Oposition against Self inquiry? - Discussion
Paweł K:
Asking any question within mind is useless, if there is an answer in mind then it need to be brought forth and the best way is to do it without asking questions. Reason is that questions make assumptions. These assumption are always wrong and the reason is that question would not be asked if mind turned toward answer to make question so it turn somewhere else, deliberately make question to be a lie because lies make good questions. All objects and their methods are but a lies. Questions mentioned in this sutta are such lies too.
There are many mechanisms with which mind confuse itself and they must be dropped. That doesn't mean one does not know who or what he/she is, quite the opposite, just whole discussion within mind about imaginary concepts is gone and what remain is much greater knowledge of mind than one could ever achieve with 'self inquiry'.
There are many mechanisms with which mind confuse itself and they must be dropped. That doesn't mean one does not know who or what he/she is, quite the opposite, just whole discussion within mind about imaginary concepts is gone and what remain is much greater knowledge of mind than one could ever achieve with 'self inquiry'.
The quote is simply stating there is no real "I"; that the "I" is dependently arisen and the "I" (and suffering) ceases when ignorance ceases.
This is the essence of the discourses therefore why, like Mara, quibble about it?
Mara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhuni Vajira, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse:
By whom has this being been created?
Where is the maker of the being?
Where has the being arisen?
Where does the being cease?
Then the bhikkhuni Vajira, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses:
Why now do you assume 'a being (satta)'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found.
Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word 'chariot' is used,
So, when the aggregates are present,
There's the convention 'a being.'
It's only suffering that comes to be,
Suffering that stands and falls away.
Nothing but suffering comes to be,
Nothing but suffering ceases.
Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Vajira knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there.
SN 5.10
By whom has this being been created?
Where is the maker of the being?
Where has the being arisen?
Where does the being cease?
Then the bhikkhuni Vajira, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to him in verses:
Why now do you assume 'a being (satta)'?
Mara, have you grasped a view?
This is a heap of sheer constructions:
Here no being is found.
Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word 'chariot' is used,
So, when the aggregates are present,
There's the convention 'a being.'
It's only suffering that comes to be,
Suffering that stands and falls away.
Nothing but suffering comes to be,
Nothing but suffering ceases.
Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Vajira knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there.
SN 5.10
For those confused about what the word 'birth' (jati) means:
What is birth (jati)? Whatever birth...of the various beings (satta) in this or that group of beings (satta), that is called birth. SN 12.2
"'A being (satta),' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?""Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, feeling...consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' SN 23.2
He assumes form to be 'self'. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth (jati), what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication (of self) is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. SN 22.81
Angulimala, go to that woman and on arrival say to her, 'Sister, since I was born in the noble birth (jati), I do not recall intentionally killing a living being. Through this truth may there be wellbeing for you, wellbeing for your fetus.'
MN 86
"Monks, any brahmans or contemplatives who recollect their manifold past dwellings all recollect the five aggregates subjected to clinging, or one among them. Which five? When recollecting, 'I was one with such a form in the past,' one is recollecting just form. Or when recollecting, 'I was one with such a feeling in the past,' one is recollecting just feeling. Or when recollecting, 'I was one with such a perception in the past,' one is recollecting just perception. Or when recollecting, 'I was one with such mental fabrications in the past,' one is recollecting just mental fabrications. Or when recollecting, 'I was one with such a consciousness in the past,' one is recollecting just consciousness. Each...is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' This, monks, is called a disciple of the noble ones who tears down and does not build up; who abandons and does not cling; who discards and does not pull in; who scatters and does not pile up.
SN 22.79
Pål:
What do you think self-inquiry done right would look like?
The suttas do teach the technique of 'noting' (accompanied by clear comprehension & wise reflection).
The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'Why don't I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?' So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort."And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation & does not lead to Unbinding.'"As I noticed that it leads to my own affliction, it subsided. As I noticed that it leads to the affliction of others... to the affliction of both... it obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding, it subsided. Whenever thinking imbued with sensuality had arisen, I simply abandoned it, dispelled it, wiped it out of existence. MN 19
Pål:
What do you think self-inquiry done right would look like?
'Self-inquiry' in the suttas is contemplating (within) the dependent origination. If unclear how to do this, this booklet helps: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/shapeofsuffering.pdf
Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying at Uruvela, beside the river Nerañjara at the foot of the Bodhi Tree...and gave well-reasoned attention during the first watch of the night to dependent arising in forward order, thus:
From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabricators.
From fabricators as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
From consciousness as a requisite condition comes mind-&-body.
From mind-&-body as a requisite condition come the six sense media.
From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.
From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.
From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.
From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging.
From clinging as a requisite condition comes becoming.
From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabricators.
From fabricators as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
From consciousness as a requisite condition comes mind-&-body.
From mind-&-body as a requisite condition come the six sense media.
From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.
From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.
From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.
From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging.
From clinging as a requisite condition comes becoming.
From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
Pål:
What do you think self-inquiry done right would look like?
This is another done right 'self' inquiry.
"Who, O Lord, has a sense-impression?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One."I do not say that 'he has a sense-impression.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who has a sense-impression?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of sense-impression?' And to that the correct reply is: 'The sixfold sense-base is a condition of sense-impression, and sense-impression is the condition of feeling.'"
"Who, O Lord, feels?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he feels.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who feels?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is: 'sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.'"
"Who, O Lord, craves?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the condition of clinging.'"
"Who, O Lord, clings?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say that 'he clings.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who clings?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of clinging?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of (self) becoming.' Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.
SN 12.12
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One."I do not say that 'he has a sense-impression.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who has a sense-impression?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of sense-impression?' And to that the correct reply is: 'The sixfold sense-base is a condition of sense-impression, and sense-impression is the condition of feeling.'"
"Who, O Lord, feels?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he feels.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who feels?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is: 'sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.'"
"Who, O Lord, craves?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the condition of clinging.'"
"Who, O Lord, clings?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say that 'he clings.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who clings?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of clinging?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of (self) becoming.' Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.
SN 12.12
The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving to be, craving not-to-be: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification (sakkāya) described by the Blessed One."
MN 44
MN 44
