Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by Ceisiwr »

This is an interesting sutra on the topic of eternalism, annihilationism and the self. In it the Buddha says that annihilationists and eternalist both hold a theory of the self. Eternalists have seen rebirth, and so argue for eternalism. Annihilationists haven't seen it, and so argue for Annihilationism. In comparison the Buddha does not have a view of there being a self now nor one in the afterlife.
This have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Rājagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels’ Feeding Place.

At that time a heterodox wanderer called Seniya approached the Buddha, paid respect, exchanged greetings, sat at one side, and said to the Buddha: “Blessed One, on a former day recluses, brahmins, itinerants (caraka ), and wanderers (paribbājaka ) gathered in a hall in the hope of some discussion on what is meaningful and praiseworthy in this way:

“‘Pūraṇa Kassapa is the leader of a great congregation, being surrounded on all sides by five hundred disciples. There are among them some who are very wise and some who have dull faculties. When they pass away, he does not declare of any of them the place where they have been reborn.

“There is also Makkhali Gosālaputta, who is the leader of a great congregation , being surrounded on all sides by five hundred disciples. Some of his disciples are wise and some have dull faculties. When they pass away, he does not declare of any of them the place where they have been reborn.’

”In the same way Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta, Ajita Kesakambalī, Pakudha Kaccāyana, and Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta, each of them is surrounded on all sides by five hundred disciples … as above.

“The recluse Gotama was then also mentioned in that discussion: ‘The recluse Gotama is the leader of a great congregation … when his disciples pass away, he does declare that certain have been reborn in that place, certain have been reborn in this place.’ Formerly the doubt had arisen in me: ‘How come the recluse Gotama has reached a condition like this?’”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “Do not give rise to doubt! Because of uncertainty, one gives rise to doubt. Seniya, you should know that there are three kinds of teacher. What are the three?

“There is a teacher who has the view that [only] in the present world there truly is a self, and he speaks according to his understanding, yet he is not able to know matters of the afterlife. This is called the first [kind of] teacher that appears in the world.

“Again, Seniya, there is a teacher who has the view that in the present world there truly is a self, and he also has the view that in the afterlife there [truly] is a self, and he speaks according to his understanding.

“Again, Seniya, there is a teacher who does not have the view that in the present world there truly is a self, and he also does not have the view that in the afterlife there truly is a self.

“Seniya, the first teacher who has the view that in the present world there truly is a self and who speaks according to his understanding, he is reckoned as having the view of annihilation.

“The second teacher who has the view that in the present world and in the future world there truly is a self, and who speaks according to his understanding, he has the view of eternalism.

“The third teacher who does not have the view that in the present world there truly is a self, and who also does not have the view that in the afterlife there [truly] is a self ― this is the Tathāgata, the arahant, the fully awakened one, who in the present has abandoned craving, become separated from desire, has made them cease, and has attained Nirvāṇa.”

Seniya said to the Buddha: “Blessed One, having heard what the Blessed One said had the effect of further increasing my doubt.”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “It is right that your doubt should increase. Why is that? This is a very profound matter, which is difficult to see and difficult to understand. The very profound has to be illuminated in its subtle aspects until it is comprehended by the wise. Living beings of the common type are not able to distinguish and understand it. Why is that? It is because living beings have for a long time had a different view, a different acceptance, a different quest, and a different aspiration.”

Seniya said to the Buddha: “Blessed One, [so that] my mind gains pure faith in the Blessed One, may the Blessed One teach me the Dharma so that in this very seat my wisdom eye will be purified.”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “I shall teach you now according to your liking.”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “Is bodily form permanent or is it impermanent?”

[Seniya] replied: “It is impermanent.”

The Blessed One asked again: “Seniya, what is impermanent, is it dukkha?”

[Seniya] replied: “It is dukkha.”

The Blessed One asked Seniya again: “What is impermanent, dukkha, of a nature to change, would a noble disciple herein [regard] it as the self, as distinct from the self [in the sense of being owned by it], as existing [within the self, or the self] as existing [within it]?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

Feeling … perception … formations … consciousness is also like this.

[The Buddha] asked again: “How is it, Seniya, is bodily form the Tathāgata?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

[The Buddha asked again]: “Is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness the Tathāgata?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

[The Buddha] asked again: “Seniya, is the Tathāgata distinct from bodily form? Is the Tathāgata distinct from feeling … perception … formations … consciousness?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

[The Buddha] asked again: “Seniya, is the Tathāgata in bodily form? Is the Tathāgata in feeling … perception … formations … consciousness?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

[The Buddha] asked again: “Seniya, is bodily form in the Tathāgata? Is feeling … perception … formations … consciousness in the Tathāgata?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

[The Buddha] asked again: “Seniya, is the Tathāgata without bodily form … feeling … perception … formations … consciousness?”

[Seniya] replied: “No, Blessed One.”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “[Although] all my disciples hear what I teach, [some] do not completely understand its significance and do not give rise to right comprehension of conceit. Because of not rightly comprehending it, they do not abandon conceit. Because they have not abandoned conceit, on having given up these aggregates [at death] they take part in the succession of aggregates and are reborn. For this reason, Seniya, I declare that these disciples, when their body breaks up at the end of life, have been reborn in this or that place. Why is that? It is because they have a remainder of conceit.

“Seniya, [some] disciples of mine are able to understand the significance of what I teach. They gain right comprehension of all conceit. Because of gaining right comprehension of it, they abandon all conceit. Because they have abandoned all conceit, when the body breaks up at the end of life there is no succession [of the aggregates for them]. Seniya, I do not declare that such disciples, on having given up these aggregates [at death], are reborn in this or that place. Why is that? It is because there is no condition whereby this could be declared.

“Wishing me to make some declaration, I would declare: ‘They have abandoned all craving and desire, are forever apart from the bondage of existence, and their mind is rightly liberated with the complete ending of dukkha.’

“From former times until the present, I constantly teach the danger in conceit, in the accumulation of conceit, in the arising of conceit, and in the rising up of conceit. If conceit is contemplated with right comprehension, the manifold dukkha does not arise.”

When the Buddha spoke this teaching, the wanderer Seniya attained the pure eye of Dharma that is remote from [mental] stains and free from [mental] dust.

At that time the wanderer Seniya saw the Dharma and attained the Dharma, abandoning all doubt and uncertainty, not needing to rely on others to understand, not needing to rely on others to cross over, and his mind had attained fearlessness in the right Dharma.

He rose from his seat and with his palms held together [in respect] towards the Buddha he said: “Blessed One, can I gain the going forth in this right Dharma to cultivate the holy life?”

The Buddha said to Seniya: “You can gain the going forth in this right Dharma, the receiving of full ordination, and the becoming of a member of the monastic [community].”

At that time Seniya, having gained the going forth, alone in a quiet place practised dwelling without negligence, reflecting in this way on that for the sake of which a clansman’s son shaves off beard and hair to go forth out of right faith into homelessness to train in the path and cultivate the practice of the holy life, personally knowing here and now and realizing directly that ‘birth for me has been eradicated, the holy life has been established, what had to be done has been done, I myself know that there will be no receiving of any further existence.’ He became an arahant.

Hearing what the Buddha had said, he was delighted and received it respectfully.
https://suttacentral.net/sa105/en/anala ... ight=false
“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.”
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:22 pm In comparison the Buddha does not have a view of there being a self now nor one in the afterlife.
we still exist
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by Goofaholix »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:21 am we still exist
That's the thing, its not even about existence or the lack thereof. If I said a table is not self nobody would retort that this means I think tables don't exist, or that I must be a table annhiliationist.

Its about whether that which is known and experienced to be subject to impermanence can be said to be permanent when passing from this life to the
next, the answer to that should be reasonably obvious.
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
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

Goofaholix wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:40 am the answer to that should be reasonably obvious.
we exist
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by Goofaholix »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:54 am we exist
stuck record
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
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

Goofaholix wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:03 am stuck record
I might as well not make any argument
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by Goofaholix »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:04 am I might as well not make any argument
yes
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
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

Goofaholix wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:07 am
cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:04 am I might as well not make any argument
yes
There is no reason to think we shall ever not exist
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by Goofaholix »

cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:41 am There is no reason to think we shall ever not exist
and therefore there is no need to repeat again and again it as if that makes any difference
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
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

Goofaholix wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:57 am
cappuccino wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:41 am There is no reason to think we shall ever not exist
and therefore there is no need
maybe so
skandha
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:38 am

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by skandha »

SA 105 is indeed an interesting sutra, where the Buddha point blank stated there is no real self in the current life as well as there after. Unlike similar Theravada suttas where this is indirectly stated by saying "it does not apply" when being asked where does a being go after death, further explaining you cannot find the being whilst alive, how can you say where the being went after death, thus not applicable. This sutra also made it very clear by comparing the Buddha's view of no real self to the stance of the nihilist and eternalist. The sutra shows that both eternalist and nihilist hold the view that the self really exists. Note that the sutra did not simply say no self but instead said that the Tathāgata's view is that of no real self.
A true master of knowledge has passed beyond all that is known and become dispassionate towards all vedanās.
- Sn 529
SarathW
Posts: 21237
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by SarathW »

I think instead of a permanent self Buddha treated it as ignorance.
Whether there is a self or not there is a continuation. (it is called the Santhathi Sanna a sub-set of Gana sanna
Average Puthujana calls it itself Buddha calls it Santhathi Sanna.
The problem is that non-Buddhists believe this Santhathi is eternal and goes forever.
Annihilist believes it will not continue after death.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
skandha
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:38 am

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by skandha »

SarathW wrote: Mon Dec 26, 2022 8:20 am I think instead of a permanent self Buddha treated it as ignorance.
Whether there is a self or not there is a continuation. (it is called the Santhathi Sanna a sub-set of Gana sanna
Average Puthujana calls it itself Buddha calls it Santhathi Sanna.
The problem is that non-Buddhists believe this Santhathi is eternal and goes forever.
Annihilist believes it will not continue after death.
Given that both the eternalist and the Buddha agreed on a continuation, I feel the main issue is whether this continuation of the aggregates, this "Santathi Sanna", can be maintained in such a way so that it is agreeable to the wishes of the "being" behind these aggregates. If not, then how can you say it, or any part of it, is the self, when there is no ultimate control within the whole mass of the aggregates, it is totally within the bounds of causal conditions. Of course for the purpose of functioning in everyday life there is an aggregation of the various aggregates, a self which we use conveniently as a reference point.
A true master of knowledge has passed beyond all that is known and become dispassionate towards all vedanās.
- Sn 529
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by cappuccino »

skandha wrote: Mon Dec 26, 2022 9:30 am of the various aggregates, a self which we use conveniently as a reference point.
Do you think there is no self?


No self would lead one to think of annihilation
SarathW
Posts: 21237
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Existence, Annihilation and the Self

Post by SarathW »

cappuccino wrote: Mon Dec 26, 2022 4:26 pm
skandha wrote: Mon Dec 26, 2022 9:30 am of the various aggregates, a self which we use conveniently as a reference point.
Do you think there is no self?


No self would lead one to think of annihilation
Eterlanlist believes in a continuation of a permanent self.
Annihilation believes that there is no continuation of the self. (they believe there is a self but do not continue)
What Buddha saying is the continuation of the clinging-aggregate. (beings subject to Samsara)
Living Buddhas have only the not clinging-aggregates.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Post Reply