anicca

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
sunnat
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

anicca

Post by sunnat »

1
sunnat
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

anicca

Post by sunnat »

2
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: anicca

Post by SarathW »

Generally monks contemplate on dead bodies to practice the repulsiveness (Asubha) of the body to detach from attachment.
Buddha taught the impermanence (Anicca), unsatisfaction (Dukkha) and the impersonal nature (Anatta) of the five clinging aggregate.
It is more about the mind.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: anicca

Post by pegembara »

The person who sees, hears, smells, tastes, feels, and thinks is impermanent(anicca).
The "self" is anicca.
“If anyone were to say, ‘The eye is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that ‘My self arises & falls away.’ That’s why it wouldn’t be tenable if anyone were to say, ‘The eye is the self.’ So the eye is not-self.1 If anyone were to say, ‘Forms are the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the eye is not-self and forms are not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Consciousness at the eye is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Contact at the eye is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Feeling is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self. If anyone were to say, ‘Craving is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that ‘My self arises & falls away.’ That’s why it wouldn’t be tenable if anyone were to say, ‘Craving is the self.’ Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self.

“If anyone were to say, ‘The ear is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.…

“If anyone were to say, ‘The nose is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.…

“If anyone were to say, ‘The tongue is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.…

“If anyone were to say, ‘The body is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.…

“If anyone were to say, ‘The intellect is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable. The arising & falling away of the intellect are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that ‘My self arises & falls away.’ That’s why it wouldn’t be tenable if anyone were to say, ‘The intellect is the self.’ So the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Ideas are the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the intellect is not-self and ideas are not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Consciousness at the intellect is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Contact at the intellect is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, ‘Feeling is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable.… Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self, feeling is not self. If anyone were to say, ‘Craving is the self,’ that wouldn’t be tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that ‘My self arises & falls away.’ That’s why it wouldn’t be tenable if anyone were to say, ‘Craving is the self.’ Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self.

https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN148.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: anicca

Post by mjaviem »

Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
sunnat
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

Post by sunnat »

Thanks. That made me feel suitably insignificant. There was still a fragment that would have felt some boost if they had captured one particle at the very end and said that, once, was you. :) oh well, no matter, no mind.

Anyway, my silliness aside, yes, so how to perceive anicca? The Blessed One said on his death bed that ‘all composed things decompose’ and to ‘strive diligently’, presumably to realise this.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re:

Post by mjaviem »

sunnat wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:30 am Thanks. That made me feel suitably insignificant. There was still a fragment that would have felt some boost if they had captured one particle at the very end and said that, once, was you. :) oh well, no matter, no mind.

Anyway, my silliness aside, yes, so how to perceive anicca? The Blessed One said on his death bed that ‘all composed things decompose’ and to ‘strive diligently’, presumably to realise this.
I think it's about seeing the conditioned nature of everything. This leads to see impermanence with certainty. It's not about to wait for things to decompose or vanish but to see how they depend on conditions.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Re:

Post by justindesilva »

mjaviem wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:04 pm
sunnat wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:30 am Thanks. That made me feel suitably insignificant. There was still a fragment that would have felt some boost if they had captured one particle at the very end and said that, once, was you. :) oh well, no matter, no mind.

Anyway, my silliness aside, yes, so how to perceive anicca? The Blessed One said on his death bed that ‘all composed things decompose’ and to ‘strive diligently’, presumably to realise this.
I think it's about seeing the conditioned nature of everything. This leads to see impermanence with certainty. It's not about to wait for things to decompose or vanish but to see how they depend on conditions.
Conditioned means to be transformed for conservation of energy, and is anicca. An example of impermanence being apo, tejo, vayo , patavi getting mutually transformed,.
Energy is never lost, but conditioned to be transformed in to another . Anicca hence is this permanent transformation from one to another happening permanently.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

anicca

Post by cappuccino »

sunnat wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:30 am so how to perceive anicca?
like an endless parade……
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: anicca

Post by Bundokji »

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.
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: anicca

Post by justindesilva »

cappuccino wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:04 am
sunnat wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:30 am so how to perceive anicca?
like an endless parade……
In that endless path of anicca lord budda was only concerned with dukka and anatta.
Dukka as for me is manifestation of energy felt by beings and anatta is the selfless nature of ongoing reactions as reactions of energy. As long as we are bound with upadana , a mind constituent, we will undergo the feeling of such manifestation.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: anicca

Post by mjaviem »

justindesilva wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:35 am Conditioned means to be transformed for conservation of energy, and is anicca. An example of impermanence being apo, tejo, vayo , patavi getting mutually transformed,.
Energy is never lost, but conditioned to be transformed in to another . Anicca hence is this permanent transformation from one to another happening permanently.
Conditioned in this context means that one thing is correlated to another. When this happen this other thing happens too. When this is no more that is no more.

To be transformed for energy conservation sounds like physics, a different dhamma not taught by the Buddha.

Anicca means impermanent, fully ending without remainder. We can see change as an overview but things don't change they only end. We see them changing but it's our own delusion from our self-making. We don't accept they ended so we say they changed and deep down they are still there as we are confused.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: anicca

Post by justindesilva »

mjaviem wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 10:43 am
justindesilva wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:35 am Conditioned means to be transformed for conservation of energy, and is anicca. An example of impermanence being apo, tejo, vayo , patavi getting mutually transformed,.
Energy is never lost, but conditioned to be transformed in to another . Anicca hence is this permanent transformation from one to another happening permanently.
Conditioned in this context means that one thing is correlated to another. When this happen this other thing happens too. When this is no more that is no more.

To be transformed for energy conservation sounds like physics, a different dhamma not taught by the Buddha.

Anicca means impermanent, fully ending without remainder. We can see change as an overview but things don't change they only end. We see them changing but it's our own delusion from our self-making. We don't accept they ended so we say they changed and deep down they are still there as we are confused.
Fully ending without remaineder is annihilation. Anicca is not annihilation either.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: anicca

Post by mjaviem »

justindesilva wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:33 am Fully ending without remaineder is annihilation. Anicca is not annihilation either.
In this case, what would be annihilated in your view?
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: anicca

Post by justindesilva »

mjaviem wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:46 am
justindesilva wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:33 am Fully ending without remaineder is annihilation. Anicca is not annihilation either.
In this case, what would be annihilated in your view?
As preached by rev. Dr. Punnaji Thero, anicca is what comes and goes and called impermanent. To be fair vedana, sanna, which arises and passes can be called annihilated. Yet rupa or form which arises and passes cannot be called annihilated as rupa is formed of four maha butas which are apo, tejo, vayo, patavi whereas they are mutually interdependant. Nama rupa being a conditioned in paticca samuppada is a conditioned stage. Vingnana paccaya nama rupa. What would happen to nama without rupa or rupa without nama, and how can we apply annihilation here.?
Post Reply