3 marks of existence vs N8FP

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10157
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Spiny Norman »

PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:43 am
Spiny Norman wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:15 am
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:11 am

Again, by describing something you give it essence. Cognitive dissonance is not easy to deal with.
What exactly is this "essence" you keep talking about? And what Buddhist term corresponds to it?
It would be the opposite of anatta, and I am not saying that it exists, besides a conventional one through which we communicate. I am not going over this again, as I already discussed it with Ceisiwr, so I will refer to that discussion. I seems you're not ready to understand it yet, or not willing to understand it, which would be the same.
The "opposite" of anatta is atta, or in the Sanskrit, it would be anatman v. Atman.
Assuming an atta/Atman is similar to assuming noumena "beneath" or "inside" phenomena, which is why I've drawn your attention to it.

So what exactly is it that I'm "not ready" to understand?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Sam Vara »

When most people see the question posed in the OP:
Do you think that the 3 marks of existence can be unified with the N8FP? If so, how?
they think of what the Buddha said about the 3 marks of existence; they think of what he said about the N8FP; and they look to see if there is any contradiction between them. If we believe in the truth of the 3 marks of existence, can we also believe in the truth of the N8FP without contradicting ourselves? And that's what a lot of knowledgeable posters have done. They have shown that there is no inconsistency in the Buddha's teaching. People's understandings may differ, of course, but they have taken pains to show how the different bits of the Buddha's teachings fit together into a coherent whole.

When PeterC86 claims that they are wrong, he is not merely saying that he has found a disjunction in the Buddha's teaching which has eluded those other posters (including myself). He is basing the claim on his absolute and incontrovertible knowledge that one part (the 3 marks part, particularly anatta) is correct; and that it is correct in a way that renders the other part (the N8FP) wrong. (In the past he has claimed that the Buddha did not teach about kamma, or that he was mistaken in doing so...) It's not just that the theory doesn't fit together. It's that his experience, breakthrough, and arahatta status go beyond normal understanding, and cannot be challenged. Sometimes it's difficult to see what PeterC86 is saying, because he tends to prevaricate and swish about with pseudo-philosophical terms like "essence", and because his understanding of doctrine is not up to the standard of many of his interlocutors. But basically his case doesn't rest on a perceived disjunction in Theravadan doctrine. It rests on his belief that he is an arahant, that he knows and sees what the rest of us cannot.

That's an effective argument-stopper. When pushed into a corner, PeterC86 can always respond (and frequently does!) that people don't understand the disjunction because they are not, like him, arahants. It's just as if a Christian fundamentalist came here to argue that Buddhism was a pernicious waste of time, or worse. Any account of the cogency or beneficial effects of Buddhism could be met with the argument-stopper that they just knew, in their heart of hearts, what God had spoken to them; and that could not be countermanded by anyone to who God had not spoken.

Arguments are for sorting out doctrine. When people have had a major breakthrough which they claim makes their ideas incontrovertible, they are literally impervious to arguments. Now PeterC86 may be an arahant according to my understanding of what the Buddha thought an arahant was; but I think it far more likely that he is an arahant according to Petervadan doctrine. That's fine. We can find plenty of examples of blokes who think they are Jesus Christ. Their understanding of the Bible is probably somewhat different from that of most Christians, just as Peter's understanding of Theravada is different from that of most Theravadans. Who am I to discourage independence of thought?

I'll let Peter have the last word. From a few days ago:
What am I doing here? I don't know, it is not my choice. Choices are not mine. Ultimately, I cannot know anything. I don't question reality anymore. Very liberating.
Don't try saying this down your local grocery store. Unless, of course, you're an arahant.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

mikenz66 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:15 am
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 7:57 am
mikenz66 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 9:30 pm
That's because this is a Buddhist discussion group, and that's what we discuss. For many of us, the discussion informs our practice, but discussing details of practice with random people on the Internet is not usually very productive - from my experience it requires an environment of trust, kindness , and common ground for such discussions to be worthwhile.

:heart:
Mike
Yes but there has to be some sort of unification between the different aspects of, what is assumed to be, the Buddha's words, in order for them to be trustworthy enough to be regarded as a unified teaching pertaining to the cessation of suffering, instead of them being a mere belief both of the promised cessation of suffering and the words being that of Buddha. Else one might be inclined to follow a practice that couldn't lead to what is promised. And this unification has to come from some understanding, else it would be merely believed. And because the 3 marks of existence stand regardless of the N8FP, the expounded N8FP can be hold against the 3 marks.

Of course, we can all meet up somewhere, preferably close to where I live ;), drink some tee, sing a few songs around a campfire, and discuss it there.

Open-mindedness in discussion would be nice, but this is of course inhibited through clinging.
Over the past few days I have been re-reading "Concept and Reality", Venerable Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda first publication from the early 1970s (his books are here: https://seeingthroughthenet.net/books/).

His discussion of Limitations of the Dialectical Approach may be relevant here:
Concepts, for all their
vicious potency to delude us, are not to be blamed per se, for they are
merely objectifications or projections of our own tanhā, māna and
ditthi—our cravings, our conceit, and our views. Hence, in the last
analysis, concepts have to be tackled at their source. They are not so
much to be demolished, as to be comprehended and transcended. The
attempt to dislodge concepts at the purely intellectual level leads to
infinite regress in thought, as will be evident from the following
dialogue between the Buddha and the wandering ascetic
Dîghanakha....
:heart:
Mike
Thanks for bringing it forward. What I read sounds in accordance to what I explained. In the book I read on page 29;

"Then, Bâhiya, thus must you train yourself: 'In the seen
there will be just the seen; in the heard, just the heard; in the
sensed, just the sensed; in the cognized, just the cognized. That
is how, O Bâhiya, you must train yourself. Now, when, Bâhiya,
in the seen there will be to you just the seen, in the heard ..... just
the cognized, then Bâhiya, you will have no 'thereby': when you
have no 'thereby,' then Bâhiya, you will have no 'therein'; as
you, Bâhiya, will have no 'therein' it follows that you will have
no 'here' or 'beyond', or 'midway-between'. That is just the end
of Ill."
—M. A. P. C 10.
The first part of the exhortation presents succinctly the sum-total of
sense - restraint, while the latter part interprets the philosophy
behind it. This sense-restraint consists in 'stopping-short', at the level
of sense-data without being led astray by them. He who succeeds in
this, has truly comprehended the nature of sense-data so that he no
longer thinks in terms of them ('na tena' =no 'thereby', 'na tattha' =
no 'therein'). He has thus transcended the superstitions of the
grammatical structure as also the verbal dichotomy (nev' idha, na
hura§, na ubhayamantarena = 'neither here nor beyond nor midway
between'). In short, he has attained the Goal. As for Bâhiya, he did
attain the Goal, and that almost instantaneously, since he had
developed his spiritual faculties to such an extent in his own religious
system, that—we are told in the Sutta - he even entertained the
illusion of being an arahant before he came to the Buddha.
The consummation of the training in sense restraint, therefore,
consists in the ability to refrain from 'thinking in terms of' (maññanâ)
the data of sensory experience. The chimerical and elusive nature of.
sense data is such that as soon as one thinks in terms of them, one is
estranged from reality.


That is it in a nutshell. Pegembra already brought this exhortation forward in this topic; viewtopic.php?t=43224

I don't know what the monk wrote more in the book though, or in his other books, so I can only advice to approach them with a diligent critical attitude.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by PeterC86 »

Spiny Norman wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:00 am
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:43 am
Spiny Norman wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:15 am

What exactly is this "essence" you keep talking about? And what Buddhist term corresponds to it?
It would be the opposite of anatta, and I am not saying that it exists, besides a conventional one through which we communicate. I am not going over this again, as I already discussed it with Ceisiwr, so I will refer to that discussion. I seems you're not ready to understand it yet, or not willing to understand it, which would be the same.
The "opposite" of anatta is atta, or in the Sanskrit, it would be anatman v. Atman.
Assuming an atta/Atman is similar to assuming noumena "beneath" or "inside" phenomena, which is why I've drawn your attention to it.

So what exactly is it that I'm "not ready" to understand?
That there is nothing to discuss.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10157
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Spiny Norman »

PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:37 am
Spiny Norman wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:00 am
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:43 am

It would be the opposite of anatta, and I am not saying that it exists, besides a conventional one through which we communicate. I am not going over this again, as I already discussed it with Ceisiwr, so I will refer to that discussion. I seems you're not ready to understand it yet, or not willing to understand it, which would be the same.
The "opposite" of anatta is atta, or in the Sanskrit, it would be anatman v. Atman.
Assuming an atta/Atman is similar to assuming noumena "beneath" or "inside" phenomena, which is why I've drawn your attention to it.

So what exactly is it that I'm "not ready" to understand?
That there is nothing to discuss.
:shrug:
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3071
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Pondera »

PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:05 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:44 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:12 pm No, an argument has to be made for the existence, possibility of discernment, of phenomena, and until then, they cannot be said to exist or non-exist, both exist and non-exist, neither exist nor non-exist.
You're pretty free-wheeling with redefining your arguments and terms on the fly, sometimes to something that is completely contradictory to a previously-held view presented only a few posts ago. So where exactly did you supposedly argue for this "possibility" of discernment?
I am not arguing for this. I thought this would be pretty clear by now.
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:12 pmThe burden of proof of unity lies with those who hold that they are unified.
In order for you to understand any proofs of that nature, you'll first have to actually learn what "anattā" means. Then we can start with anicca, etc. At present, you are still stumbling around "essences" while trying and failing to define anattā.
Well, because anatta transcends all dhammas, if anatta is understood, the Buddhadhamma is understood. So please shower us with your wisdom.
There is no “understanding” of anatta. Anatta is simply recognized in all skhandas. And on that basis, grasping can stop. Anatta is not here to give you liberating insight. The purpose of “seeing” Anatta is for repulsion and disgust, disenchantment. Anatta doesn’t annihilate the function of the eightfold path. Anatta makes the eightfold path function. If there were no vision of anatta - what would be the point of samadhi?

Anatta is not a positive thing. It’s quite negative. “Understanding” Anatta merely allows one to stop self-identify with perceptions and feelings.

For the same reason that the mark of ill allows one to grow disenchanted with perceptions and feelings, and impermanence also - that too is the purpose of realizing “This is not me; I am not this” - and let go.

There is no esoteric, existential bliss to be realized in anatta - such that the dhamma is realized. The dhamma is realized by letting go of perception and feeling.

The N8FP is the raft. The river is the three marks. Suffering is this shore. Nibbana is the other shore. You use the raft to cross the river. Once you cross the river, do you carry the raft around with you everywhere you go? No. So the N8FP is fabricated for the purpose of crossing beyond the three marks. Having done that, there is no further purpose to the raft. And no further need to be aware of the three marks.

Maybe this will help
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. Then Visakha the lay follower went to Dhammadinna the nun and, on arrival, having bowed down to her, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to her, "'Self-identification, self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"There are these five clinging-aggregates, friend Visakha: form as a clinging-aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a clinging-aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. These five clinging-aggregates are the self-identification described by the Blessed One."

Saying, "Yes, lady," Visakha the lay follower delighted & rejoiced in what Dhammadinna the nun had said. Then he asked her a further question: "'The origination of self-identification, the origination of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which origination of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"'The cessation of self-identification, the cessation of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which cessation of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving: This, friend Visakha, is the cessation of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"'The way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification, the way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"Precisely this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration: This, friend Visakha, is the way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"Is it the case, lady, that clinging is the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates or is it something separate?"

"Friend Visakha, neither is clinging the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, nor is it something separate. Whatever desire & passion there is with regard to the five clinging-aggregates, that is the clinging there."

"But, lady, how does self-identification come about?"

"There is the case, friend Visakha, 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 (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. This is how self-identification comes about."

"But, lady, how does self-identification not come about?"

"There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He does not assume feeling to be the self...

"He does not assume perception to be the self...

"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how self-identification does not come about."

"Now, again, lady, what is the noble eightfold path?"

"This is the noble eightfold path, friend Visakha: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration."

"Is the noble eightfold path fabricated or unfabricated?"

"The noble eightfold path is fabricated."

"And are the three aggregates [of virtue, concentration, & discernment] included under the noble eightfold path, lady, or is the noble eightfold path included under the three aggregates?"

"The three aggregates are not included under the noble eightfold path, friend Visakha, but the noble eightfold path is included under the three aggregates. Right speech, right action, & right livelihood come under the aggregate of virtue. Right effort, right mindfulness, & right concentration come under the aggregate of concentration. Right view & right resolve come under the aggregate of discernment."

"Now what is concentration, lady, what qualities are its themes, what qualities are its requisites, and what is its development?"

"Singleness of mind is concentration, friend Visakha; the four frames of reference are its themes; the four right exertions are its requisites; and any cultivation, development, & pursuit of these qualities is its development."

"Now, lady, what are fabrications?"

"These three fabrications, friend Visakha: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, & mental fabrications."

"But what are bodily fabrications? What are verbal fabrications? What are mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabrications? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabrications? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"Now, lady, how does the attainment of the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to attain the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am attaining the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have attained the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, which things cease first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, verbal fabrications cease first, then bodily fabrications, then mental fabrications."[1]

"Now, lady, how does emergence from the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to emerge from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, which things arise first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, mental fabrications arise first, then bodily fabrications, then verbal fabrications."

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, how many contacts make contact?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, three contacts make contact: contact with emptiness, contact with the signless, & contact with the undirected."[2]

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, to what does his mind lean, to what does it tend, to what does it incline?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, his mind leans to seclusion, tends to seclusion, inclines to seclusion."[3]


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Coëmgenu »

PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:05 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:44 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 10:12 pm No, an argument has to be made for the existence, possibility of discernment, of phenomena, and until then, they cannot be said to exist or non-exist, both exist and non-exist, neither exist nor non-exist.
You're pretty free-wheeling with redefining your arguments and terms on the fly, sometimes to something that is completely contradictory to a previously-held view presented only a few posts ago. So where exactly did you supposedly argue for this "possibility" of discernment?
I am not arguing for this. I thought this would be pretty clear by now.
So where did you supposedly argue for this "possibility" of discernment? It is very easy to find all manner of post in which you argue the opposite: that anattā excludes the possibility to discernment. So where do you now argue the opposite? From where is someone reading your posts supposed to conclude that it ought to be "pretty clear now?" So far, it seems that you are redefining your argument and usage of terms to something that is completely contradictory to what you've previously presented as your views.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:19 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:46 am Here is but one way to relate the three to the eight, and it is through the four. Three marks, an eightfold path, and four truths.

What is anicca is anattā, and is also dukkha. This is called "the three marks of existence." If this comes into contention, a sutta can easily be found. If some facile objection of "You are just playing 'Buddha says'" comes about, the three marks of existence, the eightfold path, and the noble truths all fall under the purview of "what the Buddha says" anyways.

Now, we just look at the four nobles truths. 1) Dukkha, 2) the origination of dukkha, 3) the cessation of dukkha, and 4) the path to the cessation of dukkha. What is the path to the cessation of dukkha? The eightfold path is. None of this business about the possibility or impossibility of defining, describing, imparting essences, or whatnot that has been brought up as objections to their mutual concord plays a part in this that I consider a relatively direct and uncontrived correspondence.
Please read this; viewtopic.php?p=682764#p682764

So you can say it to be so, but until it is understood, it is mere belief.
What does this have to do with what you are responding to?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Coëmgenu »

Coëmgenu wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 1:47 pmIt is very easy to find all manner of post in which you argue the opposite: that anattā excludes the possibility to discernment.
*possibility of discernment <-- a typo
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Tl21G3lVl
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2022 6:51 am

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Tl21G3lVl »

PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:11 pm Do you think that the 3 marks of existence can be unified with the N8FP? If so, how?
Conventional reality is dukkha. With the N8FP we can reach the non conventional.
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by NotMe »

Tl21G3lVl wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:55 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:11 pm Do you think that the 3 marks of existence can be unified with the N8FP? If so, how?
Conventional reality is dukkha. With the N8FP we can reach the non conventional.
Yes!
Conventional reality is all 3 marks, tho. No?

Metta

:anjali:
Tl21G3lVl
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2022 6:51 am

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Tl21G3lVl »

NotMe wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:01 pm
Tl21G3lVl wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:55 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:11 pm Do you think that the 3 marks of existence can be unified with the N8FP? If so, how?
Conventional reality is dukkha. With the N8FP we can reach the non conventional.
Yes!
Conventional reality is all 3 marks, tho. No?

Metta

:anjali:
Perhaps both, but we shouldn't lose focus once a shore is sighted right?

Metta

:anjali:
User avatar
NotMe
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by NotMe »

Tl21G3lVl wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:09 pm
NotMe wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:01 pm
Tl21G3lVl wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 4:55 pm

Conventional reality is dukkha. With the N8FP we can reach the non conventional.
Yes!
Conventional reality is all 3 marks, tho. No?

Metta

:anjali:
Perhaps both, but we shouldn't lose focus once a shore is sighted right?

Metta

:anjali:
That first glimpse does the trick!

Metta

:anjali:

edit to add: Kinda like losing your virginity or a doughnut on the floor. No going back!

edit to edit: a really really dirty floor - other wise the 10 second rule applies for doughnuts.
User avatar
Noble Sangha
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm

Re: 3 marks of existence vs N8FP

Post by Noble Sangha »

Hi everyone, I’m sort of new to the forum. At times in the past, I have participated in other Buddhist forums, but these days I have been very hesitant to do so. I have finally decided to give a shot again and see where things go because . . .

It’s quite saddening / disheartening to me . . . seeing many Buddha dhamma practitioners that are working towards being a wholesome (good) person, doing their best to walk on the Noble 8 Fold Path and working towards their liberation, end up being so confused or unclear about certain Buddha dhamma teachings. Especially the critical core teachings which one needs to get the right “sanna” to be able to attain any magga phala. Otherwise, all one’s effort will mostly be in vain at death. This is just based on my own opinion / view / understanding / knowing / seeing of the Buddha dhamma. One is free to disagree with me at anytime.

One of the things that make me so hesitant to participate in Buddhist forums is that I sometimes see disagreements that end up in arguments, where dasa akusala’s are involved. At my current practice, from all I have understood / realized / seen so far, there’s nothing in this world that’s worth committing the dasa akusala’s and end up receiving “the whole mass of suffering” for. Even with this understanding / view, I still commit them, but comparing to myself 10 years ago, the change has been dramatic. Stopping the perpetuation of dasa akusala’s is a gradual process, it’s a work in progress. As one learns / understands more deeper about the teachings of the Buddha dhamma, one naturally will commits less dasa akusala and will have more peace and happiness in their lives. I hope everyone can join me on this journey.

As an example of how one or few times of “wrong speech” committed especially to an Ariya (Noble disciples, which no one can’t tell with certainty who they are, only a Buddha or that person knows) can possibly block or hinder one’s understanding of the Buddha Dhamma or the attainment of Nibbana for many life times or / and end up with some not so pleasant consequences down the road. I understand that we all have our own opinions, views, understandings. I’m not here to say don’t argue or disagree with each other. Just for everyone’s well being, before any of us get into arguments or commits the dasa akusala’s, I sincerely hope that we all evaluate to see if is worth the possible “whole mass of suffering” consequences for whatever it is that we’re trying to achieve. (This is a really deep concept). One can disagree and still be with what it is without defilements or one can “skilfully” disagree.

For those familiar with Akusala Paticca Samuppada cycle, think of how it starts with Avija paccaya sankhara and ends up in the “whole mass of suffering”. One can use this as vipassana meditation. In my personal opinion, this more beneficial than doing any breath meditation . . . As well the Paticca Samuppada cycles can go forward, backwards and within . . .

One important thing that I would like to share with everyone is that we’re actually all on the same team or the same boat that is carrying all of us through sansara without a discernable beginning. By continuing our journey through sansara, it’s making all of us suffer considerably and a lot of this suffering is hidden from us and as it’s very difficult for any of us to start even comprehend what this “hidden suffering” is. If anyone wants to comment on what they think this “hidden suffering” is, I would love to hear your comment.

No matter if anyone here agrees or disagrees with what I say / mention or how you think of me, I sincerely wish for your well being. I would like to say may everyone be well and may we all living beings attain the supreme peace and freedom of Nibbana.

Going forward my only 2 goals on this forum is that I make progress on my own Dhamma practice, while at the same time, whatever I share / mention can help even just one single person on this forum to make progress on their practice, I feel all this would be worth the time and effort even if I end up getting criticized, put down, etc . . . After all, my own understanding and some of the things that I will mention about the Buddha dhamma will be similar and different compared to what most people are “popularity taught” out there. I hope we all can get along, one can feel free to disagree with me at anytime, I’m not here to try convince anyone of anything. Please use your discernment, take what resonates with you and discard what doesn’t. A future thank you to everyone for your patience and understanding.

In responds to OP question

"Do you think that the 3 marks of existence can be unified with the N8FP? If so, how?"

Some other forum participants already mentioned what I’m about to mention.

"Contemplation of the 3 marks is an aspect of practice in the N8FP, so that is a kind of "unification I suppose."

The 3 marks are there regardless of whether a Buddha is around or not but the Buddha is the one to point to them. Once they are fully understood/realized, the result is liberation. The N8FP is the formulation that leads to liberation. Even without the N8FP, the 3 characteristics of existence are always in operation.”

I’ll share some of what I have understood from my own knowing / seeing / understanding of the Buddha dhamma, I hope this helps. Going forward I’ll use the word “Tilakkhana” to mean the 3 marks of existence or Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta.

Comprehending and attaining the highest level understanding of Tilakkhana and other core teachings of Buddhism is completing the Noble Eight Fold Path. One cannot complete the Noble Eight Fold Path without comprehending and attaining the highest level of understanding of the Four Noble Truths, Tilakkhana, Paticca Samuppada, etc . . . as an Arhant.

In the Mahacattarisakasutta

It mentions that there are two Noble Eight Fold Paths. One is mundane which leads to good rebirths while the other leads to Nibbana.

Sammādiṭṭhimpahaṁ, bhikkhave, dvāyaṁ vadāmi
Right view is twofold, I say.

atthi, bhikkhave, sammādiṭṭhi sāsavā puññabhāgiyā upadhivepakkā
There is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment.

atthi, bhikkhave, sammādiṭṭhi ariyā anāsavā lokuttarā maggaṅgā.
And there is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.

I’ll just use “Right view” (Samma ditthi) as a quick introduction on how I can describe the difference between the two paths.

We all start off on (the N8FP that leads to good rebirths) with sila, samadhi, panna, working towards comprehending and removing the 10 micca ditthi’s. When one attain’s magga phala or becomes a Sotapanna, having comprehended and removed the 10 micca ditthi’s, then one starts on (the N8FP that leads to Nibbana or the Lokuttara magganga) with panna, sila, samadhi.

This is just an example . . .When we’re walking on the Noble Eight Fold Paths with “right view” that leads to good rebirths or “ripens in attachment”, that person has some idea about the 10 micca ditthi’s or is learning about them knowingly or unknowingly, either through Buddhism or other spiritual teachings and religions. They do their best to do good deeds, be a good person etc . . possibly for better / good returns such as good rebirths or more materialistic or spiritual returns . . . In the end though, that person must be exposed to the Buddha dhamma and comprehend the 10 micca ditthi’s and the Buddha’s worldwide view which includes the 31 realms of exisistenc. Core subjects like the Four Noble Truths, (Tilakkhana very important to know . . .), Paticca Samuppada , Assada, Adinava, Nissarana, etc . . .

When one gets rid of / remove the 10 miccha ditthi and “reaches a certain degree” of understanding / comprehension of the 4 Noble truths, Tilakkhana, Paticca Samuppada, etc . . . and fulfills the 4 requirements to attain Sotapanna. One attains stream entry and then starts on the “noble, undefiled, transcendental, a factor of the path” (Lokuttara magganga) that leads to Nibbana. This is when one has broken three out of 10 Samyojana’s (Mental bonds, chain’s, fetters, etc . . .) One is destined for Nibbana within 7 “bhave” (existences)

Some important words to understand in that sutta are “Sasava (asava)” and “anasava”. I believe it’s being translated as “defilements and undefiled”? The English word “defilements” can sound so simple by itself, but in the Buddha dhamma, there’s a lot of teachings from different parts of the teachings explaining what “defilements” are, how they make and keeps us and others in suffering in the rebirth process, how they arise and are completely eradicated. The eradication / elimination / uprooting, etc . . . of “asava’s” (defilements) is what leads to the well being (nibbana) of that living being. This action helps us to put a stop to “our” rebirth process, thereby putting an end to all our “future” suffering. Future doesn’t just mean in this life time. In our current life, many things can only be “managed” such as body pains, illness, etc . . . and cannot be stopped. This is one of the other ways that can be said what Buddhism is about.

During the night Bodhisatta attained Buddhahood, he achieved three types of higher knowledge. 1 of the 3 was “asavakkhaya nana” The wisdom and knowledge of removal / destroys / eradicates etc … “defilements”. In MN85, the Buddha mentions with “asavakkhaya nana” he understood the 4 Noble Truths, and of course within the 4 noble truths is the Noble Eight Fold Path and the Tilakkhana (Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta). From my own understanding of the Buddha Dhamma, the first 2 sutta’s that the Buddha delivered after his enlightenment teaches the Tilakkhana and other core teachings. Anattalakkhana Sutta the second sutta the Buddha delivered, “lakkhana” means “characteristic”. Anatta is a characteristic of the five aggregates (pancakkhandha) or the “all” “Kina, bhikkhave, sabbam?”. There are different teachings and ways in the Buddha dhamma that explains what “the all” is. This is very beneficial to understand well.

When one attains “Stream-enter” or Sotapanna, the 3 Samyojana’s that are broken are:

Sakkaya ditthi, vicikicca, silabbata paramasa. The reason why I bring this subject up is because I see other’s disagreements and not really able to come to an agreement in regards to what anatta “self”, “no self” “none self” etc . is. Depending how one views / think what “self” or “no self” is, it can be taken as if there’s a soul or no soul. This is just my understanding, the self or no self (if one think it's soul, no soul) stuff belongs to sakkaya ditthi.

I’ll just quickly touch on Anatta and sakkaya ditthi here. I’m not going to go into details about them here since I hope we can remain on topic about the OP’s question. Maybe sometime later, I do want to discuss Anatta when it’s a more appropriate time and opening post. As well I see some other forum topics that I would like to participate first since I feel that I can easily and don’t need to take as much time to write / respond to. What I’m typing here has already taken me 6 days to write, a few hours each day (probably could’ve done it in a few days if I tried really hard. As well I’m learning on the go and my writing skills are not that good).

Depending on each person’s of understanding of what “self” “no self” means to them. In my opinion using the words “self” “no self” to describe what anatta is can lead to a lot of confusion and can possibly give the wrong “sanna” or idea what anatta is.

Someone mentioned this, “The "opposite" of anatta is atta, or in the Sanskrit, it would be anatman v. Atman.”

Imo, this is the cause for the confusion and disagreements that comes up for the meaning of Anatta, using “anatman and atman” to describe what anatta.

I have seen someone in another forum before mentioned something like this, “if there’s “no self” why should I care if I do good or bad things, I should enjoy myself to the fullest in this world. It’s not this “self” that’s going to suffer, so who cares?”. This is how this self and no self can get twisted so badly, if one get’s the wrong idea about this self, no / non self stuff.

I have seen others though in these forums describing their own understanding of Anatta with “self” and no / “non self” which I can see / understand they possibly have the similar idea as me what anatta is, maybe just different wording.

If we literally use Sanskirt anatman and atman meaning no soul and soul to describe what anatta is (Not a fan at all . . . but just for explanation sake . . .). Such a teaching would fall under sakkaya ditthi. (From my own understanding, this is not what Anatta is . . . Even though Anatta and sakkaya ditthi are related to each other, but they are two different things.)

There were many Sakkaya ditthi views during the time of Lord Buddha and still are to this day. All the sakkaya ditthi views can be narrowed down to two of these extreme views.

Uccheda ditthi = a person is nothing more than a collection of physical matter and exist only until the death of the physical body.

Sassata ditthi = opposite of uccheda ditthi, is the view that some kind of permanent entity like a soul that’s not subject to change, stress, instability or destruction and that this permanent entity survives the death of the physical body and will eventually end up in some heavenly realm and remains there forever (like Abrahamic religions and Hinduism).

The Buddha taught the truth or true reality is in between these two extremes. THIS CAN BE EXPLAINED THROUGH PATICCA SAMUPPADA.

Depending on how one thinks / describe what Anatta is with words like “self” “non / no self”. One could have the right idea, but maybe not the most accurate wording that we can use, which I believe can lead to confusion that we currently have with Anatta.

I see someone mentioned Anatta means “no essence

Someone’s reply: “Even characteristics are giving essence. Blue, etc.”

This is just my understanding, that’s not quite the meaning of essence or no essence in regards to Buddhism.

Someone brought this up: “What exactly is this "essence" you keep talking about? And what Buddhist term corresponds to it?"

This is a great question! Myself been contemplating on that question and something similar to it on and off for the last few years.

Back to the topic about the Noble Eight Fold Path and Tilakkhana.

Here’s a short, less detailed way that I can describe how the Tilakkhana IS unified with Noble 8 Fold Path. The “noble, undefiled, transcendental, a factor of the path” (Lokuttara magganga), NOT the “accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment.”

With a certain degree of understanding / comprehension of the Tilakkhana, Four Noble Truths and other core Buddha dhamma teachings IS one part of lokottara right view (The new “vision / view” one gains and starts to see the world as Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta and Nibbana as nicca, sukha, atta. The other part is understanding / seeing the importance of attaining Nibbana, the “value, refuge, etc…”(samma ditti) -> one should “think” or arise the thought of anicca, dukkha, anatta (or other dhamma concepts) as much as much as possible (samma sankappa) -> one should be mindful and contemplate on the Tilakkhana (or other dhamma teachings) as often as possible and speak as little as possible about the none truths of this world that it’s nicca, sukha, atta. (samma vaca).  Satipatthana = Can be one of the aspects of (samma kammanta) -> One lives their life according to one’s understanding of the Buddha dhamma (samma ajiva) -> One puts the effort (samma vayama) to attain nibbana, or arising of right view or contemplating teachings with “right view” and put effort into eliminating / completely eradicating defilements from the mind -> Now one’s (samma sati) is focused / builds up the mindset of accomplishing all the previous paths / steps -> (Samma Samadhi) the mindset is solidify on accomplishing all the previous paths, which can lead to anariya (none noble) or ariya (noble) jhana’s or no jhana’s.

I know / see / understand that in the sutta’s it might describe what is “right speech”, “right action” and some others parts of the path differently then what just mentioned, but I still feel what I mentioned is still consistent with / can be what the Buddha dhamma and sutta’s teaches, “according to my own understanding . . .”

When one attains Arhanthood, all 10 Samyojana’s are broken / eliminated / removed and completes 2 extra steps in the Noble Eight Fold Path that leads to Nibbana. These two extra steps are samma nana and samma vimutti. That's the 10 out of 40 factors that one should strive, put effort, see the "value, worth, meaningful, etc . . ." of attaining. There are 20 bad factors and 20 good factors. 30 / 40 factors keeps one in the rebirth process, which is the cause of all our "sufferings" that ever existed and will continue to exist until we attain nibbana. The other 10 factors help one to walk on the mundane Noble Eight Fold Path to get rid of the 10 micca ditthi's and comprehend the "Core" Buddhist teachings. But if one doesn't at least attain stream entry before death or starts on the "lokottara" Noble Eight Fold Path that leads to Nibbana. One will still be trapped in the rebirth process for an infinite amount of bhava (existences) / jati's (births) until "the chance to be alive, have the Buddha's teachings in our world, learning / practicing it. The chance to be born as a human is already shocking, but to have a Buddha appear in this world, have his teachings, typing this I still feel flabbergasted.

I would like to mention that I left out other and some details about some of the things that I have mentioned, all the things that I have mentioned barely do any justice to the deeper teachings / understanding of the Buddha Dhamma. If I made any mistakes in what I have said, I ask forgiveness.

I don’t remember exactly whom or where I heard this from, but it’s been with me since when I first started learning and practicing Buddhism. It was mentioned that Arhants who has completed the Noble Eight Fold Path asked the Buddha what they should do next. The Buddha told them to continue on contemplating Anicca, dukkha, anatta. The Buddha is telling this to Arhants who are said to have completed the path. If I’m wrong about this part or “not quite correct” or know where it’s mentioned in the sutta’s, I hope someone can point this out to me. Thank you.

Whatever other’s say / teaches including the Buddha, in the end it’s up to the each of us to walk the path, use our intelligence / discernment to come our own conclusions. For myself, after learning and seeing the consistency in the Buddha dhamma, how the same things can be analyzed in different ways with different parts of the teachings and seeing all these different parts of the teachings are consistent with each other, fitting like a puzzle piece, I was blown away. I had no more doubts about the Buddha dhamma and no longer “believed” the Buddha. What I once took with faith started to come from my own understanding or how I’m starting to see the world. From my own understanding, a Sammasambuddha is the pinnacle existence that ever so infrequently appears in this world.

To end this off, I will say that there are other and deeper ways to see and understand how the Tilakkhana IS unified with the Noble Eight Fold Path. PeterC86, I hope you and others will continue to learn and practice the Buddha dhamma and see for yourselves what one is learning resonates with them or not. Even if it resonates with one, it doesn’t always mean it’s correct though . . . Keep an open mind, stay humble, there’s “always more” to understand about the Tilakkhana, Four Noble Truths, Paticca Samuppada, etc . . .

I hope this answers OP question.
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.

Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Post Reply