Objection · Case 14 · Buddhism

Christianity has a parallel tension: personal identity through death and resurrection is a philosophical puzzle too. Why present identity over time as a problem unique to Buddhism? And Thanissaro raises the tension only to dissolve it.

One objection from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.

Suggest a correction

Response

Personal identity is a hard problem for everyone, and that should be said. The difference is that Christianity affirms an enduring self that makes moral continuity intelligible, and its puzzle is about the mechanism, whereas Buddhism denies the enduring self and so has to explain how moral continuity works without one. Thanissaro’s resolution, that anatta is a strategy rather than a metaphysical claim, deserves to be presented whole; the question that remains even on his reading is what the moral agent is. The Buddhist answer, the causal stream, is coherent, and who gets free is a fair question to ask rather than a refutation.

About this exhibit

This objection is to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, “No-self or Not-self?”.

This Theravada teacher names the difficulty directly: the no-self teaching does not sit easily beside karma and rebirth, since if there is no self it is not obvious what experiences the results of…

Under Claim 01: Buddhism’s teaching of no-self sits in real tension with its teaching of karma and rebirth, a difficulty recognized within Buddhism itself.