No. This is not just a claim, it is also a logical certainty. ‘A’ cannot be ‘not-A’. An event consists of something, otherwise it is nothing. It is not possible for something to exist without some-thing existing.bahman wrote:This is just a claim: Experience needs an experiencer.
I think you are confusing this experiencer with a soul/mind. This experiencer is NOT a soul/mind. The experiencer only experiences (…that’s it, that’s all, …and nothing more!!!).bahman wrote:We know that there have been a long debate existence of soul/mind. Do you have any proof that soul/mind (the experiencer) exist?
Experiencer Exists --- logically derived; for without an Experiencer, Experiencing could not exist (happen).
(...oh, and the Mind/Soul only exists in one's imagination!)
bahman wrote:This is central teaching of Buddhism which makes quite sense to me.
RG1 wrote:No offense Bahman, but it only makes sense to you because you are caught up in the ‘feel-goodness’ of your religion (Buddhism), which causes you to automatically (i.e. blindly) accept this as ‘truth’. You’ve discarded ‘logic' in favor of (religious) ‘feel-goodness’.
Note: Even the almighty Buddha can’t make the impossible, possible!
Noted. Sorry for the false inference.bahman wrote:Buddhism in not my religion.