Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I must add that some people may not see the reasoning explained this way, i.e, to see the anatta nature.
Many people start comprehending anicca nature first. So, no one should be discouraged if this does not seem to be the way they are understanding Tilakkhana.
Thank you, Vilas, for sharing your experience. It is apparent that you have spent time contemplating on some key issues.
You said, “What I found out is that by changing the “gati” or habit pattern, one can change the way “chitta flows” and what rupa is being created and what perception is being had, what feeling is being generated and whether an abhisankahara needs to be performed”
That is a key point. And those gati are changed permanently at each stage of magga phala.As you explain in the rest of the post, “I” that arises depends on the arammana (thought object) and one’s gati.
This is why there is no “unchanging self”. But since gati come into play, one cannot say that there is “no-self” either. Until one gets to the Arahant stage (i.e., until one’s gati are removed), there is a “perception of a self”. This is the key that many people have a hard time understanding.Thank you, firewns.
Yes. It is discussed specifically at #2 in that post.Even if one has pending kamma vipaka, they cannot bring their fruits unless suitable conditions are present.
A special case is when one attains magga phala. Then the conditions for certain kamma vipaka to bring to fruits are removed permanently.
– For example, if one has kamma vipaka that could lead to rebirth in the apayas, they are automatically prevented from bringing vipaka when the Sotapanna stage is attained.This is the doctrine of paticca samuppada; see:
There is no direct relationship between asava and kamma beeja.
Asava are more closely related to one’s gati.
Kammma beeja are more specific. Of course they arise depending on one’s gati (or asava).
One attains Nibbana by removing asava (asavakkhaya). One’s gati are also removed at the same time. One’s kamma beeja may still be there, but they cannot bring vipaka.
There are three suttas (all named Bija Sutta): SN 22.54, SN 49.24, and AN 10.104.
It is helpful to note that kamma bija (or beeja) are created by vinnana: “Viññāna – What It Really Means” and “Sankhāra and Kammā, Viññāna and Kamma Beeja“.
July 28, 2018: Another important sutta in this context is, Pathamabhava Sutta (AN 3.76), which says: “Iti kho, ānanda, kammaṃ khettaṃ, viññāṇaṃ bījaṃ, taṇhā sneho..”
Translated: “Ānanda, deeds (kamma) are the field, viññāṇa is the seed, and craving (taṇhā) is the moisture..”Hi Tobias,
Yes. I think I should write a post on this. This is the key reason why many people today are confused about “anatta” as “no-self”.
Even in English (and in other languages), there are some words that have double meanings. For example, the word “right” is used to mean two different things in the sentences: “You are right” and “Turn right”.
Here is another example with the word “leaves”: “He leaves for work early morning”, AND “This tree has green leaves”.So, “anatta” in that latter sentence “sabbe dhamma anatta“, has NOTHING to do with “atta” and “na atta” with reference to a “self” and “no-self”.
If you read the English translation at the Sutta Central site (with this key information in mind), you may be able to see what I mean. There, Vaccagotta also got confused, and the Buddha explained this to Ven. Ananda after Vaccagotta left.
I will write a post with more references from the Tipitaka, since this is a key issue.
No. Sometimes anatta is written as anattā too, especially when it rhymes better as in “sabbe dhammā anattā”.
July 26, 2018: Actually it is do with more than to rhyme.
Anatta is a fact: This world is of “anatta nature”.
Anattā refers to something specifically with that nature, here dhammā: “sabbe dhammā anattā“.There are two concepts mentioned in this sutta: “Atta” as “self” AND “atta” as “opposite of anatta” as the Buddha meant in Tilakkhana.
In the first case, “anatta” is NEVER used as the opposite of “atta” in ANY sutta.
For example, in this sutta, Vaccagotta asks the Buddha: “kiṃ nu kho, bho gotama, atthattā”ti? Evaṃ vutte, bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi. “Kiṃ pana, bho gotama, natthattā”ti? Evaṃ vutte, bhagavā tuṇhī ahosi.”
Translated: “Master Gotama, is there a self? (atthattā”ti)”
When this was said, the Buddha was silent.
“Then, Master Gotama, is there no self? (natthattā”ti)”
Again the Blessed One was silent.”Here the Vaccagotta was asking whether there is a “self (atthattā”ti)” OR “no-self (natthattā”ti)”
Note that here the opposite is written as “natthattā”ti“, using the negation “na” and NOT “anatta“.
After Vaccagotta left (when the Buddha did not answer for the second and third time), Ven. Ananda asked the Buddha why he did not explain it to Vaccagotta. The Buddha said he did not answer because at that time Vaccagotta was incapable was grasping this difference, just as many even in Theravada are unable to grasp. He did not think Vaccagotta could understand “sabbe dhammā anattā” and could get confused, as mentioned at the end of the sutta.
This is the difference explained in the post: “Anatta – the Opposite of Which Atta?” and in “Atta Hi Attano Natho”.
This is the danger posed by those who translate these key suttas incorrectly. Of course they are not aware that they are doing a very serious damage. But the problem is that when we try to point out the problem (and explain at length), many of them do not even listen.
Now we are getting to these deeper issues in Buddha Dhamma that are critical to understand. I encourage everyone to ask questions if not clear.
“Anatta sanna leads to the uprooting of asmi mana?”
Yes. It is the comprehension of Tilakkhana that gets one to the Sotapanna stage through the Arahant stage.
All ten samyojana are removed via comprehension of anicca, dukkha, anatta.
One could have the anicca sanna or dukkha sanna and get there too.
When one has one of the three (at the four levels of Nibbana, so to speak), one will automatically have other two at those levels as well.
All these are just different ways of expressing the unfruitfulness of seeking long-term happiness in a world that is, by nature, will not be able to provide. In contrast, one will be subjected to much suffering when having that “false hope”.
Asubha means not auspicious. People get attached to sense pleasing things with the perception of them being auspicious, i.e.,they will be good and beneficial.
No matter how much money, fame, etc one gets in a lifetime, one will have to leave all that behind at death, AND it could come at any moment. One needs to have the “marana sanna“, in order to strive harder.
It is not a good a good idea to have cravings for food. One needs food to sustain oneself, but beyond that it is another craving, that will lead to suffering. When one is too greedy, one cultivates “greedy sankhara” and could become eligible to become a preta (hungry ghost).
The bottom line is that it is not a good idea to have cravings for anything in this world. Of course, one should not just abstain from things arbitrarily; that “sanna” comes via understanding, as one makes progress.
As for, “aniccasaññā, anicce dukkhasaññā, dukkhe anattasaññā” this is discussed in the key post, “Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta – Wrong Interpretations“. See #5.
pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā are along the same lines. Pahāna means to “get rid of based on their unfruitfulness AND danger”. Virāga is t lose rāga.
All these saññā are inter-related. Different people may be able to cultivate different types based on their gati.
Firewns: I just published a post: “Dhamma, Sankhara, Sankata, Rupa, Vinnana, Gati, Asava, Anusaya“.
Hopefully, this will answer some of the questions you may still have. Please don’t hesitate to ask further questions. It is important to get these fundamental, but complex, terms clarified. Many people do not really understand these terms, because these words have been badly translated to English.
I have also revised the post: “Difference Between Dhammā and Sankhāra“.
You are correct to say that mind and brain are two different things in Buddhism.
However, brain plays a critical role for the working of the mind, as explained in the post: “Brain – Interface between Mind and Body”
Therefore, when the brain function is weakened by schizophrenia, that will affect the mind in the same way that any damage to the brain will affect the mind. In fact, as we get old, brain function deteriorates and that affects the mind too. So, there is nothing special about schizophrenia in that sense.
All those, including schizophrenia, are kamma vipaka, just as cancer or any other ailment is due to kamma vipaka.
firewrns:
“What are those dhamma that have annica and dukkha nature?”None other than sankhara. Only sankhara have the anicca and dukkha nature. All sankhara eventually lead to dukkha and thus have the anatta nature too in the sense of becoming helpless. If you think there are, you can list them and we can discuss. Remember that anicca is a perception in the mind.
Everything else is dhamma and anatta in the sense they are also not fruitful in the end. But of course, we do need Buddha Dhamma to attain Nibbana. Once the Arahanthood is attained, there is no need of that either, and that also needs to be abandoned. This is why the Buddha said just like a raft enables one to cross a river, but no point in carrying it once the river is crossed. Some who get to the Anagami stage have a hard time attaining Arahanthood, because of their attachment to Buddha Dhamma.
Of course, there many other things that are included in “sabbe dhamma” category, including nama gotta (records of all sankhara that have come and gone to the past).
The key is that sankhara are CURRENT thoughts. As soon as those thoughts expire, they become nama gotta. This is something that most people do not understand. This needs some contemplation. But you are on the right track. I have explained this in detail in the post, “Pancakkhandha or Five Aggregates – A Misinterpreted Concept” and “Pancupādānakkhandha – It is All Mental“. I don’t think that many people have read those posts. They are not an easy read, but necessary to understand things better.
You may want to take a break for a couple of days and then go over things again. You may be putting too much effort into this in a short time.
firewrns said: “One more thing that I do not understand is that the bodies of Buddhas and Arahants are rupa too, and can impart suffering in the form of aches and pains. Surely they are then of dukkha nature too?”
Of course. Suffering for an Arahant completely ends only at the death of the physical body, i.e., Parinibbana. An Arahant is free only of sankhara dukkha until death.
You said in the earlier post: “I would like to respectfully point out a possible inconsistency.”
– What is the inconsistency?Yes. I did say, “A tree or a house (sankata) is not sankhara and do not lead to suffering.” Any sankata leads to suffering only when someone gets attached to it.
Sankhara are basically thoughts. Sankata are rupa. There is a huge difference between them. “sabbe sankhara anicca” basically means our hopes and dreams about future are in vain in the long run.
