What Does Anicca Mean?

I am fine with his interpretation of anicca as “inconstancy”.

I only disagree with his use of the word “perception”. To me, perception, by definition, depends on each individual. While I see all the 3 characteristics (anicca, dukkha and anattā) as inherent properties of everything in the world (the world here excludes nibbāna, which is not-anicca, is not-dukkha but still is anattā).

I will give 3 logical reasonings:

1st logical reasoning:
IF anattā is simply a perception depending on each person. Then, before the Buddha first ever announces his teaching about anattā, because nobody else ever heard about anattā, they can never perceive anattā while in fact anattā is with everything around them from birth to death. In other words, people can perceive not-anattā as much as they want but things around them can never be so. Similar with gravity, you can’t self-hypnotizing yourself to perceive gravity is not there.

2nd logical reasoning:
IF anattā is simply a strategy. That means with an arahant that already completed his task, such arahant no longer needs to use such strategy anymore to perceive anattā. That means, arahant will perceive anything that is not-anattā and this can not be true; because even nibbāna is anattā.

3rd logical reasoning:
The Buddha can NOT lie. IF anattā is not true but only a means to nibbāna, and nibbāna eventually turns out to be different than anattā and arahant also eventually see things different than anattā. Then, what the Buddha said turns out to be not true. Such conclusion must NOT be true.

2 Likes

I have always learned that that rupa has no property to suffer. For example the death body does not suffer anymore that’s why cutting in it and burning it is no problem. Why is dukkha a property of everything in the world? What do you mean by dukkha in this context?

1 Like

This is the question that you asked in another topic about why cloud is dukkha. Many other people have already gave you many answers but you are still not satisfied so here I can only try. :sweat_smile:

My answer is:
From sutta, the death body of other people (or cloud, tree, orange) is called external form.
Such external form is annica so it will eventually and indirectly give rise to something else that directly affect my aggregates, hence annica, and hence dukkha to me.

Such external form is annica so it will eventually and directly if conditions are met affect my aggregates, hence annica, and hence dukkha to me.

For my own death body, due to karma and rebirth, it also gives rise to dukkha to me.

2 Likes

I am interested in this too! I have arrived here from sutta central which I arrived at as a marked improvement over access to insight which I found as a wonderful online resource for when I didn’t have the Walshe Nanamoli Bodhi books at hand. So I guess Ven @sujato , Ven Thanissaro, and Ven Bodhi have all been hugely influential in my Buddhist life. However I am not a Theravadan, and my “intellectual” understanding of Buddhism comes much more from secular scholarship, Nagarjuna, other world-historical traditions like “western” philosophy and so on. So I have found myself here as someone who is very interested in the EBT’s in terms of what’s “early” and what’s “late” and what’s “consistent” and so on. And I have discovered, to much consternation at first, that there where many people on the forum who seemed quite hostile to this form of interrogation of the texts, and even more than that, seem to me to hold some quite particular views about how certain aspects of the texts should be interpreted- things like anatta as metaphysics, the 4noble truths as the framework for the whole teaching, kaya in jhana can mean mano, upekkha in the brhamaviharas is a different upekkha to the one in the jhanas, etc etc, and I have come to discern that what I am continually colliding with like a blindfolded bull in a china shop is the default Theravada orthodoxy. The trouble is that I have simply never been exposed to this before, it not being an area that I have particularly researched. So I guess all this amounts to a plea that we be allowed to explore these topics at least as far as other legitimate schools of thought, like academic scholarship, Mahayana interpretations, “western” philosophical perspectives, philology, linguistics and statistics and so on can support. I am learning to curtail my hyperbole and trying to voice opinions in a way that is respectful to the traditions represented here, and I hope it can remain a place where a diversity of opinions about the EBT’s can be explored and celebrated.

1 Like

weirdly a bit of googling gives a speculated etymology as “not ones own” and suggests that a collection of words mean cousin, kinsman, and relative in germanic languages like old norse and old english derive from the same root.

So I suppose that the permanence, constancy, compulsory lexical scopes might be derived from the duty to ones relatives?

1 Like

Hi Mike,

My understanding is that that section of the FAQ:

Anyone advocating extremist or conspiracy theory views will be warned, and if they persist, banned. Examples of such views include ‘The Buddha was born in Sri Lanka’, ‘Anicca doesn’t mean impermanence’, ‘The original Pali manuscripts at Aluvihara exist’, …
Frequently asked questions (FAQ) - #18 by faujidoc1

is not referring to alternative ways of expressing anicca such as “unreliable” (or translating dukkha as “unsatisfactory” or “stress”). Those are simply attempts to express the nuances of the Pali words in English. The FAQ is referring to the followers of certain (mainly Sri Lankan) teachers who claim that the usual English translations are completely mistaken about anicca, anatta, sankhara, etc. See for example: Explaining sankhāra="choices" - #29 by Coemgenu. Note the context in the FAQ: “‘The Buddha was born in Sri Lanka’, ‘Anicca doesn’t mean impermanence’, ‘The original Pali manuscripts at Aluvihara exist’,…”.

5 Likes

Even though I do not know much Pali, I prefer anicca as impermanence than unreliable.

Impermanence is a universal law of change. Everything that exists must change. Nothing can stay as it is forever. This is the force of evolution.

Because of impermanence, good must eventually lead to bad no matter how long and how many cycles it is, and bad will eventually lead to good. Day will lead to night and night will lead to day. This is the Yin-Yang in eastern’s philosophy.

Because of impermanence, we will always end up to suffering no matter where we start from. If we are from suffering, we will eventually end up to not-suffering (or happiness), but from this happiness, it will eventually bring us back to not-happiness (or suffering). If we are from happiness, we will eventually end up to suffering no matter if we like it or not. Therefore, impermanence → suffering.

1 Like

Hi.

I do not mind with whatever ‘word’ they use. The words is a show that the mind is analyzing as well as speculating.

Whatever words use as long as we can see three characteristics ie.

  1. Arising
  2. Progressing
  3. Diasppearng

If it shows these 3 characteritics the word ‘Anicca’ represented.

1 Like

Thank you a lot for clarifying this! I wasn’t aware of those teachers.

1 Like

I thought it might help to have some context for what we are talking about so I have collected every mention of anicca in DN and MN for handy refrence:

DN15

So those who say ‘feeling is my self’ regard as self that which is evidently impermanent, a mixture of pleasure and pain, and liable to rise and fall.
Iti so diṭṭheva dhamme anicca­sukha­dukkha­vokiṇṇaṁ uppādavayadhammaṁ attānaṁ

DN16:

As long as the mendicants develop the perceptions of impermanence …
“Yāvakīvañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhū aniccasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …pe…
not-self …
anattasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …
ugliness …
asubhasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …
drawbacks …
ādīnavasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …
giving up …
pahānasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …
fading away …
virāgasaññaṁ bhāvessanti …
cessation, they can expect growth, not decline.
nirodhasaññaṁ bhāvessanti, vuddhiyeva, bhikkhave, bhikkhūnaṁ pāṭikaṅkhā, no parihāni.

DN33:

Five perceptions that ripen in freedom:
Pañca vimuttiparipācanīyā saññā—
the perception of impermanence, the perception of suffering in impermanence, the perception of not-self in suffering, the perception of giving up, and the perception of fading away.
aniccasaññā, anicce dukkhasaññā, dukkhe anattasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā.

Six perceptions that help penetration:
Cha nibbedhabhāgiyā saññā—
the perception of impermanence, the perception of suffering in impermanence, the perception of not-self in suffering, the perception of giving up, the perception of fading away, and the perception of cessation.
aniccasaññā anicce, dukkhasaññā dukkhe, anattasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā, nirodhasaññā.

Seven perceptions:
Satta saññā—
the perception of impermanence, the perception of not-self, the perception of ugliness, the perception of drawbacks, the perception of giving up, the perception of fading away, and the perception of cessation.
aniccasaññā, anattasaññā, asubhasaññā, ādīnavasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā, nirodhasaññā.

DN34:

What seven things should be produced?
Katame satta dhammā uppādetabbā?
Seven perceptions:
Satta saññā—
the perception of impermanence, the perception of not-self, the perception of ugliness, the perception of drawbacks, the perception of giving up, the perception of fading away, and the perception of cessation.
aniccasaññā, anattasaññā, asubhasaññā, ādīnavasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā, nirodhasaññā.
Ime satta dhammā uppādetabbā.

What nine things should be produced?
Katame nava dhammā uppādetabbā?
Nine perceptions:
Nava saññā—
the perceptions of ugliness, death, repulsiveness in food, dissatisfaction with the whole world, impermanence, suffering in impermanence, not-self in suffering, giving up, and fading away.
asubhasaññā, maraṇasaññā, āhārepaṭikūlasaññā, sabba­loke­anabhirati­saññā­, aniccasaññā, anicce dukkhasaññā, dukkhe anattasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā.
Ime nava dhammā uppādetabbā.

What ten things should be produced?
Katame dasa dhammā uppādetabbā?
Ten perceptions:
Dasa saññā—
the perceptions of ugliness, death, repulsiveness in food, dissatisfaction with the whole world, impermanence, suffering in impermanence, not-self in suffering, giving up, fading away, and cessation.
asubhasaññā, maraṇasaññā, āhārepaṭikūlasaññā, sabba­loke­anabhirati­saññā­, aniccasaññā, anicce dukkhasaññā, dukkhe anattasaññā, pahānasaññā, virāgasaññā, nirodhasaññā.
Ime dasa dhammā uppādetabbā.

Firstly, a mendicant with defilements ended has clearly seen with right wisdom all conditions as truly impermanent.
idhāvuso, khīṇāsavassa bhikkhuno aniccato sabbe saṅkhārā yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya sudiṭṭhā honti.

(I would note that this is the first (and in DN the only) time we see the positive assertion that ALL conditions are TRULY impermanent. It is also the only time in DN that aniccato occurs. So we definitely have here a lot of support in DN for anicca as a perceptual strategy )

MN22:

“What do you think, mendicants?
“Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave,
Is form permanent or impermanent?”
rūpaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti?

“Impermanent, sir.”
“Aniccaṁ, bhante”.

“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā”ti?

“Suffering, sir.”
“Dukkhaṁ, bhante”.

“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to fall apart, is it fit to be regarded thus:
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ—
‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā”ti?

“No, sir.”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.

“What do you think, mendicants?
“Taṁ kiṁ maññatha, bhikkhave,
Is feeling …
vedanā …pe…
perception …
saññā …
choices …
saṅkhārā …
consciousness permanent or impermanent?”
viññāṇaṁ niccaṁ vā aniccaṁ vā”ti?

“Impermanent, sir.”
“Aniccaṁ, bhante”.

“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vā taṁ sukhaṁ vā”ti?

“Suffering, sir.”
“Dukkhaṁ, bhante”.

“But if it’s impermanent, suffering, and liable to fall apart, is it fit to be regarded thus:
“Yaṁ panāniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, kallaṁ nu taṁ samanupassituṁ—
‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā”ti?

“No, sir.”
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.

“So, mendicants, you should truly see any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
“Tasmātiha, bhikkhave, yaṁ kiñci rūpaṁ atītā­nāga­ta­pa­c­cu­p­pa­n­na­ṁ, ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā, oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā, hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā, yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ rūpaṁ ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti—evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.
You should truly see any kind of feeling …
Yā kāci vedanā …pe…
perception …
yā kāci saññā …
choices …
ye keci saṅkhārā …
consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all consciousness—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītā­nāga­ta­pa­c­cu­p­pa­n­na­ṁ, ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā, oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā, hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā, yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ viññāṇaṁ ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti—evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.

Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness.
Evaṁ passaṁ, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako rūpasmiṁ nibbindati, vedanāya nibbindati, saññāya nibbindati, saṅkhāresu nibbindati, viññāṇasmiṁ nibbindati,
Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed.
nibbidā virajjati, virāgā vimuccati, vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti.

They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is no return to any state of existence.’
‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṁ brahmacariyaṁ, kataṁ karaṇīyaṁ, nāparaṁ itthattāyā’ti pajānāti.

(here we have the full five aggregate formula for the first time in the canon)

MN28:

There comes a time when the exterior water element flares up.
Hoti kho so, āvuso, samayo yaṁ bāhirā āpodhātu pakuppati.
At that time the exterior earth element vanishes.
Antarahitā tasmiṁ samaye bāhirā pathavīdhātu hoti.
So for all its great age, the earth element will be revealed as impermanent, liable to end, vanish, and perish.
Tassā hi nāma, āvuso, bāhirāya pathavīdhātuyā tāva mahallikāya aniccatā paññāyissati, khayadhammatā paññāyissati, vayadhammatā paññāyissati, vipariṇāmadhammatā paññāyissati.
What then of this ephemeral body appropriated by craving? Rather than take it to be ‘I’ or ‘mine’ or ‘I am’, they still just consider it to be none of these things.
Kiṁ panimassa mattaṭṭhakassa kāyassa taṇhupādinnassa ‘ahanti vā mamanti vā asmī’ti vā? Atha khvāssa notevettha hoti.

If others abuse, attack, harass, and trouble that mendicant, they understand:
Tañce, āvuso, bhikkhuṁ pare akkosanti paribhāsanti rosenti vihesenti, so evaṁ pajānāti:
‘This painful feeling born of ear contact has arisen in me.
‘uppannā kho me ayaṁ sotasamphassajā dukkhavedanā.
That’s dependent, not independent.
Sā ca kho paṭicca, no apaṭicca.
Dependent on what?
Kiṁ paṭicca?
Dependent on contact.’
Phassaṁ paṭicca’.
They see that contact, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are impermanent.
So phasso aniccoti passati, vedanā aniccāti passati, saññā aniccāti passati, saṅkhārā aniccāti passati, viññāṇaṁ aniccanti passati.
Based on that element alone, their mind becomes eager, confident, settled, and decided.
Tassa dhātārammaṇameva cittaṁ pakkhandati pasīdati santiṭṭhati adhimuccati.

(I would note in the above we have an intermediate sequence of contact-feelings-perception-choices-consciousness showing a proto-five-aggregates where the dependant arising aspect is clear.)

MN35:

“Aggivessana, this is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and how instruction to his disciples generally proceeds:
“Evaṁ kho, aggivessana, bhagavā sāvake vineti, evaṁbhāgā ca pana bhagavato sāvakesu anusāsanī bahulā pavattati:
‘Form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are impermanent.
‘rūpaṁ, bhikkhave, aniccaṁ, vedanā aniccā, saññā aniccā, saṅkhārā aniccā, viññāṇaṁ aniccaṁ.
Form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are not-self.
Rūpaṁ, bhikkhave, anattā, vedanā anattā, saññā anattā, saṅkhārā anattā, viññāṇaṁ anattā.
All conditions are impermanent. All things are not-self.’
Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā, sabbe dhammā anattā’ti.
This is how the ascetic Gotama guides his disciples, and how instruction to his disciples generally proceeds.”
Evaṁ kho, aggivessana, bhagavā sāvake vineti, evaṁbhāgā ca pana bhagavato sāvakesu anusāsanī bahulā pavattatī”ti.

(as noted elsewhere this is the sutta that asserts that assaji first spoke the above, and then the jain questioner goes “into the woods” and the buddha confirms it there. one possible gloss of assaji btw is “not embraced” (by all followers?). MN35 then repeats the aggregate formula as at MN22)

MN49:

When he had spoken, I said to him,
Evaṁ vutte, ahaṁ, bhikkhave, bakaṁ brahmānaṁ etadavocaṁ:
‘Alas, Baka the Brahmā is lost in ignorance! Alas, Baka the Brahmā is lost in ignorance!
‘avijjāgato vata bho bako brahmā, avijjāgato vata bho bako brahmā;
Because what is actually impermanent, not lasting, transient, incomplete, and perishable, he says is permanent, everlasting, eternal, complete, and imperishable.
yatra hi nāma aniccaṁyeva samānaṁ niccanti vakkhati, addhuvaṁyeva samānaṁ dhuvanti vakkhati, asassataṁyeva samānaṁ sassatanti vakkhati, akevalaṁyeva samānaṁ kevalanti vakkhati, cavanadhammaṁyeva samānaṁ acavanadhammanti vakkhati;
And where there is being born, growing old, dying, passing away, and being reborn, he says that
yattha ca pana jāyati jīyati mīyati cavati upapajjati tañca vakkhati:
there’s no being born, growing old, dying, passing away, or being reborn.
“idañhi na jāyati na jīyati na mīyati na cavati na upapajjatī”ti;
And although there is another escape beyond this, he says that there’s no other escape beyond this.’
santañca panaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇaṁ “natthaññaṁ uttari nissaraṇan”ti vakkhatī’ti.

(spoken of the Brahma heaven)

MN52:

“Householder, it’s when a mendicant, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected.
“Idha, gahapati, bhikkhu vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
Then they reflect:
So iti paṭisañcikkhati:
‘Even this first absorption is produced by choices and intentions.’
‘idampi kho paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ abhisaṅkhataṁ abhisañcetayitaṁ.
They understand: ‘But whatever is produced by choices and intentions is impermanent and liable to cessation.’
Yaṁ kho pana kiñci abhisaṅkhataṁ abhisañcetayitaṁ tadaniccaṁ nirodhadhamman’ti pajānāti.
Abiding in that they attain the ending of defilements.
So tattha ṭhito āsavānaṁ khayaṁ pāpuṇāti.

MN62:

Meditate on love.
Mettaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
For when you meditate on love any ill will will be given up.
Mettañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yo byāpādo so pahīyissati.

Meditate on compassion.
Karuṇaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
For when you meditate on compassion any cruelty will be given up.
Karuṇañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yā vihesā sā pahīyissati.

Meditate on rejoicing.
Muditaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
For when you meditate on rejoicing any discontent will be given up.
Muditañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yā arati sā pahīyissati.

Meditate on equanimity.
Upekkhaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.

For when you meditate on equanimity any repulsion will be given up.
Upekkhañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yo paṭigho so pahīyissati.

Meditate on ugliness.
Asubhaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
For when you meditate on ugliness any lust will be given up.
Asubhañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yo rāgo so pahīyissati.

Meditate on impermanence.
Aniccasaññaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
For when you meditate on impermanence any conceit ‘I am’ will be given up.
Aniccasaññañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yo asmimāno so pahīyissati.

(here I would note that there seems no reason to elevate annica into some sort of metaphysical attribute of reality any more than ‘uglieness’ or ‘rejoicing’ its simply one perception to develop amongst many.)

They practice breathing in observing impermanence. They practice breathing out observing impermanence.
‘Aniccānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘aniccānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
They practice breathing in observing fading away. They practice breathing out observing fading away.
‘virāgānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘virāgānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
They practice breathing in observing cessation. They practice breathing out observing cessation.
‘nirodhānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘nirodhānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
They practice breathing in observing letting go. They practice breathing out observing letting go.
‘paṭinissaggānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati; ‘paṭinissaggānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati.

Mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated in this way, is very fruitful and beneficial.
Evaṁ bhāvitā kho, rāhula, ānāpānassati, evaṁ bahulīkatā mahapphalā hoti mahānisaṁsā.
When mindfulness of breathing is developed and cultivated in this way, even when the final breaths in and out cease, they are known, not unknown.”
Evaṁ bhāvitāya, rāhula, ānāpānassatiyā, evaṁ bahulīkatāya yepi te carimakā assāsā tepi viditāva nirujjhanti no aviditā”ti.

(this one is probably a good example of where ‘inconstancy’ is a better gloss than ‘impermanence’, the breath is changing, as we observe it, not posessed of some quality of ‘impermanence’ as we observe it (until the last bit :slight_smile: )and again, it places annica in a kind of sequence leading to ‘letting go’ as in the DN uses.)

MN64:

And what, Ānanda, is the path and the practice for giving up the five lower fetters?
Katamo cānanda, maggo, katamā paṭipadā pañcannaṁ orambhāgiyānaṁ saṁyojanānaṁ pahānāya?
It’s when a mendicant—due to the seclusion from attachments, the giving up of unskillful qualities, and the complete settling of physical discomfort—quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected.
Idhānanda, bhikkhu upadhivivekā akusalānaṁ dhammānaṁ pahānā sabbaso kāyaduṭṭhullānaṁ paṭippassaddhiyā vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharati.
They contemplate the phenomena there—included in form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness—as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as an abscess, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self.
So yadeva tattha hoti rūpagataṁ vedanāgataṁ saññāgataṁ saṅkhāragataṁ viññāṇagataṁ te dhamme aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato samanupassati.
They turn their mind away from those things,
So tehi dhammehi cittaṁ paṭivāpeti.
and apply it to the deathless element:
So tehi dhammehi cittaṁ paṭivāpetvā amatāya dhātuyā cittaṁ upasaṁharati:
‘This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, cessation, extinguishment.’
‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbū­pa­dhi­­paṭinissaggo taṇhākkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānan’ti.
Abiding in that they attain the ending of defilements.
So tattha ṭhito āsavānaṁ khayaṁ pāpuṇāti;

(again we see the use of lists of synonyms with a sliding lexical scope, so that annica is not so much a metaphysical principle from which logical inferences are made as a direct perception of an aspect of phenomena, its mutability or inconstancy, with the implications of that for ones happiness or dissapointment drawn out and magnified.)

MN72:

“Master Gotama, suppose there was a large sal tree not far from a town or village.
“seyyathāpi, bho gotama, gāmassa vā nigamassa vā avidūre mahāsālarukkho.
And because it’s impermanent, its branches and foliage, bark and shoots, and softwood would fall off.
Tassa aniccatā sākhāpalāsā palujjeyyuṁ, tacapapaṭikā palujjeyyuṁ, pheggū palujjeyyuṁ;
After some time it would be rid of branches and foliage, bark and shoots, and softwood, consisting purely of heartwood.
so aparena samayena apagatasākhāpalāso apagatatacapapaṭiko apagataphegguko suddho assa, sāre patiṭṭhito;
In the same way, Master Gotama’s dispensation is rid of branches and foliage, bark and shoots, and softwood, consisting purely of heartwood.
evameva bhoto gotamassa pāvacanaṁ apagatasākhāpalāsaṁ apagatatacapapaṭikaṁ apagatapheggukaṁ suddhaṁ, sāre patiṭṭhitaṁ.

(here again impermanent seems a poor gloss, the tree under discussion is still there, what has happend is that the branches have fallen off, this seems more suggestive of mutable or changing or inconstant)

MN74:

Aggivessana, this body is physical. It’s made up of the four primary elements, produced by mother and father, built up from rice and porridge, liable to impermanence, to wearing away and erosion, to breaking up and destruction. You should see it as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as an abscess, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self.
Ayaṁ kho panaggivessana, kāyo rūpī cātumahābhūtiko mātāpettikasambhavo odanakummāsūpacayo aniccu­c­chādana­pari­maddana­bheda­navid­dhaṁ­sa­na­dhammo­, aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato samanupassitabbo.
Doing so, you’ll give up desire, affection, and subservience to the body.
Tassimaṁ kāyaṁ aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato samanupassato yo kāyasmiṁ kāyachando kāyasneho kāyanvayatā sā pahīyati.

Pleasant, painful, and neutral feelings are impermanent, conditioned, dependently originated, liable to end, vanish, fade away, and cease.
Sukhāpi kho, aggivessana, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā;
dukkhāpi kho, aggivessana, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā;
adukkhamasukhāpi kho, aggivessana, vedanā aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā.

Seeing this, a learned noble disciple grows disillusioned with pleasant, painful, and neutral feelings.
Evaṁ passaṁ, aggivessana, sutavā ariyasāvako sukhāyapi vedanāya nibbindati, dukkhāyapi vedanāya nibbindati, adukkhamasukhāyapi vedanāya nibbindati;
Being disillusioned, desire fades away. When desire fades away they’re freed. When they’re freed, they know they’re freed.
nibbindaṁ virajjati, virāgā vimuccati. Vimuttasmiṁ, vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti.

MN106:
“Mendicants, sensual pleasures are impermanent, hollow, false, and deceptive,
“Aniccā, bhikkhave, kāmā tucchā musā mosadhammā.
made by illusion, cooed over by fools.
Māyākatametaṁ, bhikkhave, bālalāpanaṁ.
Sensual pleasures in this life and in lives to come,
Ye ca diṭṭhadhammikā kāmā, ye ca samparāyikā kāmā;

Furthermore, a noble disciple reflects:
Puna caparaṁ, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako iti paṭisañcikkhati:
‘Sensual pleasures in this life and in lives to come,
‘ye ca diṭṭhadhammikā kāmā, ye ca samparāyikā kāmā;
sensual perceptions in this life and in lives to come,
yā ca diṭṭhadhammikā kāmasaññā, yā ca samparāyikā kāmasaññā;
visions in this life and in lives to come,
ye ca diṭṭhadhammikā rūpā, ye ca samparāyikā rūpā;
perceptions of visions in this life and in lives to come;
yā ca diṭṭhadhammikā rūpasaññā, yā ca samparāyikā rūpasaññā—
all of these are impermanent.
ubhayametaṁ aniccaṁ.
And what’s impermanent is not worth approving, welcoming, or clinging to.’
Yadaniccaṁ taṁ nālaṁ abhinandituṁ, nālaṁ abhivadituṁ, nālaṁ ajjhositun’ti.
Practicing in this way and meditating on it often their mind becomes confident in this dimension.
Tassa evaṁpaṭipannassa tabbahulavihārino āyatane cittaṁ pasīdati.
Being confident, they either attain the imperturbable now, or are freed by wisdom.
Sampasāde sati etarahi vā āneñjaṁ samāpajjati paññāya vā adhimuccati kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā.
When their body breaks up, after death, it’s possible that the consciousness headed that way will be reborn in the imperturbable.
Ṭhānametaṁ vijjati yaṁ taṁsaṁvattanikaṁ viññāṇaṁ assa āneñjūpagaṁ.
This is said to be the third way of practice suitable for attaining the imperturbable.
Ayaṁ, bhikkhave, tatiyā āneñjasappāyā paṭipadā akkhāyati.

(things are getting wild again, “reborn in the imperturbable”!?)

MN109:

“The pleasure and happiness that arise from form: this is its gratification.
“Yaṁ kho, bhikkhu, rūpaṁ paṭicca uppajjati sukhaṁ somanassaṁ, ayaṁ rūpe assādo.
That form is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback.
Yaṁ rūpaṁ aniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, ayaṁ rūpe ādīnavo.
Removing and giving up desire and greed for form: this is its escape.
Yo rūpe chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ, idaṁ rūpe nissaraṇaṁ.
The pleasure and happiness that arise from feeling …
Yaṁ kho, bhikkhu, vedanaṁ paṭicca …
perception …
saññaṁ paṭicca …
choices …
saṅkhāre paṭicca …
consciousness: this is its gratification.
viññāṇaṁ paṭicca uppajjati sukhaṁ somanassaṁ, ayaṁ viññāṇe assādo.
That consciousness is impermanent, suffering, and perishable: this is its drawback.
Yaṁ viññāṇaṁ aniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ, ayaṁ viññāṇe ādīnavo.
Removing and giving up desire and greed for consciousness: this is its escape.”
Yo viññāṇe chandarāgavinayo chandarāgappahānaṁ, idaṁ viññāṇe nissaraṇan”ti.

(109 then repeats the standard five aggregates formula from 22)

MN118:

In this Saṅgha there are mendicants who are committed to developing the meditation on love …
Santi, bhikkhave, bhikkhū imasmiṁ bhikkhusaṅghe mettā­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti …
compassion …
karuṇā­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti …
rejoicing …
muditā­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti …
equanimity …
upekkhā­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti …
ugliness …
asubha­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti …
impermanence.
anicca­saññā­bhāvanā­nu­yo­gamanu­yuttā viharanti—
There are such mendicants in this Saṅgha.
evarūpāpi, bhikkhave, santi bhikkhū imasmiṁ bhikkhusaṅghe.

(then repeats MN62 adding;)

Whenever a mendicant practices breathing while observing impermanence,
Yasmiṁ samaye, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ‘aniccānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘aniccānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
or observing fading away,
‘virāgānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘virāgānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
or observing cessation,
‘nirodhānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘nirodhānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
or observing letting go—
‘paṭinissaggānupassī assasissāmī’ti sikkhati, ‘paṭinissaggānupassī passasissāmī’ti sikkhati;
at that time they meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.

MN121:

Furthermore, a mendicant—ignoring the perception of the dimension of nothingness and the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception—focuses on the oneness dependent on the signless immersion of the heart.
Puna caparaṁ, ānanda, bhikkhu amanasikaritvā ākiñcaññā­yata­na­sañña­ṁ, amanasikaritvā nevasañ­ñā­nāsa­ñ­ñāya­tana­sañña­ṁ, animittaṁ cetosamādhiṁ paṭicca manasi karoti ekattaṁ.
Their mind becomes eager, confident, settled, and decided in that signless immersion of the heart.
Tassa animitte cetosamādhimhi cittaṁ pakkhandati pasīdati santiṭṭhati adhimuccati.
They understand:
So evaṁ pajānāti:
‘Even this signless immersion of the heart is produced by choices and intentions.’
‘ayampi kho animitto cetosamādhi abhisaṅkhato abhisañcetayito’.
They understand: ‘But whatever is produced by choices and intentions is impermanent and liable to cessation.’
‘Yaṁ kho pana kiñci abhisaṅkhataṁ abhisañcetayitaṁ tadaniccaṁ nirodhadhamman’ti pajānāti.
Knowing and seeing like this, their mind is freed from the defilements of sensuality, desire to be reborn, and ignorance.
Tassa evaṁ jānato evaṁ passato kāmāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati, bhavāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati, avijjāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati.
When they’re freed, they know they’re freed.
Vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti.

MN137:

And in this context what are the six kinds of renunciate equanimity?
Tattha katamā cha nekkhammasitā upekkhā?
When you’ve understood the impermanence of sights—their perishing, fading away, and cessation—equanimity arises as you truly understand through right understanding that both formerly and now all those sights are impermanent, suffering, and perishable.
Rūpānaṁ tveva aniccataṁ viditvā vipari­ṇ­āma­virāga­nirodha­ṁ, ‘pubbe ceva rūpā etarahi ca sabbe te rūpā aniccā dukkhā vipariṇāmadhammā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya passato uppajjati upekkhā.
Such equanimity transcends the sight.
Yā evarūpā upekkhā, rūpaṁ sā ativattati.
That’s why it’s called renunciate equanimity.
Tasmā sā upekkhā ‘nekkhammasitā’ti vuccati.
When you’ve understood the impermanence of sounds …
Saddānaṁ tveva …
smells …
gandhānaṁ tveva …
tastes …
rasānaṁ tveva …
touches …
phoṭṭhabbānaṁ tveva …
thoughts—their perishing, fading away, and cessation—equanimity arises as you truly understand through right understanding that both formerly and now all those thoughts are impermanent, suffering, and perishable.
dhammānaṁ tveva aniccataṁ viditvā vipari­ṇ­āma­virāga­nirodha­ṁ, ‘pubbe ceva dhammā etarahi ca sabbe te dhammā aniccā dukkhā vipariṇāmadhammā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya passato uppajjati upekkhā.
Such equanimity transcends the thought.
Yā evarūpā upekkhā, dhammaṁ sā ativattati.
That’s why it’s called renunciate equanimity.
Tasmā sā upekkhā ‘nekkhammasitā’ti vuccati.
These are the six kinds of renunciate equanimity.
Imā cha nekkhammasitā upekkhā.

MN146:
(this is a long sutta more or less asking the nuns if any of the 36 sense elements are fit to be taken as ‘mine’ the heartwood similie and lamp similies are also given, because of the very long format and the lack of any really new or interesting content I am not going to paste any sections from it.)

MN147:
(this Sutta combines the sense elements and the 5 aggregates formulas and applies the standard question and answer formula to all of them with Buddha asking and Rahula answering)

SO! To summarise, the above is the totality of annica in the first 2 Nikayas, as can be seen there is a heavy leaning towards anicca as an exercise of perceiving, which incidentally provides the strongest argument against “impermanence” as a translation, since “permanence” is a thing that is not possible to observe (one would have to live for an infinite length of time, and even if you did, you would only be able to confirm the “permanence” of the thing you where observing “afterwards”) so “mutability” “inconstancy” “changing” etc are better indicators of what is meant, since these ARE things we can perceive “here and now”. the shift from anicca as just one of several perceptual aides to freeing oneself from addiction to sensual pleasures to a fundamental part of a metaphysical argument about permanence and selfhood, as per usual, can be seen developing from anti-metaphysical strategy of perception side at the beginning of DN, to a bare hint at the very end of DN, to a mix of “one perception among many” and “fundamental to the anatta argument” in MN, with again the most contentious (consciousness reborn in the imperturbable) statements appearing towards the back of MN. I haven’t done SN and AN yet, so I will not speculate, but certainly there at least seems like good grounds for Thanissaro’s position as I understand it here in DN and MN.

Hope this is of use to people!

Metta.

3 Likes

Just as a ‘heads up’, it would be much appreciated if the correct form is used when referring to this highly respected teacher, who has served the Triple Gem for such a long time - Ven Thanissaro. It is just basic politeness, and the absence of it (which I’ve noticed in a couple of threads recently), really stands out. These things may seem trivial but they really set the tone for a respectful discussion that abides by Right Speech :pray:

7 Likes

Thank you so much for correcting me! I’m totally unfamiliar with ways of referring to monastics. I’m going to pay more attention to that from now on.

Edit: I just corrected that in the beginning post of this thread.

6 Likes

Thanks for clarifying this, and of course, the intent is not to suppress good-faith discussions about meaning! Those rules were made only after a lot of time was wasted in discussions that were, in the end, useless because one person was not acting in good faith.

3 Likes

I am not sure that enforcing formalities of address such as Venerable, Mr, Miss, Mz, Your Grace, the Honorable, the right Honorable, Your Majesty and so on really is “basic politeness” nor do I think addressing someone by their name without including titles is an absence of “basic politeness”. As I understand it the requirement to address a (senior) monastic by “venerable” is a requirement of VInaya, not a requirement of pañcaśikṣapada and also certainly not a requirement to respectfully engage with someone’s ideas. The shorthand use of a surname or monastic name to refer to the works or positions of a thinker on a subject is a longstanding practice and is not meant to denigrate or slight the person or persons under discussion.

For example Ven Bhikkhu Brahmāli and Ven Bhikkhu Anālayo omit “Venerable”:

An important question in the study of the Buddhist monastic law is the
role of the origin stories that form the background narrative for most of
the rules. It has been suggested by Ṭhānissaro (“On Ordaining” 9 and
“Postscript” 3)

Ven Thanissaro themselves does the same in:

In Part I, I look at the principle of interpretation that Anālayo and Brahmāli propose for determining the validity of the rules in the Vinaya, and how they apply that principle to the question of bhikkhunī ordination. My conclusion here is that the principle they have adopted is foreign to the Vinaya and does not do justice to the wide variety of ways in which the rules in the Khandhakas—the section of the Vinaya containing the rules for bhikkhunī ordination—are related to their origin stories or to one another.

Here is our own Ven @sujato not addressing the Ven YinShun as Ven:

Yin Shun, the renowned scholar
monk of modern Taiwanese Buddhism, expressed a similar sentiment in
his autobiography.

Here is the noted scholar Mr Alexander Wynne doing the same for Ven Analayo:

In a recent edition of this journal (2016/11), Anālayo argued against the socalled ‘two paths’ theory of early Buddhist meditation. Originally formulated by
Louis de La Vallée Poussin, and more recently elaborated by Gombrich (1996),
this theory claims there were two opposing soteriologies in Indian Buddhism

In conclusion I take offence to the suggestion that my practice of referring to the ideas or writings of a thinker by either their surname or their monastic name, sans ecclesiastical or formal titles is in any way indicative of “basic impoliteness”. I also am not a huge fan of narratives around hierarchy and “respectfulness” especially when they are raised in contexts where there is clearly no disrespect intended, if anything @Mike_0123 has been raising the consciousness and awareness of Ven Thanissaro’s work on this forum and promoting conversation about and engagement with it.

When I saw your comment I started to go back and edit my contributions to include Ven, and as I was doing so a kind of familiar, sinking feeling swept over me, and the more I reflected on it the more uncomfortable I felt, and so I have been drawn into making this post.

I think demanding that people use genuflective forms of address to engage with the thought of others, monastic or otherwise, contributes to a climate of uncriticality and deference to reputation that does not serve the spirit of free and critical enquiry into ideas, and so while I have added Ven (and Mr) to this response (and to those posts I have edited on this thread). I respectfully decline to do so in future, as is the common position of academic discourse. While I respect those who have joined a particular religion using the formal terms of address endorsed by that religion, I would expect that the same respect is afforded to me for not adopting them. I hope the examples above are sufficient to demonstrate that no impoliteness is meant.

3 Likes

Do you have a reference for this?

not really, just googling, it might originate in monier-williams? search for nitya

I think i started here

scroll down to halfway for etymology 2 here

also here again, it’s quite possible that this is all just one source, in monier-williams, and the websites have just pasted things together willy-nilly, I don’t have much of a philological background tbh, too “messy”, maths and philosophy are more my thing, nice clean lines of argument :slight_smile:

Ahh okay, thanks. It seems to have a more pregnant metaphysical sense. Perhaps we should notice this more: we know that when the Buddha spoke of anattā he was rebutting the metaphysical idea of “soul”, but we sometimes forget that when he spoke of anicca, he was rebutting the idea of the “eternal”, i.e. the everlasting life of the gods.

3 Likes

Yes, I think that definitely by the EBT period we have moved to a more abstract sense to most of these terms than was perhaps apparent in the earlier Rg Vedic examples, which I think is where the “one’s own” and “kinsman” senses are attested (again I am no philologist) I do think it’s interesting tho that potentially the lexical drift was from some sort of identificational sense to a temporal one, and that the Buddha then needed to “bring back” shades of the original meaning by appeal to anatta.

Oke, but now you describe why a death body becomes dukkha for- you. How it can affect you.
But the position people have about dukkha is that dukkha is a property of something. It is not about you being affected. They say: dukkha is a proptery of a death body, a property of an atom, a goldbar, a rainbow, water, a cloud etc. That is what they say when they say dukkha is a property of something.

For me this feel not oke. Dukkha can only be a property of nama, of the mental domain. Even bodily suffering is mental. Our world consist of rupa and nama, and rupa does not suffer. Rupa is not only the physical body but also the senses and the sense-objects. Those do not suffer. If the body is not connected anymore to a subtle mental body (gandhabba), we call it death. It does not feel, sense, suffer. Why say dukkha is a property of it? Ofcouse seeing a death body can be dukkha for us but that is very different from saying dukkha is a property of a death body.

What also makes no sense, i find, is that anything impermant is suffering. Why was this so evident for the monks? Like the sutta’s seem to imply.

Pain is impermanent, why is this suffering? Are you not happy when pain can end? Suffering is impermanent and it’s causes too, why is that impermance suffering? For me this makes no sense.
An arahant also experiences impermanent sense-impressions but does not suffer from them.

I feel it is much better this way:
-what is impermanent or inconstant is not reliable, safe, a refuge. It is therefor dukkha. It is like walking on ice all the time. This inconstancy is really difficult to life with because the heart longs for constancy, control, something safe, a refuge. What is impermanent and not reliable (inconstant) is not fit to be seen as something Me and mine or my self.

Like Ven. Thanisssaro says, it is like building on unstable ground and investing in that building. This immediateltely appeals to wisdom, i find. One immediately sees this is not wise. We seek reliability, stability, a refuge but how can we find this when we grasp and invest so heavily in things that are not reliable and are unstable themselves (such as body and mind).

At least the Buddha shows a way out of this samsaric pattern. He teaches the other shore, the island, the refuge. And it is in letting go. Stop investing. Stop building. Stop feeding. Let go. Do not expact the impossibe of the conditioned. He shows the Path to the unconditioned.

I think the most important context is what we experience. Just things like feelings, memories, intentions, plans, odours, visuals, smells, longings, kilesa’s etc. All those formations and also states of mind (like jhana) are anicca.

I think this was the primary concern of the Buddha with tilakkhana. That we see the inconstancy in them and our inability to possess those formations and states. Wanting to possess them is unwise. We cannot freeze reality. We cannot freeze body and mind and keep remaining it in a certain state we wish…yes…the only possibility is…total detachment. That is not a frozen state, but it is at least the one stable, reliable, refuge, an island. But we cannot freeze the happy mind, the enthousiastic mind, a healthy body, a young body, a optimistic mind etc. This is all inconstant.

The tilakkhana are especially about the nature of what we experience and about seeing this in a realistic way. Seeing what is wise and not wise. I fact, understanding tilakkhana is seeing the four noble truths too.