Anicca

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries
ToVincent
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Anicca

Post by ToVincent » Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:20 pm

Anicca means: "Impermanent" AND/OR "not one's own".

--------

Nicca in Sanskrit is nitya (नित्य). And it has two meanings in the Vedic litterature, as seen in the Monier-Williams dictionary:
- one’s own ( opp. to araṇa ) (RV) .
And
- continual, perpetual (permanent), eternal, (RV) .

--------
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Because the concept of anicca is so important in (authentic) early Buddhism; let us put this concept in its most manifest situation.
To have the big picture in mind, refer to this visual aid. https://justpaste.it/1n1ii
This sketch represents paṭiccasamuppāda, the conditionality of all physical and psychical phenomena in Buddhism.

What interest us here, are the nāmarūpa and the saḷāyatana links (in blue).
Note on the side that, what Buddhism calls "the world" (loka) [of senses], are the external fields, the internal fields, the contact link and the feeling link.
All of the above are aniccā (not one's own & impermanent), saṅkhatā (conditioned), paṭiccasamuppannā (dependently arisen) , khayadhammā (phenomena subject to destruction), vayadhammā (phenomena subject to vanishing), virāgadhammā (phenomena subject to fading away), and nirodhadhammā (phenomena subject to cessation).

A phenomena (dhamma) occurs first in our case, when there is a saṅkhārā, a coaction of the khandhas. The khandhas are the constituents of the Nāmarūpa link (in blue). They are: matter (a.k. a. form), consciousness, feeling, perception and the coaction (saṅkhārā) between them.
This coaction develops in two steps. The coaction itself (e.g. a guitar played by an artist); and the external sensory field of experience, that is the sound of that guitar.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

What Buddha says in SN 22.33, is that these khandhas are "not yours" (na tumhākaṃ).
They are "not one's own" (anicca).

Moreover, they are impermanent (anicca) and their phenomena are subject to change (vipariṇa).

Impermanent are all coactions (formations). Aniccā sabbasaṅkhārā
SN 1.1

For no one can say: "I want this phenomenon (dhamma), [born of the coaction (saṅkhārā) of the khandhas, that are "not my one's own" (anicca)], to be permanent.


"All coactions are not one's own (& impermanent), and all phenomena are not self."
Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā, sabbe dhammā anattā’ti.
.....
“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”
“Yaṃ panāniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāmadhammaṃ, kallaṃ nu taṃ samanupassituṃ: ‘etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’”ti?
“No, Master Gotama.” “No hidaṃ, bho gotama”.
MN 35

---------

ANICCA & ANATTA

Anicca is closely related to anatta (not self).

First, let's explain what a "self" is in this context.

Mr. Olivelle, a translator of the Upanishads says the following in his "The early Upanishads":
"atman/atta (self), is a term liable to misunderstanding and mistranslating because it can mean the spiritual self or the inmost core of a human being, besides functioning as a mere reflexive pronoun."

Therefore, to say "atta is anatta" is not illogical when it means "himself (he) is not self". But sounds illogical when translated as "the self is not self".

Here, we are in the situation where the self as mere reflexive pronoun (himself/herself/oneself), that is to say in proper English, he/she believes that he/she has to do something with the khandhas.
Which is what the late Vedic and Upanishadic folks used to believe (making it a continuous and permanent spiritual self). And what Buddha disavowed; because of the "anicca" intrinsinc nature of the khandhas, their coactions (saṅkhārā) and ensuing phenomena (dhammā).
Oneself cannot be the same as the khandhas and their phenomena, because the khandhas are anicca (not one's own").
Oneself cannot make "one" with the khandhas and their phenomena, and be a spiritual self that is a permanent continuity.
Oneself (atta) is anatta (not a spiritual self).

The view of a spiritual self as a blend between the phenomena from the coaction of the khandhas in the nāmarūpa link AND the "world" (of senses, as defined above), that would make a "one", is the late Vedic view of the Upanishads.And Buddha contradicted that because of the inherent anicca nature of the khandhas.
Bhikkhus, when what exists, by clinging to what,
by adhering to what, does such a view as this
arise: 'That which is the self is the world (of senses); having passed away, that I shall be permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change'?"
SN 22.152


------

"I AM THIS" & "I AM"

SN 22.89 tells us that we must first get rid of the "not ownership" (na tumhākaṃ) - the "I am this".
Then of the "I".

Let's go back to the visual aid.
https://justpaste.it/1n1ii
There are two arrows numbered 1 & 2.

The khandhas are coacting (saṅkhārā) to produce two major phenomena (dhammā) for "oneself".

- The arrow #1 defines the phenomena that one might be experiencing - e.g. one sees a player (form) with a guitar (form), and ears some music (sound)) - All three are experienced on the external sensory fields of experience (bāhirāni āyatanāni). In our case, rūpa & sadda.
This is what "oneself" believes wrongly as "I am THIS".

These phenomena are experienced by "oneself", through the internal sensory fields of experience (ajjhattikāni āyatanāni). In our case, cakkhu & sotta).

- The arrow #2 defines how the internal sensory fields of experience (ajjhattikāni āyatanāni) are created. This is our sensory "structure", so to speak. It is more than just "physical". It is a physical "structure" with a sensory field of experience.
And it is also anicca. That is to say "not one's own" and impermanent.

Buddha declares that khandhas are" not yours" (na tumhākaṃ) in SN 22.33 - and that the internal sensory fields of experience (ajjhattikāni āyatanāni) are "not yours" in SN 35.138.
Both khandhas and ajjhattikāni āyatanāni are "not one's own" (aniccā).

Buddha also declares that the external (SN 35.4) and the internal (SN 35.1) are impermanent.
(Both suttas have their parallel in SA 195) .

In SN 12.20, Buddha also declares that all the links (nidānā) in paṭiccasamuppāda - and per extention, their components) - are aniccā.
What’s impermanent is suffering.
Yadaniccaṃ taṃ dukkhaṃ;
What’s suffering is not-self.
yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā
What’s suffering is not-self.
yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā;
And what’s not-self should be truly seen with right understanding like this: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
yadanattā taṃ ‘netaṃ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṃ
SN 22.15


“Bhikkhus, form (& all khandhas) is (are) impermanent, both of the past and the future, not to speak of the present."
“Rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, aniccaṃ atītānāgataṃ; ko pana vādo paccuppannassa".
Seeing this, the learned noble disciple is indifferent about past form,
Evaṃ passaṃ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako atītasmiṃ rūpasmiṃ anapekkho hoti;
doesn’t seek delight in future form,
anāgataṃ rūpaṃ nābhinandati;
and he practices for disgust, dispassion, and cessation regarding present form.
paccuppannassa rūpassa nibbidāya virāgāya nirodhāya paṭipanno hoti
SN 22.9


“Householder, whatever has come into being and is conditioned, a product of volition, dependently originated, is impermanent. Whatever is impermanent is suffering. It is just suffering that you are attached to and hold to.”
“Yaṃ kho, gahapati, kiñci bhūtaṃ saṅkhataṃ cetayitaṃ paṭiccasamuppannaṃ tadaniccaṃ. Yadaniccaṃ taṃ dukkhaṃ. Yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadeva tvaṃ, gahapati, allīno, tadeva tvaṃ, gahapati, ajjhupagato”ti.
AN 10.93


Bhikkhus, consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad. And how, bhikkhus, does consciousness come to be in dependence on a dyad? In dependence on the eye and forms there arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise; forms are impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. Thus this dyad is moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise.
Dvayaṃ, bhikkhave, paṭicca viññāṇaṃ sambhoti. Kathañca, bhikkhave, dvayaṃ paṭicca viññāṇaṃ sambhoti? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ. Cakkhu aniccaṃ vipariṇāmi aññathābhāvi. Rūpā aniccā vipariṇāmino aññathābhāvino. Itthetaṃ dvayaṃ calañceva byathañca aniccaṃ vipariṇāmi aññathābhāvi.
Eye-consciousness is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-consciousness is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, bhikkhus, eye-consciousness has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent?
Cakkhuviññāṇaṃ aniccaṃ vipariṇāmi aññathābhāvi. Yopi hetu yopi paccayo cakkhuviññāṇassa uppādāya, sopi hetu sopi paccayo anicco vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī. Aniccaṃ kho pana, bhikkhave, paccayaṃ paṭicca uppannaṃ cakkhuviññāṇaṃ kuto niccaṃ bhavissati.
The meeting, the encounter, the concurrence of these three things is called eye-contact. Eye-contact too is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-contact is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, bhikkhus, eye-contact has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent?
Yā kho, bhikkhave, imesaṃ tiṇṇaṃ dhammānaṃ saṅgati sannipāto samavāyo, ayaṃ vuccati cakkhusamphasso. Cakkhusamphassopi anicco vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī. Yopi hetu yopi paccayo cakkhusamphassassa uppādāya, sopi hetu sopi paccayo anicco vipariṇāmī aññathābhāvī. Aniccaṃ kho pana, bhikkhave, paccayaṃ paṭicca uppanno cakkhusamphasso kuto nicco bhavissati.
Contacted, bhikkhus, one feels, contacted one intends, contacted one perceives. Thus these things too are moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise.
Phuṭṭho, bhikkhave, vedeti, phuṭṭho ceteti, phuṭṭho sañjānāti. Itthetepi dhammā calā ceva byathā ca aniccā vipariṇāmino aññathābhāvino
(idem for ear, nose,... mano).
SN 35.93


And what, bhikkhus, is the way that is suitable for attaining Nibbāna? Here, a bhikkhu sees the eye as impermanent, he sees forms as impermanent, he sees eye-consciousness as impermanent, he sees eye-contact as impermanent, he sees as impermanent whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant.
katamā ca sā, bhikkhave, nibbānasappāyā paṭipadā? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhuṃ aniccanti passati, rūpā aniccāti passati, cakkhuviññāṇaṃ aniccanti passati, cakkhusamphasso aniccoti passati. Yampidaṃ cakkhusamphassapaccayā uppajjati vedayitaṃ sukhaṃ vā dukkhaṃ vā adukkhamasukhaṃ vā tampi aniccanti passati
SN 35.147
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... - In this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------

https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2832
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Anicca

Post by cappuccino » Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:46 pm

“Perceiving impermanence, bhikkhus, developed and frequently practised, removes all sensual desire, removes all desire for material existence, removes all desire for becoming, removes all ignorance, and tears out all conceit of ’I am.’”

(Kindred Sayings, III, p. 132)

ToVincent
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by ToVincent » Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:47 pm

cappuccino wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:46 pm
“Perceiving impermanence, bhikkhus, developed and frequently practised, removes all sensual desire, removes all desire for material existence, removes all desire for becoming, removes all ignorance, and tears out all conceit of ’I am.’”

(Kindred Sayings, III, p. 132)
SN 22.102 is indeed a sutta that addresses the impermanence/"not one's own" issue. However, it seems a bit too early to address that training without first understanding how to get to that level.
This is a counsel to advanced bhikkhus.
The parallel in the Agamas addresses even the abandonment of craving for the formless.
Very advanced indeed.
One already needs to have realized vipassana; that is to say to have experienced the estrangement of anicca, from a quite liberated citta - namely the bird-eye view of salayatana nidāna from namarupa nidāna.
Only a very few humans can do that.

See the additional note at the end of this page:
https://justpaste.it/6lfcn
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... - In this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------

https://justpaste.it/j5o4

pegembara
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Anicca

Post by pegembara » Sat Mar 30, 2019 3:14 am

Atta is 'thingness'. 'Things' include living beings.
Once thingness is assumed, there is the appearance of that 'thing' moving through space and time.
That apparent movement through time gives rise to the phenomenon of anicca or impermanence like so.

Image

Atta and anicca are only true by convention.
The anattā doctrine teaches that neither within the bodily and mental phenomena of existence, nor outside of them, can be found anything that in the ultimate sense could be regarded as a self-existing real ego-entity, soul or any other abiding substance.

Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths (sacca, q.v.), in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter into Nibbāna, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/anatta
By whom was this living being created?
Where is the living being's maker?
Where has the living being originated?
Where does the living being
cease?

What? Do you assume a 'living being,' Mara?
Do you take a position?
This is purely a pile of fabrications.
Here no living being
can be pinned down.

Just as when, with an assemblage of parts,
there's the word,
chariot,
even so when aggregates are present,
there's the convention of
living being.

For only stress is what comes to be;
stress, what remains & falls away.
Nothing but stress comes to be.
Nothing ceases but stress.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos."
‘Alas, this world has fallen into trouble. It’s born, grows old, dies, passes away, and is reborn, yet it doesn’t understand how to escape from this suffering, from old age and death. Oh, when will an escape be found from this suffering, from old age and death?’
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2832
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Anicca

Post by cappuccino » Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:18 am

Nothing but stress comes to be.
Nothing ceases but stress.
Nothing ceases but stress

ToVincent
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by ToVincent » Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:08 pm

pegembara wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 3:14 am
...
O come on pegembara! Are you serving us that apple sauce again, with free tickets for the nonsense merry-go-round?

Your references are just taking all kinds of directions, just to avoid to address how one gets to experience anicca.

First that interpretation of anatta by wisdomlib. org. is very dubious indeed. Looks like it is edging towards some kind of syncretism between all the rājāmaccā's views in DN 2. An interpretation that seems to avoid the consideration of an element of instigation (ārabbhadhātu) as in AN 6.38:
What do you think, brahmin, is there an element or principle of initiating or beginning an action?”

“Just so, Venerable Sir.”

“When there is an element of initiating, are initiating beings clearly discerned?”

“Just so, Venerable Sir.”

“So, brahmin, when there is the element of initiating, initiating beings are clearly discerned; of such beings, this is the self-doer, this, the other-doer.
Note that the parallel SA 459 says the same:
婆羅門 言。 云 何。瞿曇。 眾生 為 自 作。 為 他 作 耶
The brahmin said, “Tell me why? Gautama, do sentient beings have self-agency, do they have other agency?”

佛 告 婆羅門。 我 今 問 汝。隨 意 答 我。 婆羅門。 於 意 云 何。
what The Buddha told the brahmin, “Brahmin, now I ask you, answer as you please. What do you think?

有 眾 生 方便 界。 有 众 生 方便 界。
Do sentient beings have the element of initiating? Etc.
I see you slowly coming with that usual interpretation: "you are not responsible - live your experiences to the fullest, blabla".

If we are literally "something to be felt - (vedaniya: to be known, intelligible (through feelings)" [SN 12.37] , I suppose that we have our word to say; don't we? - What would be the point otherwise?

Sure! Beings are just mere painful phenomena "made of" khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas that are impermanent (anicca) and not "one's own" (anicca). So what? Everyone should have understood that by now. Is that the proof that we are not responsible?
The reflexive pronoun atta (that has nothing to do with the spiritual self (atta),) has the means to refuse that state of estrangement (anicca - not one's own). The reflexive pronoun atta has the means to see that his spiritual atta is not in the world/loka (of senses), by experiencing that anicca ("not one's owness" and impermanence).
It is only when one has totally been liberated from the world of senses in the fifth jhāna, that one does not use the reflexive pronoun atta. It uses the totally unpolluted citta to experience/"feel" (vedanā) and perceive (sañña).

------

However, what should be of interest in our case is just how to get to experience anicca.

How to get out of this kama loka (as defined in SN 35.82) [note that lujjati (disintegrating), √ रुज् ruj means also: to cause pain , afflict (VS.)]
“Venerable sir, it is said, ‘the world, the world.’ In what way, venerable sir, is it said ‘the world’?”

“It is disintegrating (causing pain), bhikkhu, therefore it is called the world. And what is disintegrating (causing pain) ? The eye, bhikkhu, is disintegrating, forms are disintegrating, eye-consciousness is disintegrating, eye-contact is disintegrating, and whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition … that too is disintegrating. The ear is disintegrating …
And this is directly linked to experiencing anicca:
Here, a bhikkhu sees the eye as impermanent, he sees forms as impermanent, he sees eye-consciousness as impermanent, he sees eye-contact as impermanent, he sees as impermanent whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant.
Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhuṃ aniccanti passati, rūpā aniccāti passati, cakkhuviññāṇaṃ aniccanti passati, cakkhusamphasso aniccoti passati. Yampidaṃ cakkhusamphassapaccayā uppajjati vedayitaṃ sukhaṃ vā dukkhaṃ vā adukkhamasukhaṃ vā tampi aniccanti passati
SN 35.147
------

O! And yes, you can't reach the end of that world (universe/cosmos) - but you can make and end of suffering by transcending your own "world of senses". For the universe/cosmos is the "world of senses" at large. (A bottomless pit of knowledge, with little understanding, I'd say).

Is that what you meant? Or was it another cryptic and evasive awe-inspiring reference?

For it seems that to experience anicca in vipassana (in a sound establishment (samādhi) of citta), one has definitely to leave that world of senses, that kama loka (Mara's world).
And it seems very likely that one has first to get rid of the "I am this" (external) belief - then of the "I am" (internal) belief.

In other words, one has to roll back to the "unpolluted" citta in Nāmarūpa nidāna to have that bird eye view on the process going on with our reflexive pronoun atta, in the kama loka.
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... - In this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------

https://justpaste.it/j5o4

auto
Posts: 1094
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Anicca

Post by auto » Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:52 pm

pegembara wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 3:14 am
Atta is 'thingness'. 'Things' include living beings.
Once thingness is assumed, there is the appearance of that 'thing' moving through space and time.
That apparent movement through time gives rise to the phenomenon of anicca or impermanence like so.

Atta and anicca are only true by convention.
The anattā doctrine teaches that neither within the bodily and mental phenomena of existence, nor outside of them, can be found anything that in the ultimate sense could be regarded as a self-existing real ego-entity, soul or any other abiding substance.

Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths (sacca, q.v.), in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter into Nibbāna, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/anatta
By whom was this living being created?
Where is the living being's maker?
Where has the living being originated?
Where does the living being
cease?

What? Do you assume a 'living being,' Mara?
Do you take a position?
This is purely a pile of fabrications.
Here no living being
can be pinned down.

Just as when, with an assemblage of parts,
there's the word,
chariot,
even so when aggregates are present,
there's the convention of
living being.

For only stress is what comes to be;
stress, what remains & falls away.
Nothing but stress comes to be.
Nothing ceases but stress.
There is nothing beyond the All(sense organ and its object), because of not being awakened to the One then if to tell what is beyond they understand or grasp it with what is in All, so its logical to tell there is nothing existing outside the All.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 2832
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Anicca

Post by cappuccino » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:56 pm

Nirvana is beyond the all

pegembara
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Anicca

Post by pegembara » Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:23 am

ToVincent wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:08 pm
I see you slowly coming with that usual interpretation: "you are not responsible - live your experiences to the fullest, blabla".
Sure! Beings are just mere painful phenomena "made of" khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas that are impermanent (anicca) and not "one's own" (anicca). So what? Everyone should have understood that by now. Is that the proof that we are not responsible?
What a nonsense statement. How can 'you' live your life as 'you' wish?
If you 'exist' to enjoy life as it were, you are certainly responsible for all your actions.
"You" will certainly be subject to aging, sickness and death. Possibly rebirth.

Where does that come from?
That comes from ignorance or identity view.
Then, monks, being subject myself to birth, seeing the drawbacks of birth, seeking the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I reached the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Being subject myself to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeing the drawbacks of aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeking the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I reached the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'

"Then the thought occurred to me, 'This Dhamma that I have attained is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, peaceful, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. [3] But this generation delights in attachment, is excited by attachment, enjoys attachment. For a generation delighting in attachment, excited by attachment, enjoying attachment, this/that conditionality & dependent co-arising are hard to see. This state, too, is hard to see: the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding. And if I were to teach the Dhamma and others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me.'
O! And yes, you can't reach the end of that world (universe/cosmos) - but you can make and end of suffering by transcending your own "world of senses". For the universe/cosmos is the "world of senses" at large.
Yes, the above is more sensible.
"The mind sent outside is the origination of suffering.
The result of the mind sent outside is suffering.
The mind seeing the mind is the path.
The result of the mind seeing the mind is the cessation of suffering."

Ajaan Dune Atulo
Perception of impermanence on one in or out breath. Or a thought, a sensation, a sound ...
The Blessed One said, "Mindfulness of death, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit & great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. Therefore you should develop mindfulness of death."

whoever develops mindfulness of death, thinking, 'O, that I might live for the interval that it takes to swallow having chewed up one morsel of food... for the interval that it takes to breathe out after breathing in, or to breathe in after breathing out, that I might attend to the Blessed One's instructions. I would have accomplished a great deal' — they are said to dwell heedfully. They develop mindfulness of death acutely for the sake of ending the effluents.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by salayatananirodha » Sun Apr 07, 2019 1:43 pm

the sutta definition of name is
feeling, perception, intention, contact and attention
your diagram is factually incorrect
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

ToVincent
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by ToVincent » Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:29 pm

salayatananirodha wrote:
Sun Apr 07, 2019 1:43 pm
the sutta definition of name is
feeling, perception, intention, contact and attention
your diagram is factually incorrect
But that does not take into account the definition of nāma in the SA 298 Agama.
A definition that is complementary, not contradictory.
SA 298 is the definition of nāma when the descent (avakkanti - SN 12.39) of nāmarūpa hasn't yet taken place.
SN 12.2 is the definition of nāma when the descent has taken place. (when citta becomes ceto, for instance).

If you don't catch that, you will never understand Buddhism. It's as simple as that.
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... - In this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------

https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by salayatananirodha » Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:56 am

its true that i did not catch the source when i first commented
i was trying to locate samyukta agama 298 so i could read it myself
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

ToVincent
Posts: 677
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Anicca

Post by ToVincent » Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:42 am

salayatananirodha wrote:
Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:56 am
its true that i did not catch the source when i first commented
i was trying to locate samyukta agama 298 so i could read it myself
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/sa298

SA 298 is translated in "The fundamental teachings of early Buddhism", by Choong Mun Keat.
https://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpres ... n-keat.pdf

You also have the same definition of the khandhas in Nāmarūpa nidāna, from SF 238, translated from Buddhist Sanskrit Texts No. 17 Mahāyāna-sūtra-saṃgrahaḥ.
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/sf238/13

And in SF 256 (the same than in SF 238)
nāma katamat? Catvāra arūpiṇaḥ skandhāḥ. Katame catvāraḥ? Vedanāskandhaḥ saṃjñāskandhaḥ saṃskāraskandhaḥ vijñānaskandhaḥ.

Rūpaṃ katamat? Yat kiṃcid-rūpam, sarvaṃ tat catvāri mahābhūtāni. Catvāri ca mahābhūtānyupādāya itīdaṃ ca nāmarūpamrūpam. Tadaikadhyam­abhi­saṃ­kṣipya nāmarūpam-ityucyate.
_____

So, the Theravada definition is the definition of Nāma for the kama-loka, (when there is a descent of consciousness); while the Agama's definition is the rūpa/arūpa-loka Nāma's definition.

This has been told for years on each & every forum, as some sort of taboo evidence.
Wonder why?
It will be occulted once more, trust me.

Metta
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... - In this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------

https://justpaste.it/j5o4

auto
Posts: 1094
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Anicca

Post by auto » Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:03 pm

https://suttacentral.net/sn25.10/en/sujato
“Rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, aniccaṃ vipariṇāmi aññathābhāvi;
http://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/v/vipariṇāma
Vipariṇāma,[vi+pariṇāma] change (for the worse),reverse,vicissitude D.III,216 (°dukkhatā); M.I,457 (also as “disappointment”); S.II,274; III,8; IV,7 sq.67 sq.; A.II,177 (°dhamma subject to change); III,32; V,59 sq.; Vbh.379 (°dhamma); Vism.499 (°dukkha),629 sq.; VbhA.93 (id.); PvA.60.-- a° absence of change,steadfastness D.I,18; III,31,33; DhA.I,121.(Page 626)
http://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/a/aññathā
Aññathā,(adv.) [añña + thā] in a different manner,otherwise,differently S.I,24; Sn.588,757; DhsA.163; PvA.125,133. anaññathā without mistake Vv 4418; anaññatha (nt.) certainty,truth Ps.II,104 (= tatha).

--bhāva (1) a different existence A.II,10; It.9 = 94; Sn.729,740,752; (2) a state of difference; i. e. change,alteration,unstableness D.I,36; S.II,274; III,8,16,42; Vbh.379. --bhāvin based on difference S.III,225 sq.; IV,23 sq.,66 sq.; an° free from difference Vin.I,36. (Page 14)
form, feelings.. are regressing to another existence.

if you say form is impermanent or not self, then so what?

auto
Posts: 1094
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Anicca

Post by auto » Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:32 pm

ToVincent wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:20 pm
Moreover, they are impermanent (anicca) and their phenomena are subject to change (vipariṇa).
http://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/v/vipariṇata
vipariṇataPTS Pali-English dictionary The Pali Text Society's Pali-English dictionary
Vipariṇata,[vi+pariṇata] changed,perverted Dhs.1038; Vbh.1,3,5 sq.; Miln.50.(Page 626)
changed in a context of worse, perverted.

If you see a nice car there rises a feeling, desire to sit and drive - that is anicca
then when you actually sit and drive, by that act you degrade that feeling and can lust over it it is craving and then acting on craving the fruit will result what is experienced in different existence as a punishment.

basing the above thoughts on Sutta SN 25.10

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests