allergies wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2019 7:19 am
Is that a contradiction with Buddha saying that annihilationism is wrong, or is that just a misunderstanding? Some people say that because there is no self to begin with, that it doesn't contradict Buddha saying annihilationism is wrong, because there was nothing to annihilate in the first place. However that feels like a game of semantics in order to fit within Buddhas unwillingness to say one way or the other.
Again the annihilationist view is:
The one who acts is one, the one who experiences the result is another.
"I might not be, and it might not be for me; I will not be, and it will not be for me".
If you had listen to what was said before, you would not be engaging in "let's play nonsense merry-go-round" with some of the people on this forum.
Read SN 12.46 ! - It has two perfect parallels in SA & SF.
Read SN 12.15 ! - It has two perfect parallels in SA & SF.
Learn what's the difference between eternalists' & annihilationists' views of a self, and Buddha's view of a self.
Eternalists & annihilationists see the khandhas as self (or self in khandhas, etc.). Viz "I am" (SN 22.47 - https://justpaste.it/vyhx
This triggers the descent of the indriyā (energies) (indriyāna avakkanti) of the internal āyatanani (internal fields of sensory experiences). Of which the mano
As SN 22.47 and its parallels say: "There is the mano
, there are mental phenomena (dhamma), there is the element of ignorance
This triggers the" mine". An both the Eternalists and Annihilationists (and the others) stop at that.
That is to say, (what SA 63 adds): "proclaims existence, proclaims non-existence, proclaims existence-and-non-existence, proclaims neither-existence-nor-non-existence".
However Buddha explains his Teaching on the Dhamma by the middle by : "With ignorance
as condition, co-actions come to be; with coactions as condition, consciousness…".
Buddha does not stop at "existence, non-existence, or neither-existence-nor-non-existence" - but to the ensuing process of the dhamma (above mentioned).
Ignorance triggers a coaction (saṅkhāra) with the mano, called manosañcetana.
The rest is explained in the visual aid: https://justpaste.it/1695d
That is maintenance and passage in the viññāṇa nidāna (infinite consciousness) Which makes it "not yours" (anicca) and breaks the continuity (santāno) = impermanent (anicca)
>> establishing and descent of the now nidassana (manifested/visible) consciousness in the khandhas (SN 12.59) >> and of these "saṅkhārized" khandhas that are served as a new dhamma (that is not "yours") to satta.
A "vicious circle".
I am not sure that all this will stop you from playing "nonsense merry-go-round", but it might help others to understand.