Jacques Huynen wrote:

> As I understand, it is precisely the understanding
> that every thing is conditioned
> (paticcasamutpada / pratityasamutpada), to begin with
> the "self", a mere bunch of customs, habits and
> reflexes, that makes one free.

True, with some caveats, but that is not at issue here.

> for one's own chosen aims ...

This is the problem, as I see it -- choice is just another way of saying
free-will. There is actually no choice -- it is illusory -- if a Buddha is
omniscient in the accepted sense of the term. Even if we say that there is
no self to make choices, the same problem arises. The course of the stream
of events (dhammas) to which we apply the label Jacques or Stephen would
still be pre-determined.

In the discussion to which Robert kindly pointed me, Nina quoted the
Patisambhidamagga Ch 72 (p. 131):

"What is the Perfect One's omniscient knowledge ?"
"It knows without exception all that is formed and unformed, thus it is
omniscient knowledge: [snip] All that is future it knows,... "

For a Buddha to know everything "without exception" in the future, these
things must all be fixed and pre-determined. There is no way to avoid this
conclusion. This knowledge of future things that are known include, as we
are told, a Buddha's fore-knowledge of the time etc of the liberation or
awakening of other beings. If he knows that event, then he must also,
logically, know all events in a person's life leading up to that moment.
Thus, again, these events must be pre-determined. The chain of karmic
events also becomes entirely fixed in reality, with no possibility of
deviation.

To come back to the issue which prompted this discussion, the question then
is whether the traditional understanding of "omnscience" is mistaken or else
do the teachings of the Buddha ever state or imply that choice in one's
course of actions is illusory. I tend take the former view, though I might
be wrong.

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge