3 marks of existence vs N8FP

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Sam Vara »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:21 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:05 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:55 pm if you want to correct 'mistakes', come with an argument based on some type of understanding relating to the topic. If not, I ask you again to refrain from posting, and I ask the mods to interfere when you ignore this.
I can't see any reason why mods should interfere with Coëmgenu's posts. He is not, as far as I can see, breaching any of the ToS.
OK, I can also ignore him in that case.
Yes, using the "foe" button or just ignoring posts and individuals is preferable to excluding them from debate altogether, as others may well want to engage with them on the same topic.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10159
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Spiny Norman »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:23 pm
Spiny Norman wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:16 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 4:38 pm

There is a sky which is blue.
There are skies of many colours.
You just changed the description, therefore the definition.
It's all description. We experience phenomena, not noumena (or "essences" as you call them).
Last edited by Spiny Norman on Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Ceisiwr »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:20 pm
The attempt of this thread is to determine how the 3 marks of existence and the NEFP can be unified, not resort to "the Buddha said".
What the Buddha said is important. The Buddha is recorded as saying he discovered the NEFP, not that he just made it up.
Yes, but I can't see how it relates to the 3 marks of existence.
From a Madhyamaka POV, it seems to me it is because they are conventional that they have the 3 marks. From a Theravādin POV, it's because each dhamma in the NEFP arises dependent upon conditions. The same with Early Buddhism too.

No, I said that a conventional reality can exist in convention, but there is no underlying essence, therefore still no base for an argument.
Why do you need an "essence" for there to be a basis for an argument? Right now we are arguing, and according to you there is no essence at all involved.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Sam Vara »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:25 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:17 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:10 pm

If you would have no essence, then something cannot be said to be you.
If you were to have no essence, then only things that have no essence could validly be said to be you.
This can not be validated.
In logic, it certainly can. 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... :anjali:
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:24 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:12 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:02 pm

So it is not true that the meaning of words only exists in our perception, and it's not true that a dictionary is not representing the truth?
Mere convention, because everything is not-self.
Convention is the basis of intelligibility, so the price of ignoring it is perpetual misunderstanding. As we are beginning to see in this thread.
Don't try to undermine me without substantiating, if everything is not-self, nothing can be known. Intelligibility would be a mere illusion. This is not a misunderstanding, unless you come with an argument which says it is so.

I was going to ask you to show via a syllogism or two why everything being not-self entails there being no truth. But if logic is also mere convention, then we have a problem, don't we?
I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Even your "because" in that sentence starts to look a bit wobbly....
Again, please don't try to undermine me without substantiating, it is rather childish.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:26 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:21 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:05 pm

I can't see any reason why mods should interfere with Coëmgenu's posts. He is not, as far as I can see, breaching any of the ToS.
OK, I can also ignore him in that case.
Yes, using the "foe" button or just ignoring posts and individuals is preferable to excluding them from debate altogether, as others may well want to engage with them on the same topic.
Okay, thanks, I didn't knew that.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Ceisiwr »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:39 pm I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Why then do you keep replying?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10159
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Spiny Norman »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:39 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:24 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:12 pm

Mere convention, because everything is not-self.
Convention is the basis of intelligibility, so the price of ignoring it is perpetual misunderstanding. As we are beginning to see in this thread.
Don't try to undermine me without substantiating, if everything is not-self, nothing can be known. Intelligibility would be a mere illusion. This is not a misunderstanding, unless you come with an argument which says it is so.

I was going to ask you to show via a syllogism or two why everything being not-self entails there being no truth. But if logic is also mere convention, then we have a problem, don't we?
I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Even your "because" in that sentence starts to look a bit wobbly....
Again, please don't try to undermine me without substantiating, it is rather childish.
"'If everything is not-self, nothing can be known"? That doesn't make any sense.
We know things by their characteristics, and "esences" are not required.
But again, I'm not clear whether you're talking about anatta, shunyata or lack of noumena, or what exactly. It's confusing.
Last edited by Spiny Norman on Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:34 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:25 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:17 pm

If you were to have no essence, then only things that have no essence could validly be said to be you.
This can not be validated.
In logic, it certainly can.
It certainly cannot, because for logic to make sense, things need to be defined, for which one requires/attributes an essence.
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... :anjali:
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!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10159
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Spiny Norman »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:54 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:34 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:25 pm

This can not be validated.
In logic, it certainly can.
It certainly cannot, because for logic to make sense, things need to be defined, for which one requires/attributes an essence.
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... :anjali:
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!
No, attributes are not essence. Apparently you still haven't grasped the distinction between phenomena and noumena.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:27 pm
Yes, but I can't see how it relates to the 3 marks of existence.
From a Madhyamaka POV, it seems to me it is because they are conventional that they have the 3 marks. From a Theravādin POV, it's because each dhamma in the NEFP arises dependent upon conditions. The same with Early Buddhism too.
Again, one can make things up.
No, I said that a conventional reality can exist in convention, but there is no underlying essence, therefore still no base for an argument.
Why do you need an "essence" for there to be a basis for an argument? Right now we are arguing, and according to you there is no essence at all involved.
There is no base.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:47 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:39 pm I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Why then do you keep replying?
He was asking a question.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Ceisiwr »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 6:16 pm Again, one can make things up.
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.
There is no base.
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.
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sun Jun 26, 2022 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Ceisiwr »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 6:19 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:47 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:39 pm I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Why then do you keep replying?
He was asking a question.
You keep making arguments, yet you say you have no argument to make. That being so, you shouldn't be replying.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Spiny Norman wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:52 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:39 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 5:24 pm

Convention is the basis of intelligibility, so the price of ignoring it is perpetual misunderstanding. As we are beginning to see in this thread.
Don't try to undermine me without substantiating, if everything is not-self, nothing can be known. Intelligibility would be a mere illusion. This is not a misunderstanding, unless you come with an argument which says it is so.

I was going to ask you to show via a syllogism or two why everything being not-self entails there being no truth. But if logic is also mere convention, then we have a problem, don't we?
I don't have a problem, as I don't have an argument to make.
Even your "because" in that sentence starts to look a bit wobbly....
Again, please don't try to undermine me without substantiating, it is rather childish.
"'If everything is not-self, nothing can be known"? That doesn't make any sense.
We know things by their characteristics, and "esences" are not required.
We already went over this with your sky example. Even characteristics are giving essence. Blue, etc.
But again, I'm not clear whether you're talking about anatta, shunyata or lack of noumena, or what exactly. It's confusing.
Anatta, this is clearly stated previously.
Post Reply