The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Goofaholix »

Jack19990101 wrote: Tue Jan 11, 2022 3:48 am I heard, too, about this statement 'self is conceptual.'
I am not sure it is true tho. Maybe to a degree it makes sense but -
thinking of animals or babies, they don't have conceptual mind, but they are full of self-preservations.
I would say that this is Bhava Tanha, this craving for ones own preservation runs on instinct. I don't think self view is required for this instinct to function, though it will fuel self view.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jan 11, 2022 6:30 pm
Cause_and_Effect wrote: Tue Jan 11, 2022 3:21 am Hair is a non sentient material phenomenon so is first and most easily abandoned as not self.
It is easier to see the body as not-self than the mind, despite the mind changing more rapidly according to the Buddha.
Too much of a generalization.
Hair will be shed and replaced every few weeks (or even every day if you are shaving it).
Some character traits of the personality may endure
for decades.
Obviously individual thought forms or instances of sensory cognizance can arise and fall rapidly many times a second sometimes.

Either way the duration is only one attribute of 'self'. One may be identified closely with a particular hair style but it's purely an effect and has no causal role.
Mental states and intention have causal and kammic power which is why I say they are closer to being seen as self.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ontheway »

Mental states and intention have causal and kammic power which is why I say they are closer to being seen as self.
Sorry, but this is misleading......

Let us read "Assutavāsutta" (SN12.61)
https://suttacentral.net/sn12.61/en/bodhi
It would be better, bhikkhus, for the uninstructed worldling to take as self this body composed of the four great elements rather than the mind. For what reason? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for one year, for two years, for three, four, five, or ten years, for twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty years, for a hundred years, or even longer.

But that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night. Just as a monkey roaming through a forest grabs hold of one branch, lets that go and grabs another, then lets that go and grabs still another, so too that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night.

“Therein, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple attends closely and carefully to dependent origination itself thus: ‘When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases. That is, with ignorance as condition, volitional formations come to be; with volitional formations as condition, consciousness…. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. But with the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of volitional formations; with the cessation of volitional formations, cessation of consciousness…. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.
By first statement, the Buddha taught that even we have to put a notion of "Self", better we give it to physical body. But not the mind or mentality. For reason that the body can be seen in real life for many years as the same physical body (though it gets older, but still the same body); yet the mind and mentality are arising and passing rapidly, moment by moment.

Later the Blessed One taught how to abandon this illusionary "Self" view by seeing Paṭiccasamuppāda, how things come into existence through conditionality.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Cause_and_Effect
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Cause_and_Effect »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:55 am ~
No it's not misleading. Mind and intention has kammic power, the body doesn't.
Since kamma and intention are sometimes called our only real support or refuge they can been seen as more our 'self' than the body from his perspective.

Also the passage quoted from the Pali Canon is wrong, whether or not the Buddha really said it since in reality the same body does not stand for 80 or a hundred years. Only the neuronal brain cells remain the same throughout life but the other cells all replace and are renewed varying from every few weeks (skins cells) months (blood cells) or about a decade (bones).

It's a continuous changing and rejuvenating process.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/ ... -years.htm
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...

That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."


(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ontheway »

:!: :?:
Kamma doesn't need a "Self" to operate. It's like Theravada Buddhism 101. And "Kamma and intentions" aren't our refuge in ultimate sense. It can be our refuge in certain way, eg:

If we encountered dangers or facing life & death situation, then we might say to ourselves that "We've done many good deeds and accumulated much merits. If I am going to die now, I am sure that I will be reborn in good realm."

It was in this sense, the "Kamma" can be our refuge.

And the Buddha was correct back there in Assutavāsutta.To be clear, Lord Buddha was giving a relative truth in the Sutta, it wasn't ultimate truth. Body is a just physical unit of what we might classified as "Individual". He was giving a simile.

The mind isn't static as what you claimed to be. The moment of a thought arises, the next moment it becomes otherwise. There are cases where the brain suffers permanent damage too. Nothing static whatsoever. This is why Buddha rejected "mind" and "mentality" to be taken as "Self".

If you claimed the brain as the "Self", well, then you must have certain level of control or possessiveness of the brain. Could we tell our brain to be smarter, think faster like Einstein? Or could we just give a signal to our brain say "Go to sleep!" and then sleep immediately?

And it rots when the body is dead and decaying. Could you tell your brain: "Hey, don't rot after I'm dead." :shrug:

And I couldn't understand... what "replacing cells" has to do with "Self"? Replacing cells couldn't evade the process of ageing, it can only delay it. Since it is subjected to ageing and change, how can we said it is "my Self"? Even if I apply your logic with the simile:

Mr A has a cat.
Mr A's cat was hit by a car.
Mr A's cat is dead.
Mr A's cat was buried.
Mr A adopted a new cat as replacement.
Mr A has a cat.

Is the cat in the end the same as the cat in the beginning? No sane people will say "it is the same", and since it is not the same, how could a notion of "Self" be logical when dealing with "replacement"?

If the "mind and mentality" is what you claimed as "Self", then what happened if someone get Alzheimer illness, mental illness, memory loss, etc? Did he/she eliminated the "Self" or the "Self" slipping away?

There isn't anything within or without the body can be recognised as "Self" in ultimate sense. It is impossible.

Since we understand the body isn't permanent, then what's more can be said for "mind" or "mentality"?

:| :| :|
Also the passage quoted from the Pali Canon is wrong, whether or not the Buddha really said...
This is why I often clashes with Sauntrantikas. I think sometimes they are not being honest, eel-wriggling, and cherry picky. When the Suttas pointed out facts that don't support their claims, they said "Ah, but it was a fake sutta..." First they denied Atthakatha, next they discarded Abhidhamma Pitaka, then they cut out some Suttas dealing with supernatural stuff, then they falsified the Suttas that doesn't agreeable with them :juggling:

No wonder why it was said that the decline of true Buddha Sasana starts with the disappearance of Abhidhamma Pitaka, then Suttanta Pitaka, then final Vinaya Pitaka. I think it is happening now.

The Blessed One, in many ways, showed that there isn't a thing where we can put the label of "Self" on it. The constituents of a being, namely "Five aggregates", were all Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta. Without abandoning the concept of "Atta", it is impossible to abandon Sassataditthi and Ucchedaditthi. With that, Sakkaya-Ditthi persists as a fetter and cannot be abandoned. Since Sakkaya-Ditthi is not abandoned, then Vicikkiccha and Sīlabbata paramasa cannot be abandoned too. And one cannot gain Sotapatti Magga Phala without getting rid these three fetters.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:21 pm Kamma doesn't need a "Self" to operate. It's like Theravada Buddhism 101.
speak for yourself.
For example to me the 'there is no self to begin with' is just another self theory. The things you say in your rebuttal, it's old, 100 times heard, no spiritual person buy into it.
In fact a pure material anti religious people can be converted simply by lucid dream or near death experience. And it's still not enough to see the importance of the present moment. So imagine the resistance towards the 'Now' movements, Echart Tolle is a good example of it, people here go nuts if they hear that name.

Also something opposite can be happen too, the case of Krishnamurties, who are so over the top about seeing things directly without adding anything to it to the point Jiddu K rejects all forms of meditations.
Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:21 pm No wonder why it was said that the decline of true Buddha Sasana starts with the disappearance of Abhidhamma Pitaka, then Suttanta Pitaka, then final Vinaya Pitaka. I think it is happening now.
More like people fail to understand Sutta, maybe it is you - whatever you read it is about there is no self, period, nothing else seen.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ontheway »

auto wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:37 pm
Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:21 pm Kamma doesn't need a "Self" to operate. It's like Theravada Buddhism 101.
speak for yourself.
For example to me the 'there is no self to begin with' is just another self theory. The things you say in your rebuttal, it's old, 100 times heard, no spiritual person buy into it.
In fact a pure material anti religious people can be converted simply by lucid dream or near death experience. And it's still not enough to see the importance of the present moment. So imagine the resistance towards the 'Now' movements, Echart Tolle is a good example of it, people here go nuts if they hear that name.

Also something opposite can be happen too, the case of Krishnamurties, who are so over the top about seeing things directly without adding anything to it to the point Jiddu K rejects all forms of meditations.
You are right. I will just repeat the same thing over and over again to you.

Puggalapaññatti - Tikapuggalapaññatti
17. Who are the three teachers?

Here a certain teacher sets out Atta as something real and permanent in the present life as well as in the future life.

Again, another teacher sets out Atta as something real and permanent as far as this world is concerned but does not say so with regard to any future existence.

Lastly, a certain teacher does not set out Atta as a real and permanent entity either in regard to the present or to the future life.

Here the teacher of the first order is to be understood as a teacher who upholds the doctrine of Eternalism. Again, the teacher of the second order is to be understood as a teacher who upholds the doctrine of Annihilationism.

Lastly, the teacher of the third order is to be understood as the teacher who is Sammāsambuddho.

These are the three teachers.


So the Krishnamurties adopted "Akiriyavada"? :thinking:

I would say Vibhajjavada aka the Doctrine of Analysis, as stated during the Third Sangayana Council, is nothing like that. For the Vibhajjavadins make distinctions between dhammas that exist in the present and the past, and dhammas that don't exist in the past and the future. And the name "Vibhajjavada" is specially coined by Arahant Moggaliputta Tissa Thera in order to abolish both wrong views namely Sassataditthi and Ucchedaditthi that plagued the Sangha community of that time.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 4:26 pm ..
So you reject the state where you are aware of yourself? i doubt there is any use of disintegrating this state into mental concomitants in order to refute this state. I mean you rejecting something what can be verified experimentally because of how this state is described.
Same thing, people blatantly reject sense of self, despite it is their everyday experience.

even tho you can get up to Brahma worlds or Hells holding this view. remember if you attain hell then you can get a foothold there too.
Somehow no-selfers don't have to train or anything for reappearing or how to attain a state etc.. it just come to them naturally?
https://suttacentral.net/sn36.4/en/bodhi wrote:One who cannot endure
The arisen painful feelings,
Bodily feelings that sap one’s life,
Who trembles when they touch him,
A weakling of little strength
Who weeps out loud and wails:
He has not risen up in the bottomless abyss,
Nor has he even gained a foothold.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ontheway »

Where is a "Self" to be aware of yourself? :shrug:

Awareness is the state of being conscious of something. And consciousness is dependently arisen.

Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya Suttanta explained well "consciousness" and how it is dependently arisen. A notion of "Self" cannot be found here too.

Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya Suttanta (MN38)
Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways consciousness to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness? But you, misguided man, have misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a long time.”
...

“Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds, it is reckoned as ear-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the nose and odours, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the tongue and flavours, it is reckoned as tongue-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the body and tangibles, it is reckoned as body-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as mind-consciousness. Just as fire is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on which it burns—when fire burns dependent on logs, it is reckoned as a log fire; when fire burns dependent on faggots, it is reckoned as a faggot fire; when fire burns dependent on grass, it is reckoned as a grass fire; when fire burns dependent on cowdung, it is reckoned as a cowdung fire; when fire burns dependent on chaff, it is reckoned as a chaff fire; when fire burns dependent on rubbish, it is reckoned as a rubbish fire—so too, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness…when consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as mind-consciousness.
Aren't the Buddha taught us how feeling dependently arisen too? When the eyes present, the visible datum present, there arises consciousness. With these three factors coming together, this is called "contact". From "contact" arises "feeling", and there are three kinds of feeling: Sukha, Dukkha, Adukkhamasukha. Here, since "feeling" is dependently arisen, it cannot be regarded as a standalone "Self" too.
Somehow no-selfers don't have to train or anything for reappearing or how to attain a state etc.. it just come to them naturally?
This is wrong. It is exactly because of seeing this five aggregates as "not me, mine, my self", empty of self, and without self; then more opportunity of "practice & realisation" will come. We contemplate the five aggregates as Anicca, Dukkha, and Anatta. By seeing this way, Sakkaya-Ditthi can be abandoned. It is through this way, people can be disenchanted with the entire five aggregates and get rid of craving entirely.

I never quite agree with Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation of Self, No Self, Not Self for atthattā, natthattā, and anattā. It doesn't really convey the real essence of the Pali terms. I couldn't think of any better English words though, so I would stick to the Pāli terms. To make my position clear, I reject both atthattā and natthattā. Anattā is the correct one. As what Ven. Piyadassi Thera said in his book The Buddha's Ancient Path:
The term anattā, since the prefix “an” indicates non existence, abhāva, and not opposition, viruddha, means literally “no attā”, that is, the mere denial of an attā, the non-existence of attā.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 7:53 pm ..
You don't have to prove me that the atta doesn't exist. Or that how misguided i am. If you think there is no atta to begin with then speak appropriately to this insight if not want to sound hypocritical. There is no one here who needs get enlightened or remove defilements.

You are practicing memorizing Suttas and chanting, i have read somewhere you posted, might want to clarify it to me.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 7:53 pm This is wrong. It is exactly because of seeing this five aggregates as "not me, mine, my self", empty of self, and without self; then more opportunity of "practice & realisation" will come. We contemplate the five aggregates as Anicca, Dukkha, and Anatta. By seeing this way, Sakkaya-Ditthi can be abandoned. It is through this way, people can be disenchanted with the entire five aggregates and get rid of craving entirely.
Who sees? why do you need do these things if there is no self to begin with? or you meanwhile have realized that the anatta refers to the aggregates being not self and not refutation of the atta?

i wish no-selfers be more consistent.

and interesting to note is that what i see as more opportunity to practice is when i come aware and know that i am aware. So is it so hard to admit we do the same thing, but i have balls to call it what it looks like? that i am aware? if i would take your there is no self to begin with then from my point of view this state should not exist. In that sense you are unable to see where i am coming from and keep slander me? i have given always opportunity to no-selfers to find if we talking about same thing, instead i start getting stupid similes like if train runs over me, where is the self there.. these kind of answers get me skeptical and think they are simply hostile or jelly.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

and btw it is quite difficult to find 'the state where you are aware' within the breath as object of mind. How you detect that state is that it feels like sense of self or what it feels like to be being aware.

I suspect no-selfers the most, that they haven't not even started with the food, breath grade transformations. Now ways to sublimate reproduction matter..
how, you simply don't hear them talking about these things.
Last edited by auto on Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ceisiwr »

auto wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:04 pm
Who sees?
Eye consciousness.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:22 pm
auto wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:04 pm
Who sees?
Eye consciousness.
wow, never come up with that myself. Eye consciousness, get real, read some visuddhimagga about idiom usages in Suttas.
Last edited by auto on Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The use of the provisional self or 'degrees of self'

Post by Ceisiwr »

auto wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:24 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:22 pm
auto wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 9:04 pm
Who sees?
Eye consciousness.
wow, never come up with that myself.
This is why nobody takes you seriously.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply