[pathfinder]

Thank you taryal, cubibobi. You’re right, this discussion is not fruitful. However, I would also like to take this opportunity to talk about the sense of self.

cubibobi: In this PD community, we have learned that anatta does NOT mean “no-self”; after learning true Dhamma, we see that “no-self” (no permament soul type entity, no “doer” behind phenomena) is embedded in the teaching, not an “ultimate truth” the realization of which brings arahanthood. Yet we still cannot resist bringing up this “no-self” business in a back-handed way via clever arguments. There is something very addicting about this notion.

I am taking this sense of self notion not from anatta, but sakkaya ditthi. I have gained this understanding from the following posts:

Do I Have “A Mind” That Is Fixed and “Mine”?
But it is essential to know that the perception of “me” goes away only at the Arahant stage

Sakkāya Diṭṭhi and Tilakkhana

There Are Only Causes and Effects

Translation: “A Sotāpanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view (diṭṭhisampanno puggalo) is unable (abhabbo) to fall back on the idea that pleasure and pain are made by oneself (sayaṃkataṃ). Or that they are made by another (paraṃkataṃ). Or that they are made by both (sayaṃkatañca paraṃkatañca). Nor can they fall back on the idea that pleasure and pain arise by chance, not by oneself, another, or both. (asayaṃkāraṃ adhiccasamuppannaṃ, aparaṅkāraṃ adhiccasamuppannaṃ, asayaṅkārañca aparaṅkārañca adhiccasamuppannaṃ).
– Why is that? It is because a person accomplished in view has seen that phenomena arise due to causes and conditions (according to Paṭicca Samuppāda). Those are the six things a Sotāpanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view will not fall back to”.

This is what I mean by we are just doing things based on cause and effect!

“Me” and “Mine” – The Root Cause of Suffering

• Something that we experience during every waking moment is our body and mind. Therefore, the physical body and all mental entities that arise contribute to the feeling of “me” or “mine.”

8. Paticca Samuppāda process does not care WHO is doing (abhi) saṅkhāra. The results are determined by WHAT KIND of saṅkhāra is involved. That saṅkhāra generation is associated with pañcupādānakkhandhā or one’s cravings/desires/expectations (related to anusaya, āsava, gati, etc.). Results are according to actions. Doing a particular type of action (kamma via saṅkhāra) will lead to the fruits (kamma vipāka.)

• There is no need to invoke a “me” or a “self” in Paticca Samuppāda. But, of course, such (abhi)saṅkhāra are generated BECAUSE there is a sense of “me” or “self.” The critical step is to realize the fruitlessness of acting with a sense of “me.”

9. The ultimate truth is that there is no “self.” That is easy to see because Arahant is not reborn after death. If there were an “unchanging self,” they would still have to exist in one of the 31 realms after death.

• However, until one FULLY comprehends that fact (at the Arahant stage,) one does not FULLY realize that there is no “self” involved in this whole process. Until the Arahant stage, the perception of a “me” and “mine” will be there.

 

There are more posts about this, but just to list a few. Hence the interpretation I derive is that the sense of self we have is false.

[pathfinder]

If that is the case, can you explain how Buddha knew that Santati will attain arahantship and parinibbana that very day? (“Ānanda, this minister will come to see me this very day and after I have given him a short discourse, he will become an arahat. Soon after becoming an arahat he will realize parinibbāna.”) Here he can predict not only what will become of him, but also when! If there is “free will”, then how can the Buddha be certain that he won’t follow his “free will” and do something different?

What I interpret is that this “free will” is a false perception that we have. However, if one looks at it from the outsider perspective, eg Buddha looking at Santati as an outsider, he can predict what will happen to him. However Santati himself will think that otherwise, that he has the free will to do whatever he wants. Little does he know that his fate is already known! Again, please feel free to correct my interpretation of this.

[pathfinder]

Yash: “The correct question should be, why do we feel that there is a Self?

Thats the Perception part. As I mentioned earlier, the mind arises only when the conditions are met.”

Thank you Yash, I think you understand what i’m trying to get at here, right now we still feel that there is a Self but that is only because of the conditions that make this true, and we still feel that we can control things eg change our habits only because of previous conditions which led to this perception.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Yash RS

[pathfinder]

I can dumb down my argument even further 

1) Everything is based on cause and effect

2) With complete knowledge of the causes you will have complete knowledge of the effects

3) With complete knowledge of the effect, since these effects are also causes for the future effects, one can tell with striking accuracy of the state of things in the past and future infinitely, if the being is capable enough to absorb and process all the causes in the present moment. 

4) With this, we can also say that what we do next is based on cause and effect, eg the being can predict what we will do next.

Please let me know where I am wrong in 1/2/3/4. I would think that this is a logical conclusion based on cause and effect.

[pathfinder]

Christian: “The worst-case scenario is when people read stuff, take it, and make a wall for themselves based on it rather than use it for liberation pathfinder is a great example of making the wall for himself – hopefully more people can see through that, and do not repeat the mistake by walling themselves by assumptions without any real experience of jhanas, Nibbana or wisdom.”

This is not true. The reason why I started this forum is because I know there could be something wrong, and I wish to be corrected. I start forums to ask questions rather than give answers. Yet, I still cannot find a satisfactory answer here.

Lal:

1. As explained in Abhidhamma, the most potent javana arises when a good deed is done with an understanding of the anicca nature, i.e., when one does it with “sōmanassa sahagata ñāna sampayutta citta” (or “thoughts with joyful mind based on wisdom”) Suich cittas (thoughts) do not arise in those beings in apayas but arise in humans. See “Feelings: Sukha, Dukha, Somanassa, and Domanassa.” (especially #10)
2. Humans also have fully developed brains. The brain “slows down” our response to external sensory inputs because it takes time for the brain to process sensory information. See “Triune Brain: How the Mind Rewires the Brain via Meditation/Habits.”

Yes, but what causes these javana citta to arise in the first place? There has to be causes! And even if the brain can be rewired, there has to be causes of someone to rewire it, and causes before causes before causes before causes.

Christian: There is neither determinism nor free will, there are certain mechanics and limitations. Some give us the freedom to act

What is this freedom to act you are talking about? Are you saying it is not based on causes?

Taryal: But to an unenlightened mind that hasn’t transcended the views of “existence” and “non-existence”, it would be unfruitful to declare “there is no self, therefore I’m a zombie”.

Yes, I am not saying that we should just sit back and give up on everything, but we can contemplate that things are ultimately just cause and effect.

Let’s not go into the talk about self or no self. This is my premise: Everything a person does is a result of his 5 aggregates, and kamma vipaka. With this knowledge, we can absolutely predict what someone will do next. For example, the Buddha can predict that someone will see him, become an arahant that parinibanna that very day (King Pasenadi). You guys sound like there is an additional part of the equation, please tell me what it is! And let’s keep the question simple:

What can Laplace’s Demon, not predict? (Laplace’s Demon is a being that has complete knowledge of the world at this present moment, the precise location and momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed, the 5 aggregates and kamma seeds of every being, the complete understanding of the laws of kamma, paticca samuppada. From this my premise is that he can “calculate” down to the citta level of any being, past and future for as far as he wants, as long as he has complete knowledge of the present values. Of course, his calculation abilities must be infinitely capable)

I would appreciate if you could answer based on this question. I would think that answering this question directly is the most targeted response for this discussion. Again I would like to clarify that I am not teaching this view to anyone, I just want to be corrected.

[pathfinder]

taryal:It is true that one’s gati can influence these conscious sankharas (and perhaps does to an untrained mind) but they are not necessarily deterministic and a human can use them to significantly change their gati.

Yes, but what causes the human to want to change their gati in the first place? Is it out of no where? There has to be a cause. Here i argue that the reason why someone wants to change their gati in the first place is because of their previous gati/ 5 aggregates, which is caused by their previous 5 aggregates so on and so forth. There is no room for a doer! It is because there are causes. It is because their very own gati that encourages them to change their gati. Even to stop maladaptive dreaming, you have to change your habits, but what causes you to change your habits in the first place? Other habits before that/ external influences.

taryal: But humans do have the ability to change their destiny.

In the conventional sense yes, we can “choose” whether we want to walk across the street blindfolded or not, we can choose who we want to associate with, but i’m saying in the sense of the absolute truth, at the citta level, the reason why we do all this is nothing more than the outcome of the 5 aggregates and the outcome of the causes at the moment, it is not caused by our additional “free will”.

Since the dhamma is about cause and effect, I would think that if all the causes are known, all the effects are known. There is no room for “own decision making”, because what we do are based on the causes. And that’s why the absolute truth is that there is “no doer”, “no me”, but we have the distorted perception that there is, until we reach the Arahant stage.

Here I would like to make the case that for the story of Ven. Sariputra predicting the outcome of the war, if the Buddha had seen into the 5 aggregates of every soldier in the battlefield, if he could see the kings, generals, worms and birds on the battlefield, and even the butterfly that would flap its wings across the world that may shift the wind, everyone else in the 31 realms present, basically every single thing that influences the war, he would not only be able to predict who wins, but also the number of casualties, the total number of stabs, down to the citta level who dies when. This is because he is fully aware of the causes, hence he will be fully aware of the effects. 

I am taking inspiration from Laplace’s Demon, “if someone (the demon) knows the precise locationand momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed; they can be calculated from the laws of classical mechanics.” Here, instead of just classical mechanics, if Laplace’s demon knows the full knowledge of the world, the laws of kamma and the 5 aggregates, he can derive the past, present and future citta of everyone.

This is what I mean by determinism, everything is determined by the causes, there is no room for an extra “agent” to change the causes, because the agent himself is a product of cause and effect.

I think this is worthwhile contemplating because it would help us remove our perception of self too, if we see that whatever we do is due to the pre-existing causes and not a “doer”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Jittananto, Yash RS

[pathfinder]

Yes, well said, Jittananto, Lal and Christian.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[pathfinder]

Yes, of course one should be able to control oneself in these discussions to prevent it from being heated, and it is wrong to impose onto others, it will be unproductive. However we can always try our luck and see if they are interested. And it doesn’t mean that when you try to introduce the dhamma to other people, you stop progressing on the path. It’s not like teaching the dhamma becomes a “full time job”, one can try to teach it when the opportunity arises, but yes it should not be the main goal. Also, one of the ways of meditation is to teach others! (Vimuttāyatanasutta) This is in line with the Feynman technique where the best way to learn something is to teach it. So far there has not been heated discussions for me, for example one can approach the topic even without rebirth and kamma initially. We do not even need to say that this is “buddhist philosophy” and not include pali words for a start! It is only after they are curious to learn more that you can explain in detail.

Christian: “People who are ignoring Dhamma or not are willing to learn it or practice it, or they are not interested, etc. are not children who are about to eat glass, if you think this way you will pretty much suffer as there is no way to changing the people or the world” 

Perhaps my analogy of the glass shard is not good. Let’s say you found out that smoking is harmful, and most people don’t know it. You see that your friend smokes. Would you try to explain to him that it is harmful? If he still doesn’t believe it after some explanation then sure, we can leave it as it is. But at the same time, will you suffer because millions of people in the world smoke? Similarly when your friend has many desires, you can drop the hint “hey, have you ever thought that having desire is the problem?”

At least, the dhamma can be explained. This is where you know your lack of understanding. When explaining to my friends, there are questions which i found hard to answer, which led me to realize the gaps in my understanding.

[pathfinder]

Christian: “If one reach Anagami or Arahanat then may do “convincing” but at that stage I doubt anyone will see point of doing so” 

We can do so out of compassion. If you see a child about to eat a glass shard will you just stand there? And why did the Buddha travel to teach Angulimāla? Of course they tried to preach to those who can understand. For those who cannot, it may be counter intuitive because it will make them dislike the dhamma more. Therefore we have to realise when to stop. But you’re right that we do need some good foundation ourselves.

I would also agree with Lal that just a sotapanna stage is enough. Even if we do not have the complete understanding ourselves, we can still pique their interest and point them to the necessary sites for them to gain a deeper understanding.

[pathfinder]

I agree that it is kamma generating, but i’m not sure if it is “immoral”. I thought immoral would mean that it would “hurt others”. In this case it would be a more extreme extent of paying for a massage from someone else, but isit morally wrong? Does this mean that paying for sex has a greater kammic impact than taking drugs? In both cases they trap one to the kamma loka and they are one of the more extreme sense pleasures, but im not sure if we can count both as “immoral”. Also, how does marriage “magically” make the act of sex go from immoral to moral? I would think that the laws of kamma would go beyond the conventional terms set up by people. I am saying all this with the scenario that the person is not married/ has a relationship with anyone. Also, was it not normal to have concubines during the buddha’s time? At most they would be regarded as “excessive” sense pleasures, not sure if the tipitaka says anything about concubines being immoral.

Lal: Again, the “pleasure of sex” is “mind-made, even though hard to believe. 

Is the sukha vedana not real? because it is felt by the body. I am referencing this to “Only sensory inputs to the “physical body” can bring sukha or dukkha vedanā directly. ” Vedanā (Feelings) Arise in Two Ways

[pathfinder]

Unfortunatly true. The most we can do is to help them see bit by bit

[pathfinder]

Hi Yash, I have tried to make that point a few times. However, people will see their happiness as a sine curve, where y axis is happiness and x axis is time. On  the other hand, they will see the buddhist ones as a flat zero across time. Actually this I cannot refute so strongly. We will no longer be able to feel the happiness of a gold medal as much as olympic winners do, as you said, there is no longer/ not much vexation. Even when they understand that the pleasure is actually mind made and the release of vexation, pleasure is still pleasure, so what if it is mind made? And also with the Usain Bolt example, if people could, they would just find the next peak of the sine wave. To them, it would be better than experiencing a flat 0. “Nothing worth having comes easy” is the mentality that we all have.

The only point I can make is that the sine curve has more downs than ups for lay people, and perhaps buddhists will not be at flat 0 but progressively go higher with feelings of “well being”. Even this may be hard to get across, they would think it is a “placebo effect”. Another possible way of explaining is that buddhist can experience the highs without the lows. But I think that is not possible, to feel that much of pleasure you must have that much of vexation.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Yash RS, Jittananto

[pathfinder]

Hi Taryal

During Metta Bhavana, you can look at things the other way. You can see how people are trapped in this suffering due to their ignorance. You can contemplate the suffering they endure because of their ignorance. From here you can then you would sincerely want all beings to be free from suffering, because there is so much to endure. Think about it, if all beings are already Arahants/ sotapannas then there is no need to wish them to be free from suffering! Ultimately, Metta Bhavana is about the intention.

7. What matters is not the particular set of words used, but what is felt in one’s heart. In order to do that one needs to truly comprehend that there is REAL SUFFERING in this world, not only at the human or animal realms but in many other realms. (5. Ariya Metta Bhāvana (Loving Kindness Meditation)

Again, what’s important is to understand that an infinite number of beings are going through suffering, and you wish they can be rid of it. Just like how you can generate compassion from seeing a starving child, the same can be done with Metta Bhavana.

1 user thanked author for this post.

taryal

[pathfinder]

Hi Lal, thank you for sharing. Actually the context behind this question was that I am inspired by how monks in the Jethavanarana Buddhist Monastery were able to explain dhamma concepts to lay people without invoking much of kamma and rebirth, yet they can provide such convincing explanations for the lay person about how the puthujjana way of living is highly flawed. (By the way for those who have been trying to teach dhamma to their friends, i highly recommend their videos, they explain with simple logic which people are more willing to accept)

From here I thought that most problems can be solved without invoking the “wider worldview”. Of course to gain complete understanding, one must also ultimately learn the Noble Truths, Tilakkhana, Paticca Samuppāda.

You also remind me of the reflections from the conversation I had, and watching the sermons is that explaining dhamma concepts to a lay person with just “lay logic” would be a good way to comprehend the dhamma. That way you can be fully convinced yourself by explaining things with just logic.

However, my other reflection is that if we continue to do this, it may make us stray from the path because ultimately paticca samuppada cannot be understood with “lay logic”, and we won’t contemplate this wider worldview which is necessary for Nibbāna. For example, the second noble truth requires the understanding that attachment leads to birth, with does not follow “lay logic”

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[pathfinder]

Thank you Jittananto. It is heartwarming to know that one is not truly helpless even after an apayagami by understanding the dhamma, even though it may take a long time for the effects to bear fruit!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jittananto

[Author]

Posts