[Yarikoff]

Supramundane

Itivuttaka: The Group of Twos

This was said by the Lord...

Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings hold back and some overreach; only those with vision see.

And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Devas and humans enjoy being, delight in being, are satisfied with being. When Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of being, their minds do not enter into it or acquire confidence in it or settle upon it or become resolved upon it. Thus, bhikkhus, do some hold back.

How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed and disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea of) non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when the body perishes at death, is annihilated (ucchijjati) and destroyed and does not exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is reality!' Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach.

How, bhikkhus, do those with vision see? Herein a bhikkhu sees what has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, he practices the course for turning away (nibbidāya), for dispassion (virāgāya), for the cessation (nirodhāya) of what has come to be. Thus, bhikkhus, do those with vision see.



Ucchindati [ud + chid, see chindati] to break up, destroy, annihilate S v.432 (bhavataṇhaŋ), A iv.17 (fut. ucchecchāmi to be read with v. l. for T. ucchejjissāmi); Sn 2 (pret. udacchida), 208 (ger. ucchijja); J v.383; Dh 285. Pass. ucchijjati to be destroyed or annihilated, to cease to exist S iv.309; J v.242, 467; Miln 192; PvA 63, 130 (= na pavattati), 253 (= natthi). -- pp. ucchinna (q. v.).
Kaccayanagotta Sutta

By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence (atthitañceva) & non-existence (natthitañca). But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances) & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.

"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form 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/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.



Atthi [Sk. asti, 1st sg. asmi; Gr. ei)mi/ -- e)sti/; Lat. sum -- est; Goth. im -- ist; Ags. eom -- is E. am -- is] to be, to exist.

Atthibhāva state of being, existence, being J i.222, 290; ii.415; DhA ii.5; iv.217 (atthibhāva vā natthibhāva vā whether there is or not).

Atthitā (f.) [f. abstr. fr. atthi cp. atthibhāva] state of being, existence, being, reality M i.486; S ii.17 (˚añ c˚ eva natthitañ ca to be and not to be); iii.135; J v.110 (kassaci atthitaŋ vā natthitaŋ vā jānāhi see if there is anybody or not); DhsA 394. -- Often in abl. atthitāya by reason of, on account of, this being so DhA iii.344 (idamatthitāya under this condition) PvA 94, 97, 143.

Natthika (adj. -- n.) [Sk. nāstika] one who professes the motto of "natthi," a sceptic, nihilist S i.96; usually in cpds.
-- diṭṭhi scepticism, nihilistic view, heresy Sn 243 (=micchāditthi Com.); VvA 342; PvA 244; -- vāda one who professes a nihilistic doctrine S iii.73; M i.403; A ii.31; PvA 215 (+micchādiṭṭhika).

Natthitā (f.) [Sk. nāstitā, fr. n' atthi] nihilism S ii.17; J v.110.

Natthibhāva [n' atthi -- bhāva] non -- existence DhA iii.324.

[hablyShappY]

Mundane

A1. "Now, householders, of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is nothing (natthi) given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no (natthi) fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously born beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the other after having directly known and realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three skillful activities — good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable brahmans & contemplatives do not see, in unskillful activities, the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.

A2. "Because there actually is the other world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is no other world' is his wrong view. Because there actually is the other world, when he is resolved that 'There is no other world,' that is his wrong resolve. Because there actually is the other world, when he speaks the statement, 'There is no other world,' that is his wrong speech. Because there actually is the other world, when he is says that 'There is no other world,' he makes himself an opponent to those arahants who know the other world. Because there actually is the other world, when he persuades another that 'There is no other world,' that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others. Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested. And this wrong view, wrong resolve, wrong speech, opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, exaltation of self & disparagement of others: These many evil, unskillful activities come into play, in dependence on wrong view.

A3. "With regard to this, a wise person considers thus: 'If there is no other world, then — at the break-up of the body, after death — this venerable person has made himself safe. But if there is the other world, then this venerable person — on the break-up of the body, after death — will reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. Even if we didn't speak of the other world and there weren't the true statement of those venerable brahmans & contemplatives, this venerable person is still criticized in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of bad habits & wrong view: one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence (natthikavādo) . If there really is an other world, then this venerable person has made a bad throw twice: in that he is criticized by the wise here-&-now, and in that — with the break-up of the body, after death — he will reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when poorly grasped & poorly adopted by him, covers (only) one side and leaves behind the possibility of the skillful.

B1. "Now, householders, of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is (atthi) what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the other world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously born beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the other after having directly known & realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three unskillful activities — bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three skillful activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct. Why is that? Because those venerable brahmans & contemplatives see in unskillful activities the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; and in skillful activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.

B2. "Because there actually is the other world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is a other world' is his right view. Because there actually is the other world, when he is resolved that 'There is an other world,' that is his right resolve. Because there actually is the other world, when he speaks the statement, 'There is an other world,' that is his right speech. Because there actually is the other world, when he is says that 'There is a other world,' he doesn't make himself an opponent to those arahants who know the other world. Because there actually is the other world, when he persuades another that 'There is an other world,' that is persuasion in what is true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is true Dhamma, he doesn't exalt himself or disparage others. Whatever bad habituation he previously had is abandoned, while good habituation is manifested. And this right view, right resolve, right speech, non-opposition to the arahants, persuasion in what is true Dhamma, non-exaltation of self & non-disparagement of others: These many skillful activities come into play, in dependence on right view.

B3. "With regard to this, a wise person considers thus: 'If there is the other world, then this venerable person — on the break-up of the body, after death — will reappear in the good destination, the heavenly world. Even if we didn't speak of the other world and there weren't the true statement of those venerable brahmans & contemplatives, this venerable person is still praised in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence (atthikavādo) . If there really is an other world, then this venerable person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the wise here-&-now; and in that — with the break-up of the body, after death — he will reappear in the good destination, the heavenly world. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.

Apannaka Sutta: A Safe Bet

[icyfreshy]

Brahmajāla Sutta: The All-embracing Net of Views

1. Eternalism (Sassatavāda): Views 1–4

30. "There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are eternalists (sassatavādā) and, who on four grounds, proclaim the self (attānañca) and the world (lokañca) to be eternal. And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honorable recluses and brahmins proclaim their views?

He speaks thus: 'The self and the world are eternal, barren, steadfast as a mountain peak, standing firm like a pillar. And though these beings roam and wander, pass away and re-arise, yet the self and the world remain the same just like eternity itself.



4. Annihilationism (Ucchedavāda): Views 51–57

84. "There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are annihilationists (ucchedavādā) and, who on seven grounds, proclaim the annihilation (ucchedaṃ), destruction (vināsaṃ) and extermination (vibhavaṃ) of an existent being (sattahi). And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honorable recluses and brahmins proclaim their views?

85. "Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the following doctrine and view: 'The self (ayaṃ attā), good sir, has material form; it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father and mother. Since this self (ayaṃ attā), good sir, is annihilated and destroyed with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this point the self (ayaṃ attā) is completely annihilated.' In this way some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being (sato sattassa).



Sassata (adj.) [Vedic śaśvat] eternal, perpetual D i.13; iii.31 sq., 137 sq.; M i.8, 426; A i.41; Dh 255; Dhs 1099; J i.468; Miln 413; DA i.112; dhuvasassata sure and certain Bu ii.111 sq.=J i.19; sassatiyā for ever, Sn 1075; a -- sassata J v.176; vi.315; sassatāyaŋ adv. (dat.) for ever (?) J i.468; v.172; Fausböll takes it=sassatā ayam (following the C.), and writes sassat'āyaŋ.

-- diṭṭhi eternalism, the doctrine that soul and world are eternal Dhs 1315; S ii.20; iii.98; Nett 40, 127. -- mūla eternalist Dpvs 6, 25. -- vāda an eternalist, eternalism D i.13; iii.108; S ii.20; iii.99, 182; iv.400; Pug 38; DA i.104 sq.; Ps i.155; VbhA 509. -- vādin eternalist Nett 111; Mhbv 110.

[Chooriwrocaey]

Are there any other sutta we know of?

Any comments?

[zzarratusstra]

Maybe these?
1 2 3 4 5

[Fhgzmftq]

Thanks PLWK

That is plenty, if any folks are interested in discussing the topic.

[penpizdes]

Excellent selections, Element! Somewhere between eternalism and nihilism is the world as a flow of phenomena, without inherent meaning but also not anarchic. Dynamic perceptions, rather than enduring entities. Not determined, but not random, either.

[soydaykam]

Element, could you share your thoughts on this please...
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha263.htm
If Buddhism avoids sassatavada, this means that there is no self-entity within man which is impervious to change.
This may also be interpreted as the denial of any kind of spiritual substance within man which relates him to some kind of transcendental reality serving as the ultimate ground of existence.
If Buddhism avoids ucchedavada, this means that the human personality is not a pure product of matter but is an uninterrupted and interconnected process of psycho-physical phenomena which does not terminate at death.
Although Buddhism does not agree completely with sassatavada, it does not deny survival (punabbhava) and moral responsibility (kammavada).

[Dominick Yo]

Very interesting topic and some good reading here.

[QiuCIOdO]

Excellent selections, Element! Somewhere between eternalism and nihilism is the world as a flow of phenomena, without inherent meaning but also not anarchic. Dynamic perceptions, rather than enduring entities. Not determined, but not random, either.

This.

[DiBellaBam]

Element, could you share your thoughts on this please...

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha263.htm
If Buddhism avoids sassatavada, this means that there is no self-entity within man which is impervious to change.
This may also be interpreted as the denial of any kind of spiritual substance within man which relates him to some kind of transcendental reality serving as the ultimate ground of existence.
If Buddhism avoids ucchedavada, this means that the human personality is not a pure product of matter but is an uninterrupted and interconnected process of psycho-physical phenomena which does not terminate at death.
Although Buddhism does not agree completely with sassatavada, it does not deny survival (punabbhava) and moral responsibility (kammavada).

The author's assertions with respect to the Buddha's rejection of ucchedavada are self-serving and eternalist in themselves, and do not follow.

[JohnVK]

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha263.htm

If Buddhism avoids sassatavada, this means that there is no self-entity within man which is impervious to change. This may also be interpreted as the denial of any kind of spiritual substance within man which relates him to some kind of transcendental reality serving as the ultimate ground of existence.

If Buddhism avoids ucchedavada, this means that the human personality is not a pure product of matter but is an uninterrupted and interconnected process of psycho-physical phenomena which does not terminate at death. Although Buddhism does not agree completely with sassatavada, it does not deny survival (punabbhava) and moral responsibility (kammavada). I suppose I must concur with Stuka. I get the impression 'eternalism' and 'nihilism' are views connected with 'self views'.

[fajerdoksdsaaker]

also, when discussing this topic, it is essential to avoiding quoting out of context

there is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously born beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the other after having directly known and realized it for themselves. A person is a composite of four primary elements. At death, the earth (in the body) returns to and merges with the (external) earth-substance. The fire returns to and merges with the external fire-substance. The liquid returns to and merges with the external liquid-substance. The wind returns to and merges with the external wind-substance. The sense-faculties scatter into space. Four men, with the bier as the fifth, carry the corpse. Its eulogies are sounded only as far as the charnel ground. The bones turn pigeon-colored. The offerings end in ashes. Generosity is taught by idiots. The words of those who speak of existence after death are false, empty chatter. With the break-up of the body, the wise and the foolish alike are annihilated, destroyed. They do not exist after death.'

Samaññaphala Sutta the essence of the above (mundane) quote is believing there is no fruit or result of good or bad actions (rather than at death the earth of the body returns to and merges with the external earth-substance).

it is important to always keep in mind, this mundane right view has the following result:

And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the other world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously born beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the others after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit & results in acquisitions.

Maha-cattarisaka Sutta

[Hixinfineedom]

buddha taught two types of right view:

1. defiled right view, siding with merit; and

2. transcendent right view, a factor of the noble path

And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path

Maha-cattarisaka Sutta the two suttas below, different in scope & intent, display the two types of right view

the 1st sutta states right view is that of 'existence'. the 2nd sutta states right view is that of neither existence or non-existence

Apannaka Sutta: A Safe Bet

A1. those...who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is nothing (natthi) given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no (natthi) fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously born beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the other after having directly known and realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three skillful activities — good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities: bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct.

A3. Even if we didn't speak of the other world, this person is still criticized in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of bad habits & wrong view: one who holds to a doctrine of non-existence (natthikavādo).

B1. Those who hold this doctrine, hold this view — 'There is (atthi) what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the other world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously born beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the other after having directly known & realized it for themselves' — it can be expected that, shunning these three unskillful activities — bad bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct — they will adopt & practice these three skillful activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct.

B3. Even if we didn't speak of the other world...this...person is still praised in the here-&-now by the wise as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence (atthikavādo).

Thus this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.

Kaccayanagotta Sutta: To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View)

By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

[Casyimipist]

Scope and intent , quoting out of content - examples of clear mind games - online discussion comments may not be representative

[Itrtuawh]

quoting out of context is picking & chosing small extracts to assert a view contrary to dhamma. take quoting the extract below, alone, out of context:

The person is composed of the four great elements; when he dies, earth returns and goes back to the element of earth, water returns and goes back to the element of water, fire returns and goes back to the element of fire, wind returns and goes back to the element of wind, while the senses disappear into space.... Fools and wise alike are destroyed and perish at the breaking up of the body, they do not exist after death. it is wrong view because it refers to "the person" and asserts "persons" do not exist after death.

but that earth returns and goes back to the element of earth; that water returns and goes back to the element of water; etc, is not contrary to dhamma

if the extract is quoted out of context, the context being:"There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions; generosity is taught by idiots, etc" is sounds like Buddha taught earth does not go back to the element of earth; water does not go back to the element of water; etc

'Nihilism' means believing there is no fruit of kamma. 'Nihilism' means having a reckless attitude

kind regards

From SN 35.245 - Kimsuka Sutta - The Riddle Tree.

"When a monk discerns, as it actually is, the origination & passing away of the four great elements [earth, water, wind, & fire], my friend, it is to that extent that his vision is said to be well-purified."

[Lictimind]

I suppose I must concur with Stuka. I get the impression 'eternalism' and 'nihilism' are views connected with 'self views'.

This is definitely true. Also just from what we know scientifically neither eternalism or nihilism makes sense. We know that when someone dies they are no longer conscious and we know that their body decays. But science also tells us that the matter that your body is composed of doesn't disappear. You become part of the carbon cycle.

[pKgGpUlF]

This is definitely true. Also just from what we know scientifically neither eternalism or nihilism makes sense. We know that when someone dies they are no longer conscious and we know that their body decays. But science also tells us that the matter that your body is composed of doesn't disappear. You become part of the carbon cycle.

i agree. which is why transcendent (lokuttara) buddhism does not conflict with science

the quote below emphasises matters of morality & is a moral teaching, which science also agrees with

science includes behavioural science, which studies the results of human behaviour

in the mind of a grateful survivor, a beneficator does not cease to exist after death (just as Buddha, as a teacher, is not really dead)

for a person that believes they have received gifts, offerings & sacrificies from their mother & father, their mother & father will continue to exist as part of their psyche after their mother & father die

in fact, mother & father continue to live on in the influence present in their children

not seeing any cause of gratitude & reciprocality is a central aspect of nihilistic wrong view

:hug:

there is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously born beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the other after having directly known and realized it for themselves. A person is a composite of four primary elements. At death, the earth (in the body) returns to and merges with the (external) earth-substance. The fire returns to and merges with the external fire-substance. The liquid returns to and merges with the external liquid-substance. The wind returns to and merges with the external wind-substance. The sense-faculties scatter into space. Four men, with the bier as the fifth, carry the corpse. Its eulogies are sounded only as far as the charnel ground. The bones turn pigeon-colored. The offerings end in ashes. Generosity is taught by idiots. The words of those who speak of existence after death are false, empty chatter. With the break-up of the body, the wise and the foolish alike are annihilated, destroyed. They do not exist after death.'

Samaññaphala Sutta