Letting go

[Ceisiwr]

The Kiṁdiṭṭhika sutta is a favourite of mine, as I think it tells us something rather deep about the path. In that sutta Anāthapiṇḍika has a discussion with some ascetics regarding views. The ascetics all tell him their views, and then Anāthapiṇḍika tells them his. It's stated different ways in the different versions, but they are all saying the same thing

“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self. That’s my view, sirs.”

“Householder, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What you cling to and hold to is just suffering.”

“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And I’ve truly seen clearly with right wisdom that what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, it’s not my self. And I truly understand the escape beyond that.”

- AN 10.93

“I’m not attached to any view, so I’m not attached to this view, either.”

- SA2 202

“I didn’t say that. Since what’s conditioned, etc is suffering, why would I admit to that view, knowing that it’s suffering!?”

- SA 968

What Anāthapiṇḍika is saying here that even his view of dependent origination is created, conditioned, chosen and itself is dependently originated. Since it is dependently originated, one even let's go of that view. When greeted with eternalists one shows how their meditative states and supposed ultimate reality aren't eternal, but rather arise due to intentions. They choose to enter those states, and then cling to them, but since they arise dependently, they cannot be what the eternalist claim. They are instead impermanent, dukkha and not-self. That view however is also dependently originated. It too is dukkha, and so that must also be let go of. I think then this gives us a glimpse of what awakening entails, why the teachings are compared to a raft and helps to explain why the Buddha and his followers weren't interested in philosophical truths, why they had done away with speculative views. Even the Dhamma itself, even the view of dependent origination, must too be let go of. This then is to really see that everything which arises must cease, and how all that arises and ceases is dukkha. We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go, rather than using it as a basis for theorising.

[mjaviem]

.... We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go, rather than using it as a basis for theorising.

[Sam Vara]

...

Very nice post, C. I felt it help even while reading.

[justpractice]

We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go, rather than using it as a basis for theorising.

This is what truly makes the Dhamma so profound, as far as I'm concerned. A practice that uses the rare human existence, with its unique exposure to both heaven and hell, to verify that which heaven and hell depend upon right here and now. If verified through the right effort, that wisdom can be applied to radically and utterly undo all unwarranted assumptions one's existence is founded upon, freeing one's self totally from that ignorant appropriation.

That said, the speculation and theorizing will more than likely be a starting point for most. But at some point, if one is interested in personally verifying the Buddha's cure for themselves, the theoretical distancing must be overcome by taking up the teaching on a direct and practical level.

[cappuccino]

When greeted with eternalists one shows how their meditative states and supposed ultimate reality aren't eternal, but

Eternalism is the idea of permanent identity


Because of inconstancy there is no permanent identity

[[james]]

“The way is not difficult for those who are unattached to their preferences.”
Verses on the Faith Mind
Jianzhi Sengçan (529-613)

[cappuccino]

We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go,

You’re supposed to understand what dependent arising is talking about


It’s almost mundane…

[mjaviem]

We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go,

You’re supposed to understand what dependent arising is talking about
…

[Ceisiwr]

...

Very nice post, C. I felt it help even while reading.

Oh I’m glad. I see this lining up with what we see in that famous sutta, the Kaccānagottasutta

Sir, they speak of this thing called ‘right view’. How is right view defined?”

“Kaccāna, this world mostly relies on the dual notions of existence and non-existence.

But when you truly see the origin of the world with right understanding, you won’t have the notion of non-existence regarding the world. And when you truly see the cessation of the world with right understanding, you won’t have the notion of existence regarding the world.

The world is for the most part shackled by attraction, grasping, and insisting.

But if—when it comes to this attraction, grasping, mental fixation, insistence, and underlying tendency—you don’t get attracted, grasp, and commit to the notion ‘my self’, you’ll have no doubt or uncertainty that what arises is just suffering arising, and what ceases is just suffering ceasing. Your knowledge about this is independent of others.

The eternalists chooses a meditative state or view to reach an ultimate state of being, whilst the annihilationist chooses a meditative state or view for the annihilation of being. Both are intentions that lead to conditions. No existence in the world, as what is arrived at by intention will cease. No non existence, as what is arrived at by intention will arise. Neither existence nor non-existence can be maintained, as both have a condition (intention) behind the goal. There can be then no eternal being or non-being. One sees then that to intend towards being or non-being leads only to the arising and ceasing of dukkha, and that this view too has arisen. Only dukkha arises, only dukkha passes away.

[pegembara]

The Kiṁdiṭṭhika sutta is a favourite of mine, as I think it tells us something rather deep about the path. In that sutta Anāthapiṇḍika has a discussion with some ascetics regarding views. The ascetics all tell him their views, and then Anāthapiṇḍika tells them his. It's stated different ways in the different versions, but they are all saying the same thing

“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self. That’s my view, sirs.”

“Householder, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What you cling to and hold to is just suffering.”

“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And I’ve truly seen clearly with right wisdom that what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, it’s not my self. And I truly understand the escape beyond that.”

- AN 10.93

“I’m not attached to any view, so I’m not attached to this view, either.”

- SA2 202

“I didn’t say that. Since what’s conditioned, etc is suffering, why would I admit to that view, knowing that it’s suffering!?”

- SA 968

What Anāthapiṇḍika is saying here that even his view of dependent origination is created, conditioned, chosen and itself is dependently originated. Since it is dependently originated, one even let's go of that view. When greeted with eternalists one shows how their meditative states and supposed ultimate reality aren't eternal, but rather arise due to intentions. They choose to enter those states, and then cling to them, but since they arise dependently, they cannot be what the eternalist claim. They are instead impermanent, dukkha and not-self. That view however is also dependently originated. It too is dukkha, and so that must also be let go of. I think then this gives us a glimpse of what awakening entails, why the teachings are compared to a raft and helps to explain why the Buddha and his followers weren't interested in philosophical truths, why they had done away with speculative views. Even the Dhamma itself, even the view of dependent origination, must too be let go of. This then is to really see that everything which arises must cease, and how all that arises and ceases is dukkha. We are then to use paṭiccasamuppāda as a means to let go, rather than using it as a basis for theorising.

“The truth is still and has no voice; things
that speak are not the truth.”

The Way to True Happiness - Ajahn Dtun

[samsarayoga]

For example you have to let go of your family if they're too greedy and asinine. If they hold wrong view and love to lie and cannot be reformed.