14 questions to which the buddha remained silent - newbuddhist

8/13/2019 14 Questions to Which the Buddha Remained Silent - NewBuddhist

1/8

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If

you want to get involved, click

one of these buttons!

Recent Discussions

Participated

Best Of...

Categories

All Categories

Your Practice

Buddhism for Beginners

Meditation

Diet & Habits

Sanghas

Buddhism

Modern Buddhism

Comparing Religions

Arts & Writings

Advanced Ideas

Our Community

NewBuddhist.comGeneral Banter

NewBuddhist Discussions Buddhism Advanced Ideas

14 questions to which the Buddha remained silent

person Member January 2012 edited January 2012 in Advanced Ideas

The Mahayana Version

To those who believe in a true findably existent me or self (bdag, Skt. atman) and a true findably

existent universe, Buddha did not answer when they asked are the I or the self and the universe:

eternal,

not eternal, since they undergo gross impermanence at the time of their destruction,

as both, in the sense that some beings and their environments, like the Creator Brahma and his

heaven, are eternal; while all else, such as his creations, are not eternal and end at the time of their

destruction,

neither, since it is impossible to know?

Are Is or selves and the universe:

finite,

infinite,

both finite and infinite, in the sense that limited beings (sentient beings) are infinite in number, but

the universe is finite in size,

neither, since it is impossible to know?

Does the I or the self of a Buddha:

continue to exist after death,

not continue after death,

both, in the sense that the body does not continue, but the life-force (srog) does,

neither?

Buddha did not answer these because there is no such thing as a true findably existent me or self

for either limited beings (sentient beings) or a Buddha, and no such thing as a true findably existent

universe. Therefore, there can be no question whether such things are eternal or not eternal, or finite

or infinite. It is like asking do rabbit-horns, turtle-hair or chicken-lips last forever or only a limited

time. If Buddha said the me, and so on are eternal, these people would fall to the position of

eternalism. If he said they are not eternal, they would fall to the position of nihilism, since they would

not understand his answer. Therefore, it was more skillful not to specify an answer at all.

To those who believe in a true findably existent body and life-force, Buddha did not answer when they

asked are the body and li fe-force:

the same entity,

Welcome home! Please contact [email protected] if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site.

uestions to which the Buddha remained silent - NewBuddhist http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/13804/14-questions-to-which-the-...

8 26/12/2013 2:53


2/8

totally separate and different entities?

He remained silent for a similar reason, since they would only misunderstand anything he said.

The Theravada Version

An earlier, abbreviated list of ten unspecified points appears in the Pali canon in the Sutta of Shorter

(Instructions) to Malunkya (Pali: Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta, within the The Collection of Middle-Length

Discourses (Pali: Majjhima Nikaya). In this version, the monk Malunkyaputta was continuouslydistracted by metaphysical speculation during his meditation. In order to turn him back to his

intensive meditation practice, Buddha remained silent when Malunkyaputta asked whether:

the universe is eternal,

the universe is not eternal,

the universe is finite,

the universe is infinite,

after death, a Buddha continues to exist,

after death, a Buddha does not continue to exist,

after death, a Buddha both continues to exist and not to exist,

after death, a Buddha neither continues to exist or not to exist,

the body and the self are the same entity,

the body and the self are totally separate and different entities.

http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/sutra/level4_deepening_understanding_path

/interferences/fourteen_questions_which_buddha_rem.html

Comments

Jeffrey Member

January 2012

I recall two more from the Pali Canon:

the range of a person in Jhana is unknowable

the powers of a buddha are unknowable

(I might have the phrasing wrong, unfortunately, but it is what I recall)

driedleaf Member

January 2012

Here's a good read .

A case in point is the teaching on not-self. Many students interpret this as the Buddha's answer to two

of the most frequently-asked questions in the history of serious thought: "Who am I?" and "Do I have a

true self?" In the light of these questions, the teaching seems to be a no-self teaching, saying either

an unqualified No: There is no self; or a qualified No: no separate self. But the one time the Buddha

was asked point-blank if there is a self, he refused to answer, on the grounds that either a Yes or a No

to the question would lead to extreme forms of wrong view that block the path to awakening.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/questions.html


8 26/12/2013 2:53


3/8

person Member

January 2012

I recall two more from the Pali Canon:

the range of a person in Jhana is unknowable

the powers of a buddha are unknowable

(I might have the phrasing wrong, unfortunately, but it is what I recall)

Those are unconjecturables, the essay was talking about questions the Buddha didn't answer. It may

be splitting hairs but while quite related they may be considered seperate things.

Jeffrey Member

January 2012

I looked up uncojecturable and it means: cannot make a guess. So the buddha said making a guess of

the ^abobe two items makes a vexation when you guess.

lamaramadingdong Member

January 2012 edited January 2012

I guess; therefore I am. (I guess...)

federica Moderator

January 2012

I guess not....

or not-guess.....

federica Moderator

January 2012

"Guessing " -

Is different to -

"Just not bothering because really, it's not worth anyone's time going in to it....Let's move on, shall

we...?"

genkaku Member

January 2012

As an increasingly bad Buddhist, I have a question:

Gautama said certain things are imponderable, meaning, as I take it, that any answer would lead not

to greater understanding but rather to more confusion. I can credit that approach.

My question -- and I'm not kidding, it is a question -- is this: There are imponderable things: OK.

What then, precisely, is ponderable? What is it that when discussed leads to greater understanding and

less confusion? There are a lot of facile answers even I could give, but at the nitty-gritty level, the level

of honesty ... well, what exactly is ponderable?

A rock? A toothbrush? A winning lottery ticket? A profound philosophy? Is any of this and more like it

any less imponderable than the designated imponderables? I'm not trying to suggest that a grumpy

silence should be our approach to things, but I wonder if there isn't some usefulness to the old

suggestion, "stop talkin' and start walkin'"

Just noodling here. What do you think?


8 26/12/2013 2:53


4/8

Jeffrey Member



Gautama said certain things are imponderable, meaning, as I take it, that any answer would lead

not to greater understanding but rather to more confusion. I can credit that approach.

My question -- and I'm not kidding, it is a question -- is this: There are imponderable things:

OK. What then, precisely, is ponderable? What is it that when discussed leads to greaterunderstanding and less confusion? There are a lot of facile answers even I could give, but at the

nitty-gritty level, the level of honesty ... well, what exactly is ponderable?

A rock? A toothbrush? A winning lottery ticket? A profound philosophy? Is any of this and more

like it any less imponderable than the designated imponderables? I'm not trying to suggest that

a grumpy silence should be our approach to things, but I wonder if there isn't some usefulness

to the old suggestion, "stop talkin' and start walkin'"


@genkaku , you can ponder while you are doing an art. For example you ponder what word in a poem.

It's kind of spontaneous but I guess it depends what you dilineate 'ponder' as. In dharma teachings

you ponder the meaning of the teaching you heard. Hearing, pondering, and meditation are all one.

When one happens all three do.

The nature of mind is clarity. It is fused with openness and sensitivity. Clarity is the samadhis we

come to with the problem we are thinking about. This can be a mathematical problem or accepting

some change in our life.

On the buddhist path often we discover things that are frightening. For example we may see that

others happiness is our responsibility. This results in a painful sensitivity because we are off-kilter

(dukkha). And that is when we may close down back into our cacoon of ego...

Ok I'm regurgitating teachings in the lineage of Trungpa haha... You've been around a long time! Nowyou tell me

Incidentally opening is 'the walk' in my opinion.

genkaku Member

January 2012

@Jeffrey -- When I asked him who the teacher was, my Zen teacher once said to me, "Except for me,

everything is the teacher."

And

The Zen teacher Obaku/Huang Po once s tood before his assembled monks and said, "There is no such

thing as a Zen teacher." One of the monks stood up and said more or less, "But master, how can you

say such a thing when clearly you are standing here before us and teaching." And Huang Po replied, "I

said there was no such thing as a Zen teacher. I did not say there was no such thing as Zen."

I imagine any of us might ponder about such things -- or even call them imponderable -- but in the

end, would it create more understanding or more confusion? I don't know, but just at the moment, I

need to get some sleep.

Jeffrey Member

January 2012

The Zen teacher Obaku/Huang Po once stood before his assembled monks and said, "There is

no such thing as a Zen teacher." One of the monks stood up and said more or less, "But master,

how can you say such a thing when clearly you are standing here before us and teaching." And

Huang Po replied, "I said there was no such thing as a Zen teacher. I did not say there was no


8 26/12/2013 2:53


5/8

such thing as Zen."

Like it.

When we don't know is the best time for insight to bubble up..

Jeffrey Member

January 2012

@genkaku , The teaching by Obaku is good but is also in denial of some things. For example why is itthat Obaku is always speaking wisdom? Why is 'zen' coming from his mind and not from the confused

students?

I thought of that as I questioned Tibetan Buddhism tradition of honoring the teacher. The reason the

teacher is honored is to provide a good connection with the student. It is believed that a student who

opens to the lineage can better open to the dharma. As my teacher's husband said "ego doesn't cut its

own throat". Sometimes we do even small things in fellowship. I might do another sitting as I think of

my sanghamates and get inspired. I might see the example of the masters who have gone before and

be very grateful such that I get confidence that 'rubs off'.

LeonBasin Member January 2012

One of my favorite threads! Thank you!

genkaku Member


I might see the example of the masters who have gone before and be very grateful such that I

get confidence that 'rubs off'.

@jeffrey -- I too (literally... honest injun) have wept with gratitude at those who came before. The

kindness seemed so vast as to stopper my mouth ... but not my tears of gratitude.

OK ... thank you very much!

And then the matter comes to the fore: Is weeping and gratitude and imitative effort the whole story?

Is this any way to repay what is owed, to flower as those who went before might have suggested or

wished? I'm not trying to be dismissive or coldly above the fray. But as a serious question worth

investigating: Is weeping and gratitude and imitative effort the whole story? Ducking such a question

is a mistake, I'd say.

But what do I know?

Jeffrey Member

January 2012

Well gratitude and effort are good in their own right

genkaku Member

January 2012

Well gratitude and effort are good in their own right :)

@jeffrey -- Sure. A good start. My question is, where the rubber hits the road, are they really enough

to repay that for which anyone might be grateful?

Jeffrey Member

January 2012


8 26/12/2013 2:53


6/8

Well it's not a matter of payment.. It's a matter of Indra's net. All beings (particles too) mirror

eachother in the net of the great universe. The awakened activity of beings is the buddhas samadhi

and within the fabric of the net is the path to awaken. It is evident that connections to awakened

beings are powerful.

Iktomi Member

January 2012

It is evident that connections to awakened beings are powerful.

The other side of that coin is that connections to unawakened beings are also powerful.

federica Moderator

January 2012

But not in the same way.

zenff Member


Pondering is open and inconclusive. The way I understand the word, its not knowing the final truth

about the subject.

If Im correct about that, pondering is a good thing. Ponder away. Dont stop pondering.

I mean, we often suffer because of things we know. And if we only dared to ponder them question

them that would be liberation.

In Buddhism the idea of not asking some questions fortunately is not prompted by dogma. The

reason for the suggestion, to not put too much energy in such questions, is their lack of practical

purpose.

Ponder (think, question) with the right purpose; with the goal of liberation in mind; so that it will not

reinforce our fixed ideas but so that it will lead to dropping body and mind.

And this talk of gratitude is such a parrot-thing. Everyone is so grateful towards the teachers; why?

Have you ever listened to what the teacher said? Did you hear anything new? Or was it all just clearer

- in the first stupid book you read about Buddhism?

When I did a full retreat-schedule at home; all by myself, I noticed the same things happening to me

as in an organized retreat or sesshin. But in the sesshin I was so sure it all had to do with the

inspiration of the teacher and the people around me.

Its the meditation; its the simple teachings we've known for ages. They do the trick. The teacher is

just a facilitator.

Vastmind Member January 2012

@person ....Gratitude for posting this.

Pondering is one thing. Answering all the time, is another.

The OP is about the fact that Buddha remained silent on some things and why.

It's been a few moons since I had seen this lesson, so It was refreshing to be reminded that Buddha

would not want me to answer everything.

Good message for a discussion forum! Buddha's advice still holds water today.

SpinyNorman2 Member


Gautama said certain things are imponderable, meaning, as I take it, that any answer would lead

not to greater understanding but rather to more confusion. I can credit that approach.

Yes, that's how it seems to me. Though I wonder if the Buddha did explain these things to other

enlightened Arahants...


8 26/12/2013 2:53


7/8

Though the Buddha wouldn't have needed to explain it to another enlightened being..

SpinyNorman2 Member

January 2012

Everyone is so grateful towards the teachers; why?

For pointing us in the right direction?

zenff Member

January 2012

Everyone is so grateful towards the teachers; why?

For pointing us in the right direction?

Okay.

I never said they are completely useless.

Tendzin9198 Member

February 2012

In reference to the comment 14 times when Buddha never responded to the question

1. In most cases if you look in previous conversation where he did respond, you will find the answer to

the question there. It is often a matter of going back and paying attention to what he already said.

2. In the Lankavatara Sutra page 110 it clearly states The Tathagata had not uttered a word in answer

or in discourse during his life-time between his Enlightenment and the Nirvana. The idea here is do

not cling to words. For dharma naira ca disito bhagavata pratyatmavedyo yatah or translated. The

truth has indeed never been preached by Buddha, seeing that one has to realise it within oneself.

Words should instead be treated like the reflection of the moon in water as far as they are related in

meaning. The reflection is there, though the moon itself has not entered into the water, nor is it to be

considered standing in relation to the water, because the latter has something in it to reflect the

moon. Best not to fall into the habit of superficially taking mere words for real meaning. This is the

warning of the Lankavatara: Yatharutarthabhinivesasamdhau na prapatata. Do not fall into the secret

error of getting attached to the meaning as expressed in words.

conradcook Member

February 2012


Gautama said certain things are imponderable, meaning, as I take it, that any answer would leadnot to greater understanding but rather to more confusion. I can credit that approach.

My question -- and I'm not kidding, it is a question -- is this: There are imponderable things:

OK. What then, precisely, is ponderable? What is it that when discussed leads to greater

understanding and less confusion? There are a lot of facile answers even I could give, but at the

nitty-gritty level, the level of honesty ... well, what exactly is ponderable?

A rock? A toothbrush? A winning lottery ticket? A profound philosophy? Is any of this and more

like it any less imponderable than the designated imponderables? I'm not trying to suggest that

a grumpy silence should be our approach to things, but I wonder if there isn't some usefulness

to the old suggestion, "stop talkin' and start walkin'"


I would imagine you would find an implicit answer to this in paying attention to those questions which

the Buddha answered.


8 26/12/2013 2:53


8/8

Sign In or Register to comment.

Conrad.


14 questions to which the buddha remained silent - newbuddhist

Documents