What does Buddhism say about events that cannot be explained through rational thought (also known as Glitch-in-the-Matrix events)?

For example, if I dropped a key in a closed room with nothing else there, what is the explanation for why it disappeared if I go to pick it up and it is not there?

  • 2
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it has nothing to do with Buddhism – Yeshe Tenley Jan 18 at 22:51
  • 1
    Are there any examples of such events? – user14119 Jan 19 at 10:23

A feature of Buddhism is Noble Silence -- i.e. not getting drawn into speculation (or "unwise attention").

I don't want to complain about the question, but the first paragraph is fiction (referencing the Matrix) and the second is like a "thought experiment" but I don't know what you're saying with it or if it's a metaphor for something -- it appears to invite speculation (maybe someone took it? maybe you misremembered?) -- or it's perhaps a paradox.

There are Kōans, used in some traditions of Buddhism, I don't know that's related to this question though.

One or two suttas mention the four great references -- and according to that I'd say that your question is not the kind of thing that the Buddha talked about -- to that extent "Buddhism" doesn't say anything about that topic.

At the risk of sounding too new-Age I might add that buddhism points out that put-together things are impermanent -- and so are thoughts, that there are different thought-moments. Given that your second paragraph is no more than a thought-experiment, there's nothing very remarkable about a thought (like "a key") existing in one moment and not existing in another.

| improve this answer | |

Buddha called them views. These are discussed in "Net of all views" sutta.


| improve this answer | |

There are no such events; all experienced reality is mindmade and is therefore completely reasonable

That which is called mind, consciousness or intellect preceds all phenomena, mind is their ruler mind-made are they.

Three aggregates are conjoined with consciousness; perception, feeling and synthesis. Form is not conjoined with consciousness. Form is synthesized by synthesis as form.

Contact at any sense base is associated with contact at mind base.

Thus it is not surprising that one can use mathematics to understand perceived reality and it appears as if it is based on these same philosophical principles, because it is. Therefore reality is inherently reasonable.

| improve this answer | |
  • Please elaborate/improve this answer. – esh Jan 30 at 7:17
  • I don't post on this site because mod is stupid and deletes answers but i'll make an exception. – deadmanposting Mar 8 at 4:21
  • So nice of you. – Andrei Volkov Mar 8 at 13:31

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.