Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

did buddha emphasis on of looking for impermanence intentionally or it will grow and realized by its own? for example in Anapanasati Sutta he didnt say that one should see annica in the breath.

So the very fact that if one is alive one has to continuously breath in and out indicates........what ? That it is unchanging ?

effort wrote:did buddha emphasis on of looking for impermanence intentionally or it will grow and realized by its own? for example in Anapanasati Sutta he didnt say that one should see annica in the breath.

Hi effort,
impermanence (inconstancy) does actually get a mention in the anapanasati sutta:

[4] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on inconstancy'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on dispassion'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on cessation'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on relinquishment': On that occasion the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.


Furthermore, I'm no scholar, but just offhand I would say that seeing the impermanence of phenomena (and thus by implication, having to look for it) is like a thread that runs through much of the whole Pali Tipitaka...

But yes I do note that the overarching theme of the anapanasati sutta seems to relate more to the stages of development that a practitioner would go through with that meditation. (?)

i read the suuta without attention, but again here is the question for me , so by contemplating of breath inconstancy one will gain insight of impermanence into all nature phenomena?

what do i think is if i contemplate of existing god i'll reach to the point that there is a god, if i contemplate about impermanence nature of all phenomena i'll get into that belief even i'll built faith on that. so i'm worried about building another layer of delusion on the to of others.

I am unsure what you are saying.

effort wrote:i read the suuta without attention, but again here is the question for me , so by contemplating of breath inconstancy one will gain insight of impermanence into all nature phenomena?

what do i think is if i contemplate of existing god i'll reach to the point that there is a god, if i contemplate about impermanence nature of all phenomena i'll get into that belief even i'll built faith on that. so i'm worried about building another layer of delusion on the to of others.

The point is: DO NOT CONTEMPLATE, JUST WATCH WITHOUT COMMENT. Just pay attention to the breath with no additional mental commentary.

effort wrote:i read the suuta without attention, but again here is the question for me , so by contemplating of breath inconstancy one will gain insight of impermanence into all nature phenomena?

what do i think is if i contemplate of existing god i'll reach to the point that there is a god, if i contemplate about impermanence nature of all phenomena i'll get into that belief even i'll built faith on that. so i'm worried about building another layer of delusion on the to of others.

Hi effort,
I do see the point you are trying to make, but honestly I must tell you that the two examples you use are not the same. Impermanence is so obvious that one would have to be a young child or mentally deficient to not notice it's ubiquitous presence. Leaves growing bright green in Spring...dark green in Summer...coloured in Autumn...dead in Winter. A baby is born...grows into a child...adult...ages...sickens...dies...is buried...etc. It's everywhere. We are not searching for the Tooth Fairy here, it's more like 'The Elephant in the room'.

By way of contrast, the notion of a personal God is just that - a notion, and not directly observable. You could try looking for it / him / her if you like, but I tried for years and am still yet to have any real evidence. (Unlike impermanence where the evidence is overwhelming!)

So, please don't worry, you are not being brainwashed into seeing impermanence, just as others are brainwashed into seeing God...the analogy is not valid, IMO.

With metta...

manasikara, i see the difference between two analogies, what you said is true.

tilt, do you think by watching without mental commenting then the anicca wisdom will be unfold?

( by wisdom i mean not merely intellectual knowing )

I think that impermanence can be seen in different ways and one way is the obvious one that if you just look around at life in general and observe carefully you will see that everything is impermanent.....even the idea that the stars in the sky are permanent has been punctured by scientists theorizing about the various types of ways that everything might end....whether its the big crunch or if its the big expansion into rarefied oblivion the scientists seem to have put an end to everything out there. While this kind of impermanence seems to be widely accepted these days I really don't think that this is what the Buddha was trying to get us to see when he taught about annica. I think the Buddha was trying to get us to see that our experience which seems to just keep going and going is actually composed of little pieces consciousness that arise and cease continually...that the constant flow we seem to experience is just a delusion and experience doesn't really happen that way.....and.....the important thing (in my view) is that this delusional constant flow of inter-related experience is one of the main things from which our delusional sense of self is constructed......if we can see the truely disjointed nature of experience we have a bit of wisdom which when applied and refined can lead to a big step in understanding the false nature of our experience of self.
chownah

effort wrote: tilt, do you think by watching without mental commenting then the anicca wisdom will be unfold?

It is not a matter of thinking it; it is a matter of experiencing it.

but it needs that i keep the idea in the background, if you dont name it thinking

effort wrote:but it needs that i keep the idea in the background, if you dont name it thinking

Says who?

chownah wrote:......if we can see the truely disjointed nature of experience we have a bit of wisdom which when applied and refined can lead to a big step in understanding the false nature of our experience of self.

this is easy to say but far away.

You really dont need to do that. Anicca is the natural state of all compounded things. You just have to turn up and be aware. You will see it for yourself despite any ideas you have about it if you follow certain tried and tested ways of doing that..

tiltbillings wrote:

effort wrote:but it needs that i keep the idea in the background, if you dont name it thinking

Says who?

i dont understand, you mean that i dont need to keep the idea of annica in the background? it will be experienced after enough observing?