Reply To: Why is Pali Canon so huge?

#50529
Lal
Keymaster

Yes. It does.

  • The usage of the word “self” must be understood. 

The quoted sentence is in #13 of that post and is as follows:

The question is not whether there is a “self” or not. Is it wise to think that it is worthwhile to have the perception of a “self” and do things only for the pleasure of the “self”? If born a dog, would it be the same self?  But if one does lowly deeds that a dog does (say defecating in public, having sex with children, etc.), one could be born a dog. The wrong perception of a “self” can lead to immoral actions and suffering in future lives. “

  • I made that comment referring to an “unchanging self” (like a soul) in that sentence.
  • If there is an “unchanging self” (like a soul), one cannot attain Nibbana, i.e., stop the rebirth process.
  • Instead, a given “lifestream” gets a rebirth based on the type of (abhi)sankhara cultivated with avijja. When avijja is removed from a mind (with the comprehension of the Buddha’s worldview or the Four Noble Truths), that Paticca Samuppada process stops, i.e., no more “upadana paccaya bhava” and “bhava paccaya jati.”

P.S. I revised the above-quoted paragraph as follows to make it more clear:

“The question is not whether there is a “self” or not. Is it wise to think that it is worthwhile to have the perception of a “self” and do things only for the pleasure of the “self”? If born a dog, would that dog have the same “self”?  But if one does lowly deeds that a dog does (say defecating in public, having sex with children, etc.), one could be born a dog. The wrong perception of an unchanging self can lead to immoral actions and suffering in future lives.”

2 users thanked author for this post.