- This topic has 25 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 18 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Hello Dhamma friends,
In “Self” and “no-self”: A Simple Analysis – Do We Always Act with Avijjā?:
Getting back to the first comment, instead of saying either “a person exists” or “a person does not exist,” the Buddha said that a living being exists moment-to-moment. We cannot deny that a person exists, but there is nothing absolute about “a person.” Instead, “a person” continually changes; we conventionally call a person “John Smith,” etc.- Another way to say the same thing is to say that “a living being” exists in a given state until the cause (and conditions) that give rise to that existence exist. Once root causes are changed, that existence will change to a new one. For example, if a human starts doing things that animals usually do, then that person will likely get an animal birth after death.
By the law of cause and effect (Paticca Samuppada), a sentient being comes into existence based on the ripened past cause(s) and is capable of perceiving things and making decisions involving thoughts, speech and bodily actions. So it would not be correct to say they don’t exist.
However, there is no such entity that doesn’t change and can be kept the way one likes. In other words, the entire 5 aggregates are impermanent and unreliable (anicca). So it would not be tenable to say that a “self” exists.
Funnily enough, the annoying part is that no matter how much the aggregates change, the perception of a well-defined self is there every moment until the mind is purified to the arahant level.
Now I would like to extend this idea to the unconditioned element that is Nibbana. One can’t say something is their self if it is anicca, anatta, and dukkha. This includes everything in this world (citta, cetasika and rupa). But since Nibbana is described as nicca, atta and sukha (the opposite of the conditioned elements) and only the specific mind that cultivates this correct perception (that conditions are Tilakkhana) merges with this element, would it be appropriate to say Nibbana is their “self”?
This also makes me think that “no me” is not a correct approach because there will be the deathless replacing the conditioned. What do you guys think?
-
Good householder, not on “guy”, just out of compassion:
It’s good and very needed to see one’s actions as own, make them important, look for it’s beauty and purity, to practice and to abound all of what’s no refuge, including, after having abond objects of identification in the sensual-word, also such as perception, even ideas of Nibbana.
But for now just much care about what’s a useful island, goodness, metta, virtue, purification of Sila, to gain the required Brahma-joy, to be able of refined purification and beyond.
No need to worry about useless identifications which aren’t of much support for doing the task of going beyond Dukkha. Yet that task needs a lot of conceit, a lot of desire for purity, especially when in the mud of sensuality.
Good to stay always by cause and effect and don’t leave the middle path by Papanca.
“To be or not to be” isn’t a releasing question. And no need for further identifications once the deathless, unchanging, is gained
(Samana Johann)
-
” But since Nibbana is described as nicca, atta and sukha (the opposite of the conditioned elements) and only the specific mind that cultivates this correct perception (that conditions are Tilakkhana) merges with this element, would it be appropriate to say Nibbana is their “self”?”
- No. It is only those striving to attain Nibbana consider it to be of nicca, atta, sukha VERSUS anicca, anatta, dukha associated with existence in any realm of this world.
- A living Arahant also sees what they have attained as nicca, atta, and sukha. Of course, they will experience any physical ailments associated with the body they were born with, but they know that it will also go away when the physical body dies.
- Nibbana means total dissociation from this world. Nibbana cannot be described in terms of the vocabulary “of this world.”
- The “ever-changing personality” terminates with becoming an Arahant.
- Only the physical body born as an “average human (puthujjana)” lives until its death and is subjected to physical ailments; after the death of the physical body, there is no trace of that “lifestream.” Only mental phenomena sustained that lifestream!
- That should be clear when you see that the Paticca Samuppada process starts with “avijja paccaya sankhara” and leads to “bhava ” and “jati” leading to existence as a human, Deva, animal, etc. at different times. All those existences were maintained/sustained by kammic energy!
- It takes an effort to stop evaluating Buddha Dhamma with a “mundane mindset.” A paradigm change is necessary to understand Buddha’s teachings, as I pointed out in the current post: “Sensory Experience, Paṭicca Samuppāda, and pañcupādānakkhandha.”
-
Maybe useful in regard of the OP: MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta — The Root Sequence
As for now, trainee (and later similar, Satipatthana):
…“He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
(Samana Johann)
-
Thank you for correcting me with your compassionate responses!
@Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu:
“It’s good and very needed to see one’s actions as own, make them important, look for it’s beauty and purity, to practice and to abound all of what’s no refuge, including, after having abond objects of identification in the sensual-word, also such as perception, even ideas of Nibbana.
But for now just much care about what’s a useful island, goodness, metta, virtue, purification of Sila, to gain the required Brahma-joy, to be able of refined purification and beyond.”
I see, the goal is to build the right perspective to see things the way they are, i.e. why conditions are impermanent, unstable and unreliable. Of course that will take intentional efforts encompassing the traits you mentioned: “goodness, metta, virtue, purification of Sila, to gain the required Brahma-joy, to be able of refined purification and beyond.”
@Lal:
“Nibbana means total dissociation from this world. Nibbana cannot be described in terms of the vocabulary “of this world.
The “ever-changing personality” terminates with becoming an Arahant.”
Got it, that would mean the idea of “self” is not relevant to Nibbana. But it is the specific mind of an arahant that dissociates from this world and merges with Nibbana, right? So I would think there is individuality, at least till death.
-
Things aren’t but do. Good to do, to hold deeds (kamma) as ones own, to take on just right and pleasing deeds, to go beyond all need of doing. Doing is burdensome, requires steady paccaya. And yes, doing is very individual.
Doing so, gained faith, one is already called a firm person.
(Samana Johann)
-
Let me put it this way: There is no “soul-type” permanent entity as in Cristianity. It is an illusion.
- Paticca Samuppada explains that the idea of an “everlasting self” (a “soul-type” entity) is an illusion. Each “existence” is created by the mind in previous lives. That is how the rebirth process continues.
- Please reread my above comment and the post I recommended.
- The following post could be helpful too: “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream”
-
-
The goal is to end the suffering in the rebirth process.
- The Buddha taught the following: We will not be reborn humans repeatedly (or be reborn in a higher, heavenly realm for eternity). Depending on their actions (moral/immoral), humans can be reborn in higher or lower realms. We can see only one of the four lower realms, the animal realm; the other three lower realms have even more suffering. In addition, rebirths in the low realms are much more frequent. Therefore, there is unimaginable suffering in the rebirth process.
- That is why one would want to end the rebirth process and attain Nibbana.
You have not read my comments or the posts I recommended (or do not have enough background on Buddha’s teachings). If interested, I recommend reading “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream” to learn about the rebirth process.
-
Sorry, but I am confused. I understood this point: “Paticca Samuppada explains that the idea of an “everlasting self” (a “soul-type” entity) is an illusion. Each “existence” is created by the mind in previous lives. That is how the rebirth process continues.”
So what is the goal?
Good householder,
to end the pointless wandering on from birth, aging, sickness and decay, the everon grasping of what’s lost again, to end the burden of steady sacrificing and arrive at peace, at the deathless, the task with an end done.
This path starts and ends with good deeds, blameless deeds, as it’s the source for blameless joy, required for the path.
(Samana Johann)
-
@Lal:
Thank you for responding. You don’t have to be cocky about your knowledge.
I did read your comments and the essays you referenced. You make the same conclusion in most of your posts, summarized as, “A sentient being is an everchanging lifestream that evolves according to the law of Paticca Samuppada. There is no self in reality but beings below the arahant stage have the perception of self.”
My issue with that idea is that how can there be perception of anything along with conscious ability to think and do bodily actions if there is no self in reality? Furthermore, when an arahant realizes that there is no “me”, do they suddenly become talking corpses?
By “goal”, I wasn’t referring to the ultimate goal of ending rebirth process but the understanding one needs to have in this context. If each existence represents different “person”, why should one worry about future suffering?
Note: I started this thread with the intent of learning. If I say anything wrong, I want to be corrected. It is okay if ya’ll don’t have answers, lmk and I’ll stop posting.
-
“My issue with that idea is that how can there be perception of anything along with conscious ability to think and do bodily actions if there is no self in reality?”
- The innate sense of a “me” will be there (at different levels) until one attains the Arahant stage.
_______
“Furthermore, when an arahant realizes that there is no “me”, do they suddenly become talking corpses?”
- No. Their mind would be free of even a trace of greed, anger, and ignorance (about the true nature of the world.)
- Instead of becoming corpses, they will have the best clarity of mind.
___________
“By “goal”, I wasn’t referring to the ultimate goal of ending rebirth process but the understanding one needs to have in this context.”
- Without believing in the process, one cannot understand the “true nature of the world.”
- It is up to each person to believe or not believe in the rebirth process. However, Buddha’s teachings (at least the more profound aspects, like the absence of a soul) cannot be understood without a rebirth process. The laws of kamma (explained via Paticca Samuppada) operate not only in this life but also in future lives. For example, person X may kill another and be able not to get caught by law enforcement. But he will not be able to escape the consequence of that immoral deed (kamma vipaka) and being born as an animal or worse.
_____
“If each existence represents different “person”, why should one worry about future suffering?”
- Future lives are not that different from present lives. Were you the “exact same person” when you were five, ten, or twenty years old? Did you look the same at those stages, have the same ambitions/goals or outlook on life, etc., as now?
- Whether you are worried about suffering in the coming years or not, suffering will increase as you get older (it applies to all of us). In the same way, at least according to the Buddha, suffering in future lives cannot be avoided until one cleanses one’s mind of greed, anger, and ignorance (about the true nature of the world.)
- P.S. What aspect of “Lagrade” has remained unchanged over the years to make it a specific and same exact “Lagrade”?
-
Lagrade, I admit that the site uses advanced terms and concepts that are difficult for a beginner to understand. Even I didn’t understand certain concepts. This site is more suitable for those who are advanced. I suggest focusing on the monastery sermons because they are very suitable for beginners. They use terms that are easy for non-Buddhists and new Buddhists to grasp. If you want, I can put you in contact with monks who can give you private sermons adapted to your understanding. To begin on the path to the end of suffering, a person who has reached at least the first level of the path (Sotāpanna) must explain it to us. We cannot reach the first stage by reading, we must hear it with our ears. It is When one becomes Sotāpanna that one becomes independent and no longer needs to hear. An average human must hear with their ears, to reach the first stage. This is a personal recommendation, but I advise you to speak with the monks of the monastery to facilitate your understanding and assimilation of the Dhamma! You can contact me at my email [email protected] if you are interested!
-
@Lal:
“The innate sense of a “me” will be there (at different levels) until one attains the Arahant stage.”
Yes, how is that possible? There shouldn’t be any sense of ‘me’ if there is no ‘me’ in the first place.
“Future lives are not that different from present lives. Were you the “exact same person” when you were five, ten, or twenty years old? Did you look the same at those stages, have the same ambitions/goals or outlook on life, etc., as now”
Thank you. This presents a strong argument that there seems to be no unchanging entity that defines the essence of an individual. But like you said, there is a sense of me so one could argue that there is a dynamic self. How would that be incorrect?
@Jittananto:
“If you want, I can put you in contact with monks who can give you private sermons adapted to your understanding. To begin on the path to the end of suffering, a person who has reached at least the first level of the path (Sotāpanna) must explain it to us.”
That would be great, thank you.
-
I have tried to explain it as simply as possible. Those are concepts that require a sufficient background.
- Hopefully, you will be able to understand it someday (or maybe even now by reading through the above discussion, including the suggested posts). I hope you will not lose interest in Buddha’s teachings.
- If you are interested in learning the fundamentals, I recommend reading from the following two sections: “Moral Living and Fundamentals” and “Living Dhamma.”
Of course, if someone else is willing to continue the discussion, please do. I don’t have the time necessary to explain this material in detail, as it is covered in posts throughout this website.
-
Asking questions like “is there a self?”, or “is there no self?” or “is there both self and no self?” or “is there neither self nor no self?” Are wrong questions to ask. Rather the Buddha said that the right question is to ask that “why do I feel a self?”. If you see a car, you can feel that there is a car, but if I ask you to touch the car , you won’t be able to. If you touch the frame then it’s steel not car, if you touch the Windows then it’s glass not car. You can touch those individual parts that make up a car, but never a car. So is there a car or not? Again wrong question. Ask why do I feel that there is a car? Answer is because all those causes have been arranged in a manner that match your perception of a car. If you take those individual parts and arrange them differently, you will feel that the “Car” has been disfigured, but only the arrangement has changed. It’s the mind’s nature to feel entities and not manifestations. Feeling a “Car” causes all of this mess, there is just manifestation of a Car(effect)as long as the individual parts(causes) are arranged in the “right order”(condition). Mind is just a process which only interacts with its environment, but due to its inbuilt “fault” it experiences a Self . If you have read what Rupa,Vedana,Sañña, Sankhara and Viññaña in a mental process is ,then it would be easier to grasp this. These are just steps of recognition and perception, that’s all.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
Excellent, Yash!
In a comment above, I asked Lagrade the following to point out a similar issue regarding one of his questions:
Lagrade’s question: “If each existence represents different “person”, why should one worry about future suffering?”
- Future lives are not that different from present lives. Were you the “exact same person” when you were five, ten, or twenty years old? Did you look the same at those stages, have the same ambitions/goals or outlook on life, etc., as now?
- Whether you are worried about suffering in the coming years or not, suffering will increase as you get older (it applies to all of us). In the same way, at least according to the Buddha, suffering in future lives cannot be avoided until one cleanses one’s mind of greed, anger, and ignorance (about the true nature of the world.)
- P.S. What aspect of “Lagrade” has remained unchanged over the years to make it a specific and same exact “Lagrade”?
-
Hello Lagrade,
I am sorry to see that you’re confused about this topic. While I don’t consider myself a Dhamma expert, I will try to help you with my 2 cents:
You wrote: “My issue with that idea is that how can there be perception of anything along with conscious ability to think and do bodily actions if there is no self in reality?”
Saññā (perception) is one of the mental aggregates and is a kamma vipaka, i.e. a result of past action (kamma). According to Tipitaka, the precise details of how a kammic energy can ripen into its corresponding vipaka is only discernible to a Sammasambuddha. What we can do is get the general idea. A sentient being can’t recognize anything without having perception. A human has “manussa saññā“, deva has “deva saññā”, dog has “dog saññā” and so on. We have all experienced uncountable perceptions in the beginless samsara. The first saññā can not be traced back according to Buddha. But our perceptions don’t give us the “absolute truth” as our sense organs provide us a fabricated version of reality. A good example is provided by Yash above. What we conveniently call a “person” is an assemblage of parts, specifically the 5 aggregates.
Now to the other point regarding the “conscious ability to think and do bodily actions”. Our awareness arises due to 2 processes: sensory input and the processing of sensory input. A sentient being is an everchanging entity that behaves according to the existence resulted by the law of Paticca Samuppada. This is true for even a single life as demonstrated by Dr. Lal above. There is no enduring entity that you can can attribute as your “self”.
But then you may ask why it is wrong to identify with the aggregates even if they are impermanent. You asked: “there is a sense of me so one could argue that there is a dynamic self.”
Buddha said you can’t say something is truly “yours” under the following conditions:
- It is not under your complete control
- It can’t be maintained to your satisfaction
- It leads to suffering in the long run
You are correct in pointing out that we have conscious abilities. A healthy human has a pretty sharp mind capable of performing complex tasks, BUT the question is how long will that last? As we get older, our bodies age and eventually our brains will start to decay. Our “conscious abilities” will continue to worsen as we enter old age. It will get even worse when the kammic energy sustaining the human existence is exhausted and an apaya existence is grasped after death. An animal’s conscious abilities are much more limited than that of a human, for example and of course its suffering is far worse. So if something is inconstant, subject to unexpected and unwanted changes, and ultimately leads to suffering, would it be appropriate to say this is ‘me’ or this is my ‘self’?
When you study Abhidhamma in detail, this will get even more clear. Our awareness is a result of several units of cognitions knows as “citta”. There is only one citta at a time. Identifying with it would be like saying “I arise and disappear” which wouldn’t make sense.
And as for Nibbana, Buddha said it exists but there are no words in this word that can be used to describe what it is. So the status of an arahant is the wrong point to start. This is why Buddha said it is incorrect to make the following statements about an arahant:
“They exist after death”
“They don’t exist after death”
“They neither exist nor don’t exist after death.”
“They both exist and don’t exist after death.”
But to get to the arahant level and the end of suffering, intentional efforts are needed. So yes, “individuality” is there because we are responsible for our own future. Buddha always encouraged his followers to train like a horse trained for battle!
4 users thanked author for this post.
-
-
Excellent, Taryal!
- I am happy that our community is becoming knowledgeable in the deeper aspects of Buddha’s teachings.
Taryal wrote: “Saññā (perception) is one of the mental aggregates and is a kamma vipaka, i.e. a result of past action (kamma). According to Tipitaka, the precise details of how a kammic energy can ripen into its corresponding vipaka is only discernible to a Sammasambuddha. What we can do is get the general idea. A sentient being can’t recognize anything without having perception. A human has “manussa saññā“, deva has “deva saññā”, dog has “dog saññā” and so on..”
- That summarizes a critical aspect of our world!
1. “Saññā” (loosely translated as “perception”) is a critical concept in Buddha’s teachings. It is one of the five aggregates (or, more correctly, pancupadanakkhandha) that summarizes our sensory experience and how we respond to those experiences.
- In fact, most of our decisions are based on saññā. Only bodily contacts directly lead to feelings (vedana) of pleasure or pain/distress. All other sensory experiences (sights, sounds, tastes, smells) only lead to saññā of like/dislike, tasty/bitter, etc.; they feel the same as vedana. That is clearly distinguished in Abhidhamma.
- As I have pointed out many times, the taste of honey or the smell of a rose is a saññā and not a vedana in a strict sense. However, that difference is not emphasized in the suttas because Abhidhamma was fully developed after the Buddha’s Parinibbana.
2. The critical role of saññā becomes clear when we compare the sensory experiences of humans (manussa) with those of animals.
- Humans and animals feel the pain and pleasure in physical contact in the same way. They all feel pain if hit with a stick or injured.
- However, “manussa saññā“ is different from “animal saññā.“ Furthermore, different animals generate different types of saññā. While humans and bears like the taste of honey (they seem to give a sukha vedana), cows get a sukha vedana from eating grass. Lions get a sukha vedana when they eat the flesh of other animals, etc.. All those are examples of saññā!
3. Saññā is built into the physical and mental bodies of humans and animals, so it arises automatically. Even after attaining magga phala or even the Arahant stage, those built-in saññās remain. Thus, an Arahant would also taste honey as sweet.
- The following short video is about migrating birds, which helps explain the concept of “built-in saññā.” There are many other examples, like how ants build “mega colonies” or how dogs can find their way home if released hundreds of miles away.
- Migrating birds have a built-in saññā to trigger them to start migrating and also to provide navigation! Their bodies have built-in mechanisms (via kammic energy/Paticca Samuppada) to provide navigation. I asked Grok AI about it and it gave the following description.
Migrating birds possess a natural compass mechanism that is believed to be magnetically sensitive. Here’s a bit more detail:-
Magnetoreception: Many species of birds can detect the Earth’s magnetic field, which helps them navigate during migration. This ability is known as magnetoreception.
-
Cryptochrome Theory: One leading theory suggests that birds use proteins called cryptochromes, located in their eyes, which might be sensitive to magnetic fields. When these proteins absorb light, they could become involved in chemical reactions that are influenced by the Earth’s magnetic field, thus providing directional information.
-
Iron Particles: Another theory involves magnetite, a naturally magnetic form of iron oxide. Some studies have found tiny particles of magnetite in the beaks of homing pigeons and other birds. These particles might act like a microscopic compass needle, helping birds sense direction.
-
Other Navigation Tools: Besides magnetism, birds also use visual landmarks, the position of the sun, star patterns, and possibly even smell to navigate.
-
Therefore, migrating birds have biological systems that detect magnetic fields, aiding their remarkable navigational abilities during migration.
P.S. Another example is how ants build sophisticated “cities.” Watch the video in #10 of the post “How Character (Gati) Leads to Bhava and Jāti.” It is informative to read that post, too.
4 users thanked author for this post.
-
May I add, baby turtles running for life as soon as they’re born:
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
This is one of the reasons I cringe when people say “God is good”. Look at the suffering of animals in the wild. If organizations like National Geographic didn’t exist, most humans wouldn’t even be aware of how brutal this world is. What is “right” and what is “wrong” here? It seems like more external discoveries we make, more we know that Buddha is right.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Thank you, Taryal.
- Yes. There are many such examples of “built-in” saññā, which helps those species in many cases.
- On the other hand, the built-in “distorted saññā” providing a “false sense of pleasure” is common to all living beings, which traps them in the rebirth process. Living beings in “kāma loka” receive a false/distorted kāma saññā for sensory inputs. Rupa loka Brahmās receive a false/distorted jhānic saññā and Arupa loka Brahmās receive a false/distorted arupa samāpatti saññā.
- It is essential to distinguish between the two categories.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Here is another example of built-in saññā. Iguana hatchlings running for life as soon as they’re born:
A human baby can’t even move after birth. It is crazy to think that these animals face horror as soon as they come out of the egg. This is the actual Noble Truth of Suffering (Dukkha Sacca).
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.