Conditioned / Unconditioned

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Goofaholix »

cherrytigerbarb wrote:This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's the difference between conventional truth and ultimate truth. Remember that things are both conditioned and unconditioned, depending on your perspective, which is what nagarjuna meant when he said nirvana and samsara are the same.
That's not what the quote I posted says. Everything we experience arises according to causes and conditions that's why the the reality we live in is said to be conditioned, the quote I posted talked about how the mind has the capacity to transcend it's conditioning. To say things are both conditioned and unconditioned depending on your perspective makes no sense, however I think you could say it's possible for one to have a perspective that transcend's conditioning, this is a characteristic of Nibbana.
cherrytigerbarb wrote:But that's what he meant when he said nirvana and samsara are the same.
We'll have to take your word for it because i don't see it in the text you quoted, either way what Nagarjuna had to say is not likely to carry much weight on a Theravada forum.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
User avatar
cherrytigerbarb
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by cherrytigerbarb »

Goofaholix wrote:
Everything we experience arises according to causes and conditions that's why the the reality we live in is said to be conditioned..... mind has the capacity to transcend it's conditioning.
We are mostly in agreement. The "causes" and "conditions" are the relationships between the objects comprising the concepts (automotive parts coming together in a specific relationship to cause the concept of "car") When you don't realise how this works, you only ever see "car" as an unconditioned discreet object in-and-of itself. It's when you DO realise it that your mind transcends it's conditioning (so that it see's the car as conditioned), so "car" is both conditioned and unconditioned depending on the way you view it. Do you get it yet? I think you need to read the first post again to save keep repeating it.
"The foolish reject what they see, not what they think. The wise reject what they think, not what they see." - Huang Po.
User avatar
cherrytigerbarb
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by cherrytigerbarb »

tiltbillings wrote:Not that you have shown. Have you read the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā?
Ok, let me try to spell this out....

Conventional truth: objects viewed as seperate, discreet, existing in-and-of themselves. - Samsara.

Ultimate truth = objects viewed as existing by virtue of the relationships between the parts which comprise them. - Nirvana.

All things can be veiwed in both the above mentioned ways, therefore Samsara = Nirvana.

I don't know of any simpler way of explaining it.

And yes, I've read the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. What's your point?
"The foolish reject what they see, not what they think. The wise reject what they think, not what they see." - Huang Po.
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by beeblebrox »

Hi Cherrytigerbarb,

I thought you made sense when you said that samsara is trying to view something as unconditioned (i.e., nirvana), and then that the nirvana is viewing this as conditioned (I was impressed with that)... but then you overstepped the bound by trying to say that samsara and nirvana are the same.

I think that is a misinterpretation of what Nagarjuna said.

To understand why, there is Kaccayanagotta sutta.

:anjali:
User avatar
fivebells
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:52 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by fivebells »

Goofaholix wrote:[...I think you could say it's possible for one to have a perspective that transcend's conditioning, this is a characteristic of Nibbana.
Not nitpicking, just curious, because the experience of Nibbana is quite mysterious to me: Does nibbana involve a specific perspective?
Digity
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:13 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Digity »

The Unconditioned is best understood in the context of suffering. When the Buddha spoke about the Unconditioned he was talking about the experience of ending suffering. When you look at it in this context, saying stuff like a car is Unconditioned gives people the impression that you're missing the point of the teachings on the Unconditioned.

I haven't read the following book, but I quickly looked through the Introduction. It might give you some further understanding into Unconditioned/Nibbana and the proper context for it to be understood.

http://forestsanghapublications.org/ass ... Island.pdf
User avatar
cherrytigerbarb
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by cherrytigerbarb »

Digity wrote:The Unconditioned is best understood in the context of suffering. When the Buddha spoke about the Unconditioned he was talking about the experience of ending suffering. When you look at it in this context, saying stuff like a car is Unconditioned gives people the impression that you're missing the point of the teachings on the Unconditioned.
Of course all of this is ultimately about bringing an end to suffering. If you only live from the standpoint of conventional truth seeing everything as unconditioned, the subsequent delusion results in craving and aversion, etc etc.... Sorry, but do I really need to point that out?
"The foolish reject what they see, not what they think. The wise reject what they think, not what they see." - Huang Po.
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Goofaholix »

cherrytigerbarb wrote:We are mostly in agreement. The "causes" and "conditions" are the relationships between the objects comprising the concepts (automotive parts coming together in a specific relationship to cause the concept of "car") When you don't realise how this works, you only ever see "car" as an unconditioned discreet object in-and-of itself. It's when you DO realise it that your mind transcends it's conditioning (so that it see's the car as conditioned), so "car" is both conditioned and unconditioned depending on the way you view it. Do you get it yet? I think you need to read the first post again to save keep repeating it.
I don't think so.

Using your example of a car the conditions that lead to a car would include; the discovery of oil and it's refinement to petrol, the building of roads, the invention of an internal combustion engine, the designer of the car, the market demand for the car, investors that provide venture capital, the sales and distribution process for the car etc.

It's nothing to do with the parts, or concepts. Though conditioning factors have relationships with the end result but not in the way you're talking about.

A car is conditioned, it cannot be unconditioned, ie it cannot just appear out of nowhere and you cannot make it not conform to natural laws no matter how hard you try to view it that way. However it's engine can be reconditioned, but that's a different use of the word.

What you are talking about appears to be one of the common Mahayana teachings on emptiness that talks about nothing having inherent existence and everything being composed of component parts. I'm not sure if they use the terms conditioned/unconditioned in this teaching and you haven't posted a quote showing this, either way it's not how these terms are used in translation of the Pali Canon as far as I'm aware.
Last edited by Goofaholix on Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Goofaholix »

fivebells wrote:Not nitpicking, just curious, because the experience of Nibbana is quite mysterious to me: Does nibbana involve a specific perspective?
Not necessarily, the point is the perspective is not dictated by causes and conditions.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
pegembara
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by pegembara »

cherrytigerbarb wrote:
Something which is conditioned exists only by virtue of the relationships between the parts which comprise it. So for example, a car is a conditioned thing, because it consists of many parts held together in very specific relationship with each other. Without those relationships, all you have is a  big pile of parts. You no longer have a car. So "car" is a conditioned thing.

Other examples of conditioned things are....
A building.
A clock.
A painting (diferent coloured paints arranged in specific relationship with each other)
A tv.
A cup.
A piece of clothing.
Water.
Air.....

In actual fact, everything in the world is conditioned, on the basis that ultimately things exist due to the relationships between the subatomic particles in the atoms which comprise them. So how can something be said to be "unconditioned"?
They are sunna ("empty") of any essence. It also includes man, woman, child, cat, dogs, family, nation, ethnicity etc. They are constructions(sankhara) constructed from other parts which are themselves also constructed. In other words anatta.

Come to think of it, even processes are sunna. What is eating? ----> biting, chewing, swallowing. Breathing ------> chest movement, air movement, cellular metabolism.

Once a label or name is attached to them, they become "things" or conventional reality.

Something which is unconditioned clearly exists as a 'whole thing' in its entirety, undivided. So for example a car is an unconditioned thing, because it is one whole discreet object. You can point to it and say "car!". It clearly exists in-and-of-itself, seperate to everything else.

Now here's the rub. From the above, you should be able to see that things are both "conditioned" and "unconditioned" at the same time. How is this possible?

Well, it all depends on how you look at things. In normal everyday life, we tend to look at things as being unconditioned. Objects in the world appear whole and discreet. Seperate from each other. Objects are identified on this basis, and they match up to our mentally stored concepts. This is "conventional truth". But in reality, everything is conditioned, since everything is reduceable to subatomic particles. You can think of reality as a giant subatomic smoothie, where everything is one undivided thing. This is "ultimate truth". In such a world, craving and aversion towards one thing over another is meaningless, and an experiencial understanding of this on the deepest level is the true meaning of what it is to be enlightened. :)
There is a jump to say everything is One. From the Theravada perpective, there is no ultimate undivided One which is yet another construct. All things are not self (Sabbe dhamma anatta).
The way people think is that having been born, they don't want to die. Is that correct? It's like pouring water into a glass but not wanting it to fill up. If you keep pouring the water, you can't expect it not to be full. But people think like this: they are born but don't want to die. Is that correct thinking? Consider it. If people are born but never die, will that bring happiness? If no one who comes into the world dies, things will be a lot worse. If no one ever dies, we will probably all end up eating excrement! Where would we all stay? It's like pouring water into the glass without ceasing yet still not wanting it to be full. We really ought to think things through. We are born but don't want to die. If we really don't want to die, we should realize the deathless (amatadhamma), as the Buddha taught. Do you know what amatadhamma means?

It is the deathless - though you die, if you have wisdom it is as if you don't die. Not dying, not being born. That's where things can be finished. Being born and wishing for happiness and enjoyment without dying is not the correct way at all. But that's what people want, so there is no end of suffering for them. The practitioner of Dhamma does not suffer. Well, practitioners such as ordinary monks still suffer, because they haven't yet fulfilled the path of practice. They haven't realized amatadhamma, so they still suffer. They are still subject to death.

Amatadhamma is the deathless. Born of the womb, can we avoid death? Apart from realizing that there is no real self, there is no way to avoid death. ''I'' don't die; sankhāras undergo transformation, following their nature.

Ajahn Chah
I think that the discovery that we do not die is the most valuable and important discovery made in the history of the human race. Is there any other discovery that can match it? Even to call it the most valuable and important world heritage is insufficient. However, unfortunately, most of the great number of people living in the world do not know of this great discovery. Whenever the New Year comes people think they have grown a year older and a year closer to death. But this is a big mistake. Where is that which has grown a year older, where is that which has made another step toward death? Shakyamuni pursued this question relentlessly. And he realized that this thing called the “self” had neither shadow nor form nor color nor smell nor weight nor anything at all. He realized that this “self” was no more than an image that human beings had arbitrarily produced in their heads. If “self” and “person” are no more than concepts, then “the death of a person” is no more than a concept formed from the workings of the mind. One speaks of “dying” but the “one” dying does not exist. To put it clearly, from the start “death” itself does not exist.

And, to push the argument even further, what has just been said about “death” applies in just the same way to “life.” If death does not exist, then one cannot say that life exists. In the statement above I made about Shakyamuni’s discovery let me replace the word “death” with “life”. “To put it very simply we can say that Shakyamuni’s discovery was that ‘we are not born’.”

Life and death are concepts; life and death have no substance. Nevertheless, most people find this hard to believe. Yet, life and death really do not exist. To express the essence of life and death, one can say being happy is life and being sad is death. Being in pain is life and being content is death. Walking is life and running is death. The rain falling is life and good weather is death. Mountains are life and rivers are death.

Yamada Ryoun- abbot of Sanbo-Kyodan
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Aloka »

.

The Ajahn Chah quote I referenced earlier in the thread from the book "The Island" can also be found in full at ATI in a section "Towards the Unconditioned" from "Living Dhamma" by Ajahn Chah.

An excerpt continuing from my last quote:
Seeing the true nature of conditions and the determined, the mind becomes free.

This freed mind is called the Unconditioned, that which is beyond the power of constructing influences. If the mind doesn't really know conditions and determinations, it is moved by them. Encountering good, bad, pleasure, or pain, it proliferates about them. Why does it proliferate? Because there is still a cause. What is the cause? The cause is the understanding that the body is one's self or belongs to the self; that feelings are self or belonging to self; that perception is self or belonging to self; that conceptual thought is self or belonging to self; that consciousness is self or belonging to self. The tendency to conceive things in terms of self is the source of happiness, suffering, birth, old age, sickness and death. This is the worldly mind, spinning around and changing at the directives of worldly conditions. This is the conditioned mind.

If we receive some windfall our mind is conditioned by it. That object influences our mind into a feeling of pleasure, but when it disappears, our mind is conditioned by it into suffering. The mind becomes a slave of conditions, a slave of desire. No matter what the world presents to it, the mind is moved accordingly. This mind has no refuge, it is not yet assured of itself, not yet free. It is still lacking a firm base. This mind doesn't yet know the truth of conditions. Such is the conditioned mind.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... tml#toward

:anjali:
User avatar
cherrytigerbarb
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 6:14 am

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by cherrytigerbarb »

Goofaholix wrote:
I don't think so.

Using your example of a car the conditions that lead to a car would include; the discovery of oil and it's refinement to petrol, the building of roads, the invention of an internal combustion engine, the designer of the car, the market demand for the car, investors that provide venture capital, the sales and distribution process for the car etc.

It's nothing to do with the parts, or concepts. Though conditioning factors have relationships with the end result but not in the way you're talking about.

A car is conditioned, it cannot be unconditioned, ie it cannot just appear out of nowhere and you cannot make it not conform to natural laws no matter how hard you try to view it that way. However it's engine can be reconditioned, but that's a different use of the word.

What you are talking about appears to be one of the common Mahayana teachings on emptiness that talks about nothing having inherent existence and everything being composed of component parts. I'm not sure if they use the terms conditioned/unconditioned in this teaching and you haven't posted a quote showing this, either way it's not how these terms are used in translation of the Pali Canon as far as I'm aware.
For conditioned/unconditioned, I'm happy to use the words sankhara/asankhara. Here are some of the things which Bikkhu Bodhi has to say about it....

"The third major domain in which the word sankhara occurs is as a designation for all conditioned things. In this context the word has a passive derivation, denoting whatever is formed by a combination of conditions; whatever is conditioned, constructed, or compounded. In this sense it might be rendered simply "formations," without the qualifying adjective. As bare formations, sankharas include all five aggregates, not just the fourth. The term also includes external objects and situations such as mountains, fields, and forests; towns and cities; food and drink; jewelry, cars, and computers.

The most important fact to understand about sankharas, as conditioned formations, is that they are all impermanent: "Impermanent, alas, are formations." They are impermanent not only in the sense that in their gross manifestations they will eventually come to an end, but even more pointedly because at the subtle, subliminal level they are constantly undergoing rise and fall, forever coming into being and then, in a split second, breaking up and perishing: "Their very nature is to arise and vanish." For this reason the Buddha declares that all sankharas are suffering (sabbe sankhara dukkha) — suffering, however, not because they are all actually painful and stressful, but because they are stamped with the mark of transience. "Having arisen they then cease," and because they all cease they cannot provide stable happiness and security.

To win complete release from suffering — not only from experiencing suffering, but from the unsatisfactoriness intrinsic to all conditioned existence — we must gain release fromsankharas. And what lies beyond the sankharas is that which is not constructed, not put together, not compounded. This is Nibbana, accordingly called the Unconditioned —asankhata — the opposite of what is sankhata, a word which is the passive participle corresponding to sankhara. Nibbana is called the Unconditioned precisely because it's a state that is neither itself a sankhara nor constructed by sankharas; a state described asvisankhara, "devoid of formations," and as sabbasankhara-samatha, "the stilling of all formations." "

From Anicca Vata Sankhara by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

I don't really buy the idea about conditions leading to the car as being part of the car, such as the discovery of oil etc. since none of those things exist in the present moment. Did you get that from one of Alan Watt's talks? The conditions I'm talking about are the relationships between the component parts which give rise the concept "car" which would otherwise not be there, if say for example all the parts were disassembled and strewn across the floor of the garage. A simpler example is that of a fist. Hold out your hand. Now roll up your fingers to make a fist. Now unroll your fingers again. In both cases there was only your hand, but when you rolled up your fingers you had the added concept of "fist" - something which you are able to make appear and disappear at will. The thing is, literally everything exists in the form of concepts like that.

I dont know what you meant about not being able to not make something conform to natural laws - I don't recall ever making any mention of that.

I am totally happy with the Mahayana teachings - a good deal of it makes perfect sense to me. Remember that Mahayana does not exclude the teachings in the pali cannon, but instead offers certain alternative interpretations. I do however reject the ideas about reincarnation (as opposed to rebirth) and Tantra which I think is complete nonsense. I consider those ideas to be cultural additions.
"The foolish reject what they see, not what they think. The wise reject what they think, not what they see." - Huang Po.
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Goofaholix »

cherrytigerbarb wrote:For conditioned/unconditioned, I'm happy to use the words sankhara/asankhara. Here are some of the things which Bikkhu Bodhi has to say about it....
I think you meant sankhata/asankhata, I should have clicked to these terms when Aloka posted that excellent Ajahn Chah quote. Bhikkhu Bodhi says sankhata is the passive participle corresponding to sankhara. Sankhara is mostly about mental phenomena, rather than classifying objects in the material world which is what you keep going back to.

Looking at the Pali dictionary Sankhata is defined as "put together, compound; conditioned, produced by a combination of causes", so you are focusing on the first two and I'm focusing on the last two. Of course they are all contribute to the meaning, but the title of this thread is "Conditioned / Unconditioned" so relates to the the last two.
cherrytigerbarb wrote:I don't really buy the idea about conditions leading to the car as being part of the car, such as the discovery of oil etc. since none of those things exist in the present moment.
Of course the conditions leading to the car are not part of the car, I didn't say they were, they are the conditions that made the car possible. Remember that conditions is a verb not a noun, "conditions" is about actions/events not objects. I don't think the Buddha was interested in classifying material objects though, he was interested in the mind so objects are only of interest when in relation to mental phenomena.
cherrytigerbarb wrote: The conditions I'm talking about are the relationships between the component parts which give rise the concept "car" which would otherwise not be there, if say for example all the parts were disassembled and strewn across the floor of the garage.
This would only be interesting if the Buddha were a mechanic, he was not, what is interesting however is whether we attach to the concepts we create around these objects, not attaching to these concepts is one of the characteristics of Nibbana.
cherrytigerbarb wrote: A simpler example is that of a fist. Hold out your hand. Now roll up your fingers to make a fist. Now unroll your fingers again. In both cases there was only your hand, but when you rolled up your fingers you had the added concept of "fist" - something which you are able to make appear and disappear at will. The thing is, literally everything exists in the form of concepts like that.
If I rolled up my fingers then I would have a concept of moving, fist may or may not apply. A baby rolls his fingers into a fist and back again all of time but has no concept of fist, or at least what we normally associate with the concept of fist.
cherrytigerbarb wrote: I dont know what you meant about not being able to not make something conform to natural laws- I don't recall ever making any mention of that.
To say something can be conditioned or unconditioned depending on your view implies one can make things unconditioned with ones view, this is what I mean by making something not conform to natural laws. If one's view is not conditioned then ones view is not conditioned, that's all. Conditionality is a characteristic of existence so things will remain conditioned regardless of ones view, however the mind doesn't have to buy into that the mind can be unconditioned.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by beeblebrox »

Goofaholix wrote:
fivebells wrote:Not nitpicking, just curious, because the experience of Nibbana is quite mysterious to me: Does nibbana involve a specific perspective?
Not necessarily, the point is the perspective is not dictated by causes and conditions.
Hi Goofaholix,

I think it is impossible for a perspective to not to be dictated by causes and conditions.

When there is nibbana, this perspective is merely unconditioned by greed, hatred and delusion (or confusion).

The behavior also would change... it is a behavior which is unconditioned by greed, hatred and delusion. When you meet someone who behaves in this way, it would be unmistakable. I think even a deluded person would be able to see it.

Also, I don't think that this kind of behavior would be limited to those who practice so-called "Buddhism." (E.g., the behavior of paccekabuddhas.) The Buddha was unique in that he taught this as a practice.

I think it is easy to say stuff about what we think nibbana is... but it is another story to put that into an actual practice, especially one that is useful.

Besides, it seems that if Cherrytigerbarb actually views the samsara to be the same as nirvana, then I think she shouldn't really have any issues with what's been said in here, in this thread.

:anjali:
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Conditioned / Unconditioned

Post by Goofaholix »

beeblebrox wrote: I think it is impossible for a perspective to not to be dictated by causes and conditions.

When there is nibbana, this perspective is merely unconditioned by greed, hatred and delusion (or confusion).
Dictated by causes and conditions means there is no choice, I'd agree causes and conditions would and should contribuite to one's perspective but the point is an awakened person always has choice. I don't think we can then say it was conditioned by causes and conditions.

Other than that a good point.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
Post Reply