Anattalakkhana Sutta: on Not-self
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лис 2016
- The Buddha's central teaching of Not-self - Anatta. In this discourse, the Buddha analyzes the constituents of a person's body and mind (khandha) and demonstrates that they are each impermanent (anicca), subject to suffering (dukkha) and thus unfit for identification with a "self" (attan).
www.accesstoinsight.org/tipita...
The Anattalakkana Sutta is always my 2nd favorite Sutta after the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta. Anyone who can grasp in depth this sutta and the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, could understand the whole teaching of the Buddha. Sadhu x3 for uploading.
That’s absolutely true.
great ! pure english ,pure sutra ,Good Job !
Are you Brasilian? If in the UK, and passing through London, why don't you visit me in Mildmay Hospital in Hackney, London, before January 14th. After that I'm going back to Cambridge (the Divinity Faculty there). Bravo again for getting this very important sutta out there.
I am Cuban-American. If I am ever in London, I'll let you know! Thank you!
Cheers.
0:32 Non-Self
Can anyone tells me what is it that gets rebirthed if there is no "soul, essence" or something that carries the karma?
This is an age old question. The earliest Buddhist texts do not provide a straightforward answer, so apparently the Buddha did not think it was important to understand all the details of the mechanism of rebirth. Later traditions invented concepts like the foundational consciousness (alaya vijnana) and the 'ground of becoming' (bhavanga) which act as carrier of karmic seeds which ripen in the next lives.
Javier Fernández-Viña I posit from many different views and sources from individuals who speak of these kinds of things and my opinion, that there is "something" ( a file, folder, mind ) that carries the "tendencies, fears, etc into the next life. Your thoughts?
Maybe, I can't say I have strong beliefs about this one way or the other. Thankfully, the Buddha did not see it as very important. Don't get me wrong, he thought rebirth was definitely the case, the texts just don't show him as interested in outlining the mechanism of how it works. He's more focused on practice and on ideas which are skillful.
Javier Fernández-Viña
Right. I can agree. But in my opinion, he was misunderstood just like most people who give a new view are misunderstood. What I think he meant is that there is no human soul that gets rebirthed but rather the essence or rather the history of the awareness, is what gets rebirthed which is why our tendencies, fears, etc, are what is important to grow out of or grow from which is what he stressed about. Just my opinion and I think a valid one.
Ajahn Brahm was asked this same question and I'll paraphrase what he answered: if you have a mango tree and it gives a mango seed, a new mango tree will grow from the old one. It is not the same mango tree but it came from the seed of the old one. It will grow to be a mango tree, not an apple tree or something else.