The Aspect of No-Change

Discussion
103

Thanisarro translates this verse in Dhammapada

"House-builder you are seen.
You will not build a house again.
All your rafters broken,
the ridge pole destroyed
Gone to the Unformed, the mind
has come to an end " (Dhp 154)

Seeing the deathless:

“And better than a hundred years,
lived without seeing
the Deathless state, is
one day, lived
seeing the Deathless state” (Dhp114. Thanissaro)

I do not think Buddha’s mind was only set on demolition of the house, demolishing his life, but, i want to belief, he found the ultimate Dhamma which cannot be demolished. …the truth …the far shore …the subtle …the very hard to see …the unaging …the constant …the not falling apart …the invisible …
the unproliferated …the peaceful …the deathless …the sublime …the state of grace…the sanctuary …
the ending of craving …the incredible …the amazing …the untroubled …extinguishment …
the unafflicted …dispassion …purity …freedom …not adhering …the protection …the shelter …
the refuge …” (SN43.14-43)

104

hi @Green - i have read your posts regarding this sense of ‘no change’ you have.

if you think about it, however, that sense of self you have is not permanent.

it was not there before you were born (or you would be able to recall it for it was permanent).

we can’t be sure whether it will be there after you die - but even if it persists, it will likely be changed in significant ways without a body to provide the sense of awareness (consciousness) on which that sense of self depends.

does this help? (is it relevant to what you are trying to express?)

105

Hi @IndyJ,

Most of the times we are conceited. If you look closely. You meet someone and if you look closely you can see you get lost in attitudes, lost in self-views (start acting like this and that, a buddhist for example), and get lost in self-perception. We get lost in an imagined self. An imagined Me. A persona.

But there is also a sense of self in the mind without grasping and that sense of self can be described with words like simplicity, authentic self, emptiness, signless, desireless. It is a subtle sense of self. It is almost more like a ground. I belief that does never change. Maybe, for this reason the Buddha also does not approve the idea :‘there is no self’ .

But there is a conceived self, and this is always wrong, just an imagination, and there is, i belief, a not-conceived sense of self, which is not a view, not imagined.

As humans we might differ in conceited self but there is no doubt in me that we do not differ at all in our authentic self. Conceited self is a result of grasping, but authentic self not.

106

We all know from experience that it is certaintly not another me who experiences the results of deeds. We feel like, we experience like, it is the same me who reaps the fruits of deeds. Now before we say…this must be wrong…can we first agree that we never perceive that it is another me who lies in the sun and in the evening feels the pain of sunburn. Or do you think an arahant and Buddha does? And is this wise?

107

They don’t have a sense of self.

They just know feelings of hot on the skin. Or physical pain due to sun burn. No me, myself or I in the direct perception of reality.

108

Venerable, most of the Suttas only seem to say that the “I” is not in the six sense bases.

But what are some Suttas that say that the “I” is an illusion, and that you should lose your empirical sense of self?

Because this IMO does not follow from the above.

109

I don’t understand your question. Please say it in more detail and provide step-by-step reasoning.

110

Venerable, I guess that in the end I argue that annata does not mean that one has to lose one’s empirical sense of self in everyday life. I believe that such a life would not be possible and would in the end be schizophrenia.

What it means is that you must be aware at all times that your "self " is conditioned and that there is no “soul”. I believe that it is enough to be mentally aware of this.

This is also the oppinion of the Ven. Bodhi.

111

Not by force. But by wisdom. There being no self-view, conceit or ignorance in the arahant, but they still can know the concept of self and thus use the word “I talk” without misunderstanding it.

112

I think we do not fully agree nor fully disagree.

This is what somebody looks like that has lost empirical sense of self.

113

According to the doctrine then, they haven’t attained to even stream winner, they have all of them: self view, conceit, ignorance.

In whatever form that it makes those malfuction, requires lots of learning of modern psychology. So, well, I am not an expert in that. Just that if one finds that one is practising in such a way that leads to such catatonia state, one knows there’s misunderstanding of the way of practise somewhere.

The dropping of the sense of self should be liberating, as one is no longer bounded by the cruel demands of feeling to create craving to do this or that for temporary happiness.

114

What i notice that it is just a taboe to be honest about what we all experience, namely, that we do NOT experience that the one who acts , is different from the one who reaps results. That is just being honest, and also modest, sincere, upright. All those claims that one really experiences that the one who acts and the one who reaps result are different, that is mere our conceit, our theories, our views, but not our experience. This i call modesty. Just being honest about how we perceive things.

Minds essence is its emptiness. That is, i believe, the constant and stable aspect in our lifes. The content of mind may change, and things may arise and cease, but minds essence, its emptiness, remains the same. This is what provides us with stability, i believe. The Dhamma is the Path to the Stable and Constant.

115

Yes of course, I fully agree.

But this IMO is mental detachment, not loss of one’s sense as a person in everyday life.

An interview with Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi (September 18, 2022) - YouTube (33:50)

116

Practise, when you get there, then you can accurately describe it.

That’s because that’s the default view point of unenlightened people. We don’t look up to that as the goal. I described arahanthood experience based on logical conjecture. It’s certainly not to be expected that unenlightened people can experience things like arahants does.

Yes, thank you for being honest.

117

Okay Venerable. You are the Venerable.

118

I agree. Liberation is about loosing fetters and fettering. We can assume that when the Buddha thinks about how tiresome it will be for him to start teachings and being not understood, that he also, just as any ordinairy persons knows that he will reap the results of his deeds. But i believe, at the same time we can know that a Buddha never instinctively sees body and mind as me, mine, my self. Such fettering is gone. And in this we differ very much from a Buddha. But i also see no reason at all a Buddha would have no sense as a person in every day life.

119

Do you have an example of a person who has lost all ideas, notions of me, mine, my self?
How do you know and see he/she has not?

120

ud1.10

“In that case, Bāhiya, you should train like this: ‘In the seen will be merely the seen; in the heard will be merely the heard; in the thought will be merely the thought; in the known will be merely the known.’ That’s how you should train. When you have trained in this way, you won’t be ‘by that’. When you’re not ‘by that’, you won’t be ‘in that’. When you’re not ‘in that’, you won’t be in this world or the world beyond or between the two. Just this is the end of suffering.”

Then, due to this brief Dhamma teaching of the Buddha, Bāhiya’s mind was right away freed from defilements by not grasping.

an4.200

And how does a mendicant not fume? When there is no concept ‘I am’, there are no concepts ‘I am such’, ‘I am thus’, ‘I am otherwise’; ‘I am fleeting’, ‘I am lasting’; ‘mine’, ‘such is mine’, ‘thus is mine’, ‘otherwise is mine’; ‘also mine’, ‘such is also mine’, ‘thus is also mine’, ‘otherwise is also mine’; ‘I will be’, ‘I will be such’, ‘I will be thus’, ‘I will be otherwise’. That’s how a mendicant doesn’t fume.

Notice the bold.

And how does a mendicant not draw close? It’s when a mendicant doesn’t regard form as self, self as having form, form in self, or self in form. They don’t regard feeling as self, self as having feeling, feeling in self, or self in feeling. They don’t regard perception as self, self as having perception, perception in self, or self in perception. They don’t regard choices as self, self as having choices, choices in self, or self in choices. They don’t regard consciousness as self, self as having consciousness, consciousness in self, or self in consciousness. That’s how a mendicant doesn’t draw close.

Notice also, if you regard mind as permanent and consciousness arises in the mind, and what is permanent can be taken as a self, then you’ve fallen into the view of consciousness in self.

sn35.121

“Is the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind permanent or impermanent?”

“Impermanent, sir.”

“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”

“Suffering, sir.”

“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”

“No, sir.”

“Are ideas … mind consciousness … mind contact permanent or impermanent?”

“Impermanent, sir.” …

“Anything included in feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness that arises conditioned by mind contact: is that permanent or impermanent?”

“Impermanent, sir.”

“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”

“Suffering, sir.”

“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, is it fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”

“No, sir.”

Notice mind there (mano) is impermanent.

121

Does impermanent mean: Illusion?

A heart is impermanent. Is it an illusion? Will the Arahant not have heart surgery?

122

It Means change. arising and passing away.