5 ms·

The logic of Buddhist philosophy: emotional attachment to and/or desire of impermanent things has the potential to result in dissatisfaction, as impermanent thi

The logic of Buddhist philosophy: emotional attachment to and/or desire of impermanent things has the potential to result in dissatisfaction, as impermanent things are impermanent. It's hardly rocket science. Desire nothing, and you'll never never feel the dissatisfaction of not getting what you want. Be attached to nothing, and you'll never feel the pain of losing something. Some quotes by emperor Marcus Aurelius, of the Stoics, expressing a similar idea: "You have power over your mind - not over outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength." "If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment."

xmonkee 13y ago
This is a rather gross oversimplification. What you state is true, and is in fact the essence of the first 2 noble truths, but that's hardly the meat of "the logic of buddhism". The hardest attachment is that to the self, and the hardest realization is that the self itself is impermanent. To have the "right view" of the self, one has to understand the illusory nature of phenomena and the paradoxial nature of awareness itself. Awareness, is one of those things about which none of the following can be said: 1) that is exists, 2) that is doesn't exist, 3) that is both exists and doesn't exist, and 4) that is neither exists nor doesn't exist. Buddhism is very simple, but at the same time it can take "many lifetimes" to achieve true understanding of it.
- logicchains 13y ago
  The illusory nature of the self can also be explained relatively simply to anyone who's familiar with the justification problem[1]. What 'is' the self and what 'is not' the self? That requires a metric for deciding. But that metric in turn requires another metric to determine its validity, and so on ad infinitum. The concept of self is thus arbitrary, and hence logically meaningless. Wittgenstein expresses this idea far better than I do here, in his Tractatus[2]. This equally applies to all phenomena; any attempt to divide anything up into 'things' is ultimately arbitrary, as it relies on ultimately unsubstantiated metrics, and hence is without meaning. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument 2. http://philosurfical.open.ac.uk/tractatus/tabs.html http://philosurfical.open.ac.uk/tractatus/tabs.html
  - orasis 13y ago
    Explaining the illusory nature of the self isn't important. seeing, in real time, the illusory nature of the self is what brings liberation.
virtualwhys 13y ago
Interesting, while there may be similarities between the stoic approach and extant Buddhist teachings, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that a stoic would never write something like this: Four and fifty years I've hung the sky with stars. Now I leap through – What shattering! Eihei Dogen (death poem) Buddhist logic seems to have religious experience as its foundation.
- logicchains 13y ago
  When I speak of Buddhism I'm referring to the teachings of Buddha, not Buddhism as an organised religion. I lived in East Asia for a couple of years and the Buddhism there seemed pretty much the opposite of what Buddha taught; e.g. people praying to statues of Buddha for wealth.
dfc 13y ago
This is fortune cookie buddhism from a place that you think has a statue of Buddha out front but it is actually a statue of Budai. Buddhists desire peace. Buddhists desire enlightenment. Desire in itself is not bad and withdrawal is definitely not the reaction to the recognition of impermanence. When you you get a new puppy everything is wonderful and playful and this lasts through puppyhood and changes into the love of an old lazy dog. One day that dog is going to get hit by a car or get cancer and have to be put down. Everyone says well it was bound to happen or of course that is life. If instead you get the puppy and accept from day one that the dog is already dead every day until then is that much more precious. This is not silly word play. When Plato (my first dog) died I realized that Freedom (6months younger) was on borrowed time, realizing that only strengthened my emotional attachment to him. Instead of withdrawing I embraced my extra time with him and made an effort to throw the ball one more time or scratched his head just a little longer than I would have done before Plato died. Sure I was sad on that final trip to the vet but I was comforted by the knowledge that I had made the most of my extra time with him. When I get my next dog I will not have to wait till the last year to treasure my time with the dog, every moment from day one will be bonus time.
- wpietri 13y ago
  I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted here. This is exactly in line with the teachings of Ajahn Chah, a noted Thai Buddhist. In Thoughts Without a Thinker, he is quoted as saying: “You see this goblet? For me, this glass is already broken. I enjoy it; I drink out of it. It holds my water admirably, sometimes even reflecting the sun in beautiful patterns. If I should tap it, it has a lovely ring to it. But when I put this glass on a shelf and the wind knocks it over or my elbow brushes it off the table and it falls to the ground and shatters, I say, ‘Of course.’ But when I understand that this glass is already broken, every moment with it is precious.”
  - dfc 13y ago
    I think a lot of people are not comfortable Buddhism with unless it smells like incense and has an exotic feeling distinguishing it from their everyday lives.
orasis 13y ago
Thats a quite pedestrian view of Buddhism that may have sufficed for ignorant lay people. But, being an intelligent person, you're going to want to go for the meat of it, which is to realize emptiness of the ineffable and see that both subject (observer) and object (observed) are empty. In short, meditate.
- logicchains 13y ago
  Meditation isn't necessary; you don't need to be a Buddhist to see that, with sufficient analysis/deconstruction, distinctions between the subject and object - or between anything and anything - break down and reveal themselves as arbitrary. Meditation corrects errors in thought by stopping thought. But logical understanding of the fallacious nature of concepts allows such errors to be avoided even when not meditating.

xmonkee 13y ago

This is a rather gross oversimplification. What you state is true, and is in fact the essence of the first 2 noble truths, but that's hardly the meat of "the logic of buddhism". The hardest attachment is that to the self, and the hardest realization is that the self itself is impermanent. To have the "right view" of the self, one has to understand the illusory nature of phenomena and the paradoxial nature of awareness itself. Awareness, is one of those things about which none of the following can be said: 1) that is exists, 2) that is doesn't exist, 3) that is both exists and doesn't exist, and 4) that is neither exists nor doesn't exist. Buddhism is very simple, but at the same time it can take "many lifetimes" to achieve true understanding of it.

logicchains 13y ago
The illusory nature of the self can also be explained relatively simply to anyone who's familiar with the justification problem[1]. What 'is' the self and what 'is not' the self? That requires a metric for deciding. But that metric in turn requires another metric to determine its validity, and so on ad infinitum. The concept of self is thus arbitrary, and hence logically meaningless. Wittgenstein expresses this idea far better than I do here, in his Tractatus[2]. This equally applies to all phenomena; any attempt to divide anything up into 'things' is ultimately arbitrary, as it relies on ultimately unsubstantiated metrics, and hence is without meaning. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument 2. http://philosurfical.open.ac.uk/tractatus/tabs.html http://philosurfical.open.ac.uk/tractatus/tabs.html
- orasis 13y ago
  Explaining the illusory nature of the self isn't important. seeing, in real time, the illusory nature of the self is what brings liberation.

virtualwhys 13y ago

Interesting, while there may be similarities between the stoic approach and extant Buddhist teachings, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that a stoic would never write something like this: Four and fifty years I've hung the sky with stars. Now I leap through – What shattering! Eihei Dogen (death poem) Buddhist logic seems to have religious experience as its foundation.

logicchains 13y ago
When I speak of Buddhism I'm referring to the teachings of Buddha, not Buddhism as an organised religion. I lived in East Asia for a couple of years and the Buddhism there seemed pretty much the opposite of what Buddha taught; e.g. people praying to statues of Buddha for wealth.

dfc 13y ago

This is fortune cookie buddhism from a place that you think has a statue of Buddha out front but it is actually a statue of Budai. Buddhists desire peace. Buddhists desire enlightenment. Desire in itself is not bad and withdrawal is definitely not the reaction to the recognition of impermanence. When you you get a new puppy everything is wonderful and playful and this lasts through puppyhood and changes into the love of an old lazy dog. One day that dog is going to get hit by a car or get cancer and have to be put down. Everyone says well it was bound to happen or of course that is life. If instead you get the puppy and accept from day one that the dog is already dead every day until then is that much more precious. This is not silly word play. When Plato (my first dog) died I realized that Freedom (6months younger) was on borrowed time, realizing that only strengthened my emotional attachment to him. Instead of withdrawing I embraced my extra time with him and made an effort to throw the ball one more time or scratched his head just a little longer than I would have done before Plato died. Sure I was sad on that final trip to the vet but I was comforted by the knowledge that I had made the most of my extra time with him. When I get my next dog I will not have to wait till the last year to treasure my time with the dog, every moment from day one will be bonus time.

wpietri 13y ago
I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted here. This is exactly in line with the teachings of Ajahn Chah, a noted Thai Buddhist. In Thoughts Without a Thinker, he is quoted as saying: “You see this goblet? For me, this glass is already broken. I enjoy it; I drink out of it. It holds my water admirably, sometimes even reflecting the sun in beautiful patterns. If I should tap it, it has a lovely ring to it. But when I put this glass on a shelf and the wind knocks it over or my elbow brushes it off the table and it falls to the ground and shatters, I say, ‘Of course.’ But when I understand that this glass is already broken, every moment with it is precious.”
- dfc 13y ago
  I think a lot of people are not comfortable Buddhism with unless it smells like incense and has an exotic feeling distinguishing it from their everyday lives.

orasis 13y ago

Thats a quite pedestrian view of Buddhism that may have sufficed for ignorant lay people. But, being an intelligent person, you're going to want to go for the meat of it, which is to realize emptiness of the ineffable and see that both subject (observer) and object (observed) are empty. In short, meditate.

logicchains 13y ago
Meditation isn't necessary; you don't need to be a Buddhist to see that, with sufficient analysis/deconstruction, distinctions between the subject and object - or between anything and anything - break down and reveal themselves as arbitrary. Meditation corrects errors in thought by stopping thought. But logical understanding of the fallacious nature of concepts allows such errors to be avoided even when not meditating.