All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
SilaSamadhi
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:58 pm

All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by SilaSamadhi »

Ud 8:3 - Nibbāna Sutta wrote: There is, monks, an unborn–unbecome–unmade–unfabricated. If there were not that unborn–unbecome–unmade–unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born–become–made–fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn–unbecome–unmade–unfabricated, escape from the born–become–made–fabricated is discerned.
The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned. It cannot be compelled by any factor. In particular, it cannot be compelled to attach.

Thus, any attachment can only be voluntary. Attachment and suffering are conditioned on choice.

The conscious mind, isolated from and unaware of the greater whole that made this choice, is prone to suffering. That is the meaning of ignorance. Being captivated, dazzled, and seduced by the illusory reality that the mind chose to fabricate - that is the meaning of delusion.

The mind made a choice to step into a fabricated scenario. Like an actor taking on a role of a prisoner at a gloomy prison. However, the actor wakes up without his memory, and now believes he is actually a prisoner. Forgetting he is merely playing one. Forgetting this is just a play, that the "prison" is a set piece, out of which he can walk instantly.

Why is it necessary for actors to forget that they are acting? Perhaps to make for the most authentic experience?
Last edited by SilaSamadhi on Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SarathW
Posts: 21306
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by SarathW »

The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned.
The way I understand the nature of the mind is attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
However, the mind can be trained so the wisdom arises in the mind.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
JamesTheGiant
Posts: 2157
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:41 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by JamesTheGiant »

SilaSamadhi wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:38 am The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned. It cannot be compelled by any factor. In particular, it cannot be compelled to attach.
Where did you get this idea from? It sounds like random amateur philosophy.
I'm pretty sure that's not the Buddha's Dhamma.
User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Grigoris »

JamesTheGiant wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:22 am
SilaSamadhi wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:38 am The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned. It cannot be compelled by any factor. In particular, it cannot be compelled to attach.
Where did you get this idea from? It sounds like random amateur philosophy.
I'm pretty sure that's not the Buddha's Dhamma.
In the Mahayana we talk about the Tathagatagarbha / Dzogchen / Mahamudra. Sometimes people mistakenly conceive of it as mind. I believe this has a lot to do with the term mind being applied to various Buddhist terms (like citta, manas, elements of the "mind" in the skandha, etc...)

Unfortunately the West lacks the nuanced analysis of "mind" that exists in Buddhism and this leads to much confusion. The term "mind" is slapped onto various dhamma that are only vaguely, if at all, related.
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13589
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Sam Vara »

Grigoris wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:13 am
Unfortunately the West lacks the nuanced analysis of "mind" that exists in Buddhism and this leads to much confusion. The term "mind" is slapped onto various dhamma that are only vaguely, if at all, related.
The West does have a tradition of an extremely nuanced philosophy of mind, so I suggest that the problems occur when insufficient attention is paid to correct terminology.

With regard to the OP, my problem is one of insufficient credulity regarding the narrative. Why would the mind make the choice to undertake ignorance and suffering? It looks to me like some kind of mythical account which doesn't bear a literal reading.
Bundokji
Posts: 6508
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Bundokji »

SarathW wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:54 am
The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned.
The way I understand the nature of the mind is attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
However, the mind can be trained so the wisdom arises in the mind.
This is similar to my understanding.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10264
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Spiny Norman »

Aren't attachment and suffering involuntary while ignorance persists?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Grigoris »

Sam Vara wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:34 amThe West does have a tradition of an extremely nuanced philosophy of mind, so I suggest that the problems occur when insufficient attention is paid to correct terminology.
I'm a clinical psychologist. The West does not have an extremely nuanced ANALYSIS of mind, not like Buddhism.

Buddhism is not a philosophy in the Western sense, it is a yogic science, or praxis.

Like Stoicism, for example, whose founder Pyrrho of Elis was heavily influenced by Buddhism, after travelling to India with Alexander the Great.
Last edited by Grigoris on Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by chownah »

Grigoris wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:11 am
Sam Vara wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:34 amThe West does have a tradition of an extremely nuanced philosophy of mind, so I suggest that the problems occur when insufficient attention is paid to correct terminology.
I'm a clinical psychologist. The West does not have an extremely nuanced ANALYSIS of mind, not like Buddhism.
I'm a rice farmer. I don't think that buddhism has an extremely nuanced analysis of mind so I guess we disagree. Can you show me this extremely nuanced analysis? All I have seen so far are things like "we call it consciousness because it cognizes" and "we call it perception because it perceives white and green" and in answer to what are feelings "there are three kinds of feelings". I guess I have a difficult time thinking of a "nuanced analyses of mind" when basic terms go undefined.

chownah
User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 422
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Grigoris »

chownah wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:33 amI'm a rice farmer. I don't think that buddhism has an extremely nuanced analysis of mind so I guess we disagree. Can you show me this extremely nuanced analysis? All I have seen so far are things like "we call it consciousness because it cognizes" and "we call it perception because it perceives white and green" and in answer to what are feelings "there are three kinds of feelings". I guess I have a difficult time thinking of a "nuanced analyses of mind" when basic terms go undefined.

chownah
You have moved the goal posts considerably, but I'll take your rather inadequate bait: Abhidhamma. I recommend you go study some.
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.
SarathW
Posts: 21306
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by SarathW »

Grigoris wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:13 am
JamesTheGiant wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:22 am
SilaSamadhi wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:38 am The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned. It cannot be compelled by any factor. In particular, it cannot be compelled to attach.


Unfortunately the West lacks the nuanced analysis of "mind" that exists in Buddhism and this leads to much confusion. The term "mind" is slapped onto various dhamma that are only vaguely, if at all, related.
I agree with your point.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13589
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by Sam Vara »

Grigoris wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:11 am
Sam Vara wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:34 amThe West does have a tradition of an extremely nuanced philosophy of mind, so I suggest that the problems occur when insufficient attention is paid to correct terminology.
I'm a clinical psychologist. The West does not have an extremely nuanced ANALYSIS of mind, not like Buddhism.

Buddhism is not a philosophy in the Western sense, it is a yogic science, or praxis.

Like Stoicism, for example, whose founder Pyrrho of Elis was heavily influenced by Buddhism, after travelling to India with Alexander the Great.
Sorry, I don't see the point you are making here. I took your initial statement:
Unfortunately the West lacks the nuanced analysis of "mind" that exists in Buddhism and this leads to much confusion.
to mean that in the West, we somehow lack the mental tools or the language to deal with or understand what some non-Western Buddhists mean when they talk about mind. Apologies if that's not what you meant, but if it is, my point is that in the West, there has been a tradition of extremely detailed and subtle thinking about mind and its associated concepts. This makes it, in my view, more likely that any confusion is due to misapplication of concepts rather than a lack of Western analysis.

Again, I don't see what your profession, or the importance of the term "analysis", or the label one chooses to apply to Buddhism has to do with it. My point is simply that (with a little care and discernment, of course) there isn't anything in the Buddha's teaching that Westerners are unequipped to deal with.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by chownah »

Grigoris wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:36 am
chownah wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:33 amI'm a rice farmer. I don't think that buddhism has an extremely nuanced analysis of mind so I guess we disagree. Can you show me this extremely nuanced analysis? All I have seen so far are things like "we call it consciousness because it cognizes" and "we call it perception because it perceives white and green" and in answer to what are feelings "there are three kinds of feelings". I guess I have a difficult time thinking of a "nuanced analyses of mind" when basic terms go undefined.

chownah
You have moved the goal posts considerably, but I'll take your rather inadequate bait: Abhidhamma. I recommend you go study some.
I hadn't considered that I had moved the goalposts.....maybe I moved them out of the clinic and into the paddy....is this a good thing or a bad thing?

I hadn't considered the abhidhamma....I am mostly ignorant of what is said there and what I have seen seems to not be relevant to my practice but I do agree that from what I have seen it probably is an extremely nuanced anaysis of mind....but I'm not sure because I've not read enough of it to make that determination credibly.....why do you recommend I go study some?
chownah
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by seeker242 »

Ignorance is the fundamental cause of such things. Ignorance is not voluntary thus attachment is not voluntary either.
The ultimate nature of the mind is unconditioned. It cannot be compelled by any factor.
But it can be involuntarily obscured.
sunnat
Posts: 1449
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

Re: All attachment and suffering are fundamentally voluntary.

Post by sunnat »

is there confusion between volitional and voluntary.
Involuntary volition where volition is determined by ignorance.(add:patterned by kamma fruition, resulting in re action)
Post Reply