Just because this method is not very good, I am standing on top of this big class. It would be great if we could have a discussion. Everyone can understand this. For example, in the course you are studying causality, you will also encounter this. Learning Marxism Leninism seems to be within the three major laws and five categories, one of which is causality. It talks about one cause and multiple effects, one effect and multiple causes, multiple effects and multiple causes, internal and external factors, and a lot of metaphysical language. Causal relationships are one of its main foundations in science. If you want to study science without discussing causality, what else can you study.
Regardless of studying mathematics, physics, and biology, it is said that this person does not talk about causality. Except for Einstein, most of us honestly talk about this thing from the perspective of causality. Therefore, causality is a universal concept in daily life and various disciplines. For example, what is the simplest definition of causality?
It is the mutual relationship between different objects or the same object at different time periods.
The simplest definition is, for example, when I see you and you react, it's a cause and effect. I often see many classmates on campus, and they make me walk over without hesitation. Sometimes I want to say hello to him, but I'm afraid that if he doesn't see me, I might feel awkward. I have mentioned before that some students may have high myopia and do not wear glasses in order to look good. They basically turn a blind eye to it on campus, but it does not work for them. The causal relationship is the interaction relationship.
Of course, this is the simplest, and there is another way to say that we are the same subject. For example, if I stand here today, I may stay at home tomorrow, and there is a causal relationship between me today and me tomorrow. If I were to be ruthless today and go straight down the stairs from upstairs, I would be gone tomorrow. Some people say that there is no causal relationship between the same object, but these discussions are actually very complex in ancient and modern times, both domestically and internationally.
Xiong Shili's philosophy comes from the Buddhist philosophical system and the foundation of the old Yogacara school. As I just mentioned, it is the theory of the four causes and effects. The analysis of these four causes and effects is considered a summary in Buddhism.
It is a summary based on the twelve fold theory of primordial Buddhism and the Mahayana emptiness theory of dependent origination and emptiness. It is called the four fold theory, which we will discuss in detail later. The Four Elements is a subjective philosophy that originated from the original Buddhist theory of the Twelve Elements of Destiny, in which Shakyamuni discussed the liberation of life.
Why do people have the trouble of dying in old age? Finally pushing it to the end, discovering the root of all our troubles?
When we have knowledge and the ability to distinguish, and are born fools, he doesn't have so many troubles. Of course, this is the complaint of literati. Su Shi once wrote a poem called "Life begins with the ability to read and write, but the rough memorization of names can be relieved." He said that all our pain begins with the ability to read. Those who don't know how to read will not be sad when they see Dream of the Red Chamber. Only us who have lovers will find fault for ourselves after seeing it in a mess?
Shakyamuni said that our afflictions come from the manifestation of our consciousness called action, and action comes from an unknown name. In the past, there was no explanation for Nameless. My current idea is that Nameless is probably Alaye Shi. So, what do you mean by being anonymous?
It's just a tangled mess. I don't know where it comes from, it's better to know. If we know, we'll untie it. If we can't untie it, we'll be too conflicted. And the older you get, the more indecisive you become. From the theory of karma to the Mahayana emptiness sect, there is a different perspective. I have always believed that the Mahayana emptiness sect is the true lineage of Shakyamuni. The Mahayana lineage is derived from the upper part of the Hinayana. Mahayana Kongzong is a type of Mahayana that originated from Hinayana, which is the mass sector.
The theory of some sects continues from the theory of predestination, but also includes the explanation of the dependent emptiness in Mahayana emptiness. The explanation of emptiness is the most popular discourse in Chinese Buddhism. When we talk about the theory of causality, we usually think of the causal relationship in emptiness, and do not think about the theory of 12 predestination and Yogacara, because what is the difference between the theory of 12 predestination and Yogacara?
It is causal in terms of subjectivity. There is a dilemma here. The ease of handling in the Kong Sect is straightforward. The Kong Sect talks about the Four Emptiness: Extreme Micro Emptiness, Instant Emptiness, Kana Emptiness, and Dependent Origination Emptiness.
Dependent origination emptiness means that all existence is an interactive existence, without being separated from causal relationships. So, these existences ultimately come down to emptiness, why?
Because it lacks autonomy, it talks about the emptiness of dependent origination.
But in the study of Yogacara, he divided fate into four types, the most important of which is to separate one from the four, called karma.
This distinction. This is not very discussed in the Yogacara and Emptiness schools. When the Emptiness school talks about dependent origination and emptiness, these four types of origination are basically viewed in a flat plane. In our words today, everything is universally connected, because of universal connection, there is no independent self, so everything is empty.
For example, when I just talked about the discussion of cognitive relationships, the biggest difference in Yogacara's theory of the Four Fate is that it divides these four types of fate into two categories, with three uses. One word is fate, which is a general interaction that is decisive.
After I briefly explain, I will transition to my perspective. From the perspective of causality, I have listed four hierarchical classifications of the relationship between ontology and phenomena. Take a look, there are some problems today that may not be solved in this class because when I teach Xiong Shili's theory of ontology next week, I will specifically review how we put forward some statements about ontology. That would be better, today I'm just drawing a conclusion, everyone take a look.
When we talk about causal relationships, what is the most common causal relationship and the least complicated one?
It is about universal inevitability. Its most common is interaction. If we look at it from this perspective, there is nothing in the world that is not involved in this interaction. He would also say that all existence is conditional when you study Marxism Leninism. Only conditional existence is unconditional. To put it nicely dialectically, this is interaction.
But interaction is the lowest level of causality. The lowest level of causality, if we classify it, is the lowest level of causality, where all things can be said to interact with each other. Philosophical discussions on causal effects that have a decisive relationship are called internal factors.
The seed sprouts, blooms, and bears fruit. This example seems to have been used in Hegel's philosophical history as well. Buddhist Yogacara also uses this example, and I am now using it to explain causal relationships, especially when incorporating the causal relationships discussed in Yogacara, including those later taught by Xiong Shili, into this example.
Everyone, when we talk about a seed, I won't write about any specific seed anymore. It's the seed of a pine tree or the seed of a small grass. We don't care about it. For example, if a seed needs to sprout, if a seed turns into a bud, there must be a causal relationship between the seed and the bud. And this causal relationship is an internal factor, which is called a necessary condition in logic.
For example, when sprouting, you need sunlight, water, and air. There are countless conditions for this, which are called fate, while the seed itself is called cause.
Because it is this seed. We see a small tree sprouting, and this seed must be a necessary condition for this and the logic of the small tree sprout. This seed turns into a bud, perhaps with less air, it doesn't seem to be decisive. It seems possible without sunshine, but without seeds, it is definitely not possible. Other conditions are slightly worse, and it seems acceptable. Without seeds, it is absolutely not possible. So, the seed becomes the determining factor for this bud, and similarly, for you and the bud to bloom, it is also the result of a multitude of factors, countless factors. We say that this seed is the decisive factor in the outcome.
When you are studying Marxism Leninism and teaching this passage, if you take the class seriously, you will know that you often quote a quote from Engels: 'One seed is planted, ten thousand seeds are harvested, and then these ten thousand seeds are turned back.' Then this will explain the typology.
To some extent, the seed of Alaya consciousness taught by Yogacara is also like this. So, Alaya consciousness appears as a seed, the seed appears as a thought, and the thought separates into two parts. After being influenced, it forms a new seed, and the seed erupts. This is a decisive relationship.
I used to believe that there were internal and external factors involved in this decisive relationship. Recently, I came up with a solution to eliminate the difference between cause and fate. Do you think that seed is definitely a tree bud flower, and the internal cause of this fruit can be on the same level as others?
In the past, we talked about type theory. If you want to dissolve it, how do you dissolve it? If you study the current textbooks, some of them also oppose this internal factor theory, or determinism, and use probability theory to cancel it, and use truth and probability truth to explain this thing. If from the perspective of Yogacara, can I break through it and come up with a solution? We used to think that seeds were destined to sprout, bloom, and bear fruit. So, where do your seeds come from?
You may say that there are fruits ahead, flowers ahead, and seeds ahead, as if they have dried today and cannot be omitted. This is your static thinking. If you follow the phenomenon, then I will continue to analyze it for you. 100000 years ago, he didn't have any fruit. It might have been some kind of bract, some kind of seaweed, and in the end, it didn't know what organic molecules it was. Finally, it was inorganic molecules. Where can you find that seed?
Everything is a matter of origin. In the past, we used to talk about seeds, as if I couldn't do without them. For example, a primary school teacher used Xiaoming as an example. Once I couldn't stand it, could you change it to Xiaoliang? It happened to be that seed, so the seed couldn't break. Pushing forward, the seed turned into seaweed. What kind of seed did you look for? In the end, it turned into an inorganic substance. Where did you go to find the seed?
