Buddhist Contradiction?

MindGate

So, from what I heard, a sentient being is a being that can feel pain and has consciousness. Well... one of the 31 planes of existence (planes of sentient beings) is a place where unconscious beings (asaññasatta) exist (in Buddhist cosmology). Is this a contradiction?

fivebells

Iron-age cosmologies are full of contradictions.

dharma

Hi MindGate,

sanna is perception
asanna is no-perception

The perception of the rupa-loka ceases in this realm.

Cloud

There is no being that feels or is conscious, hence why consciousness arises and falls dependent upon conditions as the Buddha has taught, otherwise we could say consciousness is the unchanging self and that thing such as feelings are experienced by the self. Feelings are just feelings! Feelings are an experience, but they belong to no one and are not-self. The experience is a selfless phenomena, an arising of consciousness of an object based on conditions, and it is not you!

When the Buddha said there are only two things, mind and form, he meant that there was form and the experience of form (mind). There is no separate "being" anywhere in that, and since both form and experience are constantly changing (arising and passing), there is no real "thing" to pin down.

Keep going!

thickpaper

So, from what I heard, a sentient being is a being that can feel pain and has consciousness. Well... one of the 31 planes of existence (planes of sentient beings) is a place where unconscious beings (asaññasatta) exist (in Buddhist cosmology). Is this a contradiction?

Hi

Sentience is a pretty hard thing to get to grips with , at least I find it so.

Yet it is of crucial importance to dharmic understanding and to philosophy in general - it is what makes a meaningful distinction between plants and ants and humans and dogs.

A sentient thing, to me, is a thing that experiences. It might not have language and thoughts and morals, but it can experience. These may be the raw feels of sucking a lemon or the grand experiences of skydiving into a supernova, or the more mundane things like putting out the garbage(which needs to be done tonight)...

So for Dharma, there are essentially two kinds of systems, the sentient and the non sentient - and we cant really say where one joins the other (interconctivity & interdependence)

As to your contradiction, I haven't a clue about the 31 planes of existence, but I would imagine that to have an experience one must be concious of the experience (I think the skandic view would cohere with my imagining??).

With sukha.

zidangus

A sentient thing, to me, is a thing that experiences. It might not have language and thoughts and morals, but it can experience. These may be the raw feels of sucking a lemon or the grand experiences of skydiving into a supernova, or the more mundane things like putting out the garbage(which needs to be done tonight)...

sky diving into a Supernova, now that would be an experience ! :hair:

With Metta

MindGate

bump

footiam

I suppose the occupants in that plane are not sentient beings. Otherwise, they could feel but just do not feel. It is the same like when we are giving a jab of some chemicals which could numb our senses. In cases like that, we are still sentient but do not feel.

fivebells

@MindGate, I take it you're not satisfied with the answers you've gotten. What kind of response were you looking for?

compassionate_warrior

I can't help but notice that no one has much exposure to or understanding of the Buddhist cosmology and 31 planes of existence. (Or maybe those in-the-know aren't participating on the relevant threads.) This topic has come up on about 4 threads in the last few weeks, but never gets any explanation or informed comment. And yet, wikipedia says the cosmology and 31 realms are a belief held by southern as well as northern schools in Buddhism. I think MindGate was hoping for a response from someone who's studied these teachings and can interpret them.

Jason

So, from what I heard, a sentient being is a being that can feel pain and has consciousness. Well... one of the 31 planes of existence (planes of sentient beings) is a place where unconscious beings (asaññasatta) exist (in Buddhist cosmology). Is this a contradiction?

I think most of what's known as the '31 planes of existence' has been cobbled together from various sources throughout the canon. For example, the formless realms may have originally referred to advanced states of meditative absorption (since they correspond to the four 'immaterial' jhanas), but were later taken to also refer to actual realms of birth above the brahma-realms, especially for the benefit of non-returners. (I suggest checking out books like Gombrich's What the Buddha Thought for a more critical look at these kinds of issues.)

Beyond that, assuming such realms like that of the asannasatta are understood to actually exist and weren't simply used by the Buddha for his own didactic purposes in teaching brahmins, there's nothing in Buddhism that states all types of beings are or must be 'conscious' or 'percipient' all the time (e.g., people in comas are, for all intents and purposes, 'non-percipient' and 'unconscious' beings); and interestingly enough, these beings are said to fall from that 'realm' (which could perhaps also refer to a particular state of mind) "as soon as perception arises in them" (Walshe, DN 1). I'll leave it up to you to decide what that means.

compassionate_warrior

Thanks for weighing in on this, Jason. I looked up "What the Buddha Thought" online, and the reviews said it was for people who already were scholars, not for relative beginners in the Pali Canon like some of us. What do you think?

Jason

Thanks for weighing in on this, Jason. I looked up "What the Buddha Thought" online, and the reviews said it was for people who already were scholars, not for relative beginners in the Pali Canon like some of us. What do you think?

Past familiarity with the Pali Canon and/or Gombrich's previous books would certainly be helpful since you probably won't get as much out of a work like this as you might if you did, but I still think it's worth reading. Personally, I don't really find it to be all that daunting, but your mileage may vary.

Vincenzi

So, from what I heard, a sentient being is a being that can feel pain and has consciousness. Well... one of the 31 planes of existence (planes of sentient beings) is a place where unconscious beings (asaññasatta) exist (in Buddhist cosmology). Is this a contradiction?

I think most of what's known as the '31 planes of existence' has been cobbled together from various sources throughout the canon. For example, the formless realms may have originally referred to advanced states of meditative absorption (since they correspond to the four 'immaterial' jhanas), but were later taken to also refer to actual realms of birth above the brahma-realms, especially for the benefit of non-returners. (I suggest checking out books like Gombrich's What the Buddha Thought for a more critical look at these kinds of issues.)

Beyond that, assuming such realms like that of the asannasatta are understood to actually exist and weren't simply used by the Buddha for his own didactic purposes in teaching brahmins, there's nothing in Buddhism that states all types of beings are or must be 'conscious' or 'percipient' all the time (e.g., people in comas are, for all intents and purposes, 'non-percipient' and 'unconscious' beings); and interestingly enough, these beings are said to fall from that 'realm' (which could perhaps also refer to a particular state of mind) "as soon as perception arises in them" (Walshe, DN 1). I'll leave it up to you to decide what that means.

anagamis go to the suddhavas abodes, not to the inmaterial domains.

Jason

anagamis go to the suddhavas abodes, not to the inmaterial domains.

Right. That probably should have been two separate sentences. With the last part. I was simply referring to the idea posited by Gombrich in What the Buddha Thought ( pg. 89-90) that a special realm of birth may have bee created for the benefit of the non-returner that was higher than the brahma-realms, which is unconnected to the realms of birth corresponding to the four immaterial jhanas. Sorry about the confusion.