Dhamma

Friday, January 29, 2021

With ignorance as condition - death


Nanamoli Thera:

There are certain aspects of truth that one can only discover in oneself; if one is told of them, one will certainly, and in the very nature of existence itself, reject them absolutely. But perhaps they can be shared by those who have discovered them individually for themselves, and perhaps those who have not discovered them can be aided indirectly to discover them for themselves. The use of the word "truth" here is in the sense is desirability of discovery).
*
In a syllogism (1. All man are mortal, 2. Socrates is a man, 3. Therefore Socrates is mortal), the generalization (all man a mortal) must have been arrived at by induction. No inductive process is ever absolutely certain. There is always the leap, the assumption, of gereralizing and therefore one of the premises of a syllogism must have an element of uncertainty. So it cannot prove anything with certainty.

A syllogism is therefore a signpoint pointing where to look for direct experience, but it inherently never give information that is 100% certain. But a syllogism (on metaphysical subjects) can point to what can, inherently, never be experienced; then it is an anomaly.
*
All the questions asked about death are wrongly put.
***
So long as one assumes death as an absolute fact, one must have, as an assumed absolute value based on it, the decision either to kill or to be killed in the last extreme (and this includes attitudes to suicide¹ and to "natural death"). This alternative ultimately divides all people (who make that assumption about death) into two types. With a proper understanding of death, the decision (dialectic) must collapse on the laying bare of the assumption. Freud has remarked that death is inconceivable to the Unconscious, a statement which, thought open to usual criticism of F's mechanistic assumptions about consciousness, does point to very important factual dialectic in assumptions about death.
***
Three forms of agnosticism (1) I am certain (know) that this is impossible for anyone else to know. (2) I am uncertain (do not know at present) whether this which I don't know now, can be known by me or by anyone at some time. (3) I am certain (know) that this which I do not know, can be known sometime.

These three cover agnosticism about death.

Three main attitudes to death (my death): (i) I believe (know) that I shall survive my death. (ii) I believe (know) that I shall not survive my death. (iii) one of the three forms of agnosticism.

It is impossible for ordinary, normal thought to confront the idea of (my) death except in one of these attitudes. All of these attitudes are wrong through the assumption (explicit and implicit) that they are necessitate. Consequently it is impossible for normal thought to confront (my) death with a correct attitude.
***
Wandering in the deserted places there are found many traces from which we deduce the movements of heroes and gods and so we weave history. Yet were our vision to become a little clearer we might discover that all these tracks are merely made by ourselves during our own ealier wanderings.
***
Cioran:

Once you have thought a lot about death, you start to wonder if it wasn't all a huge lie. Having risen above death, the truths below appear as illusions.
*
Have you looked at yourself in the mirror when nothing stood between you and death? Have you questioned your eyes? And by looking in to them, have you then understood that you cannot die? Your pupils dilated by conquered terror are more impenetrable than the Sphinx. From their glassy immobility a certitude, strangely tonic in its brief mysterious form is born: you cannot die. It comes from the silence of our gaze meeting itself, the Egyptian calmness of a dream facing the reality of death. Each time the fear of death grubs you, look in the mirror. Your eyes know everything. For in them, there are specks of nothingness, which assure you that nothing more can happen.
***
Upasena

On one occasion the Venerable Sāriputta and the Venerable Upasena were dwelling at Rājagaha in the Cool Grove, in the Snake’s Hood Grotto. Now on that occasion a viper had fallen on the Venerable Upasena’s body. Then the Venerable Upasena addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Come, friends, lift this body of mine on to the bed and carry it outside before it is scattered right here like a handful of chaff.” When this was said, the Venerable Sāriputta said to the Venerable Upasena:

“We do not see any alteration in the Venerable Upasena’s body nor any change in his faculties; yet the Venerable Upasena says: ‘Come, friends, lift this body of mine on to the bed and carry it outside before it is scattered right here like a handful of chaff.’”

“Friend Sāriputta, for one who thinks, ‘I am the eye’ or ‘The eye is mine’; ‘I am the ear’ or ‘The ear is mine’ … ‘I am the mind’ or ‘The mind is mine,’ there might be alteration of the body or a change of the faculties. But, friend Sāriputta, it does not occur to me, ‘I am the eye’ or ‘The eye is mine’; ‘I am the ear’ or ‘The ear is mine’ … ‘I am the mind’ or ‘The mind is mine,’ so why should there be any alteration in my body or any change in my faculties?”

“It must be because I-making, mine-making, and the underlying tendency to conceit have been thoroughly uprooted in the Venerable Upasena for a long time that it does not occur to him, ‘I am the eye’ or ‘The eye is mine’; ‘I am the ear’ or ‘The ear is mine’ … ‘I am the mind’ or ‘The mind is mine.’” Then those bhikkhus lifted the Venerable Upasena’s body on to the bed and carried it outside. Then the Venerable Upasena’s body was scattered right there just like a handful of chaff.
SN 35: 69

***

¹ Q: It is because I have grown in intelligence that I would not tolerate my suffering again. What is wrong with suicide?
M: Nothing wrong, if it solves the problem. What, if it does not? Suffering caused by extraneous factors — some painful and incurable disease, or unbearable calamity — may provide some justification, but where wisdom and compassion are lacking, suicide cannot help. A foolish death means foolishness reborn. Besides there is the question of karma to consider. Endurance is usually the wisest course.
Q: Must one endure suffering, however acute and hopeless?
M: Endurance is one thing and helpless agony is another. Endurance is meaningful and fruitful, while agony is useless.

No comments:

Post a Comment