A substantialist view of the aggregates

The Watercooler
,
52

There is a big difference, one group of beings in the sensual realms only experience pain/suffering - another group in the sensual realms has a mix of both painful and pleasant: all the way up to the various heavens - so both humans and kama loka devas.

And starting from some realms in rupa loka and upwards, everything is only pleasurable.

So you claiming: “Pleasing” here is not free of dukkha any more than pleasant vedanā in the sensual realm is free of dukkha.” is making you miss the point.

No, only the higher rupa loka realms of the Aviha devas plane #23 to the highest Akanittha devas plane #27 are for non-returners(!)

The Buddha also mention the following:

The lifespan of the gods of Brahma’s Host is one eon.

An ordinary person stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they go to hell or the animal realm or the ghost realm.

But a disciple of the Buddha stays there until the lifespan of those gods is spent, then they’re extinguished in that very life.

This is the difference between a learned noble disciple and an unlearned ordinary person, that is, when there is a place of rebirth.

Brahma’s Host is one of the lowest rupa loka realms.

Brahma’s Host is more than 10 planes below where non-returners reside.

53

SN 22.95 (= SA 265) states that the aggregates are seen as void (without reality, rittaka), insubstantial/vain (tucchaka), and lacking essence (asāraka). SN 35.197 (= SA 1172) states that the sense spheres are just void, just vain, just empty (suññaka).

54

Not really, because it’s conditional and impermanent. Did you read the sutta citations?

This sounds Abhidhammic. In either case, it’s impermanent and hence dukkha.
Did you read the sutta citations?

And this matters how with respect to ending dukkha – the very purpose of the Dhamma?

Thanks for the convo, but I’m not interested in debating planes of existence and their duration.
In the very quotes you provided, impermanence is mentioned so: dukkha, as in DN33.

The suttas clearly teach that anything impermanent is dukkha – and only nibbāna is free of all dukkha.
That’s why the teachings repeatedly state that the utter cessation of all forms of bhava, of the aggregates, of the senses, of rebirth are the liberation from dukkha. Clearly this incudes the formless realms , and all realms of existence, since they are based on ignorance and craving.

As in AN3.76:
" If there were no deeds to result in the formless realm, would continued existence in the formless realm still come about?”

“No, sir.”

“So, Ānanda, deeds are the field, consciousness is the seed, and craving is the moisture. The consciousness of sentient beings—shrouded by ignorance and fettered by craving—is established in a higher realm. That’s how there is rebirth into a new state of existence in the future. That’s how continued existence is defined.”

1 Like
55

yes, this also makes clear that Nibbana cannot be seen as a pleasing sense contact.
Nibbana is not something felt or perceived by vinnana. Also not for the living arahant.

56

I was just kidding

I know you read the sutta’s ofcourse. I also do. But still we develop different understanding.
It is all happening in our own minds.

57

In general relativity, where space time itself can change, the law behind the conservation of energy doesn’t hold. Energy is only conserved when the laws of physics are the same throughout time. When spacetime itself changes, energy can be not conserved.

Example, the cosmic microwave background radiation, the first free electromagnetic wave in the universe when the universe becomes cooled enough for plasma to form atoms. Atoms are invisible to EM waves and thus they radiate out in all directions and it’s the furthest reach we can probe on the cosmos with EM telescopes. Now when they were first emitted, they were super hot and thus on the high frequency/ energy side of the EM spectrum, maybe even higher than ultraviolet? Regardless, now they are super cold, in the microwave region and thus lost energy and the number of photons doesn’t seem to increase in that they don’t magically go duplicate into two less frequency photons. Their frequency are reduced via expansion of space. Thus energy is lost for the cosmic microwave background radiation.

It’s dangerous to use physics onto Buddhism when one doesn’t have a lot of physics knowledge.

1 Like
58
  1. You claim:

When looked at, seen into, and seen through with direct experience the truth of ANY and ALL conditions being dukkha can be known.

  1. I then bring up that there is no pain/sorrow/suffering during the whole duration in both the various rupa loka and arupa loka realms. And they last for billions of years.
    I therefore wonder how you can know for sure that these realms are really impermanent in the first place? ”direct experience the truth of ANY and ALL conditions being dukkha can be known.” implies this is possible. But how? Rather it is only with faith in the Buddha, not with direct experience like you claim.

  2. You then say:

You don’t know this. Where does it say in the suttas that these planes are dukkha-free?

  1. I mention that there are suttas in AN explaining how these realms are exclusively pleasant and that a disciple to the Buddha can spend the whole duration in one of those realms, from one eon in Brahma’s host to thousands of eons in some formless realm. They are only dukkha because they finally come to an end. Why would any disciple stay billions of years in dukkha and then ”Nibbāna”? So from this it is evident that these realms are not dukkha during their phase/duration.

  2. You then equate something in the sensual heavens as also applying to these rupa loka and arupa loka realms. And I then point out that you are missing the whole point.

  3. Your reply to this is: ”Not really, because it’s conditional and impermanent. Did you read the sutta citations?”

  4. You claim to know this because ”Part of the practice is with inference.” While at the same time you are ”not interested in debating planes of existence and their duration.”

  5. Great, but since you are not interested in the planes of existence and their duration (which is the only way to truly know and directly experience their impermanence in the first place) you should not write: ”You don’t know this. Where does it say in the suttas that these planes are dukkha-free?” While at the same claiming: ”with direct experience the truth of ANY and ALL conditions being dukkha can be known.” When it is you who obviously doesn’t know and on top of it doesn’t even care about the planes of existence and their duration.

It matters in that disciples to the Buddha can stay THE WHOLE duration, so where did the dukkha end?

59

I do have physics background. GR is not the final theory. The way you state that conservation of energy does not hold in GR is basically a mathematical trick that is the minority view of GR theorists. No loss of energy has actually been observed. I understand your admonishment of being careful about integrating knowledge of physics with knowledge of Buddhism. I do try and be careful. :pray:

1 Like
60

Including through inference.

Fair point in terms of direct experience. Agree that saddha, faith, applies here.
But also, again, it’s clear that these realms are conditional and arise due to craving and ignorance – as in AN3.76 – so they are fundamentally dukkha, as are all conditional, impermanent experiences.
SN22.13:
"Mendicants, form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are suffering. “Rūpaṁ, bhikkhave, dukkhaṁ, vedanā dukkhā, saññā dukkhā, saṅkhārā dukkhā, viññāṇaṁ dukkhaṁ.

You appear to be conflating the pleasantness in these realms with utter liberation from all dukkha – which the Buddha teaches only occurs with final nibbāna.

Because they’re not fully liberated and still have some craving and ignorance. They can only be fully liberated from dukkha, nibbāna, if craving and ignorance are extinguished. Maybe that happens in these realms.

Right. The details of these planes and their duration don’t appear to be needed to practice the N8FP and to attain liberation. What if they lasted only a million years? What if they lasted 2 years? What difference does it make for the purpose of the Dhamma teachings?
And all forms of existence, bhava, are dukkha, as in DN15 and many other suttas.

Also, as I believe @NgXinZhao could verify, time is not an absolute. It depends on one’s relative velocity and slows down at relativistic speeds compared to the perspective of others at slower velocities; so what can be a billion years in one frame of reference (realm) can be shorter or longer in others. But this is just a light side point…
But, look, if you or anyone else is into this realm information, fine. I’m just saying the particular details imo don’t have a direct and practical bearing on one’s practice to attain liberation.

Which you haven’t addressed or responded to.

1 Like
61

In all frames of reference - from the perspective of the observer in that reference frame - time is perceived to pass exactly as it always does; neither shorter or longer. The differences between two different reference frames are only known relative to eachother, but from the perspective of the observer in either frame, time appears to pass just like it does for the other. If we accelerate you to a constant velocity of a good fraction the speed of light in a space ship you would observe - in that space ship - time passing just as it always does. Just a light side point as well… but I do enjoy discussing stuff like this as well and I do have a physics background. I believe @Soren does as well. :joy: :pray:

1 Like
62

Thanks. I’m aware of this. The lighter point I was making was that while time is whatever it is to beings in one realm it may be different for those in other realms, depending on their relative velocities. So to speak.

But again, as I wrote, this is a side point of no real importance to the topic at hand.

:pray:

1 Like
63

Right, but sometimes it is nice to diverge into light talking about easy, simple and clear conversations about subjects of no real import like fundamental theoretical physics when we’ve been involved in such complex, difficult and obscure conversation of massive import. Somewhere my non-Buddhist theoretical physics friends are screaming in protest! :joy: :pray:

1 Like
64

I read (i do not exactly remember where) that a deva who is about to die withers away, the flowers wither away, and there are certain signs of coming death. It is also said that other deva’s avoid this deva. Because there are probably many deva’s, there are probably also many about to die. So it seems likely that the truth of death, decay, loss, is likely to be present among deva’s all time.

I think it is more likely that the existence of deva’s is like humans who have never really experienced yet the truth of decay, loss, sickness, death, at least it does not pentrate. Although there is suffering all around them, and they live amidst the truth of decay and death, they are intoxicated with happiness, pleasure.

The Buddha had in a sense also a deva-like existence before his search. That turns into hell. And then it turns into Nibbana. A pleasure which is not an intoxication, not a feeling, perception, not based upon vinnana.

Because there is death and loss in any world, i think it is unlikely that constant pleasure is based upon something different then blindness and intoxication.

65

While you mention all the time that everything is dukkha with various quotes - you and the other cessationists, believe it or not,
still have a narrow view of what dukkha actually is.

Please let me explain.

“All states of existence are impermanent, suffering, and perishable”

Yet in our interactions on this forum you have made it clear that deep dreamless sleep is close to what Nibbāna is. Nibbāna is lika a permanent version of dreamless sleep. Unconscious states are lika a precursor and hint to Nibbāna.

So somehow these states of non-awareness/unconscioussness that you happen to prefer are for some reason not seen as impermanent, suffering, and perishable.

That is why I think there is a narrow view on dukkha, despite all the quotes.

Since the jhanas of cessationists differ to the actual jhanas with plenty of contradictions like the following statements:

  • ”The 5 senses cease”,

  • ”one only recollects past lives AFTER emerging from jhana - not during”

  • And even Ven. Ajahn Brahm claiming that there is “No perception of light” in jhanas(?!?)

I’ve come to the following conclusion:

Cessationists have only entered Asaññasattāvāso, but mistaken it for Nibbāna, during their meditations.

The reason I think this is so is not only because of the statements above regarding the 4 jhanas corresponding to rupa loka which implies that the brahma gods who are the inhabitants there are not only dumb deaf and blind - there is apparently not even any perception of light in rupa loka(?)

But also the wrong views regarding the formless realms where it is suggested that at the destruction of kama loka insects end up in the formless(!?)
(because otherwise insects during the destruction of kama loka would be annihilated and reach the same type of Nibbāna cessationists strive for…)
There is even claims that those who commit suicide end up in the formless(!?)

This shows that the cessationist views regarding arupa loka are also clearly wrong and differ from the suttas.

That being said, since there is no interest in any of these planes of existence and what they are REALLY like + a preference for unconscious states I can only draw that conclusion - and hope you understand why I do that?

A healthier approach is seeing every succeeding higher plane of existence as superior in bliss compared to the lower planes, this way one knows what one is actually giving up in pursuit for something even more sublime and refined - until nothing is felt.

To claim to know what Nibbāna implies while at the same time saying VERY inaccurate things about jhanas and rupa loka/arupa loka + not seeing any unconscious states as dukkha shows that this ”Nibbāna” spoken about is most likely Asaññasattāvāso and not Nibbāna.
:pray:

66

That’s easy though. They just say that nibbana is not a state and thus not conditioned and thus not subject to impermanence. Of course, cessation is conditioned. It is conditioned on practicing the eight, but that is another subject.

This conversation though has devolved once again from the topic; which is what a substantialist view of the aggregates is or isn’t. I would like to try and keep the discussion on that topic and ask that others try as well. Maybe some side discussions of lighthearted physics, but everything else I’d prefer if folks could try and stay on topic. Thanks.

:pray:

1 Like
67

Made a new thread! :pray:

@Jasudho please reply in the new thread :slight_smile:

1 Like
68

Those quotes are from the Buddha.

Sorry we haven’t apparently caught up. :disappointed_relieved:

Not quite. Sorry if I was unclear. I was simply trying to convey that in the absence of five of the six senses, there is peace not through entering into another “thing” like nibbāna, but that the temporary absence of the hindrances and much sense experience in consciousness is an example or a taste of what it may be like to being free of them via cessation.
It’s not worth pushing this mere example too far.

You’re free to take this up with a number of Venerables who have much experience with jhanas.

That opinion is up to you.

But there’s consciousness, which is impermanent and dukkha.

No preference for unconscious states. Nibbāna is not a state and in final cessation conscious and unconscious do not apply any more than left hand and right hand.
The sleep example I used earlier was just that – a limited example to offer a point and was not an ontological position.

Well, I guess that settles the matter for us all! :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes
69

Thank you, Venerable, for this remarkable piece of writing. When you describe yourself as a lowly sentient being trying to make sense of dhamma you are one of a large group of whom I am also one. But you are much too modest. Your analysis of the nature of the aggregates relative to anicca, dukkha and anatta is focused and goes to the heart of the Dhamma. Thank you and Metta

1 Like
70

Thank you for the kind words, but please note I have not gone forth and so there is no reason to use any honorific like Venerable of which I am undeserving. :pray:

71

Yeshe Tenley. I read in SN 22.48 about two types of aggregates: (i) mere aggregates (ii) aggregates connected with grasping. Mere aggregates are: Any kind at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior. I read SN 22.59 say: any kind at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: truly see with right understanding:… impermanent, dukkha & not my self.

Yeshe. If your statement refers to SN 22.95, I think SN 22.95 does not say the aggregates are insubstantial, void, and hollow of ‘aggregate-nature’. SN 22.95 reads it is saying the aggregates are insubstantial, void and hollow of tangible value. I traced the Pali words in SN 22.95 and the dictionary referred to the same words in DN 13:

Their statement turns out to be a joke—mere words, void and hollow.

Tesamidaṁ tevijjānaṁ brāhmaṇānaṁ bhāsitaṁ hassakaññeva sampajjati, nāmakaññeva sampajjati, rittakaññeva sampajjati, tucchakaññeva sampajjati.

DN 13

The unawakened believe tangible value or happiness can be found in the aggregates. SN 22.95 is saying the aggregates are a “joke” because no lasting tangible value can be found in them. The aggregates fool or play jokes on people, like a magicians trick. :slightly_smiling_face:

Suppose a magician or their apprentice was to perform a magic trick at the crossroads. And a person with clear eyes would see it and contemplate it, examining it carefully. And it would appear to them as completely void, hollow, and insubstantial. For what substance could there be in a magic trick?

1 Like