Did the Buddha ever argue in saying "there are no people"?

Upvote:1

The statement that "there are no people" sounded to me too similar to one of the definitions of "wrong view":

There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.

Therefore I wouldn't have said this phrase to you: I guessed you could find it disagreeable.

One possible (perhaps not certain) bad impact is that it may lead to inhumane actions ("humane" means "having or showing compassion or benevolence"), even a disregard for "human rights".

"Nobody gets beaten" is the subject of one of the famous Zen (teaching) stories:

Nothing Exists

Yamaoka Tesshu, as a young student of Zen, visited one master after another. He called upon Dokuon of Shokoku.

Desiring to show his attainment, he said: "The mind, Buddha, and sentient beings, after all, do not exist. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness. There is no relaization, no delusion, no sage, no mediocrity. There is no giving and nothing to be received."

Dokuon, who was smoking quietly, said nothing. Suddenly he whacked Yamaoka with his bamboo pipe. This made the youth quite angry.

"If nothing exists," inquired Dokuon, "where did this anger come from?"

I can't tell you whether it's Jain.

I suppose your question must be based on this comment:

When I said to one of my teachers that I wanted to help other people, her response was, "There are no other people." So I would say that asking: is this action skillful for me? has the same misunderstanding.

  • First, I should mention that the author of that comment says, "I am not a Buddhist"; and quite probably his teacher, too, is not.

  • Second, I note that the quote is, "There are no 'other' people" -- that's a not unusual teaching among "mystics" -- something like that is found in Christianity, for example ("love thy neighbour as thyself" and "what you do unto others you do unto me"). I think that similar teaching is even hinted in sila doctrines of some of the Pali canon, for example:

    All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

  • Also the Dalai Lama said something like (in an interview: sorry I can't quote or reference it properly), that he likes to see himself as being "like other people" and "not special" (I think that's in order to avoid dukkha associated with selfish views).

Anyway if the phrase is a little bit Buddhist, maybe it's more like a Mahayana answer.

Note that the converse of the statement (i.e. "there are other people") may be a bit problematic too -- perhaps that view implies some self-view or conceit.

In summary I don't recall that the Buddha did use such abstract arguments.

I also find it difficult to think of any argument he used that is as short as that one -- there are only a few short formula I can think of at the moment, "Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress." (or some verses from the Dhammapada).

Upvote:2

Yes. If you consider a person to be a living being, then, in the Diamond Sutra.

Just as the Buddha declares that form is not form, so he also declares that all living beings are, in fact, not living beings.

People (and specific individuals) do in fact exist, but just not the way we think they do. This is the uniquely buddhist concept that all phenomena are empty, or devoid of self existence.

More post

Search Posts

Related post