[stacy]

We owe you a lot for your hard work. Thank you, Lal!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[stacy]

I’ve wanted to share this for a while. I’ve looked into some of these rebuttal attempts myself and I’ve seen a pattern: critics of the “Waharaka interpretation” of anicca often dismiss it outright — not with sound reasoning, but with emotional rhetoric and shallow semantics. I would call for intellectual honesty to those who believe criticism requires more than parroting traditional definitions.

Waharaka Thero redefined anicca not merely as “impermanence” but as the inability to maintain things to one’s liking, directly tied to taṇhā and the illusion of control. This interpretation isn’t a casual gloss; it’s deeply rooted in the Paṭicca Samuppāda and the Buddha’s own suttas. When someone dismisses this framework by saying: “He reduced the meaning of anicca to mere liking and disliking,” — that’s a textbook straw man, not a refutation. It’s a refusal to engage.

Quite often I see that they prioritize associating with Sanskrit but the Nail in the Coffin for these Surface Semantics is in the Vinaya Piṭaka (Chullavagga V.33.1–2) itself, where the Buddha clearly states: “The Dhamma should not be put into Chandasa (Sanskrit). Whoever does so commits an offense.” This is quite clear because Sanskrit brings in Vedic metaphysical baggage incompatible with the Buddha’s insight. Replacing Pāli with Sanskrit roots often leads to conceptual distortions.

The real issue with these critics is that they never seem to answer basic questions:

• What exactly is wrong with linking anicca to the inability to maintain outcomes?
• How does their definition of impermanence generate the insight that breaks saṁsāra? (Do I need the Buddha to tell me that the world is impermanent?)
• Why is their reading more coherent with suttas like SN 22.59 and Paṭicca Samuppāda?

Instead, most rely on:

•  Appeals to authority (“But the PTS says this…”, “Bhikkhu so-and-so translated it like that…”, etc.)
•  Semantic nitpicking over roots
•  Emotional declarations like saying “this is ridiculous” without substance

This is not reasoning. It’s academic gaslighting dressed as critique. If one is to say the Waharaka interpretation is wrong, the least I expect is they explain how it is conceptually wrong. But all I see are Linguistic surface-level critiques often interspersed with emotional rhetoric that don’t grasp the doctrinal implications.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[stacy]

This semantic word salad reads as nothing more than a lazy gaslighting attempt.

“i’ll say again, this is ridiculous. he has reduced the meaning of the buddha’s core teaching on impermanence to mere liking and disking.“

With all due apologies, the writer does not understand the first thing about “anicca“, as discovered by Waharaka Thero and elucidated by this website. All they’ve done is hurl a semantic accusation pertaining to the interpretation, and declare that it’s wrong without even attempting to explain anything conceptual.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[stacy]

I see, so in that state, are you able to do any supernormal acts like recalling your past lives? I’ve read that a gandhabba gets access to nama loka directly. I’m not a big fan of testimonies but observing the consistencies is useful. I hope to get to that level in the future.

[stacy]

It sounds like you’ve got ample experience attaining such states of mind. Please consider sharing more by elaborating your experience. I specifically want to know how you’re convinced that your experience is not a hallucination or an altered brain state.

[stacy]

Yes, the other point is that the “time” experienced in higher realms would feel much shorter than the one in the human one, right? During the void and the formation phase, beings are essentially brahmas. So more than likely, it’s an analogy used to describe the sheer length that is difficult to calculate. From Science, we know that astronomical phenomena span billions of years but Einstein’s relativity makes things more challenging.

[stacy]

Yeah, the “flow of life” is essentially cittas arising and passing away, right? That will continue until parinibbana.

[stacy]

No “me” doesn’t mean “nothing”. The cittas that flow in the seat of mind are real and existing, and the conditions that shape the associated cetasikas characterize the dynamic sensory experience. I’ve found the fire analogy to be quite helpful – as long as you have oxygen, fuel, and necessary temperature, it will continue to burn. But zoom in and there is no “fire” to be found. It is a result of causes coming together to bring in their effect which will stop manifesting as soon as any of the necessary causes are removed. The illusory perception of “me” is a default flaw that has always existed but understanding how causes and conditions shape mental phenomena is a lot more beneficial. Much of our sensory experiences are out of our control, but they are also not arbitrary.

[stacy]

Are you talking about arupa samāpatti or arupa jhānas? What would be the difference?

[stacy]

Fair enough, it’s irrelevant when one becomes an anagami anyway.

[stacy]

I asked ChatGPT to make a response:

🔢 On the Numbers and the Trend

Yes, the trend of youth seeking gender-related care—especially since the early 2010s—is real and well-documented:

• Pre-2010s: Gender clinic referrals and treatments were rare and often limited to adults.

• Post-2010: Referrals increased rapidly, particularly among adolescent girls (AFAB).

• 2016–2021: Sharp rises observed globally (e.g., U.S., UK, Canada, Australia).

• 2022–2024: Some leveling off or modest declines reported in parts of the U.S. and UK, possibly due to political, medical, and societal shifts.

🧠 This rise correlates with:

• Increased social awareness and acceptance of trans identities.

• Expanded medical access.

• More people feeling safe enough to explore gender questions.

But what does this trend mean?

<hr data-start=”1046″ data-end=”1049″ />

⚖️ Is This Like a Fashion Trend?

Many people worry: Is this just a trend like piercings or tattoos? Something kids are getting swept into?

Here’s how that concern is viewed across disciplines:

• Medical perspective: Most gender care guidelines (e.g., WPATH, Endocrine Society) are conservative and careful. They require persistent, consistent gender dysphoria over time before medical intervention is recommended.

• Social science: Some youth may be exploring identity due to peer influence, but most who pursue treatment have long-standing distress, not just a passing interest.

• Yes, there’s social influence, as with any human behavior (religion, politics, fashion, belief systems). But that doesn’t mean it’s frivolous. Humans are always shaped by their environments.

🔎 There is valid debate in the scientific community:

• Some researchers warn of over-medicalization in certain cases.

• Others point out that gatekeeping harms those who genuinely need treatment.

• Some detransitioners exist, but they are statistically rare (~1–3%) and often transition regretfully due to social pressure or lack of support, not because gender care was inherently wrong.

<hr data-start=”2264″ data-end=”2267″ />

🌿 What About “Messing with Nature”?

This concern—“don’t mess with nature”—is deeply human and understandable. Here are some things to consider:

1. We intervene in nature all the time

• Glasses, insulin, heart surgery, organ transplants—all alter “nature.”

• Even circumcision, plastic surgery, or fertility treatments are interventions.

• The idea of “natural = good” (the appeal to nature fallacy) isn’t reliable on its own.

2. Gender dysphoria has biological, psychological, and social components

• It is a recognized medical condition—not a fad.

• Untreated severe dysphoria is associated with increased depression, self-harm, and suicide.

• Studies show that, when carefully managed, gender-affirming care can reduce distress and improve well-being.

3. Respecting bodily autonomy is also natural

• We allow people to make deeply personal decisions about their bodies: abortion, tattoos, vasectomy, diet, religion.

• Gender-related care—when informed and consensual—is part of that autonomy.

<hr data-start=”3317″ data-end=”3320″ />

🧭 So, Is It Harmful?

It can be harmful when:

• It’s done too quickly without proper evaluation.

• It’s forced or socially pressured.

• It’s politicized or stigmatized, pushing people to act hastily or hide.

But it can also be life-saving when:

• It helps someone resolve deep, persistent suffering.

• It’s approached slowly, thoughtfully, with medical and psychological guidance.

• Families, doctors, and young people work together without coercion.

<hr data-start=”3788″ data-end=”3791″ />

🧘 Bottom Line

This is not just a social trend like TikTok dance moves. It reflects deeper questions of identity, belonging, and personal suffering. It can be misused or misunderstood—but the existence of real, consistent gender dysphoria is well-documented.

It’s completely okay to feel cautious, skeptical, or even uncomfortable about this—especially when things seem to change fast. But the ethical approach is to ask:

“Are people being harmed or helped? Are we making space for dignity, caution, and truth?”

If you’d like, I can recommend scientific reviews, articles from both skeptical and supportive sides, and data-driven discussions that go beyond slogans.

________

 

Gandhabba is not a soul, so I still don’t see a contradiction.

[stacy]

Lal: “Yes. But the critical point is that the phenomenon of sex change during a life is extremely rare.”

Of course, I was going with the possibility of the unusual case where a gandhabba with the opposite sex takes possession of the zygote (e.g. female occupying XY).  This is supported by the studies that show that trans people’s brain structure resembles those of cis individuals with the same gender identity. For example, White matter microstructure in female to male transsexuals before cross-sex hormonal treatment. A diffusion tensor imaging study

It is true that this issue has become too political due to greedy corporations not refraining from overrating it. But Gender affirming care has been shown to have positive impacts on the individuals who need them and medical organizations do not recommend surgeries for children (unless they’re intersex and need them). Stats say only 1% of people are affected by this problem, and I don’t see evidence of this being a rampant trend. So I just wanted to mention that I don’t see a contradiction here.

[stacy]

Lal: “If a sperm cell with the X chromosome wins the race, the resulting chromosome pair would be XX which would lead to female body.”

• Yes. In that specific case, only a female gandhabba will be pulled into the womb by kammic energy.
• In the other case, only a male gandhabba will be pulled into the womb by kammic energy.

Interestingly, there are exceptions to this rule like Swyer Syndrome, where the individual has XY pair but develops female sexual characteristics and usually lives like a woman, and De La Chapelle Syndrome, where the individual has XX pair but develops male characteristics and typically lives like a man. I feel like this excerpt from the post Sexual Orientation – Effects of Kamma and Gati (Saṅkhāra) explains the above (even though they are not necessarily transgenders):

11. Another possibility that may come into play in a transgender person (a person whose sex is changed during their lifetime) can be understood if one understands the role of the gandhabba (mental body) that dictates the functioning of the physical body. Gandhabba is not a Mahāyāna concept:  “Gandhabba State – Evidence from Tipiṭaka. “

• When a gandhabba goes into a womb, it is not firmly attached to the zygote (the cell formed by the union of the father and the mother) during the first several weeks.
• Sometimes, the gandhabba leaves the womb if it turns out to be not a good match with the parents. This is the reason for a miscarriage.
• If a gandhabba leaves the womb within such a short period, in some cases, another gandhabba can enter the womb and take possession of the partially formed physical body abandoned by the previous gandhabba. Now, the second gandhabba may be of the opposite sex.

Every major medical organization in the United States now acknowledges that (biological) sex and gender are two different things. It is fascinating to know that the scientific research of transgender now suggests that the neuroanatomy of trans women’s brains are more similar to that of cis women than that of cis men, which supports the next bullet point in the same part of the post:

• For example, suppose the first gandhabba was a male and the second a female. So, this female is thus taking hold of a physical body that was taking shape to be a male and thus continues to form a male body. Once born as a male baby and while growing, the female character may start to convert the physical body to that of a female. This is what happens to a transgender person.

Gender Identity is neuroanatomical and essentially the result of the sex of gandhabba. Correct me if I’m wrong but this looks like another evidence that Dhamma is ahead of our mundane understandings of the world.

[stacy]

Thanks a lot 🙏

[stacy]

Thank you for replying, Lal and Christian. Regarding Jhana, do we must stay away from all heavy sensual activities like sex, substance, etc.? If so, is there anything else that you guys would recommend to someone who’s not yet ready to live an ascetic type lifestyle? I still find myself often conflicted on whether pure materialism is correct (that consciousness is an emergent property of neuronal activities of the brain) or if there is something else going on. I don’t want to adamantly reject any possibility but I’m desperate to know how it works.

[Author]

Posts