Identity & Non-Identity

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by Epictetus, Jun 21, 2012.

  1. Epictetus here & now Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    554
    I just want to share the following text because I think it's very important to understanding Buddhist philosophy. I was going to include it in the thread: Does Your Mortality Frighten You? but then thought it would be a bit off the topic there, and be less prominent as well.

    I have emboldened the parts I suppose are most interesting.

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    dear gautama
    please justify all

    ad homs, argument from authority and unsupported assertions are what i see

    /bitchslap

    "Thy self to which thou cleavest is a constant change.
    Years ago thou wast a small babe;
    then, thou wast a boy;
    then a youth, and now, thou art a man.
    Is there any identity of the babe and the man?
    There is an identity in a certain sense only.


    ..and weasel words
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2012
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Epictetus here & now Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    554
    Show us this I of which you speak.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    show this "you" of which is spoken and the "i" will be revealed in all its magnificence
     
  8. Epictetus here & now Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    554
    What you? There is no you (or I).
     
  9. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    What is the actual source of this?

    It doesn't look as if it would be from the Pali Canon. It might be from the Mahayana Canon, or something else.
     
  10. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
  11. Epictetus here & now Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    554
    The Gospel of Buddha by Paul Carus
     
  12. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    That doesn't seem to contain any references to actual Buddhist canons.
    The suttas are normally enumerated in the canons, but there are no such references in Carus' text.

    Why don't you read from some more authoritative Buddhist sources?
     
  13. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    yet....a reference....

     
  14. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    "Ananda, if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of eternalism [the view that there is an eternal, unchanging soul]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of annihilationism [the view that death is the annihilation of consciousness]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?"

    "No, lord."

    "And if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self I used to have now not exist?'"



    a strawman followed by a non-sequiter encapsulated in an environ of forked tongue shit uttered by one that is obviously higher than a kite
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2012
  15. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    "Phenomena" are the aggregates - form, feelings, perceptions, (mental) fabrications and consciousness; and these are said not to be the self. Even though our ordinary experience is to consider precisely those things to be the self.

    Another problem here is the act of holding views: holding a view, as opposed to having realized something, brings about a measure of suffering. And as long as one hasn't realized something, one is bound to merely hold views about said thing, and thus, suffer.

    To the point, if one were to ask another "Who am I? Who or what is the self?" then whatever answer one would get (in the form of "You are [...]. The self is [...].") one could only accept it as a matter of holding a view, which would bring on suffering, even more so as it is about such a personal matter.
    When you think about it, to ask another "Who am I?" is a bit silly, to put it mildly.


    See here: The Not-Self Strategy
     
  16. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    You're just parroting words. You have no idea what any of it means, clearly.
     

Share This Page