Buddha一切都是因緣和合的。
如果依照這樣的主張，可以得到這個結論：我，李亮神父，事實上只不過是一個名稱而已。
這就好像《那先比丘經》的教導。請參閱http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T32/1670b001.htm
如果我們假設，我，李亮神父，只是一具肉體，這具肉體是由不同的部位和血液…等所組成，那麼，以上的結論就是成立的。我再強調一次，只有在「我，李亮神父，只是一具肉體」的前提之下，這樣的結論才會成立。
Buddha
一切都是因緣和合的。
如果依照這樣的主張，可以得到這個結論：我，李亮神父，事實上只不過是一個名稱而已。
這就好像《那先比丘經》的教導。請參閱http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T32/1670b001.htm
如果我們假設，我，李亮神父，只是一具肉體，這具肉體是由不同的部位和血液…等所組成，那麼，以上的結論就是成立的。我再強調一次，只有在「我，李亮神父，只是一具肉體」的前提之下，這樣的結論才會成立。
‧ 假設我們有靈魂。我想，依據一般人心目中對靈魂的看法，應該會假定靈魂沒有手、腳、血液…等部位，這些會發生改變的部位並不存在。在這種狀況下，我們可以說，靈魂有一個恆常的「我」，因為靈魂並不是由許多部位所組成的。
‧ 我的意思是，佛教開始於對某一個人的信任和信仰，而這個人就是成為佛陀的喬答摩悉達多，他教導大家一些理論，也教導大家萬物都是由許多部份所組成，就好像是《那先比丘經》中提到的那一輛車，它是由車軸、車輪…等部份組成。
‧ 然而，除此之外，我們還可以發現其他的理論，這些理論也是以信仰為根基，例如有人相信靈魂是非物質，靈魂並非由許多不同部份組成，這樣的理論在邏輯上也是被人接受的。
‧ 此外，還有一個非宗教領域的邏輯概念，就是「我是誰？」這個問題。這個問題並不是出自《那先比丘經》，然而，「我是誰？」這樣的思考並不會以組成我的身體的各個部位為基礎，這樣的思考獨立於我的手、腳、頭部…等部位而存在。〔在上文中提供的《那先比丘經》的網站裡，我們可以發現，經文提到了一位印度的國王，人稱彌蘭王（King Milinda Pahna），他與那先比丘展開辯論。事實上，這位彌蘭王是一位希臘籍的國王，人稱King Menandros，這不是很有趣嗎？我本身也是一個希臘人！〕
‧ 假設我們接受第五維度（空間有個三個維度，加上時間為四個維度）的存在，那麼，這輛車子的每一個小部分，例如：輪子、軸…等都可以藉由這個維度連結在一起，所以，這輛車是存在的。舉個例來說：如果你有一張紙，它是一個二維度的表面，而你可以將你的五個手指頭放在紙的上面，那麼一個二維度的生物，就會看到五個手指的指印，每一個指印，都會被這個生物當成手的零件，所以，依據佛教的教義，它可以得到一個結論，就是手並不存在，手只是一個名稱，一個稱謂罷了。然而，如果你能夠看到第三個維度，那你就會發現一個完整的物件，一隻完整的手，而不只是手所投射到二度表面的結果。我會提出這些概念，是為了說明，仍然有許多邏輯可以解釋該比丘對國王所做的回答，該比丘所做的回答，並不是唯一的答案。
‧ 另一個關於「我」的概念則是，試著不要用塵世的觀點（因為這樣的觀點可能是不精確的，不完美的…等），而是以完美的觀點來看這些和合的部件。有人認為這個世上有一千位或是一萬位的佛？佛教說，眾生皆能成佛，那麼我的問題來了，如果有這麼多的佛，是什麼原因使得佛成為「許多」的佛？「多」代表著我們可以將他們區別出來，我們可以計算他們，而這也是他們之所以被假定為「多」的原因。可是在完美狀態之下所存在的佛，並沒有手、腳…等部位，就像那先比丘所說的車子理論一樣。那麼，究竟是什麼原因讓我們可以區別出這麼多的佛呢？這就是我的問題。
‧ 在《那先比丘經》裡，那先比丘與彌蘭王的對談，得到了這樣的結論：因為我們的經驗告訴我們，我們可以觀察到某一個物件是由許多的部份所組成的，所以我們可以推論，一切事物都是由許多部份所組成的。然而，這只是一種概括性的說法，完全不是一種合乎邏輯的證明。說得明白一點，就好像我們在高中數學時所做的證明一樣：假設１和２都是整數，那麼我們可以推論９８９９８是一個整數；但我們不能說，因為經驗的結果，所以我們確定９８９９８是個整數。所以，我所要表達的是，如果我們說：「我接受佛教，是因為我們相信佛陀，信仰佛陀。」那麼這樣子的陳述是合乎邏輯的，但是如果我們說：「我接受佛教，因為這是藉由我的觀察而推論出的結論。」這樣子的推論，就是不合邏輯的，是錯誤的！！！
i always answer questions , but now i want also to ASK SOME QUESTIONS see peoples reply.
so please translate my questions about Buddhism (of of course if you give any answer in will be good but for job is only the questions this time).
my purpose is not to start a debate, i hate this and it is not good, but to open a polite dialog in a spirit of friendship and respect, and actually to attract more readers in our website and make it more philosophical. today many of religious differences are based on logical foundations misunderstandings.
1. Buddhism says that there is no personal identity, nothing permanent.
it is depended co-origination.
so me, fr jonah actually i am only a name, nothing more.
as it is in the 那先比丘經
http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T32/1670b001.htm
but this is true if we SUPPOSE that i am ONLY body, and have parts blood etc….
so this idea is correct IF AND ONLY IF WE ACCEPT this.
* but if we SUPPOSE THAT WE HAVE SOUL, as the general idea of soul, WHICH OF COURSE HAS NO HANDS, LEGS , BLOOD ETC…, has nothing that changes. in that case their IS personal identity, something PERMANENT , BECAUSE HAS NO PARTS.
* my meaning is to say that buddhism starts with a belief, a trust to a personwho teaches this theory, to buddha who suggests that EVERYTHING has parts, like the chariot in the 那先比丘經 has axis, wheels etc…
* but as we see there are other theories also that can be based on a belief for example of a soul which has no parts because it is immaterial. and can be equally logically accepted.
* another logical (not religious) idea about who i am , which is not according to the book 那先比丘經 (milida pahna the link i have above)(actually the king who speaks to the nagasena is the greek kind Menandros ,in india, is it funny?, i am greek also, …) but can be equally accepted is that the concept i have for MYSELF, FOR WHO I AM , DOES NOT DEPENDS ON MY PARTS. i have the idea that i exist independently of my legs , head , etc…
* IF we accept a 5th dimension that exists, then , the parts of the chariot, like the wheels, the axis etc.. CAN BE CONNECTED BY THIS DIMENSION, so THE CHARIOT EXISTS. for example if you have a piece of paper, which is a 2-dimensional surface and you put your fingers on it, a 2 dimensional creature will see 5 fingerprints (one for each of your figures and he will thing that there are PARTS of your hand, so it will conclude according to buddhism that the concept HAND is only a name . but if you see in 3 dimensions you see that there is one object the hand, not only the projections of the hand to a surface. i write this to say again that there are MANY logical explanations and not only one as the monk says to the king.
* another idea about identity is to see the parts not from this world point of view (which may be is not accurate , perfect, etc) so let us see from the perfection. how about the 1000 or 10.000 buddhas? buddhism says that i can be a buddha also. my question is , if there are many buddhas, WHAT MAKES THEM TO BE MANY? MANY MEANS THAT WE CAN DISTINGUISH THEM, THAT WE CAN COUNT THEM, THIS IS WHY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MANY. in the perfect state of being one buddha, obviously you do not have legs , hands etc.. like the chariot theory. WHAT MAKES THEM TO BE DISTINGUISHED ? this is my question.
* also in this famous dialog , the milida pahna, nagasena , CONCLUDES , that because our experience says that the things WE CAN OBSERVE consist of parts , HE CONCLUDES THAT EVERYTHING ALSO CONSISTS OF PARTS. but this is a generalization, it is not a logical proof at all. to be more clear , in high school mathematics we PROVE that, if 1 and 2 are integers then then 98998.. is integer. WE DO NOT SAY , OF COURSE IT IS BECAUSE OUR EXPERIENCE SAYS SO. so what i want to say is that if we say , i accept Buddhism because i trust and believe Buddha, it is logical consist , but if we say i accept Buddhism because this is the logical conclusion of my objervations , this is wrong.!!!!
