Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@Siebe: Words like sakkaya ditthi and anicca have several (but related) meanings. I may discuss just one aspect relevant to the context of the discussion. There are other ways describe sakkaya ditthi.
This is why the Buddha said that different people may describe the Sotapanna stage in different ways. I have discussed this before, under another topic.
@Siebe: The following is something that I try to emphasize in the “Living Dhamma” section. Let me try to give an analogy.
One can read about how to do a heart transplant. The basic idea is simple: One needs to disconnect the failing heart and replace that with a healthy heart from a donor who has just died in an accident.
One may even learn intricate details involved, and spend a lot of time reading about the procedures involved, etc. However, unless one goes through a series of time-consuming steps (high school, college, couple of years into medical school), and THEN practice on dead bodies first and then finally assist in several live operations, one will NOT get to be a heart surgeon.
The point is that BECOMING a heart surgeon is much more than reading (and even understanding fairly well) what is involved.
Actually getting rid of the “sense of me” (asmi mana) is unimaginaginably difficult. The Buddha said he would have the same mindset about someone who is cutting off his right arm, as towards another who is massaging his left arm reverently.
Getting rid of sakkaya ditthi is not easy either, but it is way below asmi mana. I am not going to repeat what I have said many times under several topics. Anyone can go back and read them.
The point is that Mahayanists (and even some Theravadins) believe that just reading about the “theory” is enough to get rid of “self identity”. Such people meditate for years saying to themselves “there is no me”, “there is no self”, or something to that effect. They get into intellectual debates about “self” and discuss using very sophisticated terms, but have no idea of how to get there.
If one has truly removed asmi mana, one has given up ALL worldly desires, and will willingly give away his/her possessions to the needy. Can any of those mentioned above willingly give away their possessions (one’s house, car, etc)? They are just making fools out of themselves. I am sorry to use some harsh language, but on occasion Buddha himself called some monks “fools” (“mogha purisa”) in order to get a point across.
Long before one gets to removing asmi mana, one needs to remove the cravings for sense pleasures; in fact, even a Sotapanna (who has removed sakkaya ditthi) has not achieved that; that is achieved at the Anagami stage. Has any of those people mentioned above have gotten rid of the desire for even sense pleasures?
One starts with Samma Ditthi (by getting a glimpse of Tilakkhana and thereby removing sakkaya dithi).
Then one thinks (Samma Sankappa), speaks (Samma Vaca), acts (Samma Kammanta), make an effort (Samma Vayama), live one’s life that way (Samma Ajiva), and then gets to Samma Sati (the mindset) and Samma Samadhi (cooled mind). Two more steps are actually involved to becomes an Arahant: Samma Nana (wisdom by removing avijja completely) and finally Samma Vimutti (total release from this world). Asmi mana is removed AFTER one has followed the Noble Path as above.
“Living Dhamma” section starts off with simple concepts. But there are only a few who can really understand the last subsection on nama rupa. Of course there could be Arahants who have removed even asmi mana; the Buddha said the world is not devoid of Arahants until the Buddha Sasana comes to an end). All others will need to start somewhere in between. Also, the “Living Dhamma” section is only a guide. One will have to work hard/practice to fill in any gaps. I keep adding posts as I have time.
I KNOW that I have removed sakkaya ditthi. I also know that I have NOT removed asmi mana.
@Siebe: Everyone at this forum has wanted to help you. You need to go over all those comments and see for yourself. But there is a limit as to how much we can repeat ourselves.
This is not a therapy forum. I certainly do not want to console anyone by going against the truth. The real meaning of “musavada” is not just lying (“musa” is incorrect +”vada” is arguments). It means presenting untruth (adhamma) as truth (dhamma).
By the way, adhamma are dasa akusala and dhamma are dasa kusala (abstaining from dasa akusala). The key here is that micca ditthi is the worst of the dasa akusala. Micca ditthi can be removed only by learning true dhamma AND by actually practicing (book knowledge is not enough).
Real compassion is not to keep someone happy by engaging in useless back and forth, but by trying to present the true teachings of the Buddha per Tipitaka. Any issue is to be decided by the Tipitaka, and that has been followed in every question put forth at the forum. Of course, my interpretation of a certain concept could be wrong. I am willing, and I look forward to, discuss such issues if proof is provided from the Tipitaka.
Just saying what one believes to be true, without providing evidence from the Tipitaka, is not going to benefit anyone. Please do not quote Mahāyāna or the commentaries like Visuddhimagga at this forum. I believe that is a waste of time and I have explained why in several posts. If anyone can provide contrary arguments to any specific point in those posts, they can ask questions by referring to the post and the specific bullet # in that post.
Of course, each person should decide for him/herself what is to be believed. But if those beliefs do not match the Tipitaka, no point in repeating such arguments (after it is explained why they do not match the Tipitaka). I am going to remove any unnecessary comments in the future, but will be happy to answer any legitimate questions.
P.S. I just posted a comment at “sakkaya ditthi and asmi mana” to try to clarify one more time.
Thank you for the request, vilaskadival.
I have been working on a possible desana or two on Tilakkhana. Hope to get one out in a week or so.
I need to start on another project that I have been postponing for almost two years. So, it may not be possible to do one on those suttas in the immediate term. But there are posts on them in the “Sutta Interpretations” section.
C. Saket said: “So I have settled on the conclusion that this rebirth process has not ended for me (even after infinite amount of time) because I have not truly followed the Noble 8-fold path yet.”
Yes. I am glad you came to that conclusion. The Buddha always emphasized that there are many “puzzles” in this world, but it is not worth while to spend too much time on them, unless we can learn something relevant to pursuing the Path.
I realized recently that this particular issue is a good opportunity to point out the deeper analysis of why both “there is a self” and “there is no self” are wrong.
By the way, the above statement should really read as: Both views “there is a self” and “there is no UNCHANGING self” are wrong.
The reason is that a being exists only momentarily in a given precise state. Each moment of existence arises due to cause and effect or paticca samuppada (PS), here the pavutti PS. Drastic changes normally occur with uppatti PS, but in some cases like in attaining magga phala, drastic changes can also occur via pavutti PS.
A good analogy of a “momentarily changing self” is a “circle of fire” illusion created by rapidly moving a ball of fire in circular motion. We know that really there is no “circle of fire” there; in reality the fire is located at one place at a given time. If we slow down the rotation, we can actually see that to be true. (And even the fire at the burning point arises at each moment!) But we cannot say that a circle fire does not exist as long as the rapid movement is there (especially to a child watching it).
We are like those children, who may not really “see” the true nature of “a circle of fire”. In reality a living being is sort of like that circle of fire. We think that we talk, see, smell, etc in parallel (at the same time), but that is not case.
If the mind can be slowed down, one would be able to “see” that those are the results of billions of separate actions taking place one at a time (each one taking a citta vithi that lasts only a billionth of a second; no two events can take place at the same time; when the mind deals with seeing, it cannot hear, etc). But that can be “seen” only by a Buddha. The Buddha said that mind is the fastest entity in the whole world!
So, this is a good opportunity to comprehend that aspect, especially for those who are interested in detailed explanations. But it is not necessary for others.
As you pointed out “In fact Ven. Bahiya Daruciriya became Arahant just by listening to a single discourse by Lord Buddha! Other monks were shocked as to how a person can become an Arahant in such a short time just by listening to a single discourse.
Please see – https://suttacentral.net/ud1.10/pli/ms
Actually Ven. Bahiya Daruciriya had high level of “panna” from his previous life. That is why he was able to become an Arahant in such a short time ( within minutes ! ).”Yes. Ven. Bahiya became an Arahant when the Buddha explained (in a single verse!), this dynamic process which we normally attribute to a “person”. But it is really not a “person” engaged in seeing, hearing, etc. It is really the cumulative effect of rapid actions taking place via paticca samuppada or cause and effect at each thought moment!
Again, this process can be fully comprehended only by an Arahant. But getting the basic idea can help remove sakkaya ditthi. I recommend carefully reviewing the post: “Citta and Cetasika – How Vinnana (Consciousness) Arises“. Even if one does not fully comprehend it, it is good to get the basic idea.
Also, this again points to the fact that our mental body (gandhabba) is much more important that our physical body, as I mentioned earlier.
@ C.Saket: There is a presumed monkey typing on a typewriter for an eternity (in the analogy). There is no “person” (C. Saket) travelling in samsara for an eternity.
This topic turns out to be an excellent one since it forces us to think deeper into the question of “self”.
C. Saket said: “I also feel that this is not the first time that I have heard Buddha Dhamma. I must have heard the Tilakkhana in infinite number of past lives.”
When he first pointed out this problem to me via email (before the discussion forum started), he pointed out this problem to have its origin in the infinite monkey theorem, which states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare.
So, the analogy is that “a person trying to attain Nibbana” can be compared to “a monkey trying to type the complete works of Shakespeare with a typewriter”.
The key to resolving this problem is to realize that the solution lies in the question itself (due to the Buddha’s contention that it is not correct to say whether a “person exists” OR “a person does not exist”).
We have discussed this at length (and Saket himself started a new topic “Wrong English translations of Aniccha, Anatta, Sakkaya ditthi… etc”). It was recently discussed under another topic “Anatta” where I provided more clear evidence from the Tipitaka that the Buddha rejected both views of “a person exists” OR “a person does not exist”.
In reality, there is “no person” travelling samsara trying to attain Nibbana.
Even though even the Buddha said that he had been so and so in previous lives, that is just like saying “I am doing this” or “John went home”. We need to do that to communicate.
However, at a deeper level, there is no “person” or a “satta” that lives and sees, hears, smells, tastes, touch things, and thinks AT THE SAME TIME.
There is only a series of events that occur ONE AT A TIME. When we see, we can only see; when we hear we can only hear, etc. But each of such “events” comes in as only a brief signal at a time, and is analyzed by a single citta vithi.
So, for example, suppose person X sees person Y and he is saying “mom”. There are thousands of citta vithi running through X’s mind within a second while he is seeing Y and hearing him say “mom”: “m” sound comes separately from “a” sound and that is also separated from the last “m” sound. In between them, there are visual snapshots of Y coming in through the eyes.
It is the manasikara cetasika (one of the six universal cetasika in a citta) put it all together with help of other universal cetasika, especially cetana, sanna, and vedana. This is discussed via many posts at the “Abhidhamma” section.
However, we can get an idea about how this happens by analyizing what happens in playing a movie. A movie is a collection of static pictures that are projected on a screen at a fast rate. Even though they show individual pictures (just like our mind taking a series of snapshots of seeing and hearing), when they are processed at a fast rate, IT APPEARS TO BE continuous.
Thus, the Buddha described the fastest quantum process, the working of the mind, in Abhidhamma.This aspect of the similarity to a movie projection is discussed in detail in the post:”Citta and Cetasika – How Vinnana (Consciousness) Arises”. Please watch the youtube animation video there. That is helpful in getting the basic idea.
If one needs to get a good idea of why the Buddha rejected both “self” and “no-self” views, this is a good way to analyze it at a deeper level.
By the way, this wrong perception of a “me” is due to the “ghana sanna“, i.e., the perception that “I am a solid living entity” that does this and that. In reality, one’s physical body just an inert shell; it is being controlled by an unbelievably small “almost mental entity” called gandhabba. And that gandhabba itself changes moment-to-moment (by changing gati), and drastic changes in gandhabba occur when the human bhava ends and a different bhava (deva, animal, etc) is grasped.
I invite all to ask questions (if something is not clear) since it is important to discuss this and get the basic ideas. That will help getting rid of sakkaya ditthi. It is not possible to give details in a single post, but I direct to appropriate posts or make comments if a new issue is pointed out.
Siebe said: “I have seen most buddhist teachers explain it this way. In this context Anatta is almost always translated as no-self. In the sense of ‘there is no-real ego-identity’. I do not see what is wrong with this meaning of anatta.”
Actually, the next sutta “Channa Sutta (SN 22.90)” clearly says anatta does not mean “no-self”, even in the English translation: “Channa Sutta: To Channa (SN 22.90)“:
“Everything exists”: That is one extreme. “Everything doesn’t exist”: That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.”
“Everything doesn’t exist” in the above translates to “no-self” when applied to a “living being”. As far as a “person” is concerned, “self” is one extreme and “no-self” is the other extreme: it wrong to say either “a person exists” or “a person does not exist”.
So, even though most Theravada websites (including the above sites) translate “anatta” as “no-self”, it is clear from their own translation above that the Buddha rejected this “no-self” view.
I had decided not to answer any more questions from Siebe on this issue, but I can see that he is agonizing over it. And truly, it is not easy to grasp. That is why in the above sutta, it is stated that Ven. Channa meditated for years trying to get rid of the perception of “me” (“pancakkhandha are not mine”) and could not. That is impossible to do. One first needs to realize that it is not fruitful to take pancakkhandha as mine.
I and others have described the relationship between asmi mana and sakkaya ditthi, and also why they are different too. It may be a good idea to read all those exchanges under the following two topics. No point in repeating:
“Two unbroken streams of consciousness (DN28)”
and “Wrong English translations of Aniccha, Anatta, Sakkaya ditthi… etc“.This is at the heart of understanding Tilakkhana, so I suggest to all who have questions about this to read them. There is a lot of information under those two topics.
Bottom line is that a Sotapanna is one who has seen (with wisdom; and has become dassanena sampanno). Thus a Sotapanna knows that “it is not fruitful to take pancakkhandha (including one’s body) to be mine”. That is removing sakkaya ditthi.
It is only an Arahant who has actually fully comprehended and experienced the full release from suffering and thus has removed the perception of “me”. That is removing “mana” or more specifically “asmi mana” (other components of “mana” are removed at lower stages of Nibbana.
To say it in yet another way: Removing sakkaya ditthi is done as first step in comprehending anatta. Comprehension of anatta becomes complete with the removal of “asmi mana” at the Arahant stage.
Finally, I have been getting requests to post a desana on Tilakkhana for a while. This may be the best time to do that since I need to take some time off to focus on another project soon. I hope to do that in a week or so.
Just to elaborate on a few categories listed by SengKiat:
“Unenduring (addhuva) as contemplation of anicca.”
Dhuva means permanent and addhuva means impermanent. Thus, it is clear that taking anicca as “impermanence” is only one aspect of anicca.
This term, “dhuva” comes in the Brahmanimantanika Sutta (Majjhima Nikāya 49), where the Baka Brahma says his existence is permanent; see #12 of
“Anidassana Viññāṇa – What It Really Means”“Anatta (anatta) as contemplation of anatta.”
Here anatta means “without refuge”.“Beyond (para) as contemplation of anatta.”
A better translation for “para” here is “lowly”, or very low moral standards. Beyond applies better in the case of “paralowa“. (“para” + “lowa“, or beyond this world).“Vain (tuccha) as contemplation of anatta.”
Tucca is stronger than just vain; despicable is a better translation.Siebe said: “I belief this last view is meant when it said that a stream-enterer posseses the Nobel Eightfold Path (is this case right view). Not meant is the mundane Path.”
That is exactly right.
With mundane samma ditthi, one becomes moral (gets rid of the ten types of micca ditthi).
One enters the Noble Path (the Stream) with lokottara (transcendental) Samma Ditthi (by grasping anicca, dukkha, anatta, the Three Characteristics of the world).
C.Saket had asked me this question via email sometime back, and I published a post at that time giving some ideas:”The Infinity Problem in Buddhism“.
But I need to revise that post when I have time.
The key point is that there are many philosophical questions out there. While it OK to contemplate on such things if one has time, one needs to decide whether it is fruitful to spend a lot of time on them.
One example is Zeno’s paradox. People have wasted time debating that. Google “Zeno’s paradox” and read about it if you are not familiar with it. It seems like an impressive mathematical problem, until you realize that it can be solved by experience in a minute. It is said that Socrates, for example, when told about the paradox, just drew line in the sand and walked across it without saying a word.
Another thing to think about is that the Buddha said that a Buddha is there to teach how to get rid of suffering, and to explain things about this world, some of which are not graspable by a normal human mind. He explained this to a bhikkhu names Malunkyaputta who threatened to give up the monastic life if the Buddha did not explain him about the beginning of the world, etc. See;”Cūḷamālukya sutta (MN 63)“. A reasonable translation at”The Shorter Discourse to Mālunkyāputta (MN 63)“.
But discussions like this do have some use, so I will post a revised version of my original post when I get time. If others point out any other relevant issues to address, or other relevant facts, I can incorporate those too.
@Siebe: I am glad to see that you are making progress.
Full understanding of anicca, dukkha, anatta does not come in one shot as a big revelation, even though just getting a glimpse of it makes one’s mind joyful. One can see that there is a Path to happiness (via getting rid of suffering).
It comes is stages. A Sotapanna Anugami gets a glimpse of it, and the basic idea is permanently established at the Sotapanna stage. That is when one can start putting it to practice.
By the time one gets to the Anagami stage, one has seen AND verified the uselessness of seeking sense pleasures.
It is only at the Arahant stage that one has truly verified that it is useless to crave anything at all in this world of 31 realm (even jhanic pleasures, ability to travel through the air, etc). We cannot even begin to imagine that stage. That is where one truly gets rid of the “sense of me”, by realizing via experience that it does not make sense to take any part of pancakkhandha as “mine”.
Theory itself is not enough. That is just the beginning. One meaning of Sotapanna is “starting on the stream or the Path”. Then one starts putting the theory to practice.
Buddha Dhamma is deeper than anyone can possibly imagine.
Vilaskadival said: “In my opinion, all initial sense inputs are neutral..”.
That is true except for the sense inputs coming through the kaya indriya (physical body).
– Vipaka of past bad kamma bring bring bodily pain (headaches, injuries, cancer and other other diseases, etc).
– Vipaka of past good kamma bring bring bodily pleasures (any pleasurable bodily sensation like a good massage, etc).Details at, “Does Bodily Pain Arise Only Due to Kamma Vipāka?“.
@Siebe: Do you mean: Can natural bhavanga be changed?.
No. The natural bhavnga is unchanged for the whole bhava, even for future births within the same bhava.
One cannot really feel one’s bhavanga, just like one cannot see one’s own eye (except in a mirror). But, it is the bhavanga that makes conditions for compatible thought objects to come in (through the mana indriya).
For example, when one is in a “temporary sad bhavanga state” one feels an overall sadness only because more and more sad thoughts come to the mind. One does not directly feel the sadness. When one is in a “temporary angry bhavanga state” one feels an overall state of anger only because more and more angry thoughts come to the mind.
But one CAN overcome that by forcing the mind to focus on something different. Here the best is to start thinking about the drawbacks (adinava) of continuing to be angry.
Therefore, the key point is that when one learns Dhamma, one will not be bound by bhavanga (unless one has an ahetuka birth). One can learn to be mindful and change the initial course of action that is set automatically by the bhavanga, gati, avijja, etc. While one cannot change bhavanga, one can change gati and avijja. That is why Nibbana is possible.
Hello, Rajitha. Welcome to the forum!
Namarupa formation is a deep subject. I recommend reading the subsection: “Nāma & Rūpa to Nāmarūpa“.
Of course namarupa formation is subjective. Basically, one “prepares one’s own future” by the way one cultivates one’s sankhara. “Sankhara paccaya vinnana” leads to the cultivation of different types of vinnana, which in turn give rise to kamma beeja for future births. The Paticca Samuppada cycle leads to bhava and jati, and thus to all future suffering.
This is where one puts together all aspects of one’s understanding of Buddha Dhamma. Vinnana is the the link between between mind and matter, as explained in that subsection.
