Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

A forum for beginners and members of other Buddhist traditions to ask questions about Theravāda (The Way of the Elders). Responses require moderator approval before they are visible in order to double-check alignment to Theravāda orthodoxy.
Thomas Searcher
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:25 pm

Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by Thomas Searcher »

Hello, all,

I'm using my first post to bring up a stumbling block I've come across while studying Buddhism.

In the Pali canon, it seems as though the Buddha heavily talks about continuity between life and life after death. Though this continuity is not defined by self (anatta), is there a way to describe the continuity more accurately? I've come across the concept of a "mindstream" for example, but I don't know to what extent this is supported by the Buddha's teachings in the Pali canon, especially since the five aggregates seem to exclude mindstreams as a possibility.

When some Buddhists do speak of a mindstream, is it merely a metaphor to describe how kamma moves from life to life after death? I struggle with that conception because it reminds me of a materialistic (or at best humanistic) conception of the universe where only the effects of deeds live on after death and nothing else.

Perhaps it's fair to say that I still haven't accepted the concept of anatta (though I feel closer than I did a year ago). I have to admit the idea of the mindstream seems quite beautiful: an endless stream manifesting different 'beings' who while not existing as individual selves do share a continuity beyond the effects of deeds.

Thank you in advance for any information, advice, or feedback!
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Thomas,
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm Though this continuity is not defined by self (anatta), is there a way to describe the continuity more accurately?
Abhidhamma explains the process in more detail, but in doing so, extends beyond what the Suttas present, so caveat emptor.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm I've come across the concept of a "mindstream" for example, but I don't know to what extent this is supported by the Buddha's teachings in the Pali canon, especially since the five aggregates seem to exclude mindstreams as a possibility.
Well observed. Yes, this seems to be a concept that people introduce to explain what is not explained. To me, the fact it is not explained is a signal that liberation is not found in knowing an answer to the question.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm When some Buddhists do speak of a mindstream, is it merely a metaphor to describe how kamma moves from life to life after death? I struggle with that conception because it reminds me of a materialistic (or at best humanistic) conception of the universe where only the effects of deeds live on after death and nothing else.
Again, I don't think the answer really lies there. It is enough to know that there is action (kamma) and that can ripen as fruit (vipaka) immediately, or somewhere in the future.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm Perhaps it's fair to say that I still haven't accepted the concept of anatta (though I feel closer than I did a year ago). I have to admit the idea of the mindstream seems quite beautiful: an endless stream manifesting different 'beings' who while not existing as individual selves do share a continuity beyond the effects of deeds.
Don't allow personal preferences to blinker you to what is and might be.
SN 20.7 wrote:...in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm Thank you in advance for any information, advice, or feedback!
All the best and welcome to Dhamma Wheel.

:buddha1:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by mjaviem »

This is what I posted recently about the topic.
mjaviem wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:33 am I don't want to be a killjoy in this party but we are not going to survive death. If someone is born in Tusida heaven due to the kamma we sow, that being is not us, it's somebody else. Even if that being can recollect this life of us, he/she/it is not us. That being can push its way to identify itself with us but that would be only a delusion.

Am I getting the picture rightly?
mjaviem wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:11 pm
cappuccino wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:57 am you are here after yesterday

:shrug:
Yes, good example. But it goes the same: thinking that we are somebody (and the same from yesterday) is a delusion according to what I understand the Buddha taught.

We could for example identify ourselves with the life of a crab of the past if we had some glimpses of its perceptions, and feelings, and aims, but how can you tell that crab was you? You are seeing a first-person movie from the point of view of that animal, you can recollect really being that animal but it's up to you identify your self with it.

What I'm saying is I think death is really the end (of ourselves), it's where this particular delusion of ourselves will end (if not already finished by wisdom). We find comfort believing that as per the buddhist teachings life doesn't end with death, but death is really terrible in some way and we should have it very present. Of course a new being is going to be born in some realm when we die but who can tell who's that? Of course we must follow a good practise but out of compassion to any beings that can arise and not by thinking in salvation of ourselves. This is how I see it so far.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
SarathW
Posts: 21237
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by SarathW »

As Paul said mindstream (17 thought moments) is an Abhidhamma teaching.
In my opinion, the 17 thought moments are directly on indirectly explained in Sutta. However, this is a tabulation of the Sutta.
Some people argue that Javana is not mentioned in Sutta but I can recall reading it but I can't remember the source reference.
Mindstream is like a water stream. (river)
There is nothing intrinsic called the river except the collection of water droplets.
In the same way, the mainstream (so-called person) is nothing more than a collection of thought moments (Javana or the Kamma)
When water droplets dry down there is no river.
In the same way, when there is no more Kamma, there will not be a person. (ie Anatta)
Please read the summary of Abhidhamma in the following link.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... el322.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by mjaviem »

And I also like how Bikkhu Bodhi explains it on his introductory videos as a candle that once is consumed lightens another candle and the flame carries on. The wax, the wick, the flame are not the same and are always changing but you can say that the flame moved from one candle to the next. That would be the stream of consciousness from life to life.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by DooDoot »

Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm In the Pali canon, it seems as though the Buddha heavily talks about continuity between life and life after death. Though this continuity is not defined by self (anatta)...
Personally, I have not read any suttas where the Buddha refers to "not-self" being "reborn" from "life to life". The suttas appear to refer to a "self", "person", "man", "women" and particularly "a being" that is "reborn" or subject to "continuity".

For example:
But a person has been reborn in hell.

ayañca puggalo nirayaṃ upapanno hoti.

https://suttacentral.net/an8.29/en/sujato
With clairvoyance that is purified and superhuman, I saw sentient beings passing away and being reborn — inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, in a good place or a bad place. I understood how sentient beings are reborn according to their deeds:

So dibbena cakkhunā visuddhena atikkantamānusakena satte passāmi cavamāne upapajjamāne hīne paṇīte suvaṇṇe dubbaṇṇe sugate duggate yathākammūpage satte pajānāmi:

https://suttacentral.net/mn4/en/sujato
Take some woman or man who kills living creatures. They’re violent, bloody-handed, a hardened killer, merciless to living beings.

Idha, māṇava, ekacco itthī puriso vā pāṇātipātī hoti luddo lohitapāṇi hatapahate niviṭṭho adayāpanno pāṇabhūtesu.

Because of undertaking such deeds, when their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.

So tena kammena evaṃ samattena evaṃ samādinnena kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā apāyaṃ duggatiṃ vinipātaṃ nirayaṃ upapajjati.

https://suttacentral.net/mn135/en/sujato
MN 117 appears to say any teaching that implies "rebirth" involves "acquisitions" ("upadhi") & is not "Noble"; which means taking things to be "self" and excludes the Noble Teachings of not-self (anatta).
And what is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment?

Katamā ca, bhikkhave, sammādiṭṭhi sāsavā puññabhāgiyā upadhivepakkā?

‘There is meaning in giving, sacrifice, and offerings. There are fruits and results of good and bad deeds. There is an afterlife. There are duties to mother and father. There are beings reborn spontaneously. And there are ascetics and brahmins who are well attained and practiced, and who describe the afterlife after realizing it with their own insight.’

‘Atthi dinnaṃ, atthi yiṭṭhaṃ, atthi hutaṃ, atthi sukatadukkaṭānaṃ kammānaṃ phalaṃ vipāko, atthi ayaṃ loko, atthi paro loko, atthi mātā, atthi pitā, atthi sattā opapātikā, atthi loke samaṇabrāhmaṇā sammaggatā sammāpaṭipannā
ye imañca lokaṃ parañca lokaṃ sayaṃ abhiññā sacchikatvā pavedentī’ti—

https://suttacentral.net/mn117/en/sujato
Last edited by DooDoot on Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21237
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by SarathW »

mjaviem wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:11 pm And I also like how Bikkhu Bodhi explains it on his introductory videos as a candle that once is consumed lightens another candle and the flame carries on. The wax, the wick, the flame are not the same and are always changing but you can say that the flame moved from one candle to the next. That would be the stream of consciousness from life to life.
Yes, I like that analogy.
Normally I used the analogy that a campfire becomes grass fire. grass fire becomes bush fire, bush fire becomes house fire, etc.
Perhaps we can use the analogy of Chinese whisper as well.
The basic idea is that there is no person but the cause and effect.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Thomas Searcher
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:25 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by Thomas Searcher »

Thank you all for the excellent responses!
retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:51 pmWell observed. Yes, this seems to be a concept that people introduce to explain what is not explained. To me, the fact it is not explained is a signal that liberation is not found in knowing an answer to the question.
I respect that Buddhism focuses on the poison arrow rather than abstractions for the sake of abstractions. This is probably the biggest issue in my approach. I suppose the goal of nibbana makes stances of indifferentism about certain topics much easier to swallow?
retrofuturist wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:51 pm Don't allow personal preferences to blinker you to what is and might be.
Words to ponder...
SarathW wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:08 pm In the same way, the mainstream (so-called person) is nothing more than a collection of thought moments (Javana or the Kamma)
When water droplets dry down there is no river.
In the same way, when there is no more Kamma, there will not be a person. (ie Anatta)
If there is no person, is there any specialness or sacredness to sentience in Buddhism? Why do we value a human being (or even a cat) more than a rock?
mjaviem wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:11 pm The wax, the wick, the flame are not the same and are always changing but you can say that the flame moved from one candle to the next. That would be the stream of consciousness from life to life.
Is it to be understood then that a death is literally a causal force in a new life arising?
Last edited by Thomas Searcher on Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by dharmacorps »

I find the best reflection for beginners is to simply try to observe how most of the things that we take to be a "self", or constituent of our"selves", is impermanent, unsatisfactory, and impersonal. What is reborn? Something, but not the things we think. It also helps to remember the Buddha had a not-self teaching, not a "no self" teaching. Also, as Thanissaro Bhikkhu often reminds us; when directly and persistently asked if there ultimately was a self, the Buddha refused to answer. These things have been helpful to me at least.
SarathW
Posts: 21237
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by SarathW »

If there is no person, is there any specialness or sacredness to sentience in Buddhism? Why do we value a human being (or even a cat) more than a rock?
Because sentience is suffering. (Dukkha) According to Buddhist teaching there is no feeling for trees and rocks. This does not mean Buddhists treat them uncaringly as we need them for living.
There is no sacredness of sentience but they do wholesome and unwholesome activities. Unwholesome activities create suffering, so we traditionally admire (sacred) the wholesomeness.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by DooDoot »

Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:56 pm
SarathW wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:08 pm In the same way, the mainstream (so-called person) is nothing more than a collection of thought moments (Javana or the Kamma)
When water droplets dry down there is no river.
In the same way, when there is no more Kamma, there will not be a person. (ie Anatta)
If there is no person, is there any specialness or sacredness to sentience in Buddhism? Why do we value a human being (or even a cat) more than a rock?
The process of dependent origination results in the arising of self-view, as follows:
And what is clinging? These four are clingings: sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, and doctrine of self clinging. This is called clinging.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication [of self] is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Since suffering can only occur when there is self-view, human beings are valued more than cats & rocks because human beings have the foremost development of self-view that causes suffering.
Last edited by DooDoot on Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by Aloka »

Thomas Searcher wrote:
I've come across the concept of a "mindstream" for example, but I don't know to what extent this is supported by the Buddha's teachings in the Pali canon,
"Mindstream" is a Mahayana/Vajrayana concept.

:anjali:


.
Last edited by Aloka on Mon Mar 15, 2021 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by salayatananirodha »

I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by mjaviem »

Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm ... the five aggregates seem to exclude mindstreams as a possibility.
...
Why? I can for example think of a stream of bodies. This explained by biology where parents DNA pass into (combining and changing) children. Why not think of a stream of mind? It is something possible.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm ... it reminds me of a materialistic (or at best humanistic) conception of the universe where only the effects of deeds live on after death and nothing else.
...
Whatever arises has to cease. This how I understand impermanence so far.
DooDoot wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:47 pm ...The suttas appear to refer to a "self", "person", "man", "women" and particularly "a being" that is "reborn" or subject to "continuity".
...
If you can quote a sutta referring to a self that is reborn it would give me much to think about. The quotes you included here are about the rebirth of a person, man, woman, being, etc. as you said but not about the rebirth of a self. I can imagine aggregates popping over while reading those quotes but don't see them supporting the birth of a self. The self can only arise by having wrong view as I understand it, so I see self being born when you 'choose' to identify yourself with your body, your consciousness, your intentions or, as I posted before , a crab of the past. To me the statement 'No self is undeclared by the buddha' is irrelevant. Nothing is self in reality and it can only be born by viewing things wrongly (as I do).
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:56 pm ...
If there is no person, is there any specialness or sacredness to sentience in Buddhism? Why do we value a human being (or even a cat) more than a rock?
Because killing gives you no peace and is wrong, absolutely wrong (and not wrong by terms of society). I don't know why but I keep to it as mundane right view and I hope I get to see the truth of it by myself one day. It is possible.
Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 10:56 pm ...
Is it to be understood then that a death is literally a causal force in a new life arising?
You better watch the video (can't recall the exact minute), Bikkhu Bodhi explains buddhism very well.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
pegembara
Posts: 3466
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Theravāda, Anatta, and Mindstreams

Post by pegembara »

Thomas Searcher wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 9:40 pm Hello, all,

I'm using my first post to bring up a stumbling block I've come across while studying Buddhism.

In the Pali canon, it seems as though the Buddha heavily talks about continuity between life and life after death. Though this continuity is not defined by self (anatta), is there a way to describe the continuity more accurately? I've come across the concept of a "mindstream" for example, but I don't know to what extent this is supported by the Buddha's teachings in the Pali canon, especially since the five aggregates seem to exclude mindstreams as a possibility.

When some Buddhists do speak of a mindstream, is it merely a metaphor to describe how kamma moves from life to life after death? I struggle with that conception because it reminds me of a materialistic (or at best humanistic) conception of the universe where only the effects of deeds live on after death and nothing else.

Perhaps it's fair to say that I still haven't accepted the concept of anatta (though I feel closer than I did a year ago). I have to admit the idea of the mindstream seems quite beautiful: an endless stream manifesting different 'beings' who while not existing as individual selves do share a continuity beyond the effects of deeds.

Thank you in advance for any information, advice, or feedback!
The default position of a person is that of a self or soul or a being. Upon death, most will posit that "something" continues on and others who are more of a materialistic bend will posit that the "being" dies. Literal re-birth or mind streams belong to the first.
By whom was this living being created?
Where is the living being's maker?
Where has the living being originated?
Where does the living being
cease?

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
The third option is not considered, that of anatta, the soullessness or non-being. The state of no birth and no death.
“Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still only an unenlightened Bodhisatta, I too, being myself subject to birth, sought what was also subject to birth; being myself subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, I sought what was also subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement. Then I considered thus: ‘Why, being myself subject to birth, do I seek what is also subject to birth? Why, being myself subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, do I seek what is also subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement? Suppose that, being myself subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, I seek the unborn supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna. Suppose that, being myself subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, having understood the danger in what is subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, I seek the unageing, unailing, deathless, sorrowless, and undefiled supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna.’

“Then the bhikkhus of the group of five, thus taught and instructed by me, being themselves subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, seeking the unborn supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna, attained the unborn supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna; being themselves subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, having understood the danger in what is subject to ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, and defilement, seeking the unageing, unailing, deathless, sorrowless, and undefiled supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna, they attained the unageing, unailing, deathless, sorrowless, and undefiled supreme security from bondage, Nibbāna. The knowledge and vision arose in them: ‘Our deliverance is unshakeable; this is our last birth; there is no renewal of being.’

https://suttacentral.net/mn26/en/bodhi
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Post Reply