[Buddha-l] rebirth

[Dan Lusthaus]

> But surely 'truth', as in the Four Noble Truths means simply a true
> proposition! That is less problematical than is being made out in
> there discussions now
> F. K. Lehman (F. K. L. Chit Hlaing)

Reducing things to propositions is a favorite game of analytic
philosophers -- and following Frege, since the referent (Bedeutung) of any
proposition is either "true" or "false," your proposition follows a
tradition. But, if we remind ourselves that "proposition" actually derives
from "to propose," which means to posit or suggest, then "truth" remains
somewhere in the distance.

As for satya, some medieval Hindu usages suggest this understood as "truth"
or "true," but if we go back to its vedic roots, sat meant something
"actual", something that had emerged into "actual existence," as opposed to
asat, the not-yet-existent or the no-longer-existent, i.e., potential
existence. So, rather than "true proposition" for satya, I *propose*
"actuality."

The Four Noble Actualities. Duhkha is actual. Its cooperating causes
(samudaya) are actual. One should actualize the elimination (nirodha) of
those causes, and there are actual means for doing so (maarga). Without
vivid experience of these as actual, which is to say, one engages in
altering actualities by actualizing alternate actualities, Buddhism does
become nothing more than *mere* positing.

actuarily yours,
Dan Lusthaus