[TripleGemStudent]

Since a Sotapanna has removed sakkaya ditthi, can the perception (sanna) and thoughts (citta) of “etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti” still arise in them?

Would it still be of benefit for a Sotapanna to mediate on “netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā” of the five aggregates and on the other dhatu’s like in the Mahārāhulovāda Sutta?

 

 

 

[Lal]

There are three points to sort out:

1. We attach to things in this world (and thus move away from Nibbana) due to two main reasons: (i) Having wrong views about the world, i.e., believing that the world can provide happiness if we try hard enough. That wrong (or distorted) view is sakkaya ditthi. (ii) Having wrong (or distorted) perceptions along the same lines is called sanna vipallasa.

• Sakkaya ditthi goes away at the Sotapanna stage, starting at the Sotapanna Anugami level.
• Sanna vipallasa decreases in stages. starting at the Sotapanna stage and complete removal only at the Arahant stage.

2. The deeply embedded perception of a “me” is associated with sanna vipallasa. Removal of sakkaya ditthi does not affect that much the removal of the perception of a “me.” However, without the removal of sakkaya ditthi one cannot proceed to removing sanna vipallasa. Thus, only a Sotapanna can start the process of removing sanna vipallasa.

3. It is incorrect to translate the famous verse, “‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ ti” as “‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”

• The problem is with translating atta/attā as “my self.”
• Even though in some contexts, attā indicates “a person” in relation to anicca and dukkha (i.e., in Tilakkhana), anatta/anattā ALWAYS means “not beneficial” or something to that effect. See “Anatta – the Opposite of Which Atta?“
• Thus, the correct translation of “‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ ti” is “mine, of myself, or can be beneficial for me?”

4. I will address this in detail in the current series of posts in “Does “Anatta” Refer to a “Self”?” starting with the next post.

[TripleGemStudent]

– “The deeply embedded perception of a “me” is associated with sanna vipallasa. Removal of sakkaya ditthi does not affect that much the removal of the perception of a “me.”

From reading the paragraph, it seems like it would still be of benefit for a Sotapanna to mediate on netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ of the five aggregates and on the other dhatu’s like in the Mahārāhulovādasutta.

– “Thus, the correct translation of “‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ ti” is “mine, of myself, or can be beneficial for me?”

That’s very interesting . . . In the past year or so I have been working on coming up with an interpretation that works best for my own understanding of that famous verse.

Can’t say this would be the right translation or interpretation of that famous verse, but it seems like it works best for my practice and understanding at this current time. What I have come up with so far is:

Etaṃ mama (had as mine), esohamasmi ( I am any of the 5 aggregates or the 20 kinds / types of sakkaya ditthi), eso me atta’ ti (is of value or importance to me).

None of the 5 aggregates or dhatus “can be had as mine”, that my essence is any of the 5 aggregates and the 5 aggregates is of importance or value to me. 

[Lal]

TGS wrote: “From reading the paragraph, it seems like it would still be of benefit for a Sotapanna to mediate on netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ of the five aggregates and on the other dhatu’s like in the Mahārāhulovāda Sutta.”

• Contemplating the correct translation of “‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ ti” (i.e., pancupadanakkhandha is  “mine, of myself, or can be beneficial for me?”) is part of the contemplation of the anicca nature. 
• That must be cultivated at any stage, i.e., even at higher stages of magga phala. The anicca nature is fully comprehended only at the Arahant stage. One gets a glimpse of it at the Sotapanna Anugami stage, and thereafter, “anicca sanna” increases at the higher stages.
• As one’s understanding increases, one can connect it to the perception of a “self” or “I” (the Pali word here is not “attā“). The Pali words for I, me, and mine are aham, mē, and mama.
• This is discussed in the new post “Etaṁ Mama, Esohamasmi, Eso Me Attā’ti – What Does It Mean?“

[TripleGemStudent]

Thank you for the replies, that really helped me to confirm something. 

[Author]

Posts