[ptmQqoxw]

I'm currently reading Thich Nhat Hanh's "The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching" and in it he points out that the majority of Buddhists hold that the three marks of existence are impermanence, suffering, and nonself. He, however, argues that this is a mistake and suffering should be replaced with Nirvana. I was just curious what you all thought about this? Is it important to practicing Buddhism? As an aside, have any of you read the book and what do you think of it? Thanks.

[patrycjakolekk]

hi WW

Thich Nhat Hanh is a very good person & a very good teacher (of practical matters) but often not the best scholar

the three marks of existence are impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not-self

the 1st two marks are applicable to all conditioned things (sankhata dhatus)

the 3rd mark is applicable to all things, both conditioned & unconditioned

Nirvana is the unconditioned thing (asankatta dhatu)

as all conditioned things cannot bring permanent happiness, given they are conditioned, dependent upon impermanent causes & conditions, they possess the quality of unsatisfactoriness

for example, if we are ignorant of Dhamma, we buy a new computer and believe it is satisfactory. but later on, it breaks down

the computer inherently possesses the quality of unsatisfactoriness (although it is satisfactory temporarily)

thus, if our mind can reach the unconditioned state (by not having unrealistic expectations of satisfactoriness in respect to inherently unsatisfactory things), it can abide in Nirvana

Nirvana is satisfactory. Nirvana is not marked by unsatisfactoriness

Thich Nhat Hanh's intention here, about Nirvana, is sound. but his scholarly reasoning is incorrect

kind regards

may all beings find Nirvana peace




Buddha taught:

277. "All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

278. "All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

279. "All things are not-self" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

Dhammapada "What do you think of this, O monks? Is form permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard that as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"What do you think of this, O monks? Is feeling permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard that as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"What do you think of this, O monks? Is perception permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, what is impermanent, is it unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, that which is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard that as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"What do you think of this, O monks? Are mental formations permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, those that are impermanent, are they unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, those that are impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard them as: 'They are mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"Now what do you think of this, O monks? Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?"

"Impermanent, O Lord."

"Now, what is impermanent, is that unsatisfactory or satisfactory?"

"Unsatisfactory, O Lord."

"Now, what is impermanent, unsatisfactory, subject to change, is it proper to regard it as: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?"

"Indeed, not that, O Lord."

"Therefore, surely, O monks, whatever form, past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, low or lofty, far or near, all that form must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality, thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

"Therefore, surely, O monks, whatever feeling, past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, low or lofty, far or near, all that feeling must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality, thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

"Therefore, surely, O monks, whatever perception, past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, low or lofty, far or near, all that perception must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality, thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

"Therefore, surely, O monks, whatever mental formations, past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, low or lofty, far or near, all those mental formations must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality, thus: 'These are not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

"Therefore, surely, O monks, whatever consciousness, past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, low or lofty, far or near, all that consciousness must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality, thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

"O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception, gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness. Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from passion, he is emancipated. Being emancipated, there is the knowledge that he is emancipated. He knows: 'birth is exhausted, lived is the holy life, what had to be done is done, there is nothing more of this becoming.'"

This the Blessed One said. Pleased, the group of five monks were delighted with the exposition of the Blessed One; moreover, as this exposition was being spoken, the minds of the group of five monks were freed of defilements, without attachment.

Indeed, at that time there were six arahants in the world.

Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic

[toksenveste]

In the Chinese Buddhism traditions (And I guess Mahayana in general), there is a concept of 3 marks of genuine Buddhism (3 Dharma seals), which are anicca, anatta and nirvana. The idea is that a Buddhist teaching must incorporate these 3 ideas. Otherwise, the teaching cannot be consider to be Buddhism. My speculation that anicca implies dukkha, so there is really no need to call it out separately, and that a teaching must have a goal, and that is why Nirvana in part of the seals.

Now whether or not 3 marks of genuine Buddhism is suppose to be the same as the 3 marks of existence, or what the contents should be, you can decide for yourself.

[inofindy]

hi

my impression was there are four dharma seals in Mahayana (athought some Mahayana traditions say three)

to have impermanence without unsatisfactories will not result in Nirvana, given the mind must have dispassion to reach Nirvana

if impermanent things are simply impermanent, like a car you can simply trade for another car, then discernment of impermenance will not result in Nirvana

this is the same as believing in rebirth. if one truely believes in rebirth then believing in impermanence is not important because we simply trade in one life for another life. this is why rebirth does not lead to Nirvana.

there must be the discernment of the unsatisfactoriness of impermanent things for dispassion & Nirvana to occur

thus, four dharma seals are better than three, just like $4 is better than $3

regards

[Paladin]

In the Chinese Buddhism traditions (And I guess Mahayana in general), there is a concept of 3 marks of genuine Buddhism (3 Dharma seals), which are anicca, anatta and nirvana.

At Ken Mcleod's "Unfettered Mind" Mahayana website he outlines the 3 Marks of Existence as Change, Suffering and Non-Self.

http://www.unfetteredmind.org/three-marks-three-doors

The Three Marks of Existence are described by Pema Chodron (Tibetan Buddhism) as Impermanence, Suffering and Egolessness.

http://buddhism.about.com/gi/o.htm?z...hree-marks.cfm

So both teachers are saying anicca, dukkha, and anatta and not anicca, anatta and nirvana.

However Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche (TB) describes four characteristics or "seals of Dharma"


All compounded things are impermanent.

All emotions are painful. This is something that only Buddhists would talk about. Many religions worship things like love with celebration and songs. Buddhists think, “This is all suffering.”

All phenomena are empty; they are without inherent existence. This is actually the ultimate view of Buddhism; the other three are grounded on this third seal.

The fourth seal is that nirvana is beyond extremes.

http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.ph...k=view&id=1814


.

[evalayCap]

Moderators Note:

Topic moved to General Buddhist Discussions Forum to keep it open to debate for different tradition members.

[QwOpHGyZ]

As an aside, have any of you read the book and what do you think of it?

No, I haven't read the book by Thich Nhat Hahn. I've read a couple of his other books though and I'm not keen on his style of writing - its a bit too flowery and emotional for my liking, though I'm sure he must be a very nice man.

[blenIgnigeSef]

I have not read this book, or much of Thich Nhat Hahn's teachings.
My understanding from study within Tibetan Buddhism traditions is as Aloka-D has quoted above.
One of the characteristics of every thing in this physical world, including all our mental activity and psychological experiences is that it is all marked by dukkha - imperfection or being unsatisfactory in some regard.

[Luisabens]

However Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche (TB) describes four characteristics or "seals of Dharma"

i think it is important to examine the word 'seal' or 'mudra' because i sense the word is used in a different context than the Pali 'lakkhana' (sign, characteristic, mark)

the seals of Dharma refer to the salient characteristics of the Dhamma teachings & realities

where as the originally used the term 'lakkhana' referred to the salient characteristics of the conditioned five aggregates

in general, the term "existence" means "being" or "conditioned arising". it does not mean the unborn Nirvana

for example, when Buddha described the coming into existence of conditioned things, he spoke as follows:

Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? the three marks of existent or created things, as revealed in the 2nd sermon, were not originally intended to apply to Nirvana, given Nirvana is the 'unborn' or 'uncreated'

regards

[famosetroie]

Is it important to practicing Buddhism? As an aside, have any of you read the book and what do you think of it? Thanks.

TNH discusses his version of the three seals, here

THN is not teaching the same dharma as the Buddha taught to monks, which promoted dispassion

TNH is imparting his own teaching for lay people, to promote loving families (rather than dispassionate monks & nuns)

regards

:hug: