Meditation, conditionality, and anatta

[bodom]

"Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. - Tittha Sutta: Sectarians

[Alex123]

"Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. - Tittha Sutta: Sectarians

He was talking about past Kamma not 100% determining what happens in this life. Killing, etc, is a choice and action that happens due to certain set of circumstances, all of them fully conditioned.

"Bhikkhus, determinations [saṅkhāra khandha] are not self. Were determinations self, then these determinations would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of determinations: 'Let my determinations be thus, let my determinations be not thus.' And since determinations are not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of determinations: 'Let my determinations be thus, let my determinations be not thus.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, there isn't a Self that can choose in a free-will fashion to kill or to abstain from killing. Or to think X or not to think Y during meditation.

I hope there is no contradiction between SN22.59 and Tittha Sutta.


Another interesting sutta

Doesn't intellect-consciousness (manoviññāṇa) arise in dependence on the intellect & ideas?"

"Yes, friend."

"And if the cause & reason for the arising of intellect-consciousness were to cease totally everywhere, totally in every way without remainder, would intellect-consciousness be discerned?"

"No, friend."

"It's in this way, friend, that consciousness has been pointed out, revealed, and announced by the Blessed One [with these words]: 'For this reason consciousness is not-self.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So in other words, one can't choose to have this or that state of mind-consciousness (to kill or not to kill, to be or not to be distracted during meditation) to arise.

[Viscid]

"Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. - Tittha Sutta: Sectarians

Sutta copy-pasta cop-out.

The sutta is discouraging a defeatist attitude which may result from seeing 'choice' as strictly deterministic. A determinist could say "Well, if all the unwholesome actions I've done in my past determine my future, then there is no point in attempting to change my behaviour and attitude, because I can't change anything." Which is silly.

If you know and value your own capacity to change your behaviour, you can do so, and doing so will result in future contentedness. But you do not choose to know and value your own capacity to change. We are a self-regulating system, but we did not choose our capacity to self-regulate.

[bodom]

A determinist could say "Well, if all the things I've done in my past unwholesome actions determine my future, then there is no point in attempting to change my behaviour and attitude, because I can't change anything." Which is silly.

Right. There is choice, there is free will. This was my only point to begin with. Where is the problem and what do we disagree on?

[Alex123]

A determinist could say "Well, if all the things I've done in my past unwholesome actions determine my future, then there is no point in attempting to change my behaviour and attitude, because I can't change anything." Which is silly.

Right. There is choice, there is free will. This was my only point to begin with.

What about Anatta-lakkhana sutta that says that one can't control the 5 aggregates, one of them being saṅkhāra khandha (where choice, intention, will) is included?

Doesn't the teaching on Free-Will go against conditionality and proposes an Agent that can do things regardless of conditions?


Recently today I did try to "crush mind with mind" and force the mind onto the breath. It didn't work! There is no Agent that can do these things out of free will.

If attention was really mine, then I could latch it onto anything I would wish. But this can't occur.

This, btw, is one of the reasons for dukkha, the 1st NT. You can't control the aggregates so that only good stuff ever happens for ever and ever. Things happen due to impersonal causes & conditions and not due to Self Agency of the Agent standing behind 5 aggregates.

[tiltbillings]

Doesn't the teaching on Free-Will go against conditionality and proposes an Agent that can do things regardless of conditions?

Clearly there is choice that functions within the context of conditions, but there is choice.

[bodom]

To hold the view that there is no choice is fatalism.

I ask you again, how and why did Gotama become the Buddha? Was it by mere chance? Was it an accident?

[Alex123]

Doesn't the teaching on Free-Will go against conditionality and proposes an Agent that can do things regardless of conditions?

Clearly there is choice that functions within the context of conditions, but there is choice.

If that choice functions within the context of conditions, then it is not a free choice. It is fully conditioned and if those conditions would repeat 100%, the resultant choice would be the same. If it weren't the same resultant choice, then it would be acausal or random.

[Alex123]

To hold the view that there is no choice is fatalism.

I ask you again, how and why did Gotama become the Buddha? Was it by mere chance? Was it an accident?

It was due to impersonal causes & conditions. Fully conditioned, fully not-Self.

[tiltbillings]

Doesn't the teaching on Free-Will go against conditionality and proposes an Agent that can do things regardless of conditions?

Clearly there is choice that functions within the context of conditions, but there is choice.

If that choice functions within the context of conditions, then it is not a free choice. It is fully conditioned and if those conditions would repeat 100%, the resultant choice would be the same. If it weren't the same resultant choice, then it would be acausal or random.

But it is choice. If it were not choice, there would be no kamma nor awakening. As for the 100% thingie, You are assuming a mechanical universe, but the reality is, you don't know that.

You are sounding a bit like Makkhali Gosala. Well, actually, a lot like Makkhali Gosala.

[tiltbillings]

To hold the view that there is no choice is fatalism.

I ask you again, how and why did Gotama become the Buddha? Was it by mere chance? Was it an accident?

It was due to impersonal causes & conditions. Fully conditioned, fully not-Self.

However, the Buddha made choices.

[Alex123]

But it is choice. If it were not choice, there would be no kamma nor awakening. As for the 100% thingie, You are assuming a mechanical universe, but the reality is, you don't know that.

You are sounding a bit like Makkhali Gosala. Well, actually, a lot like Makkhali Gosala.

But if there isn't any choice (sankhara khandha) that is unconditioned, then how can it be free? What about anattalakkhana sutta?


Who can choose with free will to do this or that? Isn't even this choice fully conditioned?

However, the Buddha made choices.

The choices the Buddha has made were fully conditioned. I hope you are not proposing a Self, a Free Agent that can choose.

[tiltbillings]

The choices the Buddha has made were fully conditioned. I hope you are not proposing a Self, a Free Agent that can choose.

Not at all, but there is choice. And I hope you are not advocating Makkhali Gosala's deterministic doctrine.

[5heaps]

This, btw, is one of the reasons for dukkha, the 1st NT. You can't control the aggregates so that only good stuff ever happens for ever and ever. Things happen due to impersonal causes & conditions and not due to Self Agency of the Agent standing behind 5 aggregates.

did the Ajahn teach that the observer is beyond causes and conditions? i find that hard to believe

Who can choose with free will to do this or that? Isn't even this choice fully conditioned?

youre onto something, but stick to an analysis of how the controller exists. is it just the mere collection of parts, or is it something more? in the end the fact that the observer is not a controller over the observed does not contradict that the mental factor of intention exists, functions, and is conditioned.

[Alex123]

Note: contact -> kamma (or intention)

"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.

"And what is the cause by which kamma comes into play? Contact is the cause by which kamma comes into play...

..."And what is the cessation of kamma? From the cessation of contact is the cessation of kamma;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The six classes of contact should be known.' Thus was it said. In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the ear & sounds there arises consciousness at the ear. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the nose & aromas there arises consciousness at the nose. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the tongue & flavors there arises consciousness at the tongue. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the body & tactile sensations there arises consciousness at the body. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the intellect. The meeting of the three is contact.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can one control contact? No. So one cannot control the Kamma that is being done. If that were the case, may I do only that Kamma which leads to awakening! May I never do bad kamma! Unfortunately these things cannot be controlled like that.