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.
I see Dukka as a composite property of all finite systems, loosely it is the inevitable negative entailed by annica and anataman in. The experience of Dukka by sentient systems is the suffering, strain, diminishing returns etc that we commonly experience.
Don't forget the three marks are said to be true of all contingent systems, so that necessarily means ones that don't experience as well as those that do.
Anicca is a composite property of all finite systems, loosely it is the inevitable negative and impersonal/anataman. The experience of anicca by sentient systems is dukkha,the suffering, strain, diminishing returns etc that we commonly experience.
The 3 marks can only be experienced by sentient beings. So the price of sentience(existence) is dukkha through clinging to sense desires(kamatanha), clinging to existence(bhavatanha) and rejection of existence(vibhavatanha). All presupposes a self ie. I want to be happy, I love, hate etc... I want to live forever, to be reborn... I don't want to live anymore.
Anicca is a composite property of all finite systems, loosely it is the inevitable negative and impersonal/anataman. The experience of anicca by sentient systems is dukkha,the suffering, strain, diminishing returns etc that we commonly experience.
The 3 marks can only be experienced by sentient beings. So the price of sentience(existence) is dukkha through clinging to sense desires(kamatanha), clinging to existence(bhavatanha) and rejection of existence(vibhavatanha). All presupposes a self ie. I want to be happy, I love, hate etc... I want to live forever, to be reborn... I don't want to live anymore.
I don't see it like that:)
The Three Marks condition all phenomenon, they are true of all possible phenomenon in all possible finite changing universes. We experience them acutely and profoundly in these lives of ours but that doesn't mean they only exist in these lives of ours.
As an analogous case, there would be gravity without the sense of falling. There would be annica, anataman, dukka without the experience of them.
How would there be dukkha which is reliant on craving if there were no sentient beings to crave though? Dukkha is not an inherent quality. Otherwise the 4NTs would have been the One Noble Truth.
How would there be dukkha which is reliant on craving if there were no sentient beings to crave though?
Have a think about Dharma in terms of the various levels of abstraction.
When you really do this you will see how its everywhere not just within experience. The political world, for example, is subject to the Dharmic truths. As, I would imagine are the worlds of Celebrity. I am not sure on the Economic sphere, its just too complex to see the Dharmic truths in action there.
But these truths, to me, don't just appear in the higher levels of abstraction they also appear in the lower levels too.
In fact at the very lowest levels at which they can be instantiated. So for me, I see Dukka and Anataman especially, as being emergences of their more primitive abstractions.
For example:
Any finite system that is the product of continued survival will by necessity have subsystems to support that survival. These subsystems will contain avoidance and attraction systems and these systems will contain valuation subsystems. To me, these subsystems are the protosystems of Dukka and Tanha.
Ok, I can see how you're using the terms (dukkha and tahna) now. I've never seen them defined in such a way in Buddhism and you speak in a way that makes me feel I have a brain the size of a peanut so it took me a minute. if dukkha ultimately relies on ignorance then where does that fit in? If the definition of dukkha and tahna in the Buddha's teachings are what you describe then is freedom from dukkha possible, since it's an inherent quality of all things?
Ok, I can see how you're using the terms (dukkha and tahna) now. I've never seen them defined in such a way in Buddhism and you speak in a way that makes me feel I have a brain the size of a peanut so it took me a minute.
That's my bad explination then, these are not diffocilut concepts, in fact they are very simple concepts.
I think you might want to try asking yourself about Annica, Anataman and Dukka without reference to human suffering. Maybe you are very steadfast in your understanding of Dharma and this wont be possible, I don't know.
I started doing this about six years ago and I have found it is what secured my certainty in Dharma. Mind you my understanding may be completely at odds with The Buddha's teachings!:)
if dukkha ultimately relies on ignorance then where does that fit in?
The fact that the system fails to represent its internal and external structure is a part of the Dukka composite that as Buddhists we can call "illusion and delusion."
If the definition of dukkha and tahna in the Buddha's teachings are what you describe then is freedom from dukkha possible,
1) These are not definitions of Dukha and Tanha in any relevant sense, more they are descriptions of low level phenomenon that at the high level of abstraction are craving, thirst etc
since it's an inherent quality of all things?
There are no inherent qualities I am aware of. These Dharmic phenomenon like Dukka, Tanha etc are emergent qualities. They arise from below and are not found where from they arise.
This point is absolutely foundational to my understanding of Dharma.
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?"
"As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans."
"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.
"This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.
"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a mother. The tears you have shed over the death of a mother while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.
"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a father... the death of a brother... the death of a sister... the death of a son... the death of a daughter... loss with regard to relatives... loss with regard to wealth... loss with regard to disease. The tears you have shed over loss with regard to disease while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.
"Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries — enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released."
And this
“Our unique attributes evolved over a period of roughly 6 million
years. They represent modifications of great ape attributes that
are roughly 10 million years old, primate attributes that are
roughly 55 million years old, mammalian attributes that are
roughly 245 million years old, vertebrate attributes that are
roughly 600 million years old, and attributes of nucleated
cells that are perhaps 1,500 million years old. If you think it is
unnecessary to go that far back in the tree of life to understand
our own attributes, consider the humbling fact that we share
with nematodes (tiny wormlike creatures) the same gene that
controls appetite. At most, our unique attributes are like an
addition onto a vast multiroom mansion. It is sheer hubris to
think that we can ignore all but the newest room.”
Or this
“Our true ancestry is the emergent creativity of the Universe.
Our forebears were those who learned how to coalesce
hydrogen and helium into stars, to form planets, to sustain
life first from mineral nutrients in the sea and later to capture
delicious photons, to exploit oxygen for energy rather than be exterminated by it, to diversify via sexual reproduction, to form
social groups for greater security and protection of offspring.
We are the beneficiaries (and, admittedly, also the victims) of
this narrative of emergence. Our ‘companions’ are all of these
progenitors. Indeed, they are more than companions; they are
family. From them we have inherited our corporeal shapes
and movements, our body chemistry, and even some of our
behavioral agendas.”
Was the Buddha pointing to the evolutionary process [samsaric cycle] and using metaphorical language to imply interconnectedness of all beings? This very struggle for life is itself dukkha.
If the definition of dukkha and tahna in the Buddha's teachings are what you describe then is freedom from dukkha possible, since it's an inherent quality of all things?
an arahant contemplates dukkhata all day and all night but his mind does not experience dukkha
the dukkha of the three characteristics means 'unsatisfactoriness', 'imperfection' or 'unreliableness'
this quality is inherent in impermanent phenomena
it is not the dukkha of the noble truths. noble truth dukkha is psychological dukkha
the psychological dukkha of craving is unrelated to the inherent dukkha characteristic
the dukkha of the first sermon is not the dukkha of the second sermon
just spiritual language, probably taught to an audience of monks with poor motivation or strong inherent brahministic beliefs
btw...the word saṃsāro is not 'transmigration'
some more profound suttas on the same subject can be found here and here
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "Monks, from an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, although beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on.
"There comes a time when the great ocean evaporates, dries up, & does not exist. But for beings — as long as they are hindered by ignorance, fettered by craving, transmigrating & wandering on — I don't say that there is an end of suffering & stress.
"There comes a time when Sineru, king of mountains, is consumed with flame, is destroyed, & does not exist. But for beings — as long as they are hindered by ignorance, fettered by craving, transmigrating & wandering on — I don't say that there is an end of suffering & stress.
"There comes a time when the great earth is consumed with flame, is destroyed, & does not exist. But for beings — as long as they are hindered by ignorance, fettered by craving, transmigrating & wandering on — I don't say that there is an end of suffering & stress."
The Buddha is pointing to impermanence... to the ancients oceans, mountains and the great earth should have appeared unchanging. To the Buddha such things are also subject to change and destruction. Dying planets are not in dispute nowadays. In fact the Buddha also referred to moving mountains in some sutta (Samyutta Nikaya III.25) regarding inevitability of death before this was shown to be the case by science.
There is another sutta describing all beings as being one's mother, father, brother and sister(interconnectedness), hence the respect for all lives.
The suttas are surprisingly relevant in the modern context. One doesn't have to bend the suttas to fit science.
Comments
Ah, so we agree.
Anicca is a composite property of all finite systems, loosely it is the inevitable negative and impersonal/anataman. The experience of anicca by sentient systems is dukkha,the suffering, strain, diminishing returns etc that we commonly experience.
The 3 marks can only be experienced by sentient beings. So the price of sentience(existence) is dukkha through clinging to sense desires(kamatanha), clinging to existence(bhavatanha) and rejection of existence(vibhavatanha). All presupposes a self ie. I want to be happy, I love, hate etc... I want to live forever, to be reborn... I don't want to live anymore.
I don't see it like that:)
The Three Marks condition all phenomenon, they are true of all possible phenomenon in all possible finite changing universes. We experience them acutely and profoundly in these lives of ours but that doesn't mean they only exist in these lives of ours.
As an analogous case, there would be gravity without the sense of falling. There would be annica, anataman, dukka without the experience of them.
Mat
Have a think about Dharma in terms of the various levels of abstraction.
When you really do this you will see how its everywhere not just within experience. The political world, for example, is subject to the Dharmic truths. As, I would imagine are the worlds of Celebrity. I am not sure on the Economic sphere, its just too complex to see the Dharmic truths in action there.
But these truths, to me, don't just appear in the higher levels of abstraction they also appear in the lower levels too.
In fact at the very lowest levels at which they can be instantiated. So for me, I see Dukka and Anataman especially, as being emergences of their more primitive abstractions.
For example:
Any finite system that is the product of continued survival will by necessity have subsystems to support that survival. These subsystems will contain avoidance and attraction systems and these systems will contain valuation subsystems. To me, these subsystems are the protosystems of Dukka and Tanha.
That's my bad explination then, these are not diffocilut concepts, in fact they are very simple concepts.
I think you might want to try asking yourself about Annica, Anataman and Dukka without reference to human suffering. Maybe you are very steadfast in your understanding of Dharma and this wont be possible, I don't know.
I started doing this about six years ago and I have found it is what secured my certainty in Dharma. Mind you my understanding may be completely at odds with The Buddha's teachings!:)
The fact that the system fails to represent its internal and external structure is a part of the Dukka composite that as Buddhists we can call "illusion and delusion."
1) These are not definitions of Dukha and Tanha in any relevant sense, more they are descriptions of low level phenomenon that at the high level of abstraction are craving, thirst etc
There are no inherent qualities I am aware of. These Dharmic phenomenon like Dukka, Tanha etc are emergent qualities. They arise from below and are not found where from they arise.
This point is absolutely foundational to my understanding of Dharma.
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?"
"As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans."
"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.
"This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.
"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a mother. The tears you have shed over the death of a mother while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.
"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a father... the death of a brother... the death of a sister... the death of a son... the death of a daughter... loss with regard to relatives... loss with regard to wealth... loss with regard to disease. The tears you have shed over loss with regard to disease while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.
"Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries — enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released."
And this
Or this
Was the Buddha pointing to the evolutionary process [samsaric cycle] and using metaphorical language to imply interconnectedness of all beings? This very struggle for life is itself dukkha.
the dukkha of the three characteristics means 'unsatisfactoriness', 'imperfection' or 'unreliableness'
this quality is inherent in impermanent phenomena
it is not the dukkha of the noble truths. noble truth dukkha is psychological dukkha
the psychological dukkha of craving is unrelated to the inherent dukkha characteristic
the dukkha of the first sermon is not the dukkha of the second sermon
best to call dukkha characteristic 'dukkhata'
btw...the word saṃsāro is not 'transmigration'
some more profound suttas on the same subject can be found here and here
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "Monks, from an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, although beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on.
The Buddha is pointing to impermanence... to the ancients oceans, mountains and the great earth should have appeared unchanging. To the Buddha such things are also subject to change and destruction. Dying planets are not in dispute nowadays. In fact the Buddha also referred to moving mountains in some sutta (Samyutta Nikaya III.25) regarding inevitability of death before this was shown to be the case by science.
There is another sutta describing all beings as being one's mother, father, brother and sister(interconnectedness), hence the respect for all lives.
The suttas are surprisingly relevant in the modern context. One doesn't have to bend the suttas to fit science.