Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
A Reflection on Impermanence, Unsatisfactoriness and Soullessness
pegembara
Veteran
According to Buddhism. a normal person usually views existence as permanent, satisfactory and having an essence. But reality is some thing quite different and is somewhat counterintuitive.
Our senses tell us that things are substantial and real but is this “reality”.
Let us try a thought experiment the way Einstein did with his theory of relativity.
Imagine that we are viewing things and events happening on Earth from a distant planet. We know that light takes time to travel and scientists have informed us that some stars are only detected long after the original stars have died out. If we are not aware of this fact, we would think that those stars are still there. Suppose the same thing happened to Earth.
So we see all the events taking place on Earth, the wars, famines, births, deaths, marriages, the World Cup, etc. Even the trees, mountains, lakes etc appear real and substantial. But the “reality” is all these things that we know to be true from seeing and hearing are an illusion. The Earth is gone but we remain convinced that this is not so. We see our families and friends doing their things. We have moments of joy, happiness, anger and sadness, getting involved in things. Everyone standing where we are will see exactly the same thing.
But in reality they don’t exist anymore!
If the scientists have not pointed out that we are only seeing the play of light and sounds in our consciousness, we would believe what our senses tell us. For some, even the scientific explanations are not enough to break our illusion.
You see. Our senses deceive us into believing that the world and everything in it truly exist. We grab on to existence as though it is something permanent and substantial whereas in truth everything is slipping away and nothing is substantial. There is nothing we can hold on to as real. All that we can perceive can only come through our senses. There is a time lag between contact of our retina and form, eardrums and vibrations and the actual process of seeing or hearing. Everything that we see or hear no longer exist. There is nothing that we can hold on to as permanent in such a world.
The world of our senses is neither existent or nonexistent but is dependent on the activity of our senses. Therefore is no 'the world' besides these ongoing activities.
In this experiment what is real becomes unreal. What we “know” to be substantial and permanent is in fact a conjuror’s trick.
The actual process of seeing or hearing takes place in microseconds between for example the light travelling from an object to reach the retina and eventually registering in the brain as visual consciousness. But the underlying principle is similar.
The past is over, the future is yet to come. Even the now doesn't truly exist.
For the objects for sights, sounds, smells, taste and sensations are no longer there by the time they register in our consciousness. They have already slipped away.
This is the one meaning of impermanence(anicca). When we are convinced that this is so, we develop dispassion as our reality fades (viraga) and finally disappears(nirodha). We know now that nothing whatsoever is to be clung to. We begin to give up things that we previously thought was important(patinisagga).
" . . . . . . . Suppose, monks, a magician or a magician's apprentice
should hold a magic-show at the four cross-roads; and a keen-sighted
man should see it, ponder over it and reflect on it radically. Even as
he sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it radically, he would find it
empty; he would find it hollow; he would find it void of essence.
What essence, monks, could there be in a magic show?
Even so, monks, whatever consciousness --- be it past, future or
present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior,
far or near -- a monk sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it
radically. And even as he sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it
radically, he would find it empty; he would find it hollow; he would
find it void of essence. What essence, monks, could there be in a
consciousness ?
"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. Through dispassion, he's released. With release there's the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world."
Phena Sutta
Foam
Our senses tell us that things are substantial and real but is this “reality”.
Let us try a thought experiment the way Einstein did with his theory of relativity.
Imagine that we are viewing things and events happening on Earth from a distant planet. We know that light takes time to travel and scientists have informed us that some stars are only detected long after the original stars have died out. If we are not aware of this fact, we would think that those stars are still there. Suppose the same thing happened to Earth.
So we see all the events taking place on Earth, the wars, famines, births, deaths, marriages, the World Cup, etc. Even the trees, mountains, lakes etc appear real and substantial. But the “reality” is all these things that we know to be true from seeing and hearing are an illusion. The Earth is gone but we remain convinced that this is not so. We see our families and friends doing their things. We have moments of joy, happiness, anger and sadness, getting involved in things. Everyone standing where we are will see exactly the same thing.
But in reality they don’t exist anymore!
If the scientists have not pointed out that we are only seeing the play of light and sounds in our consciousness, we would believe what our senses tell us. For some, even the scientific explanations are not enough to break our illusion.
You see. Our senses deceive us into believing that the world and everything in it truly exist. We grab on to existence as though it is something permanent and substantial whereas in truth everything is slipping away and nothing is substantial. There is nothing we can hold on to as real. All that we can perceive can only come through our senses. There is a time lag between contact of our retina and form, eardrums and vibrations and the actual process of seeing or hearing. Everything that we see or hear no longer exist. There is nothing that we can hold on to as permanent in such a world.
The world of our senses is neither existent or nonexistent but is dependent on the activity of our senses. Therefore is no 'the world' besides these ongoing activities.
In this experiment what is real becomes unreal. What we “know” to be substantial and permanent is in fact a conjuror’s trick.
The actual process of seeing or hearing takes place in microseconds between for example the light travelling from an object to reach the retina and eventually registering in the brain as visual consciousness. But the underlying principle is similar.
The past is over, the future is yet to come. Even the now doesn't truly exist.
For the objects for sights, sounds, smells, taste and sensations are no longer there by the time they register in our consciousness. They have already slipped away.
This is the one meaning of impermanence(anicca). When we are convinced that this is so, we develop dispassion as our reality fades (viraga) and finally disappears(nirodha). We know now that nothing whatsoever is to be clung to. We begin to give up things that we previously thought was important(patinisagga).
" . . . . . . . Suppose, monks, a magician or a magician's apprentice
should hold a magic-show at the four cross-roads; and a keen-sighted
man should see it, ponder over it and reflect on it radically. Even as
he sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it radically, he would find it
empty; he would find it hollow; he would find it void of essence.
What essence, monks, could there be in a magic show?
Even so, monks, whatever consciousness --- be it past, future or
present, in oneself or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior,
far or near -- a monk sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it
radically. And even as he sees it, ponders over it and reflects on it
radically, he would find it empty; he would find it hollow; he would
find it void of essence. What essence, monks, could there be in a
consciousness ?
"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. Through dispassion, he's released. With release there's the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world."
Phena Sutta
Foam
0
Comments
monastery. There the Exalted One addressed the monks, saying;
"Monks." "Revered Sir," replied those monks in assent. The Exalted
One said:
"Monks, whatsoever in the world with its gods, Màras and
Brahmas, among the progeny consisting of recluses and brahmins,
gods and men whatsoever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized,
attained, sought after and pondered over by the mind all that do I
know. Monks, whatsoever in the world . . . . . . . . . of gods and men
whatsoever is seen, . . . . . . . . . by the mind that have I fully
understood; all that is known to the Tathàgata, but the Tathàgata has
not taken his stand upon it.
If I were to say : 'Monks, whatsoever in the world . . . . of gods and
men whatsoever is seen . . . . . by the mind all that I do not 1
know' it would be a falsehood in me. If I were to say : 'I both
know it and know it not' that too would be a falsehood in me. If I
were to say : 'I neither know it nor am ignorant of it' it would be a
fault in me.
Thus, monks, a Tathàgata does not conceive of a visible
thing as apart from sight; he does not conceive of an unseen; he
does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-seeing'; he does not conceive
about a seer.
He does not conceive of an audible thing as apart from hearing;
he does not conceive of an unheard; he does not conceive of a
thing-worth-hearing'; he does not conceive about a hearer.
He does not conceive of a thing to be sensed as apart from
sensation; he does not conceive of an unsensed; he does not
conceive of a 'thing-worth-sensing'; he does not conceive about one
who senses.
He does not conceive of a cognizable thing as apart from
cognition; he does not conceive of an uncognized; he does not
conceive of a 'thing-worth-cognizing'; he does not conceive about
one who cognizes.
Thus, monks, the Tathàgata being such-like in regard to all
phenomena seen, heard, sensed and cognized, is 'Such'. Moreover,
than he who is 'Such', there is none other greater or more excellent, I
declare.
Whatever is seen, heard, sensed or clung to,
is esteemed as truth by other folk,
Midst those who are entrenched in their own views
being 'Such' I hold none as true or false.
This barb I beheld, well in advance,
whereon mankind is hooked, impaled,
'I know, I see `tis verily so'---- no such clinging
for the Tathàgatas.
Kalakarama Sutta
Recommended reading
The Magic of the Mind: An Exposition of the Kalakarama Sutta
by Ven. Nyanananda.
I wonder if it really matters to know whether the world is real or not. For me, the problem comes from wanting pleasure but not pain. In other words, maybe I'm not trapped in a "reality" that is not actually real, but trapped in believing I can have pleasure without experiencing pain. I can only be free by giving up both. However, I do see a connection between the pain/pleasure dilemma and the question of reality: as long as I believe that I am this body, it will also seem impossible to give up (with ease, not grudgingly) the body's desires, so maybe the wrong perception of reality (this body is real, I am this body) is also what keeps desire alive.