What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by nirodh27 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:26 pm
nirodh27 wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:21 pm There is no actor because there is no acquisition of any of the aggregates, so there is no "I am this" (there's a sutta that is clear: "I am", "I am this" does not occur to the Arahant: so also "I am old" does not occur).
Well, he would have still thought “I am old” otherwise he couldn’t say the words.
:jumping: (it is a joke right?)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Ceisiwr »

nirodh27 wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:43 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:26 pm
nirodh27 wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:21 pm There is no actor because there is no acquisition of any of the aggregates, so there is no "I am this" (there's a sutta that is clear: "I am", "I am this" does not occur to the Arahant: so also "I am old" does not occur).
Well, he would have still thought “I am old” otherwise he couldn’t say the words.
:jumping: (it is a joke right?)
No. Buddhas still think, no? It’s believing the concept “I am” is real, that it really refers to something, which is the problem.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Ceisiwr »

nirodh27 wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:39 pm In what sense "birth is real?"
It’s mind independent, meaning it’s not simply the product of conceptualisation.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Ceisiwr »

equilibrium wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:30 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:13 pm
retrofuturist wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:41 pm I was speaking of the paticcasamuppanne, rather than paticcasamuppada.
If the 1st Noble truth is real, not otherwise, then so is birth, ageing and death.
This is wrongly grasped.
The 1NT itself is the truth meaning one sees the “condition” one is trapped. ….. hence revealing the truth that “This is suffering”.

….. hence transcendent.
The purification of the path is for one who knows and sees, not for one who does not know and does not see.
By this logic, lamentation isn’t dukkha.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:27 pm Both truths are real, not otherwise.
I never said otherwise. But paticcasamuppanne things are not truths... they are what ceases upon the realisation of the third.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Ceisiwr »

retrofuturist wrote: Wed Oct 26, 2022 12:00 am Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:27 pm Both truths are real, not otherwise.
I never said otherwise. But paticcasamuppanne things are not truths... they are what ceases upon the realisation of the third.

Metta,
Paul. :)
How can the 1st truth be real but the contents of it not be, the same for the 2nd?
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Oct 26, 2022 12:02 am How can the 1st truth be real but the contents of it not be, the same for the 2nd?
Because the Dhamma is timeless. When it is not known, it is later re-discovered.
AN 3.134 wrote:"Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All fabrications are inconstant.

"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All fabrications are inconstant.

"Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All fabrications are stressful.

"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All fabrications are stressful.

"Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All dhammas are not-self.

"The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All dhammas are not-self."
Compare paticcasamuppada with paticcasamuppanne...
SN 12.20 wrote:Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, I will teach you dependent co-arising & dependently co-arisen phenomena. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks replied. The Blessed One said:

"Now what is dependent co-arising? From birth as a requisite condition comes aging & death. Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, & says, 'Look.' From birth as a requisite condition comes aging & death.

"From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth...

"From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming...

"From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance...

"From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving...

"From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling...

"From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact...

"From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media...

"From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form...

"From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness...

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, & says, 'Look.' From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. What's there in this way is a reality, not an unreality, not other than what it seems, conditioned by this/that. This is called dependent co-arising.

"And what are dependently co-arisen phenomena? Aging & death are dependently co-arisen phenomena: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation.

"Birth is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Becoming is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Clinging/sustenance is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Craving is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Feeling is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Contact is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"The six sense media are dependently co-arisen phenomena...

"Name-&-form is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Consciousness is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...

"Fabrications are dependently co-arisen phenomena...

"Ignorance is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation. These are called dependently co-arisen phenomena.

"When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, 'Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' or that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be."
Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
jankala
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2022 1:59 am

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by jankala »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:54 pm That doesn’t mean the rest of the links are delusions, much less that they are simply “designations”. You can of course argue that they are only designations, and so dhammas are empty of themselves. Perfectly respectable Buddhists have done so, for centuries. You have a bit of work to do though at the moment to get there. In comparison I would argue something can be empty of substance, such as an atta, yet still be real and have a nature. Wisdom is in seeing how there is only the dhamma, say pain, rather than “someone” who experiences the pain. Seeing that dhammas are alien doesn’t mean seeing that they are simply designations, or ignorantly fabricated ideas or delusions in my honest opinion.
When I say delusion, I want to clarify that I don't mean some form of solipsism or something. What I mean is that these phenomena are dependent upon a lack of true knowledge and understanding. They are real—they manifest, we experience them, they are present—and yet they are dependent and can cease.

The best example is really the magic show. When someone who is ignorant of how magic works watches a magic show, they actually experience magic. If someone told them that their experience was a delusion, it wouldn't necessarily be accurate. That person would actually experience "magic"—the experience or phenomenon of 'magic' would really be present for them, they would actually experience it, they would feel and react to it, etc. More accurately, one should not say that the magic they experienced is a delusion. Rather, they should say that the magic they experienced is dependent on ignorance; it can only manifest when there is ignorance, and if they were not ignorant, it would not (have been) be present.

Likewise, I really experience jarāmarana. Because I am born, I actually experience that liability and suffer on account of that birth and implied jarāmarana in it. However, my experience of aging and dying and suffering is like the magic: I only experience it because of avijjā. It's a bit complicated, because avijjā in the past has made it manifest in the first place without a choice, and that kamma will have to run its course. But I do not have to experience it, or be in it. In otherwords, it does not need to be present to me. The phenomenon of "me" experiencing is itself conditioned by avijjā, and with its cessation—the cessation of upādāna->cessation of bhava—I will be able to:
SN 12.30 wrote: abide having transcended old age and death.
We have to (1) distinguish between our experience of the 'arahant' and the experience of the arahant themself, and (2) distinguish between the growing cool of the aggregates and sense experience from the experience of a sentient being dying, as per the definition of jarāmarana.

Nobody is denying that what we designate as the arahant is going to appear to die just as any living being would in our experience. But the difference is that what we experience is not what the arahant experiences. Remember that jarāmarana = dukkha (or sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā), and that it refers to a sentient being (as per SN 12.2, etc.). Similarly, recall that it is dependent on there being something to die. Again, from the perspective of the non-arahant there is a thing there and that thing is annihilated. But the idea of a 'thing' that exists being annihilated into non-existence is not true for the experience of the actual arahant, and so we cannot project that onto them. Likewise, the death of the aggregates does not apply to the arahant, just as the death of a twig does not apply to you; they are irrelevant phenomena. As such, even if they were 'annihilated,' the arahant would still be free—and yet, the arahant does not exist outside the aggregates either.

This Dhamma is atakkāvacara and it is to be known by the wise for themselves. We can say the Buddha died for the sake of convenience and convention, just as he himself could say so. But just as the arahant doesn't actually believe in an "I" if they think it as a word, or a magician doesn't believe or experience any actual magic, the apparent jarāmarana does not fool the arahant.
Ud 1.3 wrote: When phenomena manifest themselves
to the keen, meditating brahmin,
he abides, dispelling Māra’s army,
as the sun illuminates the sky.
The arahant knows phenomena. He knows Māra (i.e. 'Death') and his tricks, and it does not fool him. He dispels it all with wisdom, liberated.

As I've mentioned before, I am writing a thesis / book on this. I will be ordaining soon in a forest monastery and will have no internet for a long while, so I plan on finishing the book pretty soon before I leave. I'll post it here when the time comes, but it will be a while.

With mettā
Joe.c
Posts: 1483
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Joe.c »

Two groups:
1. First Group is stuck with Mundane thought such as Buddha said "I'm old". In fact, this is just common language for human to refer to the body. They don't know that an Arahant can use common language without any attachment of using the language.

2. Second Group is stuck with an Arahant knowledge. But they don't know the complete path. Path lead to Wisdom.

There is no paticcasamuppanna without paticcasamuppada. But someone say paticcasamupanna is illusion. Question to ask is: are they an arahant? I doubt it ... If not an arahant, then there is no proof. LOL indeed.

If someone can say/explain paticcasamuppanna, they can explain paticcasamuppada clearly as well. Not one or another. One who has completely understood paticcasamuppanna can explain step by step very clearly and simple.

O Boy.... Blind vs Blind indeed. 😂😂😂 🤣 🤣 🤣
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
User avatar
equilibrium
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:07 am

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by equilibrium »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:52 pm
equilibrium wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:30 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:13 pm

If the 1st Noble truth is real, not otherwise, then so is birth, ageing and death.
This is wrongly grasped.
The 1NT itself is the truth meaning one sees the “condition” one is trapped. ….. hence revealing the truth that “This is suffering”.

….. hence transcendent.
The purification of the path is for one who knows and sees, not for one who does not know and does not see.
By this logic, lamentation isn’t dukkha.
Lamentation…..an expression of sorrow/grief is an act following/attached to something lost/gone/cannot be obtained…..while under delusion. … that is suffering, as they are clearly not acting.

For those who do know, lamentation isn’t suffering because they know and have seen ….. the “condition”….hence released.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:10 pm Greetings,
jankala wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:00 pm That's the "average sotāpanna," and their intuition of paṭiccasamuppāda with no formal education and not having studied a page of Abhidhamma would still best hundrends of Abhidhamma manuals on the topic.
Hi MikeNZ66. :hello:

These things are not said for no reason... it is not "intolerance".

Metta,
Paul. :)
Sorry, I've no idea what you are on about. I would, though, tend to agree that the average sotāpanna has no need for either the Abhidhamma, or the equally dense logic of Ven Nanavira... :tongue:

:heart:
Mike
Last edited by mikenz66 on Wed Oct 26, 2022 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8149
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Coëmgenu »

jankala wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:00 pmmillions of sotāpannas
What's the scriptural source for this? I'm open to it being in the EBTs, but if so, it seems the same case as with the exaggerated numbers that supposedly attended the Sermon on the Mount.
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.
jankala
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2022 1:59 am

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by jankala »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Oct 26, 2022 7:57 pm
jankala wrote: Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:00 pmmillions of sotāpannas
What's the scriptural source for this? I'm open to it being in the EBTs, but if so, it seems the same case as with the exaggerated numbers that supposedly attended the Sermon on the Mount.
DN 18 wrote: Whoever has experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and has the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones; and whoever is spontaneously reborn, and is trained in the teaching; in excess of 2,400,000 such Magadhan devotees have passed away having ended three fetters. They’re stream-enterers, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening.
There are other suttas where the Buddha discloses a rough estimate of the amount of ariya sāvakas in a particular village or region which are quite high. I agree that we do not know the exact source of this number, but Ancient India had an extremely large population for the ancient world of the time. Last I checked it was upwards of 80 million. It wouldn't surprise me if there were a large number of devotees, even if it wasn't necessarily millions. There certainly were many thousands.

Mettā
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8149
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by Coëmgenu »

DN. That makes sense.

I think a lot of the material in DN is very valuable. I also think that number is hugely inflated, but that's just IMO.

I don't think the population of India at the time was actually high enough also to support such numbers in "villages" and such.
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
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: What precisely is the problem with the so-called "three lives" model?

Post by nirodh27 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:52 pm DN. That makes sense.

I think a lot of the material in DN is very valuable. I also think that number is hugely inflated, but that's just IMO.

I don't think the population of India at the time was actually high enough also to support such numbers in "villages" and such.
Considering that estimated world population - source Wikipedia - is said to be between 27 and 72 millions for 2000 bc (14-42m 3000 bc so one can guess about 2500 bc) and that all the people was not in Northern India at the time, there is no reason to take it as something different from an highly inflated number: embellishment to marvel the readers or a simple mistake that was not challenged afterwards: nobody can know.
Post Reply