I’d like to ask about the following post, and I’d ask it here since we did refer to the current series here.
Sakkāya Diṭṭhi and Pañcupādānakkhandhā
You mentioned a “person” in several places:
#2
iv. The point is that a “person” is not consciously involved in that fast process.
#8
The concept of khandhas shows that at least the initial attachment DOES NOT involve a person. As I have tried to explain in the posts in this section, experiencing sensory input is an automatic process.
Sakkāya Diṭṭhi = View that “There is an Unchanging Person” Experiencing the World
#9
That means “there is no unchanging person.”
#10
The point here is that the idea of a “person” seeing a tree (and generating mental aspects based on it) is not what actually happens.
So, the initial sensory processing is automatic, but somehow at the khandā level a “person” is conjured up.
I recall that in another post you wrote that the Buddha said that viññāṇa is like a magician. Is this an example of that? That viññāṇa produces the notion of a “person” out of an automatic process.
Is this also related to atta/anatta? The notion of a “person” implies that somebody is in control or in charge (atta) when the true nature of sensory processing is such that nobody is “in charge” (anatta)?
Thank you, as always, for all the series of posts. I am about to read the last one in the series.
Lang