Basic Buddhist Concepts
p. 46-47 -- asserts free will, grossly and amateurishly and non-philosophically misportrays the no-free-will position as literal passivity in the manifest realm.
Most freewill defenders are such undisciplined, pre-philosophical thinkers, who demonstrate their incomprehension of the position they are supposedly against. They thrive on a straw man argument, upholding their own feeling-based, unrefined, pre-critical position by refuting a version of determinism that no one has ever held.
What the Buddha Taught
Chapter 6 (recommended) -- portrays free will as a conventional illusion together with Self. Rejects the notion of discovering that you are really Self or the World or God or consciousness or anything else; rejects any construction "I am actually X".
I hold that oneself is something and exists in some way, but defining this something and the nature of this existence requires careful qualification within a defined conceptual framework. Simple yes/no answers to ego's existence, or "I am X" constructions, can never be anywhere near precise enough -- instead, improving accuracy of thinking is a matter of "first I thought of self this way, but now I think of it this other way."
A fair short construction is "oneself is a virtually separate, secondary controller, not a literally separate, primary controller", but this construction cannot stand without a supporting explanatory framework that elaborates each term.
There was another intro book I read with those two, that was even more literalist, doctrinaire, and superficial. That was a milestone for me, to pick up three introductory books and have a strong, immediate sense of judging which books express the lowest and highest level of Buddhism -- which books are coming basically from exoteric vs. esoteric positions.
>Basic Buddhist Concepts
>p. 46-47 -- asserts free will, grossly and amateurishly and
>non-philosophically misportrays the no-free-will position as literal
>in the manifest realm.<<<<<<<<<<
>Mizuno is very "basic' all right. He is a semi-decent surface
>buddhist historian, heavily conditiioned by sectarian dogma, not a
>Buddhist philosopher, by any means.
>MUSHROOM IS Secret DoorUntil Now
>Emblems of Death
>And the Sun,
>The Serpent Flame
>BC-AD is the force behind it all
>A very intelligent force
>Is going to rise
>Jesus is a Myth
>Seal of Perfection,
>Particle of Dust
>Wisdom of the Ages
>Choose ye an island
>Is not the
>- Secret Key -
>Remember today is 12/12
I remembered today when the computer told me the date.
12/12/1987 was my first breakthrough and intellectual puzzle solution, 16 years ago. I had been reading Watts' The Way of Zen with full mystic intensity, and it all suddenly made sense by applying the assumption of no-free-will. "Well why didn't you say so explicitly! You are a poor, too-poetic-only writer! You ought to have more command of word-combinations!" was my immediate reaction. I have full notes from this era, which I'd like to scan and upload to show notation and style.
Almost immediately after, on Jan. 11 1988, in the computer lab at a Mac, I thought of the block universe in mystic-state terms and cybernetic self-control terms, deepening the 12/12 discovery and breakthrough. My Dead friend Bill said he was studying Structural Engineering.