This is also an interesting title on the subject:
1 Like
Indeed! But copyrighted 
The papers that make up that book are probably all here:
I have some of them so those I know are free to download.
1 Like
As I see it, to understand this issue, one needs to separate ‘conventional reality’ and ‘ultimate reality.’ In conventional reality, free will exists - for example, we say that a person can do whatever he/she wants to do. However, when considering ultimate reality, there is no free will - there are simply causes and conditions leading to other causes and conditions and these causes can operate through any of the five causal laws (pancha niyama dharma). Also, when hearing the dhamma (another causal factor) the “person” begins to understand phenomena and begins to see ‘things as they are.’ Then the “person” is able to see how it is causes and conditions that lead to other causes and conditions - so, this dhamma understanding has the potential to change his/her actions rather than doing things based on past habits.
[quote=“Mike_0123, post:1, topic:25677”] The idea of an agent behind the actions is incorrect, let alone a free agent.
Everything is conditioned, so something can’t exist without its conditions, but the existence of the conditions don’t always determine whether or not the effect exists. For example, water is necessary for a plant to grow, but the existence of water doesn’t always imply that there is a plant growing there.
[/quote]
- In the beginning stage of developing the path, applying to most western lay Buddhists, a self is necessary:
“The self as a governing principle”—AN 3.40
-
The reason there is confusion is because of seeing conditioning as meaning DO, rather than impermanence. ‘Conditioned’ means everything that has a birth is destined or conditioned to die. In the case of water, when it evaporates that is classed as a death.
-
Free will is essential in Buddhism. An act of will is implied here as the initiator, followed by a positive causal sequence. In practice these factors are subtle at first and need recognition and cultivation:
“For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, ‘May freedom from remorse arise in me.’ It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue etc.”—AN 11.2
Recognition of the effects of sila and its absence should constitute the main investigative activity, as illustrated by the Buddha-to-be’s example:
"The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: ‘Why don’t I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?’ So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort.
"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that ‘Thinking imbued with sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding.’—MN 19
You often emphazise (i think i see that) that we need to make good use of the conditioned. I feel that is true and can be seen in the sutta’s very clearly.
One can see desire and conceit as a problem, and they are called defilements, but it is not like one must or can immediately abandon all desires and conceit. In the sutta’s there is more an approach that one must make good use of it.
I think it is the same with will. It is not that one must immediately drop all will and see will as the great problem or cause of suffering. We can develop will and we can grow in applying will. We can even develop supernatural powers from this which can benefit the world.
If free means no condition, and will means desire or craving then I think it is not compatible with DO that says craving is a dependently arisen phenomenon. Without feeling, there is no craving. Therefore, there is no craving with no condition (or there is no free will.)
1 Like
If a Buddha, at will, can go to whatever realm, can transform himself in the elements, can copy himself, can dive into the Earth, can fly, can walk over water, what must he do to let us believe his will is freed?
If free means no restriction, then the Buddha is unable to have desire or will to kill living beings. So, it is not free to do so.
Tibetans hold that monks can’t steal Dhamma 
3 Likes
I love the ambiguity in that “can’t” 
3 Likes
Exactly. It makes me appreciative of the generosity of many Theravāda publishers though, so that we don’t have to explore that ambiguity
4 Likes