tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post2312090250814710541..comments2024-01-27T11:15:31.605-08:00Comments on Rational Buddhism: The Rational Basis of Buddhismseanrobsvillehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01135048988031819619noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-77938967289939481832022-06-05T00:17:31.389-07:002022-06-05T00:17:31.389-07:00I read all of your posts and was blown away by the...I read all of your posts and was blown away by the quality of information you provide. To me, your website resembles a <a href="https://www.buddhist-art.com/" rel="nofollow"> Buddha gallery </a>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-52445139388184606772022-05-15T00:09:31.760-07:002022-05-15T00:09:31.760-07:00I recently converted to Buddhism and have been res...I recently converted to Buddhism and have been researching and reading extensively about Buddhism and <a href="https://antique-buddhas.com/" rel="nofollow"> Antique Buddhas </a> . I came over to your post and enjoyed it. Please keep posting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-82631973438770974752021-12-21T01:30:06.684-08:002021-12-21T01:30:06.684-08:00I've spent a lot of time on many blogs, but th...I've spent a lot of time on many blogs, but this is truly a one-of-a-kind site for me. the four lofty <a href="https://buddha-statues.co.uk/" rel="nofollow"> ideals </a>Buddhisthttps://buddha-statues.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-15507119188167611532019-10-22T10:18:15.458-07:002019-10-22T10:18:15.458-07:00Buddhists believe that they have a special bond wi...Buddhists believe that they have a special bond with India and Hindoos !<br /><br />The poor souls - if they knew ! dindooohindoo<br /><br /> “In the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Anjana,in the province of Gaya, just for the purpose of deluding those atheists.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 1:3:24)<br /><br />यथा हि चोर स्स तथा हि बुद्ध-स्तथागतं नास्तिकमत्र विद्धि।<br /><br /> "As a thief, so is Buddha". Know that "Tathagatas are atheists". [Ayodhya Kandam,Sarga 109; shloka 34]samir sardananoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-45079252413905732892015-09-28T01:08:28.324-07:002015-09-28T01:08:28.324-07:00@ Cantus
I've taken your advice and posted an ...@ Cantus<br />I've taken your advice and posted an article regarding Ed Feser's recent analysis of eliminative materialism here: http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2015/09/why-materialism-is-crap.htmlseanrobsvillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135048988031819619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-46134059836758750172015-09-25T08:06:32.133-07:002015-09-25T08:06:32.133-07:00It seems like you're convinced that the Abraha...It seems like you're convinced that the Abrahamic religions "can't deal with" materialism, but I don't think that's correct. I can't speak for Judaism, or Islam, but Catholics have a long and storied intellectual tradition, particularly in the fields of Classical Theism (I also notice that your examples of "The Abrahamic Religions" and their "degeneration" are comprised almost entirely of creationist Protestants, whose actions have no bearing on Catholicism).<br /><br />I know you've visited Ed Feser's site at least once, so you have seen or at least heard of this before. Don't you think that's worth considering, or at least mentioning the existence of?Cantushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09423694187264830935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-3990615932319318932015-06-24T09:11:45.065-07:002015-06-24T09:11:45.065-07:00I read all. Thank you very much for this explanati...I read all. Thank you very much for this explanation. I found almost all agree with my view, but something is still dark for me. Mind is concept hard to understand even for Buddha or materialists. And in regard to teligions I don't think it's falling all in bigotism, it is falling on non-negotiable principles in Christianity.<br />Universe is impermant as the particles, being their motion impressed by quantistic equations, materialism doesn'exists although Darwinists are are trying to say the opposite. Actually no evolutions exists, races are going toward de-evolutionalehttp://www.oasitech.itnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-85825279963312677562014-11-02T01:53:22.386-08:002014-11-02T01:53:22.386-08:00@ Larry Rowe and Anonymous 31-Oct-14
The confusio...@ Larry Rowe and Anonymous 31-Oct-14<br /><br />The confusion about dualism can be resolved by bearing in mind that Buddhism is a process philosophy, which regards process and change as being the fundamental nature of the universe.<br /><br />Of course there's nothing wrong with seeing mountains as mountains, and rivers as rivers, especially if you're an engineer planning to build a baseline railroad through the Alps. These are conventional everyday ways of looking at things which are adequate for most normal purposes. But if we view rivers and mountains philosophically, or on a long enough timescale, we may come to the same conclusion as Heraclitus, that you can't step into the same river twice because it's a process, not a stable thing with its own inherent existence. <br /><br />Similarly, a mountain is a snapshot of a combination of geological processes. Mount Everest appears stable and inherently existent because its lifetime is long in comparison with human lifetimes. But in geologicaly terms, mountains are ephemeral. They are thrown up by tectonic processes and then eroded by rain, frost, ice and wind. <br /><br />The shorter the lifetime of a natural feature, the more it resembles a process than a thing. Is a sand dune advancing across the desert a thing or a process? Is a wave on the ocean thing or a process?<br /><br />As regards body/mind duality, there is no 'substance dualism', because both body and mind are interlinked processes (not separate things or substances). However there may be a kind of 'process dualism' in that there are two types of processes at work in our lives: mechanistic and mental. <br /><br />Mechanistic processes explain the working of all machines including computers, and all the classical laws of science including biology, chemistry, and physics. The brain is a physical machine no different in principle from a computer, and carries out mechanistic processes. <br /><br />But mental processes are fundamentally different.<br /><br />Mental processes consist of irreducible aspects of consciousness that have no mechanistic explanation, for example qualia (qualitative experiences such as pleasure and pain) and intentionality or aboutness (the power of minds to be about, to represent, experience, cognise or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs). <br /><br />When the mechanistic processes of the brain shut down, <a href="http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2014/10/life-after-death-mental-processes.html" rel="nofollow"> mental processes can still continue. </a> <br /><br />For a more detailed explanation of mental and mechanistic processes see <a href="http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2014/09/buddhist-philosophy.html" rel="nofollow"> Buddhist Philosophy. </a>seanrobsvillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135048988031819619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-76623393843523720412014-10-31T14:29:26.962-07:002014-10-31T14:29:26.962-07:00@Larry Rowe. I feel the same way, that kind of dua...@Larry Rowe. I feel the same way, that kind of dualism is absurd imo and dualism of the body/mind is perhaps even worse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-1069646544413654572014-06-06T06:29:58.564-07:002014-06-06T06:29:58.564-07:00I thought Buddhism was all about getting beyond du...I thought Buddhism was all about getting beyond dualism so why all the strange focus on a supposed duality between materialism and spirituality? What exactly is wrong with seeing mountains as mountains and rivers as rivers?Larry Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406422517419147835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-62129285714513482092013-09-08T10:40:22.552-07:002013-09-08T10:40:22.552-07:00These seals you mention are connected.
We imagine...These seals you mention are connected.<br /><br />We imagine a timeline, which begins, stretches through the aeons, there is a slice of it called "the present moment", and it extends into the future. This timeline is created from the collating of memories, ideas and perceptions. We imagine solid objects moving on that timeline.<br /><br />In actual experience, however, there is only now. Not the present moment, as a slice of time. Simply the ever present now. Past appears in now as a memory that comes and passes away. Future appears as a projection that comes and passes away. Neither are ever experienced.<br /><br />When we pay attention now, we see that whatever is now is in a constant flux. There is change. That change is the only constant. In order to have inherent existence (seal 1), it would have to actually _be_ something, but never in experience does something actually remain something. <br /><br />There is no coming, no going, no remaining. There is emptiness. Even the idea of causes and conditions is incoherent because no alleged cause or condition is inherently existing. Such language is a tool, a pointer. Nothing more.<br /><br />Impermanence is another word for the same thing. Things are impermanent (or in reality, there are no things to be permanent) because there is no inherent existence. There is just flow. The breath is impermanent because it is empty. The emptiness and impermanence of the breath is so easy to see, which is why it is such a good idea to pay attention to it.<br /><br />The third seal is a consequence of the first and second seal coupled with the grasping of that which is not. We suffer when we try to hold on to something we imagine has solidity, whether it be the "me", or objects we believe make us happy. Since neither me nor objects are what we imagine them to be, suffering arises when the truth of what is collides with our beliefs and wishes.<br /><br />The fourth seal is simply seeing what is, knowingly. When what is, is clearly seen, grasping ceases and suffering ends. But it is not something that can happen to the "me", because when the seeing of thusness happens knowingly, the "me" is also seen as empty and no different from any other phenomenon. So "I" can never become enlightened. If enlightenment has occurred, the "I" is already gone (it was never actually there in the first place as an existing entity).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-44643165546461433362013-05-13T02:32:01.971-07:002013-05-13T02:32:01.971-07:00I have spent a lot of the time in different blogs ...I have spent a lot of the time in different blogs but this is really a unique blog for me.<a href="http://www.fournobletruths.org" rel="nofollow">the four noble truths</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03977848492914623671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-56012305278426266692013-04-01T06:24:50.924-07:002013-04-01T06:24:50.924-07:00@Anon
"What about YOU? Can you divide yourse...@Anon<br /><br /><i>"What about YOU? Can you divide yourself into pieces?"</i><br />- Whenever I cut my nails. I could do a more drastic division, but I'm not sure I have the surgical skills to reverse the process. Sometimes I'm in two minds, like when I'm gardening or driving along familiar roads while thinking about something entirely different. <br /><br /><i>"...it doesn't follow that "all phenomena exist dependent upon causes and conditions</i>" <br />- The universe and all that's in it started with a Big Bang followed by an inflationary phase, so as far a we can observe, everything had at least these causes and conditions.<br /><br /><i>"There is a big leap of faith between the fact that we perceive things in particular manner and designate them and the statement that phenomena depend upon imputation, attribution or designation by the mind. We need good evidences to make such an assumption and you did not show any. </i> " <br />- See <a href="http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2012/05/roger-scruton-on-algorithms-data.html" rel="nofollow"> Roger Scruton on algorithms, data structures and mental attribution </a> and <a href="http://rational-buddhism.blogspot.com/2012/12/intentionality-aboutness-and-mental.html" rel="nofollow"> Intentionality. </a> <br /><br />- <i>"So it is no sense to comment more, because you didn't give any convincing evidence that inherent existence is true. </i>"<br />That's because I don't believe there is any such thing as inherent existence. In fact, <a href="http://seanrobsville.blogspot.com/2009/10/inherent-existence-in-buddhist.html" rel="nofollow"> quite the contrary. </a>seanrobsvillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135048988031819619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-43099886743325360922013-04-01T03:00:35.660-07:002013-04-01T03:00:35.660-07:00Let's examine this rationality of Buddhism:
&...Let's examine this rationality of Buddhism:<br /><br />"No phenomenon is a ‘thing in itself’."<br /><br />What about YOU? Can you divide yourself into pieces?<br /><br />" Phenomena exist dependent upon causes and conditions."<br /><br />Well that's right, but from it doesn't follow that "<b>all</b> phenomena exist dependent upon causes and conditions" and that "phenomena exist dependent <b>only</b> upon causes and conditions". <br /> <br />"Phenomena depend upon the relationship of whole to parts." <br /><br />That is how we perceive things (and you perfectly showed it), but this doesn't mean that our perception can be treated like ontological truth (it just doesn't follow).<br /><br />"Most profoundly, phenomena depend upon imputation, attribution, or designation by the mind. It's the mind that designates what's a tray and what's a box."<br /><br />Whoa, wait a minute. There is a big leap of faith between the fact that we perceive things in particular manner and designate them and the statement that phenomena <b>depend</b> upon imputation, attribution or designation by the mind. We need good evidences to make such an assumption and you did not show any. <br /><br />" The impermanence of all functioning phenomena is an inevitable logical consequence of their emptiness of inherent existence."<br /><br />So it is no sense to comment more, because you didn't give any convincing evidence that inherent existence is true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-89741321353454497892012-09-30T02:59:13.227-07:002012-09-30T02:59:13.227-07:00@jps
It's not only the ancients who have detec...@jps<br />It's not only the ancients who have detected internal inconsistencies and deficiencies in logic. In modern times Kurt Godel and Betrand Russell have come to similar conclusions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_paradox <br /><br /><i>'...For example, the Barber paradox supposes a barber who shaves all men who do not shave themselves and only men who do not shave themselves. When one thinks about whether the barber should shave himself or not, the paradox begins to emerge.'</i><br />seanrobsvillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135048988031819619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-63187451086926196242012-09-29T23:03:43.099-07:002012-09-29T23:03:43.099-07:00As always, another excellent article. However, the...As always, another excellent article. However, there is a distinction that might be made between 'rationality' and 'tangibility'. What most modern people mean by the former, is actually the latter. What they mean by 'rational' is 'what can be demonstrated empirically, or inferred by mathematical reason on the basis of such a demonstration'. In other words, they are prepared to believe only what can be observed and measured in third-party terms. But this rests on an <i>a priori</i> that the world <i>is</i> rational - that it 'makes sense', that the principles by which it can be understood, exist within it.<br /><br />I think if you go back to some of the ancient thinkers, notably Parmenides and Zeno in Greece, and Nagarjuna in India, the point of their philosophies is to demonstrate that the world of observation is actually internally inconsistent - that the world, as such, is not logical. This does not mean that logic is at fault, but that the bounds of experience cannot be circumscribed by logical laws.<br /><br />I suppose that is a big argument, now I spell it out. But anyway, the point remains that what moderns mean by 'rational' is 'what I can see and fee' (by means including instruments.) And now, as a result, we have evolution by random mutation and multiverses and the other infinite cans-of-worms that modern people believe are 'rational'.wayfarerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04102461128980478006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-62304505192129992652012-09-01T12:23:40.157-07:002012-09-01T12:23:40.157-07:00"Exclusivism = 'Our religion is the only ..."Exclusivism = 'Our religion is the only path to salvation. All unbelievers are destined for hell.' Anyone who claims this is at best suffering from memetic delusions, and at worst is a charlatan and a liar." which makes you a liar, because this is a contradiction. You have said, "Exclusivity is a sin, you are evil or mentally ill if you are exclusive" and have therefore excluded those who exclude.<br /><br />That's called, a contradiction, and an Exclusivity Fallacy, fallacy in Informal Logic as identified by me, a teacher of I.L. It's similar in hypocrisy to a person who says, "You shouldn't judge" yet by that statement has made a judgment that judging is wrong, a contradiction.<br /><br />It's also morally hypocritical. Excluding a thing is not morally wrong merely because you, an imperfect hypocrite who can't see obvious contradictions, said so or feels so. You're not God either to declare right and wrong for all. GOD IS GOD, HE MAY DECLARE RIGHT AND WRONG FOR ALL. You didn't learn what you were supposed to in your Christian schools, because you were taught poorly and were self centered. THIS, IS WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE LEARNED:<br /><br />The right path is Christ, who said the second greatest law is "Love your neighbor as yourself," and the first greatest from which it comes: "Hear oh Israel, 'the Lord your God is One, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart," and that all the laws could be fulfilled by this one: "Do to others as you would have them do to you." But without repentance, there will be no forgiveness from the One and the unrepentant like the demon worshipers will be met with eternal shame and pain.<br /><br />Not: "Whatever you feel is true and whoever you call a liar is a liar because you have said so and don't like the thought of criminals being punished for criminal behavior." You're so ignorant that you don't even know that Buddhism also has a Hell. You're thoroughly stupid and arrogant. You don't even show an email showing what an intolerant arbitrary exclusivist you are.<br /><br /><a href="http://eternian.wordpress.com/life" rel="nofollow">eternian.wordpress.com/life</a><br /><br />"YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE TESTIMONY" - MOSES<br /><br />"DON'T LIE" - YESHUA.<br /><br />WHAT IS A LIE? TO SAY WHAT IS FALSE, WHAT IS NOT TRUE, WHAT DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE FACTS, WITH WHAT IS EVIDENT, WITH WHAT IS LOGICAL, NOT "WHAT DISAGREES WITH YOUR FEELINGS AND YOUR WORD."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-3831242025192211622012-06-23T22:09:12.124-07:002012-06-23T22:09:12.124-07:00My novel, This Moment Is My Home
deals with a medi...My novel, This Moment Is My Home<br />deals with a meditator seeking to regain the enlightenment he lost, and other things, like reincarnation and ghosts.<br /><br />www.zenwhiperer.blogspot.comMichael Harry Anifantakishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08738998035827500366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-63300281416587105362012-04-15T10:08:24.028-07:002012-04-15T10:08:24.028-07:00Insightful! I think Buddhism must be more relevant...Insightful! I think Buddhism must be more relevant to our spiritual needs than other belief systems.Nattynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-30914475740334148312011-10-21T05:55:40.349-07:002011-10-21T05:55:40.349-07:00Excellent article. Best exposition on Buddhism i h...Excellent article. Best exposition on Buddhism i have ever read. Brief but concise. My concern with Buddhism is how can we trust the map that the Buddha have drawn for us to be the true original teachings he has provided, since the first known Buddhist scripture appeared about 400 years after his death. The Buddha's teachings was primarily memorized by his followers and was transmitted orally. Some corruption will probably be introduced during these period. Would metarationalization led to delusional ideas of deification of the Buddha and acceptance of reincarnation or rebirth?vtgawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12111760469330295461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-22167891886987398292011-10-20T10:27:20.779-07:002011-10-20T10:27:20.779-07:00Well written and a nice layout. Straight and to th...Well written and a nice layout. Straight and to the point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-40818812195047119792011-07-30T17:43:25.276-07:002011-07-30T17:43:25.276-07:00Love your work. Will cross-post on my blog.Love your work. Will cross-post on my blog.wayfarerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04102461128980478006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-2210264949284565622011-07-15T13:11:50.113-07:002011-07-15T13:11:50.113-07:00Fantastic article! Thanks for putting the effort i...Fantastic article! Thanks for putting the effort into this--I've been looking for a resource like this for a while now.Ianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02021231933723212452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2292960509733202658.post-10031727515258065802011-05-31T12:28:58.505-07:002011-05-31T12:28:58.505-07:00Great concept, looking forward to following along....Great concept, looking forward to following along.Wappyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03737606090648805620noreply@blogger.com