âBuddhist philosophyâs guiding thought is expressed in the âno-selfâ (anÄtma) doctrine: the claim, sketched with admirable nuance by Garfield, that persons do not have enduring, unitary selves.â
âAs David Hume similarly argued, this is because any moment of experience turns out upon analysis to consist in countless momentary events, none of which makes sense as oneâs âself.ââ
âItâs important to emphasize, though, that Indian Buddhist philosophers strenuously rejected materialismâ
âThe Buddhist rejection of materialism reflects a commitment to understanding the no-self doctrine as ethically significant â as the basis, indeed, for practices of self-transformation that promise to change, as well, the very world we experience.â
âWhile the idea of dualist reductionists may be counterintuitive, Buddhists had a strong stake in emphasizing the basic reality of consciousness.â
âThat is not to say they affirmed the reality of any kind of conscious substance (as reductionists, they generally held that there are no enduring substances at all) â only that they thought conscious events are real, and that these cannot coherently be thought to have distinctly physical causes.â
âA central Buddhist conviction is that consciousness, far from being an epiphenomenal product of the objective world, veritably produces the experienced world â and that if we are to transform a world chiefly characterized by suffering, it can therefore only be by transforming consciousness that we do so.â
âcrucial to efforts at overcoming that mistake, which can only be achieved by habituating consciousness to experience the world selflessly.â
âBuddhists typically emphasized that the âconventional truthâ of ordinary experience (in which things like âselvesâ and âpersonsâ routinely figure) differs fundamentally from an âultimately trueâ account, on which no such things really exist.â
âFor Buddhist idealists, the ultimate truth is that only conscious events finally exist, albeit not as we habitually think; only fleeting moments of experience exist (there is no self to which they belong), and they arise not from interaction with the world but simply out of habituated dispositions.â
âExperience thus results not from a selfâs interaction with the world, but from the accumulated weight of our own psychological pasts.â
âAgainst this, proponents of the skeptical Madhyamaka school denied that momentary mental events are any more âultimatelyâ real than selves are.â
âAnything at all posited as definitively explaining experience turns out itself to be reducible to further causes and conditions; analysis never reaches the bottom, and the ultimate truth, we thus ought to understand, is that there is no ultimate truth.â
Navigation
Backlinks
There are no backlinks to this post.