why can't the spirtual experience explained from logic
score:0
why can't the spirtual experience explained from logic
I'll try to guess three analogies.
One is that experience can be explained, but that hearing an explanation isn't the same as experiencing. For example if I go outside then I see (and thus I experience) a lot of things there. I could describe those to you but that's not the same as your seeing (experiencing) them yourself.
Secondly, experience has a partly-emotional component or basis. For example, take a baby and separate it from its mother and father, and it starts to cry. You might "explain" to the baby that there's no need to cry and that the world is benevolent, but the baby cannot learn from your explanation, and can only learn from its own experience. Something similar (i.e. you'll find that your explanation is not effective) might happen if you try to explain something to a dumb animal, to somebody with a psychiatric disability, to somebody who is too busy or has too many preconceptions to listen to you.
Thirdly the mind is a sense-organ for perceiving ideas, in the same way that the eye is a sense-organ for perceiving sights. If the eye is cloudy or troubled then you cannot see properly (or cannot see as clearly as somebody else can). Similarly if the mind is cloudy or troubled then you cannot understand as clearly.
And also, if past, future and present are just illusion than why do we feel it?
I think that when non-Buddhists read about Buddhism they may get the impression that Buddhism teaches that "the world is an illusion" or something like that.
Actually I don't see the word "illusion" used much when I read about Buddhism. Instead I read the word "delusion", which means something which I think is related to "ignorance".
So, if it's true that "past, future and present are just illusion", I'm tempted to assume that's an inaccurate translation of a statement such as "we have ignorant, unwise, unskillful knowledge about and attitudes towards past, future and present".
One of Buddhism's attempts to explain "why do we feel" is the theory of the Twelve Nidānas.
What are similaritys between Schrodingers cat theory and multiverse accordig to spirtual path?
In my own mind I would categorize such thinking as papañca -- i.e. trying to think or talk about a "multiverse" reduces one's ability to see reality-as-it-is.
More specifically "Schrodinger's cat" may have some limited applicability as a theory when talking about quantum mechanics, but it's not appropriate when talking about macroscopic objects. Maybe it's like saying "people are conscious, therefore stars and atoms are conscious too", i.e. untrue/useless.
My impression is that the theories of physics says nothing about morality (good and not-good), about subjective experience (suffering and not-suffering), about recommended behaviour (wise and unwise).
I have heard that conciousness pops up like an electron
I think that consciousness is conditioned by sense-impressions. For example if you see a bull charging at you then you're conscious of that; if you hear music then you're conscious of that; if you step on something sharp then you're conscious of that; but these are all moments of consciousness.
Upvote:0
(See this answer and this answer for explanation some of the terminology of the non english terms below)
The vocabulary and language is conditioned by common experiences of people. When suddenly a new experience comes about there will be no words or terms (nama pannatti) to describe it or language or medium to explain it (nirutti). You cannot create a vocabulary to communicate this experience to someone who has not experienced it, i.e., it is hard to express its meaning (abhilapa). Hence meditative experiences cannot be put into words, or make know (pannapiyatta or atthapannatti).
Some of the meditative states part of the mind's operations stop. Hence logic breaks down. In the 1st Jhana Thinking and Pondering (vitakka & vicara) stops. When you attain Nirvana so does Perception (sañña). At this stage all metal operations stop. This again is another reason it cannot be described. Since at these levels, conventional logic also breaks down you cannot use this to deduce of infer anything about it.
Also logic and reasoning is concepts (pannatti) or metal models of what we think is out there. This does not represent reality. Since concept and reality do not mix you cannot use concepts to describe accurately what reality is. Since only a few has experienced reality as it is there no vocabulary or language that describes the concepts.
Generally our current model of the universe is based on:
- concept of time: (kala pannatti)
- spatial dimensions concept: (disa pannatti), sapce: (akasa pannatti)
- and generally a lot of theorising, maths and logic which are concepts
These are not ultimate realities themselves, hence cannot not related to meditative experiences, which deal with ultimate realities. They generally do not mix well like oil and water. This does not mean concepts do not exist, but they are not ultimate realities which are free from delusion. Conceptual realities are always with delusion or tainted by ignorance of the 3 characteristics. So a concept which is seam solid is not necessarily with no reality in it, but it does not reality well, which in turn leads to attachment or aversion which being about misery. Dealing with realities which are ultimate, misery does not arise as there is no disparity between reality and what is known or experienced hence will not develop false expectations, when you reach the level you can experience the relevant ultimate realities.
In Buddhism atomic units are explained as Kalapas which can be experienced through meditation. The experience realities might differ from what modern science says.
Upvote:0
I think you're misunderstanding 'illusion' with respect to past and future. The only thing which really exists is the here and now (think about it). Past and future don't exist in this way, although it seems to us sometimes that they do, especially when the mind is telling itself stories. Past and future only exist intellectually, not really like the present does.
This doesn't mean that past and future are delusions, just that they're not real like the present. And it's important sometimes for us to be able to think about the past and future in order to live our lives. If you couldn't imagine the future you wouldn't think to put on coat when you left home on a rainy day :)
But Buddhism stresses that they're not real in order to encourage us to live in and relate to what is, here and now, not what was or what might be.
Upvote:0
...can't be expressed with words and logic
Because words and logic are the "formats" used by the mind, i.e., Name-Form conditioned. (Name-Form {名色} is the 4th in the 12-Nidāna), it cannot express the Ultimate Truth, that rid of Ignorance {無明} - the 1st of the 12-Nidana. Likewise a daughter cannot give birth to her father (in the same life-time).
Albert E is talking about "understood" in the scope of intellectual mind, but the Ultimate is beyond intellect.
...if past, future and present are just illusion than why do we feel it?...
About Illusion Why a sad novel will make you cry? Even though what you are in contact with merely paper and ink (if you are reading a book). Why you see the wave coming and going, even though the water particles are merely moving up and down, not forth and back; (number of persons holding hands get them up and down will create the same "wave" illusion). Illusion can have real effect, if the mind believes in it. We are seeing many illusions, e.g. our vision is not perfect constructed partly by illusion/imagination, we have blind spot in our vision scientist said that the brain "filled in" the blank, read this in the medical magazine.
You assumed but didn't directly ask if past future present are illusions Yes, time is illusion, so is space. Past and Future definitely can't exist independently on their own, it depends on the Present - when the mind recalled or projected them; the Present doesn't exist as well (!!). I credit Rinpoche Khenpo Tsultrim (慈誠羅珠堪布), he explaint that how a smallest unit of time can never be found, therefore the moment of Present can never be established. What is the smallest unit of time the Present? A second, but it can be divided into half a second, a half second can further be divided half... so on and so forth - infinite. However, if a unit of time can be infinitely divided, then that moment can never be passed thus the next moment can never be born. Infinitely dividable is a mathematically dividable but it is not for our phenomenal world's time. We are tricked by the mind and logic. In our phenomenal world we experience the previous moment and the next moment continuum. However as it can continuously be dividing the smallest unit of the present moment, the present moment cannot be established. If the present moment cannot be established then all the phenomenal world "matters" cannot be established. But we do experience the phenomenal world - Ultimate Truth is beyond the dialect logic and also the Indian Classical four-truth logic.
So, Albert E., no matter how high his IQ scored, can't work on this bit of anomaly :D. So does a yogi or meditator there able to tell you what's going on with him (provided he is authentic and genuine).
What are similaritys between Schrodingers cat theory and multiverse accordig to spirtual path?...
I've not invested much on S.'s Cat and Multiverse and so on I left the rest for those wise-well-learnt.
(P. S. self gibberish: I cannot understand why so many Buddhist students talking so happily about Anatta the so called not-Self/non-Self, as if Columbus discovering the new continent. It's really a horrible truth to learnt when one realizes that a present moment indeed doesn't exist at all so does a Self doesn't have an abode to take shelter... it simply can't be established! :"'C)
More post
- 📝 If Buddha stayed unanswered on this matter, why do his followers preach that soul doesn't exist?
- 📝 Problems of a Lay Mediator
- 📝 How do I become a Saddhanussari or Dhammanussari and know if I have attained it?
- 📝 Do we sense the mental stream (santāna)
- 📝 Would the Buddha Shelter us from being offended?
- 📝 Working with hallucinogenic images during meditation
- 📝 Can one be a part-time monk?
- 📝 Questions about reacting to bodily sensations
- 📝 Does reality fight back when you want to meditate?
- 📝 In a Buddhist perspective how do we recall memories of this life and beyond?
- 📝 What's the "wise" answer when the epistemic distance is important?
- 📝 Does pasteurization count as cooking in prep of juices for after noon?
- 📝 What does wrong freedom or wrong release mean?
- 📝 The Complex Abhidhamma
- 📝 Happiness, rebirth, and the death of an arahant
- 📝 What do you regard as noteworthy differences in the popular pali to english translations?
- 📝 Dukkha Nana - deep knowledge of our own suffering
- 📝 temple policy for babies/young kids
- 📝 Why I keep repeating the same mistakes?
- 📝 How do you handle when someone tries to instill guilt in you?
- 📝 Attachment to body and bodily sensations
- 📝 What is meant by statement "the one who sees Dhamma sees dependent origination"?
- 📝 Is Buddhism just Hinduism stripped for export?
- 📝 how to aware of Dukkha ( "suffering", "anxiety", "stress", or "unsatisfactoriness")
- 📝 What is the difference between mindfulness and concentration?
- 📝 How do I focus from the distraction of people who look attractive?
- 📝 How can evil doers be 'reborn' as 'human'?
- 📝 Is Nirvana the goal for all Buddhist?
- 📝 It's ok to grow, harvest and consume vegetables and fruits, because they are not sentient?
- 📝 Is there an Orthodox Buddhism?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 why can't the spirtual experience explained from logic
- 📝 What is the reason why Buddhist monks don't work to support themselves? Do the monastic rules prohibit them from working?
- 📝 Iconography in Buddhism - from the Greeks? And why isn't the Buddha bald?
- 📝 Why emphasise the EBT when anyone who has achieved Arhathood can teach from direct experience?
- 📝 Why would the Buddha refrain from instructing?
- 📝 Why are some bodily fluids missing from the "Thirty Two Parts of the Body" teaching?
- 📝 How does the experience of "realisation of Sunyata" differ from "realisation of Anatta"?
- 📝 Why are the psychological forces that stop us from attaining Nibbana greater/stronger than those propel us towards Nibbana?
- 📝 Why did Buddha refrain from finding knowledge of the whole universe?
- 📝 How is sexual misconduct explained in regards to the five precepts?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha suffer before he died?
- 📝 Why does the Buddha call himself the Tathāgata?
- 📝 Attachment is a poison. Why is attachment to the Buddha and to Buddhist philosophy not a problem?
- 📝 Why would anyone ever want to go to the heavens?
- 📝 What does it mean to 'advert' to the factors of jhana after emerging from jhana?
- 📝 Why is contributing to the market demand for meat not wrong?
- 📝 Why can't we reason or logic our way to NIrvana?
- 📝 Why the Buddha didn't originally allow ordination of women
- 📝 Why did Mahayana leave out the Pali Canon?
- 📝 Why is the Buddha described as trackless?
- 📝 Why should we stop the Samsara?
- 📝 Why does the Buddha always answer a question if asked three times?
- 📝 If there is no soul or self, why did the Buddha speak of his past lives?
- 📝 Did the Buddha ever delve on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego?
- 📝 Why is desire the root of suffering?
- 📝 Why do Buddhists believe that the Buddha was enlightened, despite that he claimed it himself?
- 📝 If a Buddhist believes lay life is not ideal for the practice, why does he or she continue?
- 📝 Why is the first lines of the Dhammapada twin verses sometimes translated using the word 'heart'?
- 📝 Why did the Buddha touch the earth at his enlightenment?
- 📝 Why is the Heart Sutra so important in Mahayana Buddhism?