A phone conversation with a muslim missionary

[bob x]

Bob x: See the bold parts above. They seemed to contradict each other don't you think? Unconditioned carries the meaning of not depending on any factors, conditions or things. But sems (mind) cannot be unconditioned.

Sems MUST be "unconditioned". That is its essence; without that characteristic, it is not sems.

 

[OAT]

Sems MUST be "unconditioned". That is its essence; without that characteristic, it is not sems.

Sems as used in Tibetan text always refers to the conditioned mind.

 

[OAT]

Please cite where the Buddha taught this. I am certainly unfamiliar with this concept. It is not one that I have ever been taught as a Buddhist.

The Buddha did not explicitly teach this. But, the Buddha taught that everything in this world is dependently arisen. If so, then, it would follow that all choices are dependently arisen. If choices are dependently arisen, then it follows that choices would not be free from various factors, conditions etc. If so, how could choices be labelled "free"?

 

[citizenzen]

Sems as used in Tibetan text always refers to the conditioned mind.

The universe is conditioned.

How could our minds not be? Aren't they part of the universe?

How does that take away our free will?

 

[OAT]

The universe is conditioned.

How could our minds not be? Aren't they part of the universe?

How does that take away our free will?

It does not take away our ability to make choices nor our responsibility for the choices. What I am saying is that our choices will always depend on something. In that sense, I do not consider our choices as "free".

So when we are taught the Buddha Dharma, that factor of having the knowledge of Dharma will then affect the way we make our choices as Buddhists.

If we are not Buddhists, the lack of the Buddha Dharma in our mindstream will affect the way we make choices too. Without the Dharma in our mindstream, our choices are more often then not, will not become a path towards liberation. With our choices affected by the Dharma, they become part of the path towards liberation and buddhahood.

 

[citizenzen]

The Buddha did not explicitly teach this. But, the Buddha taught that everything in this world is dependently arisen. If so, then, it would follow that all choices are dependently arisen. If choices are dependently arisen, then it follows that choices would not be free from various factors, conditions etc. If so, how could choices be labelled "free"?

They are not free because they exist free of conditions. They are free because within the existing conditions we are given the freedom to react and choose at that moment.

As rodgertutt was implying, most of our choices are driven by the inertia of the conditions we find ourselves in, and the karma that we have built up. But the sage, the Buddha, the arhat are able to see that moment of choice clearly and live each one naturally and spontaneously... not driven by conditions, but living freely within them.

One of the core teachings of Buddhism is the Eight-fold Path...

1. Right View
2. Right Intention
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration​

How could we ever develop these qualities in ourselves if we didn't have the freedom to do so?

 

[citizenzen]

From the buddhanet.net...

Thus, from a Buddhist point of view, our present mental, moral intellectual and temperamental differences are, for the most part, due to our own actions and tendencies, both past and present.

Although Buddhism attributes this variation to Karma, as being the chief cause among a variety, it does not, however, assert that everything is due to Karma. The law of Karma, important as it is, is only one of the twenty-four conditions described in Buddhist Philosophy.

Refuting the erroneous view that "whatsoever fortune or misfortune experienced is all due to some previous action", the Buddha said:

"So, then, according to this view, owing to previous action men will become murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, covetous, malicious and perverts. Thus, for those who fall back on the former deeds as the essential reason, there is neither the desire to do, nor effort to do, nor necessity to do this deed, or abstain from this deed."

It was this important text, which states the belief that all physical circumstances and mental attitudes spring solely from past Karma that Buddha contradicted. If the present life is totally conditioned or wholly controlled by our past actions, then certainly Karma is tantamount to fatalism or determinism or predestination. If this were true, free will would be an absurdity. Life would be purely mechanistic, not much different from a machine. Being created by an Almighty God who controls our destinies and predetermines our future, or being produced by an irresistible Karma that completely determines our fate and controls our life’s course, independent of any free action on our part, is essentially the same. The only difference lies in the two words God and Karma. One could easily be substituted for the other, because the ultimate operation of both forces would be identical.​

 

[citizenzen]

There are plenty more references out there OAT, just search "Buddhism + free will". I believe you will find plenty of evidence to support the fact that free will is an essential component to Buddhist practice.

 

[OAT]

CZ, let me repeat that the way I see "free" is that "free" implies independent of any factors, conditions etc. Clearly you don't see "free" in the same way.

Also, do note that I did not state that everything is due to karma, so your post #167 is irrelevant.

 

[citizenzen]

CZ, let me repeat that the way I see "free" is that "free" implies independent of any factors, conditions etc. Clearly you don't see "free" in the same way.

No... and neither did the Buddha.

If you're looking to invent your own religion, in which no conditions exist, good luck with that.

Buddhists understand that even though conditions exist, they are still free to make the choices that they do.

Let me know the name of this new religion you're inventing.

I'll be sure to avoid it in the future.

I would call it "Unrealisticism".

 

[bob x]

Sems as used in Tibetan text always refers to the conditioned mind.

There IS no such thing as "the conditioned mind" in the Tibetan beliefs. When they say that "sems nyid" (the essence of mind) is "spontaneous and unconditioned", that means that nothing is to be called "sems" unless it has the nature of being "spontaneous and unconditioned"; and somehow you think that "sems nyid" is not the definition of what "sems" has to be. It's like: I tell you that the "nature of a triangle" is to be "three sided"; but you want to interpret that to mean that "a triangle" is not three sided!

 

[rodgertutt]

I don't agree with Rodgertutt that it is the strongest influence that determines a choice. With dependent arising, it is the combination of factors, conditions and whatever influences there may be that result in a particular choice. This would make more sense as it allows for even subconscious or unconscious factors and conditions to come into play in a choice.

I agree with you Oat.
I can't see where we differ.
You have stated exactly what I believe too.

IMO here is the crux of the matter.
Of course we all choose what we WANT.
That is not the issue.
The issue is that it is not even possible that we can choose any other way than we do.
And that is because of what Oat said above, with which I agree.

The idea that it would not be right for God to punish us for doing what we could not help but do is merely an ethical opinion that is rendered irrelevant by the irrefutable fact that WE ALWAYS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, CHOOSE IN THE DIRECTION OF THE "COMBINATION OF FACTORS," (AS OAT PUT IT) ALL OF THE TIME.

I believe that God will eventually fit every unique individual into His master plan in a positive way that necessitates their unique temporary involvement in evil and suffering that will enable God to manifest, and glorify, and magnify the many facets of His character in a way that uniquely involves that person, and everyone else involved in that person’s life too.

Then, after God has finished using evil and suffering for the reasons why He allowed them to temporarily exist, He will eradicate them from existence.

THE PURPOSE OF EVIL
http://thegloryrd.com:80/apadams/evil.html

 

[OAT]

No... and neither did the Buddha.

If you're looking to invent your own religion, in which no conditions exist, good luck with that.

Buddhists understand that even though conditions exist, they are still free to make the choices that they do.

Let me know the name of this new religion you're inventing.

I'll be sure to avoid it in the future.

I would call it "Unrealisticism".

Do you hold that your mind truly and inherently exists? If yes, then you contradict the Buddha's teachings. If no, then your mind is dependently existing. If so, how can freewill that you hold as truly and inherently exists within your dependently arisen mind?

 

[OAT]

There IS no such thing as "the conditioned mind" in the Tibetan beliefs. When they say that "sems nyid" (the essence of mind) is "spontaneous and unconditioned", that means that nothing is to be called "sems" unless it has the nature of being "spontaneous and unconditioned"; and somehow you think that "sems nyid" is not the definition of what "sems" has to be. It's like: I tell you that the "nature of a triangle" is to be "three sided"; but you want to interpret that to mean that "a triangle" is not three sided!

sems - mind, 'cognitive act', grasping mind, frame of mind, mind or soul, thought, main mind, cognitive act Syn {rnam shes tshogs drug} experiencing, potential for experience, general forms of experience, grasping, conceptual mind, attitude, intent; (ordinary) mind; attention; cognition, cognitive act, mind or soul, grasping mind, frame of mind, thought, main mind. Syn {rnam shes tshogs drug} experiencing, potential for experience, general forms of experience, conceptual mind, attitude, intent. mind, thoughts, thought process, [chitta]; Def. by Jamgön Kongtrül: {phung khams skye mched thams cad kyi bag chags sam sa bon bsags pa dang sna tshogs la dmigs pa dang don la sems pas na sems su bzhag pa gang yin pa de ni kun gzhi'i rnam shes kho na} [ry]

sems nyid - chittata, mind 1) mind itself, mind essence, nature of mind, mind nature, mind as such, ultimate nature of mind, true nature of mind itself, mind-as-such. Syn {ngo bo rig pa}. 2) the mind [ry]

In Tibetan, no one use "sems" to mean "sem nyid". "Sems" is always used to refer to the ordinary grasping mind and that has to be a dependent arising.

 

[rodgertutt]

Let me know the name of this new religion you're inventing.

I'll be sure to avoid it in the future.

I would call it "Unrealisticism".

No, "unrealisticism" is thinking that anyone could have avoided makng the choices that they made since they were responding to a combination of influential factors that CAUSED them to choose as they did.

SEE POST #172

Every choice that eveyone makes is the ONLY choice that they can make at the time that they make it.

 

[citizenzen]

Do you hold that your mind truly and inherently exists?

I don't believe I've stated an opinion as to the "true and inherent existence" of mind. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by those words. I'd be happy to share my thoughts with you, but it would help if I understood the terms you wish to use.

 

[OAT]

I don't believe I've stated an opinion as to the "true and inherent existence" of mind. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by those words. I'd be happy to share my thoughts with you, but it would help if I understood the terms you wish to use.

True existence = inherent existence = an existence that does not depend on any factor, conditions etc.

 

[citizenzen]

True existence = inherent existence = an existence that does not depend on any factor, conditions etc.

I honestly don't know.

 

[OAT]

I honestly don't know.

As I understand it, dependent arising is a cornerstone of Buddhist thought. It means that things in this world exist in dependence on causes and conditions. Importantly, the causes and conditions themselves are also dependently arisen. Things here can refer to "things" that are in your mind and external things. So when a thing is said to be inherently or truly existing, it means that the thing exists without depending on any causes or conditions.

More on dependent arising can be found in Nagarjuna's writing.

 

[citizenzen]

Things here can refer to "things" that are in your mind and external things. So when a thing is said to be inherently or truly existing, it means that the thing exists without depending on any causes or conditions.

Sorry Oat, I'm more of this kind of Buddhist...

The Buddha always told his disciples not to waste their time and energy in metaphysical speculation. Whenever he was asked a metaphysical question, he remained silent. Instead, he directed his disciples toward practical efforts. Questioned one day about the problem of the infinity of the world, the Buddha said, "Whether the world is finite or infinite, limited or unlimited, the problem of your liberation remains the same." Another time he said, "Suppose a man is struck by a poisoned arrow and the doctor wishes to take out the arrow immediately. Suppose the man does not want the arrow removed until he knows who shot it, his age, his parents, and why he shot it. What would happen? If he were to wait until all these questions have been answered, the man might die first." Life is so short. It must not be spent in endless metaphysical speculation that does not bring us any closer to the truth.

- Thich Nhat Hanh, in Zen Keys​

That is what free will is to me. I've been given this opportunity to learn what I can, using the tools that I have. Speculating on things that can't be known just don't interest me. It doesn't get the job done.