[pathfinder]

If I understand correctly, there are 2 things which influence our experiences: Kamma vipaka and what we do about it.

Kamma vipaka itself requires the necessary causes and conditions. Hence we can say it is not deterministic, if the conditions are not there, the seed cannot grow.

However, what we do about it depends on our gati or the heaps of 5 aggregates accumulated. In “Me” and “Mine” – The Root Cause of Suffering:

• There is no need to invoke a “me” or a “self” in Paticca Samuppāda. But, of course, such (abhi)saṅkhāra are generated BECAUSE there is a sense of “me” or “self.” The critical step is to realize the fruitlessness of acting with a sense of “me.”
• In other words, actions arise based on  one’s gati (habits/character.) See “The Law of Attraction, Habits, Character (Gati), and Cravings (Āsava).”

Here  we can tell that there is no need for a “doer” to “act”, we generate sankhara/ abisankhara because of our pre-existing gati. In The Law of Attraction, Habits, Character (Gati), and Cravings (Āsava):

Dhamma says this law of attraction does not need to be fatalistic, i.e., one with bad habits/cravings does not have to go down a slippery slope. One CAN change those habits/cravings GRADUALLY and thus change one’s character (gati).

Although we can change our gati, what causes us to change our gati? The 5 aggregates! Or the “gati to change our gati”. So the decision to change to change our gati has causes.

From here I wish to bring in kamma vipaka again, it requires causes and conditions. The causes are created by our gati, when we choose to act based on our gati. I would now also like to add on that the conditions are also based on our gati. When we associate with bad friends, that will lead to bad kamma vipaka. But why do with associate with bad friends? It is because of our gati/ accumulation of the 5 aggregates! Suppose we learn the dhamma and decide to leave our bad friends. Here it also also due to the 5 aggregates that make us leave our bad friends. Why did we learn the dhamma? There are causes to it as well!

From here I would think that everything is deterministic. There is no “doer” That can change the decision. If this is true, the Buddha should be able to predit down to the citta level what can happen next, since he can see the 5 aggregates of a person. Something still feels off here, what do you all think?

[taryal]

I asked a similar question a couple weeks ago and Dr. Lal told me that it is wrong to say there is “no doer”. It is true that there is no “real doer” here but as long as the root causes of greed, hate and delusion exist in mind, a “doer” exists as the Paticca Samuppada process sustains the lifestream. Regarding your concerns of determinism, I think it is helpful to analyze the sankhara of a human. Mental volition of a human is composed of mano sankhara, vaci sankhara and kaya sankhara. Mano sankhara generates thoughts that one can’t directly control. It is according to a person’s gati. Vaci and kaya sankhara involve conscious thoughts, speech and bodily actions. It is true that one’s gati can influence these conscious sankharas (and perhaps does to an untrained mind) but they are not necessarily deterministic and a human can use them to significantly change their gati. This will further change their mano sankhara and ultimately their destiny. I wrote a post about how one can use this knowledge to be free from the trap of maladaptive dreaming here. The goal is to remove the impulsive tendencies towards the subconscious thoughts generated via mano sankhara.

Of course beings in the apayas don’t have this ability. An animal, for example, is generally enslaved to its instinctive desires. A hell being is likely always raging. There is little that they can do to change their mindset, sadly. So I think your idea of determinism could apply to such beings and to a certain extent, might also apply to untrained humans. But humans do have the ability to change their destiny. This is why Buddha rejected both the extremes of an immortal soul and denial of existence.

[Lal]

Yes. This is a subtle and vital issue. Taryal has a general sense of it.

• Even though there is no “me” in the ultimate reality, everyone below the Arahant stage has a “sense of me” because they do not comprehend the true nature of reality.
• That ignorance is avijja. 
• That avijja manifests when one attaches (automatically) to certain types of sensory inputs based on the types of gati they have at that time. One’s gati can change based on one’s associations (mostly family and friends). The “Gati Sutta (AN 9.68)” describes the five major gati that lead to rebirths. There can be innumerable gati within those five types.
• The first three gati are removed (and one becomes free of rebirths in the apayas) at the Sotapanna stage when one starts comprehending Buddha’s worldview, i.e., when critical wrong views (sakkaya ditthi) are removed. The other two are removed at the Anagami and Arahant stages. That requires removing “distorted sanna“
• I am traveling for several days and may not be able to respond fully. But I will try to find time to respond further when I have more time. In the meantime, please ask more questions so I can answer them all.

[pathfinder]

taryal:It is true that one’s gati can influence these conscious sankharas (and perhaps does to an untrained mind) but they are not necessarily deterministic and a human can use them to significantly change their gati.

Yes, but what causes the human to want to change their gati in the first place? Is it out of no where? There has to be a cause. Here i argue that the reason why someone wants to change their gati in the first place is because of their previous gati/ 5 aggregates, which is caused by their previous 5 aggregates so on and so forth. There is no room for a doer! It is because there are causes. It is because their very own gati that encourages them to change their gati. Even to stop maladaptive dreaming, you have to change your habits, but what causes you to change your habits in the first place? Other habits before that/ external influences.

taryal: But humans do have the ability to change their destiny.

In the conventional sense yes, we can “choose” whether we want to walk across the street blindfolded or not, we can choose who we want to associate with, but i’m saying in the sense of the absolute truth, at the citta level, the reason why we do all this is nothing more than the outcome of the 5 aggregates and the outcome of the causes at the moment, it is not caused by our additional “free will”.

Since the dhamma is about cause and effect, I would think that if all the causes are known, all the effects are known. There is no room for “own decision making”, because what we do are based on the causes. And that’s why the absolute truth is that there is “no doer”, “no me”, but we have the distorted perception that there is, until we reach the Arahant stage.

Here I would like to make the case that for the story of Ven. Sariputra predicting the outcome of the war, if the Buddha had seen into the 5 aggregates of every soldier in the battlefield, if he could see the kings, generals, worms and birds on the battlefield, and even the butterfly that would flap its wings across the world that may shift the wind, everyone else in the 31 realms present, basically every single thing that influences the war, he would not only be able to predict who wins, but also the number of casualties, the total number of stabs, down to the citta level who dies when. This is because he is fully aware of the causes, hence he will be fully aware of the effects. 

I am taking inspiration from Laplace’s Demon, “if someone (the demon) knows the precise locationand momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed; they can be calculated from the laws of classical mechanics.” Here, instead of just classical mechanics, if Laplace’s demon knows the full knowledge of the world, the laws of kamma and the 5 aggregates, he can derive the past, present and future citta of everyone.

This is what I mean by determinism, everything is determined by the causes, there is no room for an extra “agent” to change the causes, because the agent himself is a product of cause and effect.

I think this is worthwhile contemplating because it would help us remove our perception of self too, if we see that whatever we do is due to the pre-existing causes and not a “doer”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, Yash RS

[Dawson]

Nope. Sorry but I disagree. You can’t rationalise your way to Nibbana in that way. It will more than likely just result in cognitive dissonance.

A mistake that a lot of people make is to try to perceive reality according to what they believe is true.

If someone were to tell themselves, “there is no doer, it’s all just causes and effects”, that will contradict how things appear within their immediate experience.

What is necessary is to instead investigate your experience and see whether any given premise passes the sniff test. If it does, then you investigate further. It’s an iterative process.

[Yash RS]

An Arahant only responds to the environment.

For example, hunger then eat food, thirst then drink water, and so on.

If a naked woman in front, no response,etc.

All the actions an Arahant does are kammically neutral and done by the Arahant’s Gati. That individual neutral gati is responsible for two Arahants to react in their individual ways with the Environment.

Thats why not even two Arahants behave in the same manner. One example of a young Arahant who used to jump over puddles of water.

I think what Pathfinder says is logical and makes sense, but it’s extremely complex! Note that billions of citta arise in a second and each one is completely different from the other! Completely unique. 

We all are a Process! The mind is a process! RVSSV

With Avijja built in, we tend to react in ignorant ways with the Environment. 

The most eligible person to answer such a question would be an Arahant, but let’s see what others have to say 🙏

So in this sense we can say that everything is Causality, even the mind ( consciousness) arises when the causes and conditions are present.

For example Cakkunca Paticca Rupecca Uppajati Cakku Vinnanam.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[Lal]

Good comments!

1. I think it was Nagarjuna or Buddhaghosa who tried to explain the basic theme of Buddha’s teachings with “there is no doer, it’s all just causes and effects.”

• That is not the way to correctly interpret the teachings.

2. If you apply Paticca Samuppada without grasping how the mind works differently in different realms, you can come to that WRONG conclusion.

• That saying applies to animals and beings in the other three apayas. They don’t have free will. 

3. The reason for humans to have free will is mainly two-fold:

1. As explained in Abhidhamma, the most potent javana arises when a good deed is done with an understanding of the anicca nature, i.e., when one does it with “sōmanassa sahagata ñāna sampayutta citta” (or “thoughts with joyful mind based on wisdom”) Suich cittas (thoughts) do not arise in those beings in apayas but arise in humans. See “Feelings: Sukha, Dukha, Somanassa, and Domanassa.” (especially #10)
2. Humans also have fully developed brains. The brain “slows down” our response to external sensory inputs because it takes time for the brain to process sensory information. See “Triune Brain: How the Mind Rewires the Brain via Meditation/Habits.”

As I mentioned above, this topic is critically important. The above two points need to be discussed in detail, but those two posts should be helpful. Keep asking questions based on those two posts.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Yash RS

[Christian]

1) There is a doer or person, I – in Nibbana we can not say there is something but we can not say there is nothing, it’s like a third option that needs to be discovered and experienced. You can not read “there is no self” and act like you have no self, it will be counter-productive.
2) There is neither determinism nor free will, there are certain mechanics and limitations. Some give us the freedom to act, some determine limitations beyond the possibility of choice ie. cause, and effect. The problem is you do not see the full picture but make the judgment based on very little information on suttas without knowing the whole context, mechanics, and how things work.

The worst-case scenario is when people read stuff, take it, and make a wall for themselves based on it rather than use it for liberation pathfinder is a great example of making the wall for himself – hopefully more people can see through that, and do not repeat the mistake by walling themselves by assumptions without any real experience of jhanas, Nibbana or wisdom.

For example if you know someone drinks a lot of alcohol you can predict that he will become alcoholic or already is and you can predict related issue/outcome because of that condition. Prediction on the base of attachment is not really determinism and lack of free will, but result of it. At the end of the day it’s neither if you look very closely at it, that there is only cause and effect  that can be sometimes predicted but it’s not “determinism” which is hard to see-thru. Same if you see object that is spinning really fast, if you do not know physics of spinning you would say the object does not move or move backwards etc. It’s much complicated than you think it is when it comes to “free will” or “determinism. Assumptions are your “enemy” on the Path.

 As Buddha said in one sutta, if there will be “determinism” there would be no Nibbana. (I do not remember exact sutta though)

[taryal]

Nihilistic view: ‘I’ don’t exist

Eternal view: ‘I’ exist

Ultimate view: ‘I’ neither exist nor don’t exist

Without exposure to Buddha’s teachings, sentient beings can only come up with the first two views of existence. The ultimate view transcends both these views and that is the view perfected by an Arahant/Buddha. It would not be possible to develop that view by starting with “there is no self, just causes and conditions”. A sentient being (satta) is an everchanging lifestream that has the eternal view, i.e. the view of an unchanging essence (self). Of course this is a wrong view that is not beneficial to have but it is not beneficial to adapt to the other extreme view of no self either. A sotapanna removes the wrong view of a self (sakkaya ditthi) but the perception of a self will only be removed at the arahant stage. So till the arahant stage is attained, one can say that there is a dynamic self.

Of course in the ultimate reality, the idea of “self” is not relevant. But to an unenlightened mind that hasn’t transcended the views of “existence” and “non-existence”, it would be unfruitful to declare “there is no self, therefore I’m a zombie”. I like to use concepts from Science, sorta like an analogy to intuitively visualize this issue. In classical mechanics, it is assumed that Gravity exists. The equations developed based on this assumption work brilliantly for daily objects like cars, projectile, planets, etc. But when we are dealing with really fast particles like photons, this model no longer works. We need to transcend this and enter the realm of Theory of Relativity which is much more real in the ultimate sense. Einstein proved that the concept of “gravity” here is no longer relevant. So even though we know that Gravity does not exist in the ultimate sense, it works for daily objects so we use them. It would not be beneficial to say “there is no Gravity in the ultimate sense so therefore Classical Mechanics is fake”.

I think the issue with pathfinder’s analysis is that firstly, he doesn’t quite realize that there is a third way of looking at existence (which is different from both “I exist” and “I don’t exist”). He understands that the former view is wrong but is erroneously leaning to the latter. This happens when one tries to look at the world from an arahant’s perspective without actually being an arahant. We must say that there is a dynamic self till we get to that level even if that isn’t fully accurate in the ultimate reality. Secondly, he is equating mental entities (citta) with matter (suddhathaka). Material phenomena are indeed deterministic which is why they are relatively easy to study. Scientists are able to conduct experiments involving inert matter to produce repeatable results. But mental phenomena are not reproducible. Why do you think scientists struggle so much to explain the mystery of consciousness? A human mind is extremely complex and even the best that a Buddha can do is predict not determine.

[pathfinder]

Christian: “The worst-case scenario is when people read stuff, take it, and make a wall for themselves based on it rather than use it for liberation pathfinder is a great example of making the wall for himself – hopefully more people can see through that, and do not repeat the mistake by walling themselves by assumptions without any real experience of jhanas, Nibbana or wisdom.”

This is not true. The reason why I started this forum is because I know there could be something wrong, and I wish to be corrected. I start forums to ask questions rather than give answers. Yet, I still cannot find a satisfactory answer here.

Lal:

1. As explained in Abhidhamma, the most potent javana arises when a good deed is done with an understanding of the anicca nature, i.e., when one does it with “sōmanassa sahagata ñāna sampayutta citta” (or “thoughts with joyful mind based on wisdom”) Suich cittas (thoughts) do not arise in those beings in apayas but arise in humans. See “Feelings: Sukha, Dukha, Somanassa, and Domanassa.” (especially #10)
2. Humans also have fully developed brains. The brain “slows down” our response to external sensory inputs because it takes time for the brain to process sensory information. See “Triune Brain: How the Mind Rewires the Brain via Meditation/Habits.”

Yes, but what causes these javana citta to arise in the first place? There has to be causes! And even if the brain can be rewired, there has to be causes of someone to rewire it, and causes before causes before causes before causes.

Christian: There is neither determinism nor free will, there are certain mechanics and limitations. Some give us the freedom to act

What is this freedom to act you are talking about? Are you saying it is not based on causes?

Taryal: But to an unenlightened mind that hasn’t transcended the views of “existence” and “non-existence”, it would be unfruitful to declare “there is no self, therefore I’m a zombie”.

Yes, I am not saying that we should just sit back and give up on everything, but we can contemplate that things are ultimately just cause and effect.

Let’s not go into the talk about self or no self. This is my premise: Everything a person does is a result of his 5 aggregates, and kamma vipaka. With this knowledge, we can absolutely predict what someone will do next. For example, the Buddha can predict that someone will see him, become an arahant that parinibanna that very day (King Pasenadi). You guys sound like there is an additional part of the equation, please tell me what it is! And let’s keep the question simple:

What can Laplace’s Demon, not predict? (Laplace’s Demon is a being that has complete knowledge of the world at this present moment, the precise location and momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed, the 5 aggregates and kamma seeds of every being, the complete understanding of the laws of kamma, paticca samuppada. From this my premise is that he can “calculate” down to the citta level of any being, past and future for as far as he wants, as long as he has complete knowledge of the present values. Of course, his calculation abilities must be infinitely capable)

I would appreciate if you could answer based on this question. I would think that answering this question directly is the most targeted response for this discussion. Again I would like to clarify that I am not teaching this view to anyone, I just want to be corrected.

[Jittananto]

Taryal: “The ultimate view transcends both these views and that is the view perfected by an Arahant/Buddha.”

• I’m not sure it’s safe to say that. While reading this sutta, Arahant Khema Theri said that it is wrong to say this. Of course, she said this in the context of parinibbānna but it can apply during the lifetime of an arahant. Arahants do not see an I anywhere.

Khemāsutta: Ma’am, does a realized one still exist after death?”

“kiṁ nu kho, ayye, hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti?

“Great king, this has not been declared by the Buddha.”

“Abyākataṁ kho etaṁ, mahārāja, bhagavatā:

‘hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’”ti.

“Well then, does a realized one no longer exist after death?”

“Kiṁ panayye, na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti?

“This too has not been declared by the Buddha.”

“Etampi kho, mahārāja, abyākataṁ bhagavatā:

‘na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’”ti.

“Well then, does a realized one both exist and not exist after death?”

“Kiṁ nu kho, ayye, hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti?

“This has not been declared by the Buddha.”

“Abyākataṁ kho etaṁ, mahārāja, bhagavatā:

‘hoti ca na ca hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’”ti.

“Well then, does a realized one neither exist nor not exist after death?”

“Kiṁ panayye, neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā”ti.

“This too has not been declared by the Buddha.”

“Etampi kho, mahārāja, abyākataṁ bhagavatā:

‘neva hoti na na hoti tathāgato paraṁ maraṇā’”ti

• Until one becomes an arahant there is no point in speculating. No matter how much we try to convince ourselves, we will always have this belief of the I. Of course, at the sotāpanna stage, the micchādiṭṭhi linked to this have been eradicated but the perception of I will remain until the arahant stage.

[Jittananto]

For further information, please also refer to the Yamakasutta where Venerable Sariputta explains that it is incorrect to believe in annihilation.

 

[pathfinder]

I can dumb down my argument even further 

1) Everything is based on cause and effect

2) With complete knowledge of the causes you will have complete knowledge of the effects

3) With complete knowledge of the effect, since these effects are also causes for the future effects, one can tell with striking accuracy of the state of things in the past and future infinitely, if the being is capable enough to absorb and process all the causes in the present moment. 

4) With this, we can also say that what we do next is based on cause and effect, eg the being can predict what we will do next.

Please let me know where I am wrong in 1/2/3/4. I would think that this is a logical conclusion based on cause and effect.

[Yash RS]

Let’s take an example of a any object like a mobile phone.

Take your phone and touch it . 

If you touch the screen ,then it’s not the “phone” ,it’s the screen.

If you touch the back, you didn’t touch the “phone”. 

Same with a Car. You can touch it’s individual parts but can never touch a “car”.

Now two questions arise

Is there a car? (As we can’t touch the “car”)

Is there no car? ( A car is there , we can see that!)

So what’s exactly the reality?

Both these questions are wrong, and the right question is to ask , Why do we feel that there is a car.

All the individual parts came together, and we create a perception of what a car looks like, and if both these match, we feel that the object is a car.

If it is cut in half, we feel that the car is cut in half, but in reality only the arrangement has been changed 

This was the question asked to the Buddha (I don’t know the sutta).

Both these sayings that “Is there a self?” Or “Is there no self” or “IS there neither self nor no self?” Or “Is there either self or no self?” Are wrong questions.

The correct question should be,why do we feel that there is a Self?

Thats the Perception part. As I mentioned earlier,the mind arises only when the conditions are met.

For example, clap your hands ,that sound is not in the clapping but is generated in the mind. What that clapping generated was just vibrations of certain frequency.

The longer you clap ,the longer you hear that sound, that is sound consciousness arises, which means a citta arises to experience that only if the conditions are met.

Since the mind is also based on Causality, this is why we can attain Nibbana! We can remove all the causes that give rise to a future mind.

That is the Vinnana , we need to tackle the Kamma Vinnana. If the mind doesn’t generate Kamma Vinnana, it won’t fabricate a future mind, as the cause is no longer present.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[pathfinder]

Yash: “The correct question should be, why do we feel that there is a Self?

Thats the Perception part. As I mentioned earlier, the mind arises only when the conditions are met.”

Thank you Yash, I think you understand what i’m trying to get at here, right now we still feel that there is a Self but that is only because of the conditions that make this true, and we still feel that we can control things eg change our habits only because of previous conditions which led to this perception.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Yash RS

[Lal]

Some of the points made above are per “mundane logic” and do not consider the “wider worldview” of the Buddha. Our conclusions must apply to all living beings.

• First, let us address the issue: “Does any living being have free will”?
• The answer is no. See “Distorted Saññā Arises in Every Adult but Not in a Newborn” (especially #6). Thus, not even all humans have free will. P.S. However, Most humans above age seven (with a fully working brain) have free will.
• In addition, animals and other beings in the apayas do not have free will.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Yash RS

[pathfinder]

If that is the case, can you explain how Buddha knew that Santati will attain arahantship and parinibbana that very day? (“Ānanda, this minister will come to see me this very day and after I have given him a short discourse, he will become an arahat. Soon after becoming an arahat he will realize parinibbāna.”) Here he can predict not only what will become of him, but also when! If there is “free will”, then how can the Buddha be certain that he won’t follow his “free will” and do something different?

What I interpret is that this “free will” is a false perception that we have. However, if one looks at it from the outsider perspective, eg Buddha looking at Santati as an outsider, he can predict what will happen to him. However Santati himself will think that otherwise, that he has the free will to do whatever he wants. Little does he know that his fate is already known! Again, please feel free to correct my interpretation of this.

[cubibobi]

My 2 cents on this discussion.

First, the argument from pathfinder:

1) Everything is based on cause and effect

2) With complete knowledge of the causes you will have complete knowledge of the effects

3) With complete knowledge of the effect, since these effects are also causes for the future effects, one can tell with striking accuracy of the state of things in the past and future infinitely, if the being is capable enough to absorb and process all the causes in the present moment.

4) With this, we can also say that what we do next is based on cause and effect, eg the being can predict what we will do next.
—-

Premise #2 is highly questionable. There is no such thing as “complete knowledge of the causes” — not even for inert matter, let alone the mind!

The thought experiment of Laplace’s Demon is also quite suspect:

“if someone (the demon) knows the precise location and momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed…”

I am no physicist, but I learned that there is some kind of uncertainty principle which states that it is not possible to know both the location and momentum of a particle.

The notion of the possibility of deriving the past (which has no beginning), present, future of atoms, particles, or even 5 khandā or cittā — even as just as an idle intellectual pastime, and no matter how cleverly constructed — is futile. Not only that, it can be addicting, since seemingly clever arguments is often mistaken for “profundity of thought”, when it just leads to sampappalāpā, not nibbana.

 

Second, just a general observation based on my experience of listening to numerous “Buddhists”, including even bhikkhu teachers who consider the truth of “no-self”, i.e. there is no “doer”, the highest realization, and that seeing this means attaining arahantship (seeing the absolute truth). It leads to statement like we see above:

“And that’s why the absolute truth is that there is “no doer”, “no me”, but we have the distorted perception that there is, until we reach the Arahant stage”.

In this PD community, we have learned that anatta does NOT mean “no-self”; after learning true Dhamma, we see that “no-self” (no permament soul type entity, no “doer” behind phenomena) is embedded in the teaching, not an “ultimate truth” the realization of which brings arahanthood. Yet we still cannot resist bringing up this “no-self” business in a back-handed way via clever arguments. There is something very addicting about this notion.

My intention is by no means to offend anyone. It’s just that I have seen too often how arguments/reasoning of this type leads to endless discussion without leading in the direction of nibbana, in my opinion.

Best,
Lang

1 user thanked author for this post.

Yash RS

[taryal]

Pathfinder’s construction of Laplace’s Demon is what many would consider “God”. If such a divine deity who knows everything existed then the idea of free will would be objectively false and we would all be predestined. But like cubibobi explained, Quantum Mechanics in a way proves that such a being can’t exist. But of course there is always the thought of “what if ?” Buddha taught us that indulging in such philosophical banter is a waste of time.  So instead of trying to break everything down to fundamental cittas, it would be more beneficial to look at the mind on a higher level. This is why I brought up the idea of sankhara.

In the Accinteyya Sutta, Buddha declared, “There are these four things that one should not conjecture about and would bring anxiety and madness to anyone who speculates. Which four? (i) capabilities of a Buddha, (ii) subject of jhānā, (iii) detailed knowledge of kamma/kamma vipāka, and (iv) origins of the world.”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, Yash RS

[taryal]

Jittananto wrote:

I’m not sure it’s safe to say that. While reading this sutta, Arahant Khema Theri said that it is wrong to say this. Of course, she said this in the context of parinibbānna but it can apply during the lifetime of an arahant. Arahants do not see an I anywhere.

You are right. I just wanted to explore my understanding of why both self and no-self and incorrect approaches. For an arahant, the idea of “self” is not relevant but they are obviously not talking corpses, are they? An unenlightened mind has the perception of self and when one tries to negate that, they can get depressed. So we should think that there is a dynamic self and gradually comprehend why the 5 aggregates are not beneficial to be taken as one’s own.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, Yash RS

[pathfinder]

Thank you taryal, cubibobi. You’re right, this discussion is not fruitful. However, I would also like to take this opportunity to talk about the sense of self.

cubibobi: In this PD community, we have learned that anatta does NOT mean “no-self”; after learning true Dhamma, we see that “no-self” (no permament soul type entity, no “doer” behind phenomena) is embedded in the teaching, not an “ultimate truth” the realization of which brings arahanthood. Yet we still cannot resist bringing up this “no-self” business in a back-handed way via clever arguments. There is something very addicting about this notion.

I am taking this sense of self notion not from anatta, but sakkaya ditthi. I have gained this understanding from the following posts:

Do I Have “A Mind” That Is Fixed and “Mine”?
But it is essential to know that the perception of “me” goes away only at the Arahant stage

Sakkāya Diṭṭhi and Tilakkhana

There Are Only Causes and Effects

Translation: “A Sotāpanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view (diṭṭhisampanno puggalo) is unable (abhabbo) to fall back on the idea that pleasure and pain are made by oneself (sayaṃkataṃ). Or that they are made by another (paraṃkataṃ). Or that they are made by both (sayaṃkatañca paraṃkatañca). Nor can they fall back on the idea that pleasure and pain arise by chance, not by oneself, another, or both. (asayaṃkāraṃ adhiccasamuppannaṃ, aparaṅkāraṃ adhiccasamuppannaṃ, asayaṅkārañca aparaṅkārañca adhiccasamuppannaṃ).
– Why is that? It is because a person accomplished in view has seen that phenomena arise due to causes and conditions (according to Paṭicca Samuppāda). Those are the six things a Sotāpanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view will not fall back to”.

This is what I mean by we are just doing things based on cause and effect!

“Me” and “Mine” – The Root Cause of Suffering

• Something that we experience during every waking moment is our body and mind. Therefore, the physical body and all mental entities that arise contribute to the feeling of “me” or “mine.”

8. Paticca Samuppāda process does not care WHO is doing (abhi) saṅkhāra. The results are determined by WHAT KIND of saṅkhāra is involved. That saṅkhāra generation is associated with pañcupādānakkhandhā or one’s cravings/desires/expectations (related to anusaya, āsava, gati, etc.). Results are according to actions. Doing a particular type of action (kamma via saṅkhāra) will lead to the fruits (kamma vipāka.)

• There is no need to invoke a “me” or a “self” in Paticca Samuppāda. But, of course, such (abhi)saṅkhāra are generated BECAUSE there is a sense of “me” or “self.” The critical step is to realize the fruitlessness of acting with a sense of “me.”

9. The ultimate truth is that there is no “self.” That is easy to see because Arahant is not reborn after death. If there were an “unchanging self,” they would still have to exist in one of the 31 realms after death.

• However, until one FULLY comprehends that fact (at the Arahant stage,) one does not FULLY realize that there is no “self” involved in this whole process. Until the Arahant stage, the perception of a “me” and “mine” will be there.

 

There are more posts about this, but just to list a few. Hence the interpretation I derive is that the sense of self we have is false.

[Lal]

I am sorry I did not get to address some of the issues brought up. 

• I think this discussion is very fruitful. It revealed some issues I need to address in upcoming posts. Thanks to Pathfinder for starting the discussion and all for the active discussion.

The following post is important: “Anatta – the Opposite of Which Atta?“

• I will write about other issues later when I have more time—I’m still traveling.

 

4 users thanked author for this post.

dosakkhayo, Yash RS, Jittananto, pathfinder

[Lal]

On June 16, 2024 at 10:47 am (comment #50277) Pathfinder asked: “If that is the case, can you explain how Buddha knew that Santati will attain arahantship and parinibbana that very day?”

• That does not mean EVERYTHING is deterministic.
• I explained that in the post “Pāramitā – How a Puthujjana Becomes a Buddha.”
• Even a Buddha first gets “aniyata vivarana” or “not fully confirmed.” As a Bodhisatta continues to fulfill more paramita, a later Buddha would see that the Bodhisatta is “definitely going to attain the Buddhahood.” That is when a Bodhisatta gets “niyata vivarana” or “definite confirmation.” See #2 of the post.
• Some “predictions” may not be realized if prevailing conditions change. See #4 through #6 in the same post.

[cubibobi]

@pathfinder

Yes, I should not have mentioned “anatta“; that was habit.

My main point, which I of course bungled, was this: it’s usually not beneficial to contemplate in terms of self/no self (whether from sakkaya ditthi or anatta), since it too often spawns speculations of “what if” scenarios; it tends to lead to arguments as to whether there is free will, whether things are determistic, etc. I often see this in people who contemplate self / no self, and thus just wanted to share.

BUT, a disclaimer here: this is my personal experience and observation as a puthujjana working toward the sotapanna anugami stage. Others’ approaches will be vastly different.

In my experience, contemplating sakkaya ditthi as the ditthi that the world is of nicca, sukha, atta nature, and what a folly that ditthi is, is of great benefit; one can make enormous progress with it.

The “perception of self” (māna samyojana) is, as we know, removed at the arahant stage. In this community, if there are anagamis working on this samyojana then that is fantastic!

Best,
Lang

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Jittananto]

 The future is extremely complex, and only a Lord Buddha can say exactly what will happen. However, the future is not certain; anything can happen, but sometimes it is impossible to change your future. My teacher explained this in one of his speeches with a good example. Let’s consider a boat in the ocean. We all know that the ocean is vast and immense. Consequently, there are several possibilities for this boat—it can go west, east, north, or south. Now, let’s imagine that in its path, there is a large iceberg. The captain of the boat rushes at full speed towards the iceberg. Unfortunately, he realizes too late that he’s going to hit it and wreck the boat. No matter how hard he tries to break, the boat will hit the iceberg (inevitability). Similarly, it is impossible to avoid the consequences of bad anantariya Kamma, no matter what good deeds one does thereafter. Yes, the future can indeed be deterministic. However, we have put in place the causes for this future to be deterministic. Arahant Santati established the causes of his enlightenment in many past lives. We are free to establish the causes but we do not control the good or bad results.

However, if the captain spots the iceberg in advance, he can avoid a collision. The causes that enable avoiding the collision include the captain’s vigilance and maintaining a safe distance from the iceberg. If any of these causes is missing, an accident may occur.

There is a story in the suttas, where Lord Buddha talks about two homeless people who could have become extremely rich by being secular, or who could have achieved magga phala if they became bhikkhus. They had the Kamma necessary to do well on both the mundane and supramundane levels. However, their lack of education was their downfall.Mahadhanasetthiputta Vatthu

 

• With Jhanas and Iddhis, it is possible to see one’s past lives but also future ones!! However, these lives are not deterministic; they are based on our happiness in the present moment. As long as we maintain this goal, these lives will surely come true. There is a Burmese monk who was a friend of one of my teachers. He developed jhānas and Iddhis. Through this, he was able to see the future lives that awaited him. In many future lives, he is a yogi or bhikkhu who continues to develop good gati, but in some, he falls into apayas as an animal or into nirayas. Please translate it into English or your language, because the site is in French.

 The Vision of his past and future lives

Through meditation, we can all access the knowledge of our past lives, which in Pali we call paṭiccasamuppāda ñāṇa. This, however, requires great maturity because this knowledge can only be developed based on jhāna and direct knowledge of cause and effect, nāma rūpa pariccheda ñāṇa.

• To develop paṭiccasamuppāda ñāṇa, our samādhi must first allow us to distinguish moments of consciousness. These appear by the millions in the blink of an eye. Then we direct our mind to the present moment of awareness. Then we follow the link to its cause, that is to say, the previous moment of consciousness. The latter leads us to the knowledge of the one before, and so on. With training, the process speeds up, especially for periods already revisited. As we start from the present, we begin by reviewing our present life, our childhood, our birth, and our gestation. Then immediately behind the first consciousness of our present life, in other words, our fertilization, we become aware of the last consciousness of our previous life, our last death. You can visit this site by going through one page after another. But you can also click on links to directly access certain information.
• On the same principle, we can also access precise information by following kammic links. Compared to the knowledge of our past lives, that of future lives is carried out according to a reversed process. We start from the present moment and then direct our mind towards the awareness that will result from the present awareness, and so on. Knowledge of future lives develops, as it were, on continuity probabilities based on current conditions. However, unlike the past that has already passed, this future seen in advance is not immutable as if everything were pre-established. But it is not completely random either. We are fortunately free from certain choices such as that of applying ourselves to doing what is necessary to progress towards Deliverance. But the margin of free will is very small compared to the mass of conditioning that has shaped our physical and mental behaviour (gati) for so long.

[cubibobi]

“Through meditation, we can all access the knowledge of our past lives, which in Pali we call paṭiccasamuppāda ñāṇa.”

 

Isn’t this knowledge called pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna in Pali?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[Lal]

The issue about a “self” can be cleared up if the following is understood:

There are two phases to go through:

(i) At the Sotapanna stage, based on understanding the worldview of the Buddha, one realizes that there is no “permanent self” like a soul in Abrahamic religions or an “atma” in Hinduism. That is the same as removing wrong views. That is also connected to getting rid of sakkaya ditthi.

(ii) Even after getting rid of the wrong view, there is still a “wrong sanna (perception)” of a “me” or “I” left. That is also called “asmi māna” or simply “māna.” That goes away only at the Arahant stage. Everyone, even those who don’t believe in a soul (like materialistic scientists), has “asmi māna.” Furthermore, even an Anagami has asmi māna.

_______

Cubibobi’s comment: “Through meditation, we can all access the knowledge of our past lives, which in Pali we call paṭiccasamuppāda ñāṇa.”

Isn’t this knowledge called pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna in Pali?”

• Yes. It is.
• There are two types of related ñāṇa: (i) pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna and (ii) cutupapāda (cuti and uppatti) ñāna.
• With the first, one can see one’s past lives in the human realm. With the second, one can see all past lives, including those in the apayas.
• Anariya yogis cannot cultivate (ii). That makes their wrong view of sassata ditthi (a “permanent self” moving from life to life) stronger. However, it becomes easier for Ariyas who cultivate (ii) to see the dangers of the rebirth process. 

[Jittananto]

SIR LAL:Anariya yogis cannot cultivate (ii). That makes their wrong view of sassata ditthi (a “permanent self” moving from life to life) stronger. However, it becomes easier for Ariyas who cultivate (ii) to see the dangers of the rebirth process. 

• Sir, are you referring to non-Buddhists or those who are not at the sotāpanna stage? Bhikkhu Isidore has not yet reached the sotāpanna stage, but he is working to develop the paramis to become a supreme Buddha. It appears that he has seen different realms such as animals, niraya, peta, deva, brahma rupa, or arupa. However, no one is obligated to believe what he says.

[Lal]

Yes. It is unlikely that an anariya has the  cutupapāda ñāna.

[Jittananto]

However sir this story shows that an anariya can see different Bhava.

Vangisatthera Vatthu

Once, in Rajagaha, there was a brahmin by the name of Vangisa who by simply tapping on the skull of a dead person could tell whether that person was reborn in the world of the devas, or of the human beings, or in one of the four lower worlds (apayas). The brahmins took Vangisa to many villages and people flocked to him and paid him ten, twenty or a hundred to find out from him where their various dead relatives were reborn.

On one occasion, Vangisa and his party came to a place not far from the Jetavana monastery. Seeing those people who were going to the Buddha, the brahmins invited them to come to Vangisa who could tell where their relatives had been reborn. But the Buddha’s disciples said to them, “Our teacher is one without a rival, he only is the Enlightened One.” The brahmins took that statement as a challenge and took Vangisa along with them to the Jetavana monastery to compete with the Buddha. The Buddha, knowing their intention, instructed the bhikkhus to bring the skulls of a person reborn in niraya, of a person reborn in the animal world, of a person reborn in the human world, of a person reborn in the deva world and also of an arahat. The five were then placed in a row. When Vangisa was shown those skulls he could tell where the owners of the first four skulls were reborn but when he came to the skull of the arahat he was at a loss.

[Lal]

No. That was not done with cutupapāda ñāna. That person did not have cutupapāda ñāna. He could not recall HIS past lives. 

• He learned some “mystic technique” to touch a dead person’s skull and tell where that person has been reborn. The Buddha agreed that his readings were correct. 

[taryal]

Lal wrote:

(ii) Even after getting rid of the wrong view, there is still a “wrong sanna (perception)” of a “me” or “I” left. That is also called “asmi māna” or simply “māna.” That goes away only at the Arahant stage. Everyone, even those who don’t believe in a soul (like materialistic scientists), has “asmi māna.” Furthermore, even an Anagami has asmi māna.

From an arahan’ts pov, “who” experiences samsara and “who” attains Nibbana? I do have a general understanding of this but something feels unclear to me.

[cubibobi]

Somewhere on the site is the story of a little girl who remembered her past bhava of a deva. Would that be an example of cutupapāda ñāna?

post on Boy Who Remembered Pāli Suttas for 1500 Years

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[Lal]

Taryal: “From an arahan’ts pov, “who” experiences samsara and “who” attains Nibbana? I do have a general understanding of this but something feels unclear to me.”

• In a mundane sense, we can say that the human who attained the Arahanthood attained “Nibbana.” 
• We can also say that “who” experiences samsara at a given moment is whatever the lifeform is at that moment. It could be an animal, a human, a Deva, etc. 

Any existence is GENERATED via the Paticca Samuppada process. No “fixed entity” goes through the rebirth process (samsara.)

Cubibobi: “Somewhere on the site is the story of a little girl who remembered her past bhava of a deva. Would that be an example of cutupapāda ñāna?”

• No. She did not have cutupapāda ñāna. That is an unusual case of a “rebirth account” by a child. Typically, children remember their last birth with a human body (with the same gandhabba, i.e., within the same human existence.) But in this case, she remembered possibly the last existence as a Deva, i.e., this was her first birth with a physical human body after she died as a Deva. 
• Lang (Cubibobi) refers to the video discussed in the following comment: “Reply To: Lord Buddha statue.”

[taryal]

Lal wrote:

In a mundane sense, we can say that the human who attained the Arahanthood attained “Nibbana.”

What about the ultimate sense? Is it not discernible to us?

[Lal]

In the ultimate sense, a “lifestream” (my term) goes through all that suffering (with brief existences with “mind-made pleasures” such as sensual pleasures while in human/Deva realms and jhanic/samapatti pleasures while in Brahma realms). It does not make sense to say “WHO” went through it, because it was a different entity at each stage. See “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream”

• That is why I wrote the following in my above comment: Any existence is GENERATED via the Paticca Samuppada process. No “fixed entity” goes through the rebirth process (samsara.)

1 user thanked author for this post.

taryal

[pathfinder]

Im still confused about the following:

If everything we do is decided by paticca samuppada then where is the free will? Let’s say I see someone I don’t like and I start generating bad thoughts. Here you may say that we have the free will to stop these thoughts after learning the dhamma. However, isnt this very thought itself, eg “I should stop generating abhisankhara”, come as a result of paticca samuppada? Same goes for gati. You can say that our actions are determined by our gati, so we can change it. But the very thought that “I should change my gati” would come as a result of paticca samuppada. Is there some other process other than paticca saumppada, determining this action? If not, then where is the room for free will?

Here I interpret that we have the impression of free will, eg we can willingly lift up our finger, but based on what I described above, that too is based on paticca samuppada. Please note that I am not incorporating some “mahayana” or “Buddhagosa” teaching. I am saying this from my interpretation of the posts.

Lal: Any existence is GENERATED via the Paticca Samuppada process. No “fixed entity” goes through the rebirth process (samsara.) 

Will this be true for the Idappaccayata PS cycle as well? And does PS apply to cittas? If that is true, then can we interpret that there is no fixed entity even from moment to moment?

There also examples raised up to show that there is no determinism. I agree that it would be hard to predict everything, because it is difficult to know what external influences there are. There is also the issue of randomness in quantum mechanics. However the more pertinent point I would like to make is the impression of “free will” that we have.

[pathfinder]

Here is where I got the idea that everything is based on paticca samuppada:

Anattā in Anattalakkahana Sutta – No Soul or an Ātma

• The rest of the above verse explains WHY the rupa aggregate is of no essence: “If rupa aggregate is of essence (and is under one’s control), my body (which is a part of the rupakkhandha) would not have ailments, and it would be possible to have: ‘Let my body (or any other rupa) be the way I like; let it not be the way I don’t like.’ But because the rupa is not under my control, it can face unexpected changes, and it is impossible to have: ‘Let my rupa be thus; let my rupa not be thus.”

Here, the verse seems to focus on one’s physical body. But it could also mean any rupa that one likes/dislikes. As we will see, whether it is one’s own body or any other external rupa, they evolve according to Paṭicca Samuppāda (PS.) A rupa does not evolve according to anyone’s wishes, but ONLY according to PS. That has been true for any rupa that ever existed, any rupa existing now, and any rupa that will ever exist, i.e., it is true for rupakkhandha!

• Then that verse is repeated for the other four aggregates: vedanāṇakkhandha, saññākkhandha, saṅkhārakkhandha, and viññāṇakkhandha.
• Here, the words “anatta/anattā” refer to the unfruitful nature of any rupa, vedanā, sanna, sañkhāra, viññāṇa (i.e., one’s world).

—–

Even sankhara and vinnanana does not evolve according to one’s wishes! Then if we say that we have the “free will” in some aspects, does that not mean there we are seeing some things as “atta” nature, to our control? Is it not the same as saying ” Let my sankhara be the way I like; let it not be the way I don’t like.” Will there be any exceptions? The verse said that it is true for saṅkhārakkhandha, or any sankhara that will ever exist! If we say that we have a small amount of free will, then it also means that there is a small amount of sankhara that we can control.

[taryal]

Billions of cittas (and associated cetasikas) collectively form the mind that can think, feel and perceive. The process of Paticca Sampudda includes intentional thoughts. By that, a sentient being capable of making its own decisions exists and in case of a human, it can train itself to the point that the suffering filled existence can be stopped i.e. cittas stop arising. It is true that there are many factors that can influence one’s actions, but a human does have the ability to perform intentional actions which will create causes that can bear their results, some earlier than others. To remove the instinctive (built in) desires for the 5 aggregates, one needs to make intentional efforts.

 

[taryal]

pathfinder wrote:

Even sankhara and vinnanana does not evolve according to one’s wishes! Then if we say that we have the “free will” in some aspects, does that not mean there we are seeing some things as “atta” nature, to our control? Is it not the same as saying ” Let my sankhara be the way I like; let it not be the way I don’t like.” Will there be any exceptions? The verse said that it is true for saṅkhārakkhandha, or any sankhara that will ever exist! If we say that we have a small amount of free will, then it also means that there is a small amount of sankhara that we can control.

The statement regarding these aggregates not being under one’s complete control are made in the context of the rebirth process. When the kammic energy for human bhava ends, the next existence is not determined according to one’s wish but according to Paticca Samuppada process. One may wish “may I not be reborn as an animal or a hell being or a peta”, but if the kammic seed suitable for an apaya bhava ripens at the cuti patisandhi moment, there is nothing one can do at that point. Thus, the 5 aggregates evolve according to natural causes and not according to one’s desires in this regard. But after comprehending Buddha’s teachings, one does have control over the 5 aggregates, not in the sense that you can have eternal life in the heavens but you can gradually and eventually stop them from arising.

[taryal]

As we are working hard to understand these concepts, it can feel stressful sometimes. So here’s a beautiful art of Lord Buddha that will hopefully provide encouragement:

4 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, Yash RS, pathfinder, Dawson

[Jittananto]

 Sir Lal: No. That was not done with cutupapāda ñāna. That person did not have cutupapāda ñāna. He could not recall HIS past lives. 

• So what can we say about the divine eye? You don’t have to be an Ariya to have it. The divine eye allows one to see several Bhavas and to see the actions which led to the birth of this bhava. They see beings reborn in the apayas or in higher planes. Yogis and Brahmins develop false views regarding this. This is proof that one does not need to be an ariya to possess this ability. If we can see the lives of others we can see our own lives. It’s harder to see other people’s minds than our own. If we follow this logic, they likely see their previous bhava. In this sutta, Lord Buddha explains how yogis and Brahmanas develop micchādiṭṭhi based on this ability.

Mahākammavibhaṅgasutta

But some other ascetic or brahmin—by dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind—experiences an immersion of the heart of such a kind that it gives rise to clairvoyance that is purified and superhuman. With that clairvoyance, they see that person

Idha panānanda, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṁ cetosamādhiṁ phusati yathāsamāhite citte dibbena cakkhunā visuddhena atikkantamānusakena amuṁ puggalaṁ passati—

here who killed living creatures … and had wrong view. And they see that that person is reborn in a heavenly realm.

idha pāṇātipātiṁ adinnādāyiṁ …pe… micchādiṭṭhiṁ, kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā passati sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapannaṁ.

They say:

So evamāha:

‘It seems that there is no such thing as bad deeds and the result of bad conduct.

‘natthi kira, bho, pāpakāni kammāni, natthi duccaritassa vipāko

 

 

[Lal]

I hope Pathfider’s earlier questions were resolved with the following comment by Taryal:

“Billions of cittas (and associated cetasikas) collectively form the mind that can think, feel and perceive. The process of Paticca Samuppada includes intentional thoughts.“

• Thank you, Taryal. That summarizes it well. P.S. In fact, cultivating Satipatthana/Anapanasati is all about intentional thoughts, speech, and actions.
• If there are remaining questions, feel free to ask.

______________

Jittananto’s question: “So what can we say about the divine eye?”

• The divine eye (Dibba cakkhu) is the ability of Devas to see long distances, including other realms (in real-time). Some yogis can cultivate that ability, too.
• That is a much lesser ability than cutupapāda ñāna, which is being able to see one’s own past lives (including those in other realms).

[pathfinder]

Thank you Taryal, Lal. I think I’m almost getting it and will take some time to contemplate further. Will ask if I have anymore queries. And thank you for the discussion thus far, and to the rest in this forum as well. 🙏

[Jittananto]

Sir Lal, here is a sutta that contradicts the claim about the inability of Anariyas yogi to remember their previous bhavas. Lord Buddha says that they develop wrong views about this. The sutta says that they can remember several Kappas. If we follow this logic, they see other bhavas.

 

Brahmajālasutta

3.1.1. Eternalism

And what is the second ground on which they rely?

Dutiye ca bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā kimāgamma kimārabbha sassatavādā sassataṁ attānañca lokañca paññapenti?

It’s when some ascetic or brahmin—by dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind—experiences an immersion of the heart of such a kind that they recollect their many kinds of past lives.

Idha, bhikkhave, ekacco samaṇo vā brāhmaṇo vā ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṁ cetosamādhiṁ phusati, yathāsamāhite citte anekavihitaṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussarati.

That is: one eon of the cosmos contracting and expanding; two, three, four, five, or ten eons of the cosmos contracting and expanding. They remember: ‘There, I was named this, my clan was that, I looked like this, and that was my food. This was how I felt pleasure and pain, and that was how my life ended. When I passed away from that place I was reborn somewhere else. There, too, I was named this, my clan was that, I looked like this, and that was my food. This was how I felt pleasure and pain, and that was how my life ended. When I passed away from that place I was reborn here.’ And so they recollect their many kinds of past lives, with features and details.

Seyyathidaṁ—ekampi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭaṁ dvepi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭāni tīṇipi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭāni cattāripi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭāni pañcapi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭāni dasapi saṁvaṭṭavivaṭṭāni: ‘amutrāsiṁ evaṁnāmo evaṅgotto evaṁvaṇṇo evamāhāro evaṁsukhadukkhappaṭisaṁvedī evamāyupariyanto, so tato cuto amutra udapādiṁ; tatrāpāsiṁ evaṁnāmo evaṅgotto evaṁvaṇṇo evamāhāro evaṁsukhadukkhappaṭisaṁvedī evamāyupariyanto, so tato cuto idhūpapanno’ti. Iti sākāraṁ sauddesaṁ anekavihitaṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussarati.

They say:

So evamāha:

‘The self and the cosmos are eternal, barren, steady as a mountain peak, standing firm like a pillar.

‘sassato attā ca loko ca vañjho kūṭaṭṭho esikaṭṭhāyiṭṭhito

• I highly recommend everyone to read the Brahmajala sutta, an excellent sutta in which Lord Buddha explains the basis of all religions and beliefs that dominate our world today.

[Lal]

On June 17, 2024 at 1:28 pm (comment #5304) I wrote the following:

Cubibobi’s comment: “Through meditation, we can all access the knowledge of our past lives, which in Pali we call paṭiccasamuppāda ñāṇa.”

Isn’t this knowledge called pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna in Pali?”

• Yes. It is.
• There are two types of related ñāṇa: (i) pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna and (ii) cutupapāda (cuti and uppatti) ñāna.
• With the first, one can see one’s past lives in the human realm. With the second, one can see all past lives, including those in the apayas.
• Anariya yogis cannot cultivate (ii). That makes their wrong view of sassata ditthi (a “permanent self” moving from life to life) stronger. However, it becomes easier for Ariyas who cultivate (ii) to see the dangers of the rebirth process. 

________

Jittananto’s excerpt from the Brahmajala Sutta appears @ marker 1.32.1: “Brahmajala Sutta (DN 1).”

• Just before that, the sutta starts explaining how sassata ditthi (eternal view, i.e., that of a “soul-type entity” living forever) in yogis‘ who have cultivated pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna.
• That section starts @ marker 1.30.1: “Brahmajala Sutta (DN 1).”
• With pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna, those yogis can ONLY SEE their past lives as humans. So, they erroneously assume that they had been reborn human in ALL their previous lives (through innumerable maha kappas or eons!). 
• Had they been able to cultivate the cutupapāda ñāna, they would not have grasped that wrong view.

[Jittananto]

The sutta refers to several Kappas. During this time, they witnessed the destruction and reformation of the earth. It is obvious they also observed their lives in the apayas, as well as in Brahma and other worlds. This is surely why the yogis of the past taught moral living. Sila was known long before the coming of Lord Buddha. Despite this evidence, the human mind is often hindered by micchādiṭṭhi, making it challenging to break free. An example is heliocentrism. It may seem surprising, but some people believe that the Earth revolves around the sun despite evidence to the contrary. It is very hard to come out of micchādiṭṭhi. This is the case of those yogis with iddhi powers. Despite evidence that they have been powerless countless times, they continue to believe in stable happiness in this world. They realized that they couldn’t sustain their lives in other bhavas. Even though it’s Annica’s nature, they struggled to grasp this concept. They continue to believe that they can attain lasting happiness as long as they engage in Jhanas.

 

Brahmajālasutta

3.1.2. Partial Eternalism

It’s possible that one of those beings passes away from that host and is reborn in this state of existence.

Ṭhānaṁ kho panetaṁ, bhikkhave, vijjati, yaṁ aññataro satto tamhā kāyā cavitvā itthattaṁ āgacchati.

Having done so, they go forth from the lay life to homelessness.

Itthattaṁ āgato samāno agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajati.

By dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind, they experience an immersion of the heart of such a kind that they recollect that past life, but no further. 

Agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajito samāno ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṁ cetosamādhiṁ phusati, yathāsamāhite citte taṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussarati, tato paraṁ nānussarati.

They say:

So evamāha:

‘He who is Brahmā—the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, God Almighty, the Maker, the Creator, the First, the Begetter, the Controller, the Father of those who have been born and those yet to be born—by the we were created. He is permanent, everlasting, eternal, imperishable, remaining the same for all eternity.

‘yo kho so bhavaṁ brahmā mahābrahmā abhibhū anabhibhūto aññadatthudaso vasavattī issaro kattā nimmātā seṭṭho sajitā vasī pitā bhūtabhabyānaṁ, yena mayaṁ bhotā brahmunā nimmitā, so nicco dhuvo sassato avipariṇāmadhammo sassatisamaṁ tatheva ṭhassati.

There are gods named ‘depraved by play.’ They spend too much time laughing, playing, and making merry. And in doing so, they lose their mindfulness, and they pass away from that host of gods. 

Santi, bhikkhave, khiḍḍāpadosikā nāma devā, te ativelaṁ hassakhiḍḍāratidhammasamāpannā viharanti. Tesaṁ ativelaṁ hassakhiḍḍāratidhammasamāpannānaṁ viharataṁ sati sammussati. Satiyā sammosā te devā tamhā kāyā cavanti.

It’s possible that one of those beings passes away from that host and is reborn in this state of existence.

Ṭhānaṁ kho panetaṁ, bhikkhave, vijjati yaṁ aññataro satto tamhā kāyā cavitvā itthattaṁ āgacchati.

Having done so, they go forth from the lay life to homelessness.

Itthattaṁ āgato samāno agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajati.

By dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind, they experience an immersion of the heart of such a kind that they recollect that past life, but no further.

Agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajito samāno ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṁ cetosamādhiṁ phusati, yathāsamāhite citte taṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussarati, tato paraṁ nānussarati.

• Here we can clearly see that they recall their Brahma or Deva bhava through meditation. Therefore, I believe it is incorrect to assume that an anariya yogi is only capable of perceiving their human bhava.

[Lal]

Yes. The sutta analyzes various other cases that lead to different types of ditthi.

• What you quoted above “By dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind, they experience an immersion of the heart of such a kind that they recollect that past life, but no further. “

That whole section needs to be explained in detail.

• This is about a yogi who had been born a Brahma in the previous life, and believed Maha Brahma created him in that previous life.
• After dying from that realm, he is reborn a human and cultivates pubbe nivāsānussati ñāna. To quote: “Agārasmā anagāriyaṁ pabbajito samāno ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṁ cetosamādhiṁ phusati, yathāsamāhite citte taṁ pubbenivāsaṁ anussarati, tato paraṁ nānussarati.” OR “By dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right application of mind, they experience an immersion of the heart of such a kind that they recollect that past life, but no further.” See “Brahmajala Sutta (DN 1).”
• Then he can recollect only that previous birth as a Brahma and comes to a wrong view of Partial Eternalism. That particular yogi can only see that single Brahma birth as a previous birth.
• In the section I referred to in my previous comment, the sutta describes three sets of yogis who could look back at their past HUMAN LIVES for three different time ranges. Please read the sutta carefully.

Anyway, this is a complex sutta and requires a detailed analysis. This is my last comment on this issue. I don’t have the time necessary to analyze the sutta in detail. The sutta provides a thorough analysis of how the two main wrong views of sassata ditthi and uccheda ditthi branch out into 62 wrong views.

• The bottom line (as I understand) is that without the cutupapāda ñāna, a given yogi cannot look at ALL his previous lives. Only Ariya yogis can have the cutupapāda ñāna.

[Jittananto]

Yes, I completely agree that an Ariya who has cultivated jhanas and cutupapāda ñāna will have a much broader view of his past lives than an anariya yogi. This is an indisputable fact!

Thank you for taking the time to address this issue, sir!

[Lal]

The following post is on free will and determinism: “Free Will in Buddhism – Connection to Sankhāra.”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, pathfinder

[Author]

Posts