Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nuwan9999" data-source="post: 31526918" data-attributes="member: 587037">Ok let me try this way <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":-)" />, setting dhamma aside for a moment and using only what we already know  (even using modern science if you prefer) what actually happens when light hits the cells in the eye that detect it (in this case, the light forming your Abhidhamma post on my screen)?Where do “I (me), Sydney, Texas, the distance between Sydney and Texas, Rosh, huge, ego, Abhidhamma,” and all the rest actually come from? Were these things/thoughts truly out there as fixed entities and distances, or do they only appear as entities within a mental process at the exact moment (or right after) light contacts those cells?The point I’m trying to make is that without that light and those cells (how they come into contact can be explained through dhamma, but that’s out of scope here), none of the above would have existed. In fact, my entire “world” in that moment wouldn’t have existed. So my view on the accuracy of the statement “Rosh has a huge ego about Abhidhamma” is a minor issue or maybe even irrelevant compared to the far more mistaken view that there is an external world full of independently existing things, places, time, distances, and so on.So, based on above, am I way more wrong than taking the statement “Rosh has a huge ego about Abhidamma” is correct here? What do you think?BTW: I am not sure I made my point clear, there’s a great dhamma talk on this topic if you’re interested.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite22" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs up    (y)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(y)" /></blockquote>

Verification: Nawa warak dahaya keeyada? (Namaya wadi kireema dahaya)

Top Bottom