- This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta . LEIDER… unbefriedigend/unbeständig / vorübergehend
And yet it is not untrue; A.D.A., to be described as unsatisfactory/impermanent/transients, suffering and not self. Because we must always remember that the Buddha Dhamma is very profound. Many of the people in India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma etc. carry deep spiritual Anusaya and feel this statement… as Right<br />
It is also correct that “atta” and anatta cannot be traced back to “not yourself”.<br />
But why is it still not untrue to call anicca, dukkha, anatta as unsatisfactory/impermanents/transient, suffering and not self? Can anyone tell me this except Lal?Please, dear Dhamma friends, correct, explain, and write what you think.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
- It’s not completely wrong to view them this way. However, this way of looking at tilakkhana is superficial. Yes, these are aspects of Tilakkhana but they are not the deep aspects. For example, Annica’s “inability not to maintain things to our satisfaction” suggests a certain impermanence. However, suffering is also impermanent! Even though we spend the majority of our time in the Apayas, sooner or later we end up leaving them. We are happy to come out of these states of suffering. Impermanence here is rather beneficial! The problem is that most Buddhists these days associate impermanence with suffering. Yes, all phenomena are impermanent. What Annica means is that we will be unable to permanently maintain phenomena to our liking. Let us admit that a bhikkhu says “The eye and visual consciousness is Annica”. Of course, the eye is impermanent at the end of the body it will disintegrate and lose its functions. No need for Ariyas to remind us. What it says is that the eye will not be to our liking in the long term. In our quest for happiness through the eye and visual consciousness, we will suffer and we will never reach our goal. Certainly, we will have small moments of pleasure but it is nothing compared to the infinity of suffering that we suffered in Samsarā and that we will encounter in an immeasurable future. This is valid for the other 5 senses.
- Anatta means non-control. Yes, the idea of the absence of a permanent entity in each of us that is always in control is compatible with the Dhamma. However, there is someone who acts and undergoes the Vipāka of a past Kamma. It is therefore false to say that there is no one. There is a male human named Gad who comes from Cameroon and who speaks to another male human named Tobi who comes from Germany. In the ultimate sense, there are only the 5 aggregates that interact. The conditions of the past have shaped these two people. These 2 people are two distinct lifestreams and suffer positive or negative consequences from their respective Karmas. Of course, they will change and be able to be free, if in one of their lives they become arahants. There is a self but it constantly changes without a fixed identity according to the conditions of the current of life. However, we agree that no fixed and eternal self goes from life to life without ever changing. Anatta tells us that we are unable to control these changes and that the vast majority of the time they happen without our knowledge. The vast majority of the time this change leads one to the Apayas. Let us assume that a non-Buddhist person commits anantariya bad Kamma at the age of 20 and he will live to the age of 100 in this jati and his human bhava has 3000 years left. From the moment the act is committed, there is a change in that person. He will be able to perform positive actions for the rest of her remaining 80 years but whatever the action his mind will grasp the gati of a being from Niraya at the cuti patisandhi moment. His human bhava will be destroyed even if there are still 3000 years left. For 80 years, the person has not been aware that he has committed an act that will automatically land him in an Apaya upon his death. These changes are out of control (Anatta) however, there is a niraya being who is born spontaneously as a result of the actions of a human. They are two different people but they are the same lifestream. I specified non-Buddhist because the vast majority of them do not have the concept of anantariya Kamma.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
And yet it is not untrue to describe Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta as unsatisfactory/impermanents/transient, suffering and not self.
These terms were formed from kinships, just as the term Tilakkhana is related to anicca, dukkha, anatta. But a very deep aspect of the Buddha Dhamma is expressed with Jati. For the Buddha said, “He has found the way to deathlessness.” (see “Pāsarāsi Sutta (MN26)The Buddha said…
“And so, having been exposed to rebirth me and understanding the drawbacks of rebirth, I sought that which is free from rebirth, the supreme sanctuary from the yoke, from annihilation, and I found it. Since I myself was inclined to grow old, to get sick, to die, to care, and to be corrupted, and to understand the drawbacks in these things, I sought that which is free from old age, sickness, death, sorrow, and corruption, the supreme sanctuary from the yoke, of extinction—and I found it in the world.
Thus, the depth meaning should be anicca, dukkha and anatta.Anicca are the characteristics of this world that always lead to suffering dukkha, because anatta always produces the same fruit.
Here is an example of ANATTA as; always the same fruit…
Saṁyutta Nikāya 35.12
1. Transience
1. Aniccavagga
The Exterior as Not-Self in the Three Times
BāhirānattātītānāgatasuttaForms/Rupa, Venerable Ones, are made with the same fruit as Future Forms.
“Rūpā, bhikkhave, anattā atītānāgatā;
and are the opposite of a wise man’s breeding ground in the mind…”
ko pana vādo paccuppannānaṁ.
This comparison, venerable ones, from one who has heard and understood Dhamma, he does not cling to forms of the past, he does not look forward to enjoying the forms in the future, and he practices non-attachment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to forms of the present
Evaṁ passaṁ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako atītesu rūpesu anapekkho hoti;
anāgate rūpe nābhinandati;
paccuppannānaṁ rūpānaṁ nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti.
The same in terms of sound…
Saddā …
The same in terms of smell…
gandhā …
The same in terms of taste…
rasā …
The same in terms of touch…
phoṭṭhabbā …
Also, dhammā are made with the same fruit as past and future rupa and are the opposite of a sage breeding ground in the mind.
dhammā anattā atītānāgatā;
ko pana vādo paccuppannānaṁ.
This comparison, venerable ones, of one who has heard and understood Dhamma, does not cling to past Dhammā nor adheres to future ones, and it engages in non-attachment, dispassion, and cessation with respect to Dhammā of the present.
Evaṁ passaṁ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako atītesu dhammesu anapekkho hoti;
anāgate dhamme nābhinandati;
paccuppannānaṁ dhammānaṁ nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hotī”tI’m sure there are more suttas where anatta can be used as “always leading to the same Fruit”. It always depends on how profound and what it refers to.
Thus, in the context of the relationships of the words to each other, it should be seen that “anicca” includes all the characteristics of this world, such as Sam/San, UPS, IPS, PS, Pancakkhandha, etc., which lead to suffering. And what leads to suffering/dukkha? It is “Jati” the birth, as “Jati” is synonymous with “old age, sickness, death, sorrow and corruption” and this describes the suffering “dukkha”.
And of what kind is it? It is always the same fruit “Anatta” and that is our consciousness. Since our consciousness arises with the help of the characteristics of this world, i.e. Anicca, but is always subject to change, since the consciousness through the entity mind with Citta, Cetasika, Rupa creates a stream of thoughts that is impermanent. Consciousness is the ever-recurring fruit “anatta” which is not our self. In relation to each other, “Anatta” is thus referred to as not self.
So we can say for Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta; “unsatisfying/inconstant/transient, suffering and not self”Four Noble Truths 1,2,3,4 Anicca Anicca Dukkha
(dukkha lakkhana)Anatta Mindset for Tilakkhana
1 and 2 (Abhi)sankahra, apuñña/akusala, sancetana, Chanda Raga, pati+ichcha”, to “sama”+”uppāda. etc. Akusala Dukkha fruitless, without essence The understanding of lakkhana that the world is fruitless and without essence. 1
micchā diṭṭhi, sakkāya diṭṭh, (Abhi)sankahra, , san-cetana, Chanda Raga, Arupa Raga etc. Kusala and Akusala Jati
(dukkha dukkha)Always the same Fruit The understanding of lakkhana that always leads the world to the same fruit. We are helpless! 3 Sankhara, sammaditthi, Arupa Raga etc. Kusala with sāsavā Sukha
(Sankhara Dukkha)Good Fruit The understanding of lakkhana that it is not the highest fruit. 4 Noble Eightfold Path, Magga Phala, “kalyāṇamitta”to explain the Dhamma Dasa Kusala with anāsavā Nibbāna Absolute fruit The understanding of Tilakkhana/Four Noble Truths/PS that leads Magga Phala to the highest fruit. So it is not untrue to call anicca, dukkha, anatta impermanents, suffering and not self, but it is not possible for an “assutavā” to mentally fathom and interpret to arrive at the magga phala because these qualities are based on affinities based. .
And that is why it is absolutely necessary to start by learning Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta with the affinities that are easier to fathom.
It is not possible to understand the Buddha’s message as “Puthujjano” with these related interpretations, translations.Tilakkhana – So there are three Terminology of the world, characterized by many properties depending on the context…
However, to attain Nibbāna, one must understand the “barren and dangerous nature (anatta)” of this world (tilakkhana) or the “true nature”,hence the achievement of “yathābhūta ñāṇa” and that includes several characteristics. So with the understanding of anccia, dukkha, anatta you can look at the world superficially or deeply, because we don’t live in one world, but in ANICCA, DUKKHA, ANATTA.Please correct/improve/explain
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
- I agree with you that mundane terms are easier for a Puthujuna to understand. Indeed, the vast majority of Buddhists today are Puthujunas! We are in a period of decline of Sasana. The Dhamma may be viewed superficially at first, but over time the concepts will become deeper and deeper. If it was impossible for a puthujuna to understand the profound terms then they would not have an ariya or even a Lord Buddha. We have all been puthujunas for infinite times. If we succeed in becoming Ariya it is because we make the effort to understand life at a more subtle level. We understand that there is no refuge in this infinite Samsarā and that there is no point in chasing the mirages of the 31 planes of existence. But for a good start, the terms impermanence and non-self (no fixed entity) are good. The majority of Buddhists today do not make the effort to free themselves from the cycle of rebirth. They are Buddhists because of the culture of their country. They are attached to rituals and superficial terms. Some even believe in the existence of a fixed soul that goes from life to life! It is not completely wrong to use these terms what is wrong is to limit yourself to them. It’s like saying that Spain is planet Earth. Spain is part of the Planet but it is not the planet. It’s a tiny part of this planet. I’m sure there are many ways to interpret tilakkhana. Lord Buddha used several allegories to highlight them. However, impermanence and not-self are only the surfaces.
- Bāhirānattātītānāgatasutta “Mendicants, sights of the past and future are not in our control.
-
Thank you Gad,
I wasn’t sure if it was worded precisely enough.
I just wanted it to contribute to the insight and consensus of the many different schools of Buddhism, and I hope that many others will now understand, or at least try, Lal’s profound, outstanding work.1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
My thoughts: If it were in the nature of things to change for the better, it wouldn’t matter if they were impermanent; a temporary existence in the deva loka would be succeeded by one in the rupa loka.
Before I discovered Buddha Dhamma, I smoked a pack of cigarettes a day. It didn’t matter to me that the value I derived from that experience was temporary, as I could simply light up another cigarette.
If someone were to claim that Anicca means impermanence, I would ask them what the significance of things being impermanent is. If you need to ask follow-up questions when a person describes Anicca, then that isn’t a definition they are describing; at best, it’s an attribute. I see this happen a lot when people explain Pali terms.
I could add more, but I need to go to work! I appreciate the thoughtful discussion, though.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
Good on ya Dawson, I already agree with your statement.
By the way, I also smoked when I was young and even saved up matches.
I would ask these questions; “What level does he think he has reached on the 8-fold path?” To make a statement like that.
So he would have to have understood the true nature of “Pancakkhandha” as Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta and be a “Bhikkhu” who does NOT adhere to Pancakkhanda with the SANs to enjoy worldly pleasures.
He would now have to have the ability to distinguish the conventional truth of this world from the absolute truth, and that has nothing to do with the middle path! Because that would be just as nonsensical as viewing “ANICCA” as transitory.<br /><br />
The tendencies (Kilesas) must be recognized in order to free the confused mind. The tendency of a “Puthujjano” is to perceive “pancakkhandha” as icca, sukha, and atta…1 user thanked author for this post.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.