Post on “Anattā is a characteristic of the world, not about a ‘self’ “.

Viewing 11 reply threads
  • Author
    • #45197

      Anatta is a Characteristic of the World, not About a “Self

      In #9 it is said that,

      That is why the Buddha always referred to aggregates. For example, as we discussed, rupakkhandha includes physical rupa and our mental impressions of past and future rupa.

      I think that might be confusing.

      You probably mean “mental impression of physical Rūpa sensed via five senses”.

    • #45200

      Thank you, LDF!

      I revised it to:

      That is why the Buddha always referred to aggregates. For example, as we discussed, rupakkhandha includes our mental impressions of physical rupa ever arose in our minds. Similarly for vedanākkhandha, saññākkhandha, saṅkhārakkhandha, viññāṇakkhandha. “

      P.S. It is critically important to realize that — unless expressly specified — the Buddha always referred by “rupa” or “rupaṁ” to such mental impressions that arose in our minds, and NOT the physical rupa out in the external world. 

    • #45203

      Lal, Interesting side question;

      When RūpakKhanda for some particular type of physical Rūpa arises, most of us cannot know the true physical nature of that Rūpa, right?

      For example,

      Let’s say that Someone is given a poisoned cake. That particular Poison doesn’t have any distinct taste or smell and that poison doesn’t change the physical appearance of cake in any way.

      So, receiver of cake doesn’t know that cake is poisoned. He eats cake and dies.

      The saññā of that cake in mind of receiver of cake might be that “this is just a normal cake, which can be consumed”.

      So, This is another way in which the mind can get deluded right?

      This mental impression of physical Rūpa doesn’t accurately represent the reality, right?

    • #45204

      Yes. That is correct.

      Eventually, one will realize that no “rupa” (whether it is a poisoned cake or a poison-free cake) is of nicca, sukha, and atta nature. 

      • That complete comprehension of “yathabhuta nana” comes in stages and is complete at the Arahant stage. Then one will not be interested in any cake (of course, an Arahant will eat cake to satisfy hunger). 

      That holds for all five aggreagtes INCLUDING vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana. They all have the anatta (unfruitful) characteristic.

    • #45205

      Thank you Lal.

      I was going to mention “Yathābhūta ñāna” but I thought Yathābhūta ñāna was more about fundamental structure and composition of Rūpa.

      You wrote,

      Eventually, one will realize that no “rupa” (whether it is a poisoned cake or a poison-free cake) is of anicca, dukkha, and anatta nature. 

      You probably mean “Niccā, sukha, atta”, right?

    • #45209

      Yes. Thank you. Just fixed it.

    • #45210

      In this same post,


      In Point #2,

      The Buddha points out that those aggregates CANNOT be under one’s control in that first part.

      I think we should write it as “CANNOT be under one’s COMPLETE control”.

      Otherwise, it might be misinterpreted to support “fatalistic/deterministic” philosophy.

      Because, mind can decide to experience some PañcakKhanda over other PañcakKhanda, Subject to causes+conditions.

      Example. Deciding to Watch sermon over watching movie.


      In point #4,

      For example, suppose I saw the world center towers before their destruction in the terrorist attack in 2011.

      You mean 2001, right?

      Hope that pointing out this kind of factual but not dhamma-related error is also fine with you Lal.

    • #45213

      Yes. Those need to be corrected. But are they in the same post or a different post? 

      • Of course, I appreciate anyone pointing out such errors. Sometimes, what I write may not fully reflect what I think! I am not sure why that is. But that happens to us all. 
      • That terrorist attack example is a good one. Of course, I knew that it happened in 2001. But somehow, it got typed as 2011.
      • In addition, in some cases, my understanding may be improved, or there may be a better way to say the same thing. 
      • Please don’t hesitate to point out any type of errors. 
      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #45215

      Great. Thank you.

      Yes, they are within this same post.

      They are in point #2 and #4 of the respective post.

    • #45218

      You may be referring to “Anatta in Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta – Part 1” and NOT “Anatta is a Characteristic of the World, not About a “Self

      • I revised #2. But #4 had the year correct as 2001. 
    • #45221

      Yes, My apologies, Lal.

      I have been re reading the old sections from printed book. I printed “key dhamma concepts” section at end of 2021.

      In the printed book, number is “2011”.

      Anyways, now onwards I will verify the printed book articles with online latest revised versions before posting.

    • #45222

      No Problem! Yes. Please check the online version before posting. I keep revising posts regularly.

      • Seng Kiat does a great job of keeping up with the revisions.
      • However, sometimes I don’t notify him of minor corrections, like changing from 2011 to 2001. 
      • So, it is OK to read Seng Kiat’s eBook, especially if you use the current version. He revises it every week when send him a list of revised posts. Again, I don’t notify him of a change of a few words. 
Viewing 11 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.