Are all forms of Buddhism Monistic?

[seattlegal]

So there is a difference (between good and bad) whether you're enlightened or not then?

Yes.
Kalama Sutta

Greed, hate, and delusion

5. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to greed, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by greed, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
6. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to hate, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by hate, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
7. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to delusion, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by delusion, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
8. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Bad, venerable sir" — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Censured, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to harm and ill, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill. Thus it strikes us here."​

 

[mattityahu]

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

 

[earl]

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

Are day and night whole? Are life and death whole? earl

 

[seattlegal]

So Reality isn't whole then? As good and bad aren't whole.

Greed, hate, and delusion are products of the mind. Keeping this in mind, go back and read Dhammapada 1:1-5 in post #6 of this thread. The unifying factor in this is the mind. {Look for how everything is interconnected in order to see the wholeness of reality.}

 

[seattlegal]

Are day and night whole? Are life and death whole? earl

They are connected, though.

 

[mattityahu]

Are day and night whole? Are life and death whole? earl

Well, not for me, obviously, but I'm not the one claiming Reality is whole
What does "Reality is whole" mean? Is this where I'm going wrong?

 

[mattityahu]

Greed, hate, and delusion are products of the mind. Keeping this in mind, go back and read Dhammapada 1:1-5 in post #6 of this thread. The unifying factor in this is the mind. {Look for how everything is interconnected in order to see the wholeness of reality.}

So "whole" means interconnected? Well I can agree with that. But that's not the way Snoopy was using the word - whole means undivided. You can't have connectedness without division (or can you...).

 

[seattlegal]

Well, not for me, obviously, but I'm the one claiming Reality is whole
What does "Reality is whole" mean? Is this where I'm going wrong?

Try to look at it from a perspective of function rather than a perspective of form. Focus on the is (the verb,) portion of the phrase, "Reality is whole." {Does that help?}

 

[earl]

They are connected, though.

And in that is their wholeness Seattlesan. earl

 

[mattityahu]

Try to look at it from a perspective of function rather than a perspective of form. Focus on the is (the verb,) portion of the phrase, "Reality is whole." {Does that help?}

Could you elaborate a bit?

Thanks,
Matt

 

[seattlegal]

So "whole" means interconnected? Well I can agree with that. But that's not the way Snoopy was using the word - whole means undivided. You can't have connectedness without division (or can you...).

Mathematically speaking, connectedness means "all one piece."
Connectedness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In mathematics, connectedness is used to refer to various properties meaning, in some sense, "all one piece". When a mathematical object has such a property, we say it is connected; otherwise it is disconnected. When a disconnected object can be split naturally into connected pieces, each piece is usually called a component (or connected component).

​

 

[seattlegal]

Could you elaborate a bit?

Thanks,
Matt

Everything changes from moment to moment. Change is a constant feature in reality. Some of the changes occur in cycles, which lends a wholeness to the extremes of each cycle. Other changes may or may not be part of a cycle that we can't easily perceive, but these changes are still part of reality.

 

[mattityahu]

Everything changes from moment to moment. Change is a constant feature in reality. Some of the changes occur in cycles, which lends a wholeness to the extremes of each cycle. Other changes may or may not be part of a cycle that we can't easily perceive, but these changes are still part of reality.

Sorry to be a constant pain, but could you explain the italicised bit and what precisely this "wholeness" is?

And how does this all relate to good and bad?

Thanks,
Matt

 

[seattlegal]

Sorry to be a constant pain,

I'm sure that will change.

but could you explain the italicised bit

What? Change is a constant feature in reality? Can you dispute that?

and what precisely this "wholeness" is?

How these constant changes inter-react to continue the "be-ing" of reality.

And how does this all relate to good and bad?

wholesome

Thanks,
Matt

I hope this helps.

 

[mattityahu]

Sorry, I forgot that quotes italicised themselves:

"which lends a wholeness to the extremes of each cycle"

How these constant changes inter-react to continue the "be-ing" of reality.

This requires some ponderance....

 

[seattlegal]

Sorry, I forgot that quotes italicised themselves:

"which lends a wholeness to the extremes of each cycle"

Day follows night, night follows day. Day and night are parts of a whole cycle.

This requires some ponderance....

Take your time.

 

[Snoopy]

So in absolute reality, we are the same person?

No I don’t think one would conclude that. The topic of “personhood” is a whole other topic I think; not to evade just not to confuse.

In short, at the heart of Buddhism are four characteristics. One of these is that all phenomena lack inherent self-hood. So this does not lead to an idea that “we are all the same person” since the delusion of the “self” is just that – a delusion. (Although all phenomena are interconnected but I don’t think that’s what you were thinking of when you said “we are the same person”. Correct me if I am wrong).


s.

 

[Snoopy]

So "whole" means interconnected? Well I can agree with that.

Yes.

But that's not the way Snoopy was using the word - whole means undivided.

...and this as well; all things are interconnected (Indra's Net) and the universe is also an undivided whole. Divisions are created by mind.

You can't have connectedness without division (or can you...).

...so yes you can

s.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Matt,

thank you for the post.

Please forgive, for I'm a total noob when it comes to Buddhism. I've heard that some Buddhists (Zen?) use the phrase "If you see the Buddha, kill him", and that it means that you haven't realised that you are the Buddha, because all is one (monism). Is this right?

there are several things, in my view, which are incorrect in your formulation.

i do not agree that the mondo "if the meet the Buddha kill the Buddha" has anything to do with a beings own Buddhanature.

the Buddha does not teach monism in any manner whatsoever, in fact, the Buddha specifically teaches that monism is a particular sort of wrong view with regards to the Buddhadharma. recall, however, that several of the Dharma traditions do advocate a monistic philosophical view.

metta,

~v

 

[Netti-Netti]

.... in fact, the Buddha specifically teaches that monism is a particular sort of wrong view with regards to the Buddhadharma. recall, however, that several of the Dharma traditions do advocate a monistic philosophical view.

metta,

~v

Hello again Vaj,

Where does the Buddha teach that monism is "a particular sort of wrong view"?