Even attributes need to be defined.Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:57 pmNo, attributes are not essence. Apparently you still haven't grasped the distinction between phenomena and noumena.PeterC86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:54 pmIt certainly cannot, because for logic to make sense, things need to be defined, for which one requires/attributes an essence.
It is not solipsistic nonsense, as even the mind cannot be known, therefore; unconditioned. Good luck with trying whatever it is that you're trying!But as you probably consider logic to be mere convention, then you have cast yourself adrift in a world of meaningless interactions where nothing can be true or can ever be substantiated. I've seen this before with posters who are pushed back into solipsistic nonsense like this. It might be gratifying for them if they are here to get attention or troll people or to have the last word, but it rarely ends well. Good luck, Peter, in an essence-less, meaningless, unverifiable sort of way...
3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
The thread is based upon a series of severely mistaken assumptions all related to a fundamental misunderstanding of anattā. It's been claimed, in a separate but highly-related thread, that anattā excludes the possibility of discernment of difference. Here, it is argued that the act of "defining" is in-and-of-itself essentialism. There is no support put forward to defend this hasty and foolhardy stance. The OP has yet to substantiate any of his wild claims about the ramifications of anattā and the relation of anattā and essencelessness.
With such misunderstandings of anattā, one of the three marks, it's no wonder the OP sees them as contradictory to the eightfold path.
With such misunderstandings of anattā, one of the three marks, it's no wonder the OP sees them as contradictory to the eightfold path.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
You're again resorting to 'the Buddha said'.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 6:23 pm Based on the textual evidence, the Buddha didn't think he made up the NEFP. Rather he claimed to have discovered it. I don't think Venerable Nāgārjuna thought the path was "made up" either. That the NEFP and dhammas are just things we make up is your claim alone. A claim with no substance.
Because an argument needs to be based on logic, and without attributing a certain essence to words, a logical argument cannot be made, because words would have no meaning. So our way of communicating is based on that we attribute a certain shared essence to words, mostly governed by dictionaries. But this essence that we attribute is merely conventional, and merely based on the assumption that phenomena are self, which could then be defined/described. So if everything is not-self, there is no base for an argument, as there is no underlying essence behind the words, therefore words don't have an ultimate meaning.
This didn't answer my question. Why does a lack of essence or base mean an argument cannot be made? You are currently arguing with me and you claim there is no base or essence behind the words. You are therefore contradicting yourself.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
You were asking a question.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
That's because this is a Buddhist discussion group, and that's what we discuss. For many of us, the discussion informs our practice, but discussing details of practice with random people on the Internet is not usually very productive - from my experience it requires an environment of trust, kindness , and common ground for such discussions to be worthwhile.
Mike
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Yes, this is an implication of what is being discussed here, because difference has to be attributed to something. So although we have an experience that is changing, we cannot atttribute this changing or difference to certain phenomena, as this would already be attributing something as this, and something else as that.
No, an argument has to be made for the existence, possibility of discernment, of phenomena, and until then, they cannot be said to exist or non-exist, both exist and non-exist, neither exist nor non-exist.Here, it is argued that the act of "defining" is in-and-of-itself essentialism. There is no support put forward to defend this hasty and foolhardy stance. The OP has yet to substantiate any of his wild claims about the ramifications of anattā and the relation of anattā and essencelessness.
The burden of proof of unity lies with those who hold that they are unified.With such misunderstandings of anattā, one of the three marks, it's no wonder the OP sees them as contradictory to the eightfold path.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
You're pretty free-wheeling with redefining your arguments and terms on the fly, sometimes to something that is completely contradictory to a previously-held view presented only a few posts ago. So where exactly did you supposedly argue for this "possibility" of discernment?PeterC86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:12 pmNo, an argument has to be made for the existence, possibility of discernment, of phenomena, and until then, they cannot be said to exist or non-exist, both exist and non-exist, neither exist nor non-exist.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 8:00 pmHere, it is argued that the act of "defining" is in-and-of-itself essentialism. There is no support put forward to defend this hasty and foolhardy stance. The OP has yet to substantiate any of his wild claims about the ramifications of anattā and the relation of anattā and essencelessness.
In order for you to understand any proofs of that nature, you'll first have to actually learn what "anattā" means. Then we can start with anicca, etc. At present, you are still stumbling around "essences" while trying and failing to define anattā.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
TLDR the entire thread.
The 3 marks are there regardless of whether a Buddha is around or not but the Buddha is the one to point to them. Once they are fully understood/realized, the result is liberation. The N8FP is the formulation that leads to liberation. Even without the N8FP, the 3 characteristics of existence are always in operation.
The 3 marks are there regardless of whether a Buddha is around or not but the Buddha is the one to point to them. Once they are fully understood/realized, the result is liberation. The N8FP is the formulation that leads to liberation. Even without the N8FP, the 3 characteristics of existence are always in operation.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html"Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.
"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are inconstant.
"Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful.
"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are stressful.
"Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.[1]
"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All phenomena are not-self."
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
-
- Posts: 10184
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Yes, it's all a bit of a muddle. Failing to understand the distinction between anatta, shunyata and "essences", failing to understand the distinction between phenomena and nounena, failing to understand the distinction between defining and describing, and so on.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 8:00 pm The thread is based upon a series of severely mistaken assumptions all related to a fundamental misunderstanding of anattā. It's been claimed, in a separate but highly-related thread, that anattā excludes the possibility of discernment of difference. Here, it is argued that the act of "defining" is in-and-of-itself essentialism. There is no support put forward to defend this hasty and foolhardy stance. The OP has yet to substantiate any of his wild claims about the ramifications of anattā and the relation of anattā and essencelessness.
With such misunderstandings of anattā, one of the three marks, it's no wonder the OP sees them as contradictory to the eightfold path.
Last edited by Spiny Norman on Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
-
- Posts: 10184
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Being able to describe something doesn't mean it has independent self-hood or "essence".PeterC86 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:23 pmYou're again resorting to 'the Buddha said'.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Jun 26, 2022 6:23 pm Based on the textual evidence, the Buddha didn't think he made up the NEFP. Rather he claimed to have discovered it. I don't think Venerable Nāgārjuna thought the path was "made up" either. That the NEFP and dhammas are just things we make up is your claim alone. A claim with no substance.
Because an argument needs to be based on logic, and without attributing a certain essence to words, a logical argument cannot be made, because words would have no meaning. So our way of communicating is based on that we attribute a certain shared essence to words, mostly governed by dictionaries. But this essence that we attribute is merely conventional, and merely based on the assumption that phenomena are self, which could then be defined/described. So if everything is not-self, there is no base for an argument, as there is no underlying essence behind the words, therefore words don't have an ultimate meaning.
This didn't answer my question. Why does a lack of essence or base mean an argument cannot be made? You are currently arguing with me and you claim there is no base or essence behind the words. You are therefore contradicting yourself.
"Form is only emptiness" (Heart Sutra) doesn't mean we can't describe form, it means that form doesn't have independent existence - it's conditional.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Because an argument needs to be based on logic, and without attributing a certain essence to words, a logical argument cannot be made, because words would have no meaning. So our way of communicating is based on that we attribute a certain shared essence to words, mostly governed by dictionaries. But this essence that we attribute is merely conventional, and merely based on the assumption that phenomena are self, which could then be defined/described. So if everything is not-self, there is no base for an argument, as there is no underlying essence behind the words, therefore words don't have an ultimate meaning.
The solar system is a collection of the sun and planets.Being able to describe something doesn't mean it has independent self-hood or "essence".
"Form is only emptiness" (Heart Sutra) doesn't mean we can't describe form, it means that form doesn't have independent existence - it's conditional.
A country is a collection of states.
A tree is a collection of roots, a trunk, branches, leaves, and flowers.
A person is a collection of five aggregates
"Name has conquered everything,
There is nothing greater than name,
All have gone under the sway
Of this one thing called name."
"Beings are conscious of what can be named,
They are established on the nameable,
By not comprehending the nameable things,
They come under the yoke of death."
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Strange question. The attainment of N8FP depends on contemplation of the 3 marks according to doctrine.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Here is but one way to relate the three to the eight, and it is through the four. Three marks, an eightfold path, and four truths.
What is anicca is anattā, and is also dukkha. This is called "the three marks of existence." If this comes into contention, a sutta can easily be found. If some facile objection of "You are just playing 'Buddha says'" comes about, the three marks of existence, the eightfold path, and the noble truths all fall under the purview of "what the Buddha says" anyways.
Now, we just look at the four nobles truths. 1) Dukkha, 2) the origination of dukkha, 3) the cessation of dukkha, and 4) the path to the cessation of dukkha. What is the path to the cessation of dukkha? The eightfold path is. None of this business about the possibility or impossibility of defining, describing, imparting essences, or whatnot that has been brought up as objections to their mutual concord plays a part in this that I consider a relatively direct and uncontrived correspondence.
What is anicca is anattā, and is also dukkha. This is called "the three marks of existence." If this comes into contention, a sutta can easily be found. If some facile objection of "You are just playing 'Buddha says'" comes about, the three marks of existence, the eightfold path, and the noble truths all fall under the purview of "what the Buddha says" anyways.
Now, we just look at the four nobles truths. 1) Dukkha, 2) the origination of dukkha, 3) the cessation of dukkha, and 4) the path to the cessation of dukkha. What is the path to the cessation of dukkha? The eightfold path is. None of this business about the possibility or impossibility of defining, describing, imparting essences, or whatnot that has been brought up as objections to their mutual concord plays a part in this that I consider a relatively direct and uncontrived correspondence.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
-
- Posts: 10184
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Yes, it is a strange question, and seems to stem from a misunderstanding of anatta.
Contemplation of the 3 marks is an aspect of practice in the N8FP, so that is a kind of "unification" I suppose.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP
Why does someone need to be certained if N8FP is in unified with 3 marks ? That is totally unnnecessary . You just walk on the path , along the road you will find out for yourself whether it is so or not . Simple .
No bashing No gossiping