Reply To: Sakkaya vs Sakkaya ditthi


Thank you Lang and Lal for taking the time to reply to my post and the sharing of Dhamma, much merits to the both of you. Saddhu saddhu saddhu

#1. *** Just wondering, have I understood properly what is being taught in the video below in regards to the difference between Sakkaya and Sakkaya ditthi? ***

From what I understand right now and believe to make the most sense, is that Sakkaya and Sakkaya ditthi are understood (1) differently (not exactly the same thing) but are connected. Why I say this is because if one watches the above video from the beginning to about the 38:00 mark, Waharaka Thero spent most of the video teaching about the different wrong views of a “self” (I, Me).

The definition given to Sakkaya ditthi in the sutta’s and what I understand is that Sakkaya Ditthi is having the four wrong views about the 5 aggregates or the wrong views about a “self” (I, me).

While Sakkaya is pancupadanakkhandha, a satta (attached), or taking Kaya as Sath . (37:53 – 39:45 of the video.)

(1) Why I believe Sakkaya and Sakkaya ditthi are to be understood in two different ways. 39:00 – 39:16 of the video.

Lal said: “Sakkaya Ditthi arises in those who do not understand the Paticca Samuppada process”

#2. If I have understood correctly or what I contemplated is correct, Sakkaya is the origin of Sakkaya Ditthi.

I believe the understanding of Paticca Samuppada is one of the requirements to remove Sakkaya ditthi. But even with Sakkaya Ditthi removed one would still Sakkaya until one has removed all Avija. If I understood correctly, the “perception” of “I, me” or mana is deeply embedded in our pancakkhandha, its been with us since no discernable beginning. As long as the pancakkhandha is there for the satta, the “perception” of “I, me” or mana will be there.

Lang said:
“I haven’t heard of one who connects breath meditation to sakkaya ditthi”.

I come to realize that connecting breath meditation to Sakkaya ditthi was one of the many wrong understandings that I came to while contemplating on Dhamma. I apologize for wasting the person’s time for reading an inappropriate example.

with Metta,