Free Will

[Lucky7Strikes]

This is basically "monism". All things are one thing. This is what the Buddha called the mis-understanding of experience interpreted as Eternalism. This is why you don't understand what the Buddha taught, because you are clinging to a supreme source and background to all of existence that shines from it's own side and which makes all things possible and is in fact all things in it's shining.

 

This is contrary to how the cosmos actually works on deeper levels. Though your view and interpretation of experience is a part of the universe and part of how it works, it's an incomplete view that does not lead to total clarity. The experiences that support your view are considered mis-cognitions or mis-interpretations of spiritual experience that merely lead to higher rebirth but not genuine liberation from the egg of Samsaric existence.

 

All that you have said I have heard before, and I have upheld before as the truth of things. I used to agree with you TzuJanLi. But, I had a deeper experience that showed a deeper view and interpretation of the very same spiritual experiences that you interpret internally beyond concept in the way you just pronounced. I only came to this experience through the influence of the Shakya Muni having taken birth and taught the "Sanatana Dharma". Dharma also is translated at times as "the way".

 

Take care.

I think you are imposing your attachments to the "no there is no source view" too much. You always mention it even when it is irrelevant, like an atheist who keeps shouting that there is no God to no one in particular but only to disavow deep seated personal history with the concept of God. It's become something like a catch phrase for you. .

[Vajrahridaya]

I think you are imposing your attachments to the "no there is no source view" too much. You always mention it even when it is irrelevant, like an atheist who keeps shouting that there is no God to no one in particular but only to disavow deep seated personal history with the concept of God. It's become something like a catch phrase for you. .

 

It's an important quality to mention during debate which sets Buddhism apart. It is a truth that subverts the deep seated attachment to the idea of a source and essence to everything. This idea re-occurs on a deep seated level of every mind stream that has been cycling since time immemorable. Dependent upon this idea and deeply subtle experience the seed for a persons cycling in Samsara is originated, over and over again. So yes, it is a kind of catch phrase for me.

 

If it rubs you the wrong way. This is not my intention, but there is a source to the disturbance.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Again, if I am accountable and will be punished, then 'free will' is not a real thing, it is an illusion. Free will with limitation is not free will, it's similar to the lovely Christian view 'God gave you free will.....BUT, if you do this you're going hell...Happy Christmas!'.

 

Pardon me for butting in, but a glaring flaw in your logic prompted my response:

 

We have the free will to make choices, not decide the outcomes of our choices, by engaging in and acting on free will, we physically enter into contract that we agree to sustain all outcomes of the choices of our free will, regardless of weather or not we are aware that this physical contract is in effect or the rules of engagement.

We have complete rights to our free will so long as we retain our sovereignty. we are also allowed to give up or abstain from personal sovereignty, thereby giving up our free will to the public at large, or whom so ever might be able to buy/afford/steal y/our time.

 

And how should we be held accountable for our actions that were, more than likely, based on a childhood we had no control over? Cut off a hand? Stoning? Prison? Death sentence? And how can I, or you, judge such a punishment when we have not lived that life? Is not the American constitution supposedly structured around the concept of 'freedom'? Is freedom by degrees freedom? I would say not.

 

You have a CHOICE. accept punishment, or fight it. if you are unwilling to fight it, you forsake your sovereignty, and thus your free will to determine an alternate outcome; you have a choice between extremes, give up your lifestyle for your freedom, or accept punishment for your lifestyle.

 

Don't get me wrong Marbles, I'm not saying I want everyone running around shooting everyone, I'm just toying with the concept of free will, and I find it wanting.

 

Also, your idea of accountability is very confucian. Nothing wrong in that, but personally I've never really been able to reconcile confucianism with Daoism. Is your goal to uphold society and it's mores, or to be a Daoist? How about if being a Daoist contradicts societies mores.... I won't go as far to say murder... but I mean some other fairly common thing that is simply not acceptable to the society you're living in at the time. What would you do? Which path?

 

I know there are a lot of questions there Marblehead, I don't expect you to answer them all, they are more for pondering than anything else.

 

I gotta go to bed, or one particular element of society won't be best pleased with me.

 

 

The eternal struggle between selfish and selfless effort for either the self or for the community.... it's eternal indeed.

 

Seek balance to find sovereignty if you so choose to retain your ever-present right to own and operate the gift of free will.

 

If you engage in the correct physical contracts (read as: rituals) you can learn the true source of authority and decide weather or not you wish to take the responsibility of owning and operating the freedom of choice, or if your choices are preferably the responsibilities of others, and thus the choices thereof.

 

It is still inevitably your choice. to have or not to have... the gift of free will.

 

 

I apologize for intruding in your argument.

 

 

 

 

 

P.S.

 

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FRICKING BUDDHISM.

Buddha taught [us] how to breathe properly; and the functioning intent of meditation. that is it.

 

 

To expand the consciousness/awareness/conscious awareness which requires the understanding of the way of the whole is breathing.

 

Inhale, hold, relax, exhale.

When the earth breathes in, it nourishes us with rains and fertility.

The earth holds that breath, warming us up and preparing our resources.

When the earth relaxes, she lets go of her breath and with it, our resources-prompting us to harvest and prepare for winter.

When the earth fully exhales, she becomes cooled, and her resources become dormant.

 

The tao of earth is that we are perpetually engulfed in both night and day simultaneously, one half of the day is summer, the other half of the day is winter.

 

Buddha only showed us the Tao of meditation and the Tao of breathing... He is not any more or less deity than anyone else nor any more or less messiah than any of us either.

Edited June 19, 2010 by Stoner Shadow Wolf

[Marblehead]

We have the free will to make choices, not decide the outcomes of our choices,

 

That is a very nice post. I especially like the above statement. You actually got pretty close to Zoroaster's initial teachings in your follow-up.

 

Peace & Love!

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Nice post, Stoner Wolf. We constantly come up against Buddhist elitism here, you take is a fresh perspective.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

 

 

P.S.

 

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FRICKING BUDDHISM.

Buddha taught [us] how to breathe properly; and the functioning intent of meditation. that is it.

 

On the contrary he spent 40 years preaching what he called Buddhadamma. He taught the 4 noble truths first, then the 8 fold noble path, he debated with scholars and yogi's of the time, he created an order of monks as well as rules of conduct within the monkhood. He also taught lay disciples and an order of conduct within the lay community. He taught so, so much including the foundations of the Mahayana while he was alive. He taught quite a lot more than breathing techniques. He did teach about the many levels of Jhana or Samadhi as well as dependent origination. He also taught vipassana.

 

 

Buddha only showed us the Tao of meditation and the Tao of breathing... He is not any more or less deity than anyone else nor any more or less messiah than any of us either.

 

He is the only teacher that taught dependent origination and emptiness. You need to read some more about the history of what the Buddha taught.

 

He is also the only teacher that set out to establish the beginning of an entire spiritual tradition that would last beyond his physical life.

 

He was far more important of a teacher.

[ralis]

It's an important quality to mention during debate which sets Buddhism apart. It is a truth that subverts the deep seated attachment to the idea of a source and essence to everything. This idea re-occurs on a deep seated level of every mind stream that has been cycling since time immemorable. Dependent upon this idea and deeply subtle experience the seed for a persons cycling in Samsara is originated, over and over again. So yes, it is a kind of catch phrase for me.

 

If it rubs you the wrong way. This is not my intention, but there is a source to the disturbance.

 

Apparently you are unable to see past your own myopic point of view. Your untenable point of view that there is no a priori cause can neither be proven nor disproven. Not by logic, the Buddha says so, or any appeal to emotion. Yet you post this point ad infinitum. Do you really believe your argument is new and unique? Special somehow? Hardly! This age old argument has been debated and fought over by humans for ages.

 

Actually your view falls into the mechanistic school. I suggest you read up on it.

 

 

ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

Apparently you are unable to see past your own myopic point of view. Your untenable point of view that there is no a priori cause can neither be proven nor disproven. Not by logic, the Buddha says so, or any appeal to emotion. Yet you post this point ad infinitum. Do you really believe your argument is new and unique? Special somehow? Hardly! This age old argument has been debated and fought over by humans for ages.

 

Actually your view falls into the mechanistic school. I suggest you read up on it.

 

 

ralis

 

We've had this discussion before. The mechanistic school does not include luminous emptiness, the 31 realms and much other such things. Now you can prove it through meditation. If you want physical evidence, you will be hard pressed.

 

The Buddha actually does say that there is no primal cause and that cycling is beginningless. You should study more of what the Buddha taught if you are going to make such claims. The chain of dependent origination has no beginning, as he taught. You merely flip it from samsaric to nirvanic.

[ralis]

We've had this discussion before. The mechanistic school does not include luminous emptiness, the 31 realms and much other such things. Now you can prove it through meditation. If you want physical evidence, you will be hard pressed.

 

The Buddha actually does say that there is no primal cause and that cycling is beginningless. You should study more of what the Buddha taught if you are going to make such claims. The chain of dependent origination has no beginning, as he taught. You merely flip it from samsaric to nirvanic.

 

The Buddha makes some claim and you meditate to prove the claim. That happens all the time in various religions. It is called a self fulfilling prophecy. Wanting to believe and hallucinating the experience.

 

I studied Buddhism before you probably knew such a philosophy existed. I found it dogmatic, limited, authoritarian, hierarchical, ostentatious and no different than any other religion. What I mean by that, Buddhism was an impediment to my direct experience with life (Tao). Furthermore, I grew weary of listening to men in skirts sitting on their thrones dispensing so called wisdom. I no longer needed the exotic trappings Buddhism had to offer.

 

I used to live 1 mile from the Tibetan Kagyu center here in Santa Fe. I spent countless hours meditating in the Stupa and taking all the teachings. Clearly, I have insight into the Buddhist religion.

 

To me it is obvious by your incessant parroting of Buddhism and what you have bought into as an absolute teaching, tells me you never have questioned authority.

 

 

One last thing I might add, is that I was tired of the guilt trips around karma. It became clear to me, the Lama's in charge were in their position because of some good karma and everyone else was considered a heathen due to bad karma.

 

ralis

Edited June 19, 2010 by ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

The Buddha makes some claim and you meditate to prove the claim. That happens all the time in various religions. It is called a self fulfilling prophecy. Wanting to believe and hallucinating the experience.

 

That's where dependent origination comes in, the view. So all meditative experiences, including those where one thinks there is a primal source are transcended. This is exactly why view is important so that one doesn't get fooled by meditative experiences. Even though... they do happen and they are hardly hallucinations. You can claim as such, but you are wrong. Of course life can be considered a kind of agreed upon, co-originated hallucination.

 

I studied Buddhism before you probably knew such a philosophy existed. I found it dogmatic, limited, authoritarian, hierarchical, ostentatious and no different than any other religion.

 

Most people aren't ready for it. I find you dogmatic, limited, authoritarian, and ostentatious. The thing is, is that I know you are wrong about Buddhism, as your mind didn't open. Your mental dogmas are in the way. I do know that I am right about you though. 2 years of you following me around with your negative syrup.

 

Clearly, I have insight into the Buddhist religion.

 

No, clearly you don't. So many people do it but don't get it, your just one of the countless many.

 

To me it is obvious by your incessant parroting of Buddhism and what you have bought into as an absolute teaching, tells me you never have questioned authority.

 

It took a lot of questioning to come to Buddhism. More than you know.

 

One last thing I might add, is that I was tired of the guilt trips around karma. It became clear to me, the Lama's in charge were in their position because of some good karma and everyone else was considered a heathen due to bad karma.

 

ralis

 

That's your own fear speaking as I've never met a Lama that felt that way. It must be your karma...

 

You will not learn anything from me and I will only learn patience from you. I don't know why you keep harping on, chasing me around with nothing of real importance to say?

Edited June 19, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[ralis]

That's where dependent origination comes in, the view. So all meditative experiences, including those where one thinks there is a primal source are transcended. This is exactly why view is important so that one doesn't get fooled by meditative experiences. Even though... they do happen and they are hardly hallucinations. You can claim as such, but you are wrong. Of course life can be considered a kind of agreed upon, co-originated hallucination.

 

 

 

Most people aren't ready for it. I find you dogmatic, limited, authoritarian, and ostentatious. The thing is, is that I know you are wrong about Buddhism, as your mind didn't open. Your mental dogmas are in the way. I do know that I am right about you though. 2 years of you following me around with your negative syrup.

 

 

 

No, clearly you don't. So many people do it but don't get it, your just one of the countless many.

 

 

 

It took a lot of questioning to come to Buddhism. More than you know.

 

 

 

That's your own fear speaking as I've never met a Lama that felt that way. It must be your karma...

 

You will not learn anything from me and I will only learn patience from you. I don't know why you keep harping on, chasing me around with nothing of real importance to say?

 

 

You are fun to play poker with! Every time I throw the out the bait, you chase it. In a poker game, you would be the fish at the table. :lol:

 

Chasing you around! Is this your own private forum?

 

 

ralis

Edited June 19, 2010 by ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

You are fun to play poker with! Every time I throw the out the bait, you chase it. In a poker game, you would be the fish at the table. :lol:

 

ralis

 

Nothing says more about a person than seeing what they get joy from.

[ralis]

Nothing says more about a person than seeing what they get joy from.

 

Why not lighten up and stop taking everything so seriously. Life should be fun!

 

 

ralis

[Marblehead]

You guys! Hehehe.

 

Ralis practicing his free will and Vajrahridaya following his destiny.

 

I am so glad I am ignorant of Buddhism so I can't argue against it, or for it.

 

Peace & Love!

[ralis]

Nothing says more about a person than seeing what they get joy from.

 

Now you are making a moral judgment. Interesting! I thought in your point of view, all phenomena are empty. Seems as though your judgment is empty and illusory. Doesn't mean a thing!

 

 

ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

Now you are making a moral judgment. Interesting! I thought in your point of view, all phenomena are empty. Seems as though your judgment is empty and illusory. Doesn't mean a thing!

 

 

ralis

 

It's not an absolute judgement. It's more of a relative discernment based upon your conduct towards me and other Buddhists here. There are reasons why you choose to say the things you do and the Avatar you chose and the name you chose... etc. You have made many, many judgements and personal attacks.

[ralis]

You guys! Hehehe.

 

Ralis practicing his free will and Vajrahridaya following his destiny.

 

I am so glad I am ignorant of Buddhism so I can't argue against it, or for it.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited June 19, 2010 by ralis

[ralis]

It's not an absolute judgement. It's more of a relative discernment based upon your conduct towards me and other Buddhists here. There are reasons why you choose to say the things you do and the Avatar you chose and the name you chose... etc. You have made many, many judgements and personal attacks.

 

You are a really sensitive Buddhist. Way too serious! BTW, the Joker is a very ancient archetype. Of course, if the Buddha didn't mention the Joker archetype, I guess it doesn't exist.

 

 

ralis

[buddhasbellybuttonfluff]

Hi all,

 

I propose that there exists a middle way which transcends both free will and determination.

 

Upon what do we base our choices? Pleasure and pain. How can we discern between pleasant and unpleasant when our life becomes filled with persistent misery? What do choices amount to when we still suffer regardless of the outcome? Moreover, with impaired cognition one may find it impossible to seek and apply effective means of changing the vicious circle of suffering, and what could prove as a more fitting band aid than the temporary thrill of dopamine through violence and other extreme behavior? A caged bird, too, will start plucking its feathers if we restrict its spontaneous behavior, wuwei. Cultivating qi makes us more in tune with the spontaneous harmony which people usually call "true self," hence it leads to the liberation from suffering.

 

Since we do not choose the contents (phenomena) of our consciousness, but rather experience and live them, we have no ownership or control over of how we manifest. We only navigate through life by the easiest and most effortless path we may uncover. Turned away from wuwei, suffering simply escalates into a strong tendency that we cannot solve by projecting more of it unto the world: Blaming and framing other people as criminals and deviants solves nothing, and even the accuser suffers the ill effects of bad temper needlessly. We have no need of creating a mystified high-brow concept of "free will," when the law of least resistance works just fine with perfect impartiality to all parties, hence no preferential dichotomies of us versus them and definitely no judgemental moral show-off.

 

When will the people learn not to think in terms of binary categories? We have defined a substantial "will," therefore we have also given birth to "no-will." With this we turn our position from victim to accuser and resort to justification of retribution: We rationalize the material losses and demand for swift recuperation for the abuse of volition, thereby further sidestepping the spontaneous action of heart. Would you call that harmonious living? Obviously the international jurisprudence has not met the growing need for mercy and understanding. No one's happiness depends on a single linear variable such as "free will" because life weaves a complex harmony which transcends all the attempts to encapsule it.

 

Cherish harmony and infuse more and more of it to your everyday life. Cultivate wisely!

 

Blessings

[johndoe2012]

Maybe one should read Meditation Works to get an "objective" view of different meditation styles to end this Buddhism vs Taoism debate once and for all.

[Vajrahridaya]

Hi all,

 

I propose that there exists a middle way which transcends both free will and determination.

 

We have no need of creating a mystified high-brow concept of "free will," when the law of least resistance works just fine with perfect impartiality to all parties...

 

When will the people learn not to think in terms of binary categories? We have defined a substantial "will," therefore we have also given birth to "no-will." ...

 

...No one's happiness depends on a single linear variable such as "free will" because life weaves a complex harmony which transcends all the attempts to encapsule it.

 

Cherish harmony and infuse more and more of it to your everyday life. Cultivate wisely!

 

Blessings

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

On the contrary he spent 40 years preaching what he called Buddhadamma. He taught the 4 noble truths first, then the 8 fold noble path, he debated with scholars and yogi's of the time, he created an order of monks as well as rules of conduct within the monkhood. He also taught lay disciples and an order of conduct within the lay community. He taught so, so much including the foundations of the Mahayana while he was alive. He taught quite a lot more than breathing techniques. He did teach about the many levels of Jhana or Samadhi as well as dependent origination. He also taught vipassana.

 

Teaching us tools for the use on our own spiritual paths.

might as well call shop class constructionism.

 

More simply, I mean to say that Buddhism is not a religion, but a tool.

 

 

He is the only teacher that taught dependent origination and emptiness. You need to read some more about the history of what the Buddha taught.

 

He is also the only teacher that set out to establish the beginning of an entire spiritual tradition that would last beyond his physical life.

 

He was far more important of a teacher.

 

 

Regardless of what he taught, he was no more a messiah than anyone's 6'th grade math teachers, nor was what he taught an organized religious effort any more than shop class is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Free yourself of attachments, of bondage, to "The" Buddha. It is what "The Buddha" taught after all.

 

Siddhartha was it? I am no good with names...

Edited June 19, 2010 by Stoner Shadow Wolf

[Vajrahridaya]

Teaching us tools for the use on our own spiritual paths.

might as well call shop class constructionism.

 

More simply, I mean to say that Buddhism is not a religion, but a tool.

 

 

 

It's a spiritual path with a specific goal, specific outcomes for the individual mind stream. I've never thought of it as a religion in the Western sense but a tradition of methods used specifically for the outcome of completely awakening one's self to the nature of everything.

 

Not every path teaches with the same results.

 

 

Regardless of what he taught, he was no more a messiah than anyone's 6'th grade math teachers, nor was what he taught an organized religious effort any more than shop class is.

 

The goal of shop class and Buddha Dharma are very different, unless one is using shop class in conjunction with dharma contemplation. But this would be in conjunction with vipassana, or Dzogchen practice of integrating the state of Rigpa with every day ordinary life.

 

 

 

 

 

Free yourself of attachments, of bondage, to "The" Buddha. It is what "The Buddha" taught after all.

 

Learn what the Buddha taught and realize it first. Even after the Buddha realized the nature of things, he still taught the Dharma in specific ways never wavering from the 4 marks which sets the Buddha Dharma as different from other spiritual traditions.

Edited June 19, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Lucky7Strikes]

It's an important quality to mention during debate which sets Buddhism apart. It is a truth that subverts the deep seated attachment to the idea of a source and essence to everything. This idea re-occurs on a deep seated level of every mind stream that has been cycling since time immemorable. Dependent upon this idea and deeply subtle experience the seed for a persons cycling in Samsara is originated, over and over again. So yes, it is a kind of catch phrase for me.

 

If it rubs you the wrong way. This is not my intention, but there is a source to the disturbance.

I don't know. This discussion was not about an undercurrent source or a creator or how BUddhism is set apart. You brought it out of seemingly no where.

 

Not many people are prone to the whole "source to everything" belief. People usually believe in their individual selves and souls. Science believes in materialistic varieties. The "source to everything" is simply another view. I do think it's important to talk about, and it doesn't rub me the wrong way. I find is quizzical your strong attachment to it. .

Edited June 19, 2010 by Lucky7Strikes

[Vajrahridaya]

I don't know. This discussion was not about an undercurrent source or a creator or how BUddhism is set apart. You brought it out of seemingly no where.

 

Not many people are prone to the whole "source to everything" belief. People usually believe in their individual selves and souls. Science believes in materialistic varieties. The "source to everything" is simply another view. I do think it's important to talk about, and it doesn't rub me the wrong way. I find is quizzical your strong attachment to it. .

 

It just came about naturally after people questioned my first posts in this thread.