Thank you Chiara and Prof. Garfield. I think this discussion will become more and more prominent from here. I only pray it does not become a new "New Atheism" on the no-self side
Wondering what your reaction would be if you sat down for a sit, in a Zen center (suburb of Boston) and the first thing they did was to have everyone go around the room and tell the group, out loud, your preferred pronoun? To me this simply reinforces identity and supports the self illusion.
This is wishy washy idea of not self but trying to refute soul the Atman Buddha NEVER denied the Atman there is not one single text stating directly from Buddha that there is no atman so its unfortunate that this teaching goes on falsely
he explicitly denies the self (atman) by asserting dependently arisen persons (anatman) for example craving for french fries appears like a giant monolithic desire in our minds which completely take control of our mind and body and makes us drive to the store, whereas what a single instant of craving for french fries actually looks like is something composed of dozens of parts. similarly there is no enduring essence (self/atman) to persons, there are only persons composed of momentary parts. the final moment of mind of this life functions as a cause for the first moment of mind of the next life. etc.
Love Prof. Garfield's teachings. Thank you for sharing this...
Thank you Chiara and Prof. Garfield. I think this discussion will become more and more prominent from here. I only pray it does not become a new "New Atheism" on the no-self side
Thanks Jay..lovely to see and hear you again.. from a former and still inspired student.
Thank you Jay! I also loved your conversation with Sam Harris on his recent “Making Sense” podcast (June, 2022).
thanks for this talks! and keeping us updated
Such clairoty. Great work!
Wondering what your reaction would be if you sat down for a sit, in a Zen center (suburb of Boston) and the first thing they did was to have everyone go around the room and tell the group, out loud, your preferred pronoun? To me this simply reinforces identity and supports the self illusion.
Props to the amazing probing interviewer
This is wishy washy idea of not self but trying to refute soul the Atman Buddha NEVER denied the Atman there is not one single text stating directly from Buddha that there is no atman so its unfortunate that this teaching goes on falsely
he explicitly denies the self (atman) by asserting dependently arisen persons (anatman)
for example craving for french fries appears like a giant monolithic desire in our minds which completely take control of our mind and body and makes us drive to the store, whereas what a single instant of craving for french fries actually looks like is something composed of dozens of parts.
similarly there is no enduring essence (self/atman) to persons, there are only persons composed of momentary parts.
the final moment of mind of this life functions as a cause for the first moment of mind of the next life.
etc.