Soul theories and the Dhamma

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:07 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:01 pm
cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 3:56 pm Read the Buddhist scriptures
Which one?
Yamaka Sutta: To Yamaka

:coffee:
That sutta has nothing to support your view.

Okay, if you think that Sutta supports your view that there is a Soul exists in real and in ultimate sense, that go create a new thread in general board.

I'm interested too, to see how EBT supporters react to it.
Last edited by Ontheway on Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:11 pm The term "a being" is used conventionally to convey meaning in our daily lives... Like this is a man, a woman, a Yakkha, a ghost, a cat, a hell being, etc.

But when we analyse this so-called "a being", it is just made up of five aggregates affected by Clinging in ultimate reality. The formation of these aggregates through conditionality and their combination is what we called "a being" conventionally. Just like we recognise water as "water", but when comes to chemistry class, it is H2O, the combination of two molecules of hydrogen and one molecule of oxygen through atomic interaction between them.
so what is the problem then if i say there is a self? i just don't reduce it to ultimate realities and i'm sure death won't reduce everything either.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

auto wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:17 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:11 pm The term "a being" is used conventionally to convey meaning in our daily lives... Like this is a man, a woman, a Yakkha, a ghost, a cat, a hell being, etc.

But when we analyse this so-called "a being", it is just made up of five aggregates affected by Clinging in ultimate reality. The formation of these aggregates through conditionality and their combination is what we called "a being" conventionally. Just like we recognise water as "water", but when comes to chemistry class, it is H2O, the combination of two molecules of hydrogen and one molecule of oxygen through atomic interaction between them.
so what is the problem then if i say there is a self? i just don't reduce it to ultimate realities and i'm sure death won't reduce everything either.
There is a problem because

(1) It contradicts the Scriptures (be it Suttanta, Abhidhamma, or even Atthakatha)

(2) It is a form of Sakkaya-Ditthi, which is Sassataditthi.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by cappuccino »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:13 pm
cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:07 pm Yamaka Sutta: To Yamaka
That sutta has nothing to support your view.
"Yes, friends. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"Don't say that, friend Yamaka. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One. It's not good to misrepresent the Blessed One, for the Blessed One would not say, 'A monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'"

Yamaka Sutta
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:22 pm There is a problem because

(1) It contradicts the Scriptures (be it Suttanta, Abhidhamma, or even Atthakatha)

(2) It is a form of Sakkaya-Ditthi, which is Sassataditthi.
how is saying that there is a self or a being contradicting the texts you pointed out? if the said text themselves say there is a being what has citta vitthi or the mind?
abhidhamma by Tin Mon wrote: These cittas function as rebirth-consciousness for all living
beings to be reborn in appropriate planes of existence; then they
function as life-continuum for the whole existence of each living
being and finally as death-consciousness of the being.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:27 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:13 pm
cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:07 pm Yamaka Sutta: To Yamaka
That sutta has nothing to support your view.
"Yes, friends. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"Don't say that, friend Yamaka. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One. It's not good to misrepresent the Blessed One, for the Blessed One would not say, 'A monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'"

Yamaka Sutta
Venerable Yamaka is reprimanded because he thinks that there is a being here and now - "A monk" is going to be annihilated, perished, no longer exists.

The reason is this: there isn't a single aggregate that "Self" or "being" can be identified with.

Now Arahant Sariputta Thera taught Ven. Yamaka in that sutta:
Rupa is not "Self".
Vedanā is not "Self".
Sañña is not "Self".
Saṅkhāra is not "Self".
Viññāṇa is not "Self".
Now since these five aggregates, none of them can be regarded as "Self". What is there is to be annihilated? What is there to be assumed as "A monk" and for this to be annihilated?

Clearly it is illogical to think that there is something to be annihilated.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:41 pm Venerable Yamaka is reprimanded because he thinks that there is a being here and now - "A monk" is going to be annihilated, perished, no longer exists.

The reason is this: there isn't a single aggregate that "Self" or "being" can be identified with.

Now Arahant Sariputta Thera taught Ven. Yamaka in that sutta:
Rupa is not "Self".
Vedanā is not "Self".
Sañña is not "Self".
Saṅkhāra is not "Self".
Viññāṇa is not "Self".
Now since these five aggregates, none of them can be regarded as "Self". What is there is to be annihilated? What is there to be assumed as "A monk" and for this to be annihilated?

Clearly it is illogical to think that there is something to be annihilated.
it can be interpreted that the aggregates cease after death and then asks if aggregates are the self or not, if they are not then the monk won't get annihilated after kayassa bheda.

if you say "there is no self to begin with" sounds more like dodging the issue of considering the khandhas to be the self(a being). You are annihilationist(in denial).
Show a sutta what says "there is no self to begin with"
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by cappuccino »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:41 pm Clearly it is illogical to think that there is something to be annihilated.
You miss the point
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

auto wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:28 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:22 pm There is a problem because

(1) It contradicts the Scriptures (be it Suttanta, Abhidhamma, or even Atthakatha)

(2) It is a form of Sakkaya-Ditthi, which is Sassataditthi.
how is saying that there is a self or a being contradicting the texts you pointed out? if the said text themselves say there is a being what has citta vitthi or the mind?
abhidhamma by Tin Mon wrote: These cittas function as rebirth-consciousness for all living
beings to be reborn in appropriate planes of existence; then they
function as life-continuum for the whole existence of each living
being and finally as death-consciousness of the being.
There is not only one, but many more scriptures that are contradicting your view.
To name a few would be Anattalakkhanasutta, Cūḷasaccakasutta, Yamakasutta, Anattasuttaṃ, Anattadhammasuttaṃ, etc.

And as clearly taught by the Vajirā Sutta, a "being" is not real and don't exist in ultimate sense, but merely a conventional concept.

Abhidhamma scripture - Kathavathu even devoted the entire first chapter to refute this "having a 'Self' " Micchaditthi presented by the schismatic Puggalavada sect.

And Citta Vithi is a process occurs in the course of Viññāṇasota, and Viññāṇa is not "Self" as clearly taught by Arahant Sariputta Thera in Yamakasutta above.

How could a "Self" theory be maintained in the light of Dhamma, when the entire five aggregates are impermanent, suffering, and not "Self"? That is impossible.

If anyone in this thread still clinging to the view that there is a "Self" (or Soul, Linghun, or Purusha, or whatever language used to describe a permanent entity existing here and now in the body or outside the body experience, serving as an entity to be transmigrated from one life to another life, or as a real entity to experience Kamma results now and then) in this five aggregates as real and in ultimate sense, then this is the reprimand from Arahant Sariputta Thera.

Yamakasutta
"In the same way, 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 (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He assumes feeling to be the self...

"He assumes perception to be the self...

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

auto wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:58 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:41 pm Venerable Yamaka is reprimanded because he thinks that there is a being here and now - "A monk" is going to be annihilated, perished, no longer exists.

The reason is this: there isn't a single aggregate that "Self" or "being" can be identified with.

Now Arahant Sariputta Thera taught Ven. Yamaka in that sutta:
Rupa is not "Self".
Vedanā is not "Self".
Sañña is not "Self".
Saṅkhāra is not "Self".
Viññāṇa is not "Self".
Now since these five aggregates, none of them can be regarded as "Self". What is there is to be annihilated? What is there to be assumed as "A monk" and for this to be annihilated?

Clearly it is illogical to think that there is something to be annihilated.
it can be interpreted that the aggregates cease after death and then asks if aggregates are the self or not, if they are not then the monk won't get annihilated after kayassa bheda.

if you say "there is no self to begin with" sounds more like dodging the issue of considering the khandhas to be the self(a being). You are annihilationist(in denial).
Show a sutta what says "there is no self to begin with"
This is nonsense and the slandering of yours is evil.

It is taught in Suttanta in many ways. If you don't believe, go ask Ven. Dhammanando, Ven. Pesala, or any monastic you can find in this forum. Go ask. No need to argue with me, go ASK.

Rupa, Vedana, Sañña, Saṅkhāra, and Viññāṇa are not "Self". Since all of them is not "Self", the notion of "Self" wouldn't even apply to these aggregates. So, where is this "Self" can be found?

This illusion of having "Self" is Sakkāyadiṭṭhi and it need to be abandoned in order to practice forward in the path. Without abandoning Sakkaya-Ditthi, no hope for such person in this Dispensation.
Last edited by Ontheway on Sat Feb 19, 2022 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

cappuccino wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 5:05 pm
Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:41 pm Clearly it is illogical to think that there is something to be annihilated.
You miss the point
You can't even read a post probably. Hardly can communicate with you anymore.

And seriously, I don't actually care any of members to take up right views or wrong views, none of my business.

So, go ahead. And I will not respond to you anymore. Consider this is the last reply.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 5:18 pm There is not only one, but many more scriptures that are contradicting your view.
To name a few would be Anattalakkhanasutta, Cūḷasaccakasutta, Yamakasutta, Anattasuttaṃ, Anattadhammasuttaṃ, etc.

And as clearly taught by the Vajirā Sutta, a "being" is not real and don't exist in ultimate sense, but merely a conventional concept.
tathagata can be pinned down as truth or reality* in the present life as the sutta says here,
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.085.than.html wrote:"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"
yamaka considers tathagata with the form, feelings.. he didn't understand the reality of tathagata apart from the khandhas.
additional sutta,
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/DN/DN01.html wrote:As long as his body remains, human beings & devas will see him. But with the break-up of the body and the depletion of life, human beings & devas will see him no more.
*truth, reality, fact here is the pali term sacca. Conventional reality is not factual.
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by auto »

Ontheway wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 5:26 pm This is nonsense and the slandering of yours is evil.
Unlike you, i accept afterlife and beings as a fact.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Sam Vara »

Moderator note: please try to keep this discussion within the bounds of the ToS. Posts which predict or threaten kammic retribution fall foul of ToS 2d and have been removed.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Soul theories and the Dhamma

Post by Ontheway »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 6:42 pm Moderator note: please try to keep this discussion within the bounds of the ToS. Posts which predict or threaten kammic retribution fall foul of ToS 2d and have been removed.
You can remove or even ban me. It doesn't change the fact that he did so.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Post Reply