cappuccino »

Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:34 am does Nibbana do that?
Nirvana is the absence of conditioning


the Universe is all manner of conditioning
"All men's souls are immortal, but the souls of the righteous are immortal and divine." -Socrates
Good for Your Soul
SteRo
Posts: 4753
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: अ धीः

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by SteRo »

Tutareture wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 9:50 pm
SteRo wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 9:38 pm
Tutareture wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 6:04 pm

Quantum Science supports Palamism.
I can't see how your response ("Quantum Science supports Palamism") is related to what you are quoting. And I never came across the term "Palamism", so i don't know what that means.
I am saying philosophy alone doesn't prove orthodox theology,do does science.
SteRo wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:04 pm Philosophy is thought and orthodox theology is thought. How should thought ever be able to prove thought?
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 3:08 am It was a typo .I ment so does science.the fact quantum physics support cosmic consciousness of some sort is openly admitted by michio kaku,he also said God.almost all eminent physicists I know of are idealists of some sort.materialism has been buried by the double slit experiment.
Theology can't be proven at all. Theology is a system of thought that either is believed in or isn't believed in. But theology as system of thought as such may be consistent or not.
To me it seems as if you would create your own theology. Since theology is arranged around the concept "god" it necessarily is based on metaphysical speculation because "god" is metaphysical speculation and can only be supported in thought by similar speculations. I called your approach "medieval" because the philosophers of that time took the same approach and the belief in "god" was commonly established at that time. It was the philosopher Kant who once and for all showed that metaphysical philosophy and thus theology cannot be taken seriously.
Now one might ask "Is there metaphysical speculation in buddhism as well?" And the answer is "yes" but dependent origination is metaphysical speculation only if it is interpreted as a model for rebirth as is done in classical buddhism. If it is interpreted as a heuristic model for the purpose of removal of unease and stress in combination with meditation DO has nothing to do with metaphysical speculation.

No science will ever support any theology. Why? Because scientific validation is based on experiment and measurement but theology is merely fabrication of creative minds. However to arrange their theology in a way that is compatible with science is no problem for creative minds. There are many scientists who believe in "god".

Not believing in the metaphysical speculation "god" does not necessarily entail believing in the philosophy of "materialism". Buddhism teaches very well how 'not believing in anything' can be the basis for happiness and living at ease. One does not have to believe in the metaphysical speculations that are part of classical buddhism to make use of the relevant buddhist teachings.
Exhaling अ and inhaling धीः amounts to བྷྲཱུཾ་བི་ཤྭ་བི་ཤུད་དྷེ . (This is the esoteric essence of the yoga of continuous flow which is no different from the universal flux of materiality. Therefore exoteric natural science provides vital guidelines.) अञ्जलि वागीश्वर
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11755
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Ceisiwr »

SteRo wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 9:35 am
It was the philosopher Kant who once and for all showed that metaphysical philosophy and thus theology cannot be taken seriously.
Hume and Kant. Kant fleshed out what Hume had said prior, with Kant crediting Hume with his awakening from his "dogmatic slumbers". Kant then tried to rescue causality from the devastation of Hume's insights. Insights that, I think, the Buddha shared. If Kant was successful in rescuing it is another matter. What is interesting is that Hume also arrived at the same conclusion on the self as the Buddha:
"For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception. When my perceptions are remov’d for any time, as by sound sleep; so long am I insensible of myself, and may truly be said not to exist. And were all my perceptions remov’d by death, and cou’d I neither think, nor feel, nor see, nor love, nor hate after the dissolution of my body, I shou’d be entirely annihilated, nor do I conceive what is farther requisite to make me a perfect non-entity. If any one upon serious and unprejudic’d reflexion, thinks he has a different notion of himself, I must confess I can reason no longer with him. All I can allow him is, that he may be in the right as well as I, and that we are essentially different in this particular. He may, perhaps, perceive something simple and continu’d, which he calls himself; tho’ I am certain there is no such principle in me... But setting aside some metaphysicians of this kind, I may venture to affirm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement."
Treatise of Human Nature
Now one might ask "Is there metaphysical speculation in buddhism as well?" And the answer is "yes" but dependent origination is metaphysical speculation only if it is interpreted as a model for rebirth as is done in classical buddhism. If it is interpreted as a heuristic model for the purpose of removal of unease and stress in combination with meditation DO has nothing to do with metaphysical speculation.
Not at all. Dependent origination is an analytic a priori examination of all dukkha, which includes within it rebirth as the Buddha directly experienced prior lives.

Reverse order analytic a priori
In order for there to be old age, disease and death one has to be born.

In order to be born one must exist (Bhava).

For existence to be there must be clinging to the aggregates (Upādāna).

In order to cling to the aggregates, one must crave sense experience (Taṇhā).

In order to crave sense experience, one must notice as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral sense experience (vedanā).

In order to notice as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral sense experience there must be contact within the domains of vision & forms etc (āyatana).

For there to be bifurcation into the domains of vision & forms etc there must be attention (manasikāro).

In order for there to be attention there must be designation & resistance contact (phasso in nāma).

In order for there to be designation & resistance contact there must be intention (cetanā).

In order for there to be intention there must first be recognition & conceptualisation (sañña).

In order to recognise & conceptualise one must first notice as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral (vedanā).

In order to notice as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral one must first be aware and have discriminatory knowledge of (viññāṇa).

In order to be aware and have discriminatory knowledge pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral one must have intention towards (saṅkhāra).

In order to have intention towards pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral one must have an inclination/tendency towards the senses, Being/Existence, views, and ignorance which themselves are based on ignorance (āsavā).

Forward order analytic a priori
That is to say with the tendencies towards (āsavā) the senses, Being/Existence, views and ignorance as condition there is intention towards (saṅkhāra).

With intention towards as condition, there is awareness of and establishing of consciousness (viññāṇa).

With awareness and establishing of as condition, there is noticing of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral experience(vedanā).

With noticing of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral experience as condition there is recognition & conceptualisation (sañña).

With recognition & conceputaliation as condition there is intention towards (cetanā).

With intention towards there is designation & resistance contact (phasso in nāma).

With designation & resistance contact as condition there is attention (manasikāro).

With attention as condition there is the basis for the bifurcation of the domains of vision & forms etc (āyatanā).

With the domains as condition, there is sensory contact between vision, forms and awareness (phasso)

With contact as condition between the 3 there is vedanā within the domains.

With vedanā as condition one can crave (Taṇhā).

With craving as condition one can cling to the aggregates (Upādāna).

With clinging as condition there is existence (Bhava).

With existence as condition there is birth (Jāti).

With birth as condition there can be ageing, sickness and death.

There is nothing metaphysical in that, if the Buddha directly experienced it. No synthetic a priori can be found above.
“Aṅgulimāla, I have forever stopped"

MN 86
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 4005
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Coëmgenu »

If God can be established logically, then so can the Dharma. You can figure out the Dharma from an armchair with a really nice glass of bourbon and a cigar. The better the cigar, the higher a stage of awakening you get, they say.

We can communicate in just as much bad faith as the OP, making silly claims that are so obviously untrue, like that quantum woo "proves" God, etc.

Did you know that "quantum reality" "proves" that all phenomena are empty and therefore there is no God? After we argue about this, I'll claim that you are a religious zealot, a fundamentalist, and an extremist, because you won't admit to seeing the obvious truth of there being no God. Instead of having an honest conversation, I'll insist that you have been refuted, know it in your heart that you have been, but are being prideful and vain and refusing to admit your own defeat.

Remind you of anyone...?

:juggling:
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.

(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by cappuccino »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:07 pm You can figure out the Dharma from an armchair with a really nice glass of bourbon and a cigar. The better the cigar, the higher a stage of awakening you get, they say.
:coffee:
"All men's souls are immortal, but the souls of the righteous are immortal and divine." -Socrates
Good for Your Soul
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:07 pm If God can be established logically, then so can the Dharma. You can figure out the Dharma from an armchair with a really nice glass of bourbon and a cigar. The better the cigar, the higher a stage of awakening you get, they say.

We can communicate in just as much bad faith as the OP, making silly claims that are so obviously untrue, like that quantum woo "proves" God, etc.

Did you know that "quantum reality" "proves" that all phenomena are empty and therefore there is no God? After we argue about this, I'll claim that you are a religious zealot, a fundamentalist, and an extremist, because you won't admit to seeing the obvious truth of there being no God. Instead of having an honest conversation, I'll insist that you have been refuted, know it in your heart that you have been, but are being prideful and vain and refusing to admit your own defeat.

Remind you of anyone...?

:juggling:
Quantum isn't woo as the atheists would wish,its based on many experiments like double slit experiments,Schrodinger's cat,quantum eraser experiments etc one can adequetely make the case that evolution is woo though.

Shunyata is impossible and incompatible with quantum physics because you assert that things come out of a true nothing,wich is impossible logically speaking.also shunyata isn't compatible with the philosophy that has proven God from Fr.Robert Spitzer.

Madhyamika philosophy is self-refuting.Nagarjuna stated that arising is like a hare's horn.if thats the case there would be a permanance of entities.
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

I think I have argued my case,quiet soundly.I haven't seen any refutations that things cannot pop out of nothing or that a infinity in quantity can exist,and therefore Dependant origination is false.the rest is just cognitive dissonance on part of the Buddhists.I think this thread is overdue.thats just my opinion.
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11755
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:12 pm I think I have argued my case,quiet soundly.I haven't seen any refutations that things cannot pop out of nothing or that a infinity in quantity can exist,and therefore Dependant origination is false.the rest is just cognitive dissonance on part of the Buddhists.I think this thread is overdue.thats just my opinion.
You actively ignored my challenge to your epistemology. That or you just didn’t understand it.
“Aṅgulimāla, I have forever stopped"

MN 86
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 pm
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:12 pm I think I have argued my case,quiet soundly.I haven't seen any refutations that things cannot pop out of nothing or that a infinity in quantity can exist,and therefore Dependant origination is false.the rest is just cognitive dissonance on part of the Buddhists.I think this thread is overdue.thats just my opinion.
You actively ignored my challenge to your epistemology. That or you just didn’t understand it.
You're basically arguing against logical inference.why would I take this seriously?
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 pm
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:12 pm I think I have argued my case,quiet soundly.I haven't seen any refutations that things cannot pop out of nothing or that a infinity in quantity can exist,and therefore Dependant origination is false.the rest is just cognitive dissonance on part of the Buddhists.I think this thread is overdue.thats just my opinion.
You actively ignored my challenge to your epistemology. That or you just didn’t understand it.
Rejecting logical inference to save blind faith.keep on blindly believing.dont however say buddhism is rational. :twothumbsup:
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11755
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:31 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 pm
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:12 pm I think I have argued my case,quiet soundly.I haven't seen any refutations that things cannot pop out of nothing or that a infinity in quantity can exist,and therefore Dependant origination is false.the rest is just cognitive dissonance on part of the Buddhists.I think this thread is overdue.thats just my opinion.
You actively ignored my challenge to your epistemology. That or you just didn’t understand it.
You're basically arguing against logical inference.why would I take this seriously?
I’m asking how you can assert something as knowledge which is independent of experience yet isn’t true analytically?
“Aṅgulimāla, I have forever stopped"

MN 86
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

The twelve links don't explain how the aggregates form together.it only explains an apparent why.If there is kshanabhanga they couldn't form anyway.you need a God to aggregate atoms and the mental aggregates.if atoms joined by nature there could be no dissolution,if they reppeled by nature no joining.since they are neutral you need to have a intelligent agent Wich joins them into an aggregate.
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Tutareture
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Tutareture »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:39 pm
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:31 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:20 pm

You actively ignored my challenge to your epistemology. That or you just didn’t understand it.
You're basically arguing against logical inference.why would I take this seriously?
I’m asking how you can assert something as knowledge which is independent of experience yet isn’t true analytically?
The same way math works.
I am a Toscano Italian (well,also half African american and part Choctaw native american)Ethiopian Tewahedo christian exploring Buddhism.Just looking for friendly Philosophical discussion.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11755
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:43 pm The twelve links don't explain how the aggregates form together.it only explains an apparent why.
Well they wouldn’t would they, since DO is about conditionality not causality.
If there is kshanabhanga they couldn't form anyway.you need a God to aggregate atoms and the mental aggregates.if atoms joined by nature there could be no dissolution,if they reppeled by nature no joining.since they are neutral you need to have a intelligent agent Wich joins them into an aggregate.
In my professional life I’m a scientist, so if I’m looking for a theory of matter the atomic theory is currently the best one around. It is, of course, not certain knowledge as it is synthetic a posteriori. You are claiming that there is a God which is required. I ask you, how are you arriving at this position? Is it via a priori or a posteriori? I’m assuming it’s not based on experience but rather a priori reasoning? If so, I don’t see how it is analytically true that God exists, which leaves us with the synthetic a priori. I trust you are aware of the problems there?
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Aṅgulimāla, I have forever stopped"

MN 86
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 11755
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: How can Dependant Origination be established?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:44 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:39 pm
Tutareture wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 10:31 pm

You're basically arguing against logical inference.why would I take this seriously?
I’m asking how you can assert something as knowledge which is independent of experience yet isn’t true analytically?
The same way math works.
Mathematics is analytic a priori. 2 + 2 = 4 is true by definition (Kant would disagree with me here). There is nothing in “exists” which entails “God” by definition, much less still “atoms binding together require God”.
“Aṅgulimāla, I have forever stopped"

MN 86
Post Reply