- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Hi There, my question actually refers to two posts. They both describe 20 types of sakkāya ditthi but in different ways.
In the post Sakkāya Diṭṭhi – Wrong View of “Me” and “Mine” the following is stated:“One group (referred to as uccheda diṭṭh <– my addition) has the wrong vision about rūpa (material form) in 4 ways: to regard rūpa as “mine”, or “I” as rūpa, or rūpa to be “in me”, or “I” to be “in rūpa.”
Then there is the other group (referred as sassata diṭṭhi<– my addition) who regard one or more of the mental factors vedanā (feeling) … saññā (perception) … saṅkhāra ( ways of thinking) … viññāṇa (consciousness) as “mine”, or “I” as those, or them to be “in me”, or “I’ to be “in them”.”
“The Buddha pointed out that the mind can be separated out into four components (vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, and viññāṇa. Each of those could be viewed as “mine” in 4 ways like for the rupa. Thus, they could have one or more of those 16 wrong views. Those have sassata diṭṭhi.”My comment: In other words, one with sassata ditthi can have up to 16 wrong views and one with uccheda ditthi 4, totaling 20.
Then, in the post Sakkāya Diṭṭhi – Getting Rid of Deeper Wrong Views it is stated (I posted the relevant parts):
“Thus, there are five types of sakkāya diṭṭhi due to ucchēda diṭṭhi and 15 types of sakkāya diṭṭhi due to sassata diṭṭhi,” which is explained here:
One with ucchēda diṭṭhi (ucchedavādino) perceives “I am my body,” “I am my vēdanā,” “I am my saññā,” “I am my saṅkhāra,” and “I am my viññāna.”
“In other words, One with ucchēda diṭṭhi attributes all five aggregates to the physical body. Thus, when the physical dies, that is the end of all five aggregates. No rebirth.”
“One with sassata diṭṭhi (sassatavādino) perceives my body is me; my body is in me, I am in my body‘. He also perceives vedanā..sañña.. saṅkhāra.. viññāṇa in the same four ways (e.g., my viññāṇa is me, my viññāṇa is in me, I am in my viññāṇa)”.
In other words, One with sassata diṭṭhi attributes all five aggregates to the mental body. Thus, even when the physical dies, the five aggregates will continue.”My comments: Here there are 5 types of ditthi due to uccheda and 15 types to to sassata, again totaling 20 types of sakkaya ditthi.
Could this be clarified please?
With metta
-
Thanks, Jorg. It seems to me that the description in the second post you quoted is the correct explanation.
– I will go through both posts carefully and revise one. I will comment here when that is done.
– Thanks again for pointing out the discrepancy.P.S. When asking a question on a specific post, please have “Post on ‘Title of the Post'”
– I have revised the title of this thread accordingly.
– Otherwise, the thread could be confused with the post itself. -
-
I have re-written most of the post, “Sakkāya Diṭṭhi – Wrong View of ‘Me’ and ‘Mine’”
Please post if anyone has questions/comments.
– Thanks again to Jorg. My goal is to have all posts on the website be self-consistent and also consistent with the Tipitaka. -
Can someone clarify what would be difference between two views,
“I am my Body” vs “My body is Me”?They both seem to me same thing.
However difference last two views that is
When someone says “my body is IN me” or “I am IN my body” they clearly think there is somethings else which is actually his essence.EDIT:
This doubt came to me due to reading above replies. In which views are “I am body”, “my body is me”, “My body is in me”, “I am in my body “.
However, in the revised post by lal, the views written are “My body is equivalent to me” and “My body represents me”.
IF THIS IS THE CASE, then it becomes much easier to understand. “my body is equivalent to me” means without the body there would no renewed life of that being just like materialistic scientist’s view.
However CRITICAL THING TO UNDERSTAND IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACTUAL VIEW OF LIFE (i.e. Buddhist view) VS “THIS BODY REPRESENTS ME” View.
The materialistic view is easy to disregard, if one believes in rebirth then obviously something is taking rebirth. So there would be two kinds of views which would emerge. One is that “self” in this life is same as “self” in previous life. Another is that it is not same. Former view is wrong. Latter view is correct view.
In the actual true view of life, there is no permanent essence/Self/”I”/Me/Soul at any point in any lifestream anywhere There is only constantly changing mental body created based on strongest kammic energies present at those times.
However when one is of view that “My body represents me”, there is obviously window that in future “I” would represented by some new body, which would represent SAME “I” as right now, at that time. Which is wrong.
-
Only remaining question I have is how kamma Bijā and pañcakKhanda are tied to constantly changing lifestream?
I suspect this question has something to do with magga phala as well. Because at each magga phala there are kamma Bijā which that lifestream cannot grasp after phala citta, right?
Edit:
After some reading on website It seems answer lies in “tanha paccayā upādāna” step. After magga phala there are countless number of our aspirations about this world which cease. So, we never form any tanha for those object ever again.
Similarly, We remove tanha for all kama loka objects at anāgāmi stage,
so, as long as there is tanha, we want to keep close those desired arammana, and we will have bhava and jati and all dukkhā consequently.
So, removal of all tanha leads to removal of all upādāna and consequently all births in 31 realms, so, end of all suffering experienced due to Aniccā nature of saṅkhata in 31 realms ends with removal of tanha.
So, we need to just cultivate the panna about dhamma.
This is the nissarana from adīnava of sansarā.
Wow, I can see the path now.
Thank you so much for all your work, lal.
Your website has enabled all this for all of us!
-
You are right. It is at the “tanha paccayā upādāna” step that we do the both of the following:
1. We accumulate more kamma (and add to existing kamma bija).
2. We also grasp a new bhava at the cuti-patisandhi moment by “attaching to an arammana” via “tanha paccayā upādāna” which lead to “upadana paccaya bhava”, i.e., to a new bhava. Here an existing “kamma bhava” becomes “uppatti bhava”.
See, “Difference Between Tanhā and Upādāna” and “Taṇhā Paccayā Upādāna – Critical Step in Paṭicca Samuppāda“
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.