How does impermanence relate to our lives?

yomchi

How does impermanence relate to our lives?

Happy holidays one and all

Asiaprod

Jon wrote:

How does impermanence relate to our lives?

Happy holidays one and all

Hi Jon, and thanks. I will pick this up a little later.

Asiaprod

Back to this tough, and popular, question. To answer it I am going to reefer heavily on my interpretation of a series of lecture on Buddhist Wisdom given by Ratnaghosa. It might be a little deep in places so bear with me, and please feel free to question, I will try to answer as best I can.

The Buddha said that all ordinary people are mad. The reason we are considered to be mad, from an enlightened point of view, is because we behave as if changing things were permanent, as if unreal things were real, as if painful things were pleasant and as if ugly things were beautiful. These are known as the four ‘perversities’ or the four topsy-turvy views (viparyasas).

Buddhism makes a distinction, at least provisionally, between Samsara and Nirvana. Samsara is the unenlightened state, it is cyclic existence, it is the constant round of birth and death that we fall into because of our spiritual ignorance. Nirvana is the Enlightened state; it transcends the cycle of birth and death. This distinction between Samsara and Nirvana is provisional. It is how we have to approach things because of our unawakened, dualistic perceptions. There is, of course in Buddhism, only one Reality. Those who Awake to the true nature of Reality do not pass into some parallel Universe or some other dimension. The distinction is really that they are Awake and we are asleep. They can see Reality as it is, we see Reality in a topsy-turvy, perverse way. For instance, we see what is changing as permanent. This does not mean that we think nothing ever changes – that would be perverse indeed – but we behave and live our lives as if we and the transient things of the world were permanent. Perhaps we see this most clearly when we suffer a loss. If our partner or lover decides to leave us, we get upset because having believed in eternal romance, we can’t cope with the inevitable transience. If we lose our favourite pen, or our bicycle is stolen or our TV breaks down, we get upset and annoyed and rail against the injustice because we are attached to things and want them always to remain the same and remain with us. And especially perhaps when someone close to us dies, we are shocked by the unfairness of it. Why did they have to die? And perhaps they weren’t even old. Because we identify ourselves and other people with our bodies we see what is simply part of a process as something final and fatal. But we are not our bodies, other people are not their bodies and when the body ceases to function, nothing final has happened really.

That body and those senses have always been in a process of change and gradual dissolution. That is the reality of physical existence. Things come into being, flourish for a while, then decay and die. If we could relate to others in a more real way, rather than becoming attached to their form and senses, we would have a totally different experience of death. But to relate to others differently we would have to relate to ourselves differently. We would have to realise that we are simply a constantly changing process, a mind/body continuum. However, we usually behave as if we are fixed, unchanging, and substantial. We have a sense of ‘me’ and ‘mine’ that seems quite real and solid. We may even come to accept our essential impermanence but we think ‘I’ am changing. These changes are happening to ‘me’. So we cling to an ‘I’, an ‘ego’ which is ultimately unreal. This does not mean we don’t have a personality, it simply means that there is nothing ultimately real about our personality, it is change, it is process. But we are subject to the topsy-turvy view that we are a fixed self and this means that we try to take some things in to enhance this self and keep some things out to protect the self. Like a walled city, with gates to allow in what is needed and wanted and defences to attack and keep out what is not wanted, we proceed through life giving vent to craving and ill will. And, of course, this perversity lived out in the lives of individuals is also lived out collectively between nations and tribes and groups of all kinds. This can lead to such horrors as war and extermination camps and torture chambers.

No wonder the Buddha said ordinary people are mad! We also hold to the topsy-turvy view that satisfaction is to be gained where satisfaction cannot be gained. And I think this is the key point to remember, don't look for satisfaction where it cannot be gained.

yomchi

Thats interesting post Asiaprod! Not too deep at all and very to the point. You actually answered another boiling question I had about emptiness and what it actually relates to.

Many thanks!
Jon

DinoBot

Asiaprod wrote:

Nirvana is the Enlightened state; it transcends the cycle of birth and death. This distinction between Samsara and Nirvana is provisional. It is how we have to approach things because of our unawakened, dualistic perceptions. There is, of course in Buddhism, only one Reality. Those who Awake to the true nature of Reality do not pass into some parallel Universe or some other dimension. The distinction is really that they are Awake and we are asleep.

Do the Awake still "change" ? Do they still walk among us , live die and become reborn ?

Asiaprod

DinoBot wrote:

Do the Awake still "change" ? Do they still walk among us , live die and become reborn ?

I cannot explain it well, but I believe the answer is yes, yes, and yes, yes, and yes.
I did state that "those who Awake to the true nature of Reality do not pass into some parallel Universe or some other dimension." To me, that means they then remain subject to the same laws we un-awakened, here, are subject to, they just understand them in a way we cannot, as yet.

<Yoda will kill me for all those commas.>

DinoBot

Asiaprod wrote:

I cannot explain it well, but I believe the answer is yes, yes, and yes, yes, and yes.
I did state that "those who Awake to the true nature of Reality do not pass into some parallel Universe or some other dimension." To me, that means they then remain subject to the same laws we un-awakened, here, are subject to, they just understand them in a way we cannot, as yet.

<Yoda will kill me for all those commas.>

Thanks, buddhism is very different than anything Ive come across before.

Asiaprod

DinoBot wrote:

Thanks, buddhism is very different than anything Ive come across before.

You are very welcome. It is so diffeerent that it has kept me enthralled for 20 years. It has also given me better insight into other religions.

maitri

Asiaprod wrote:

I cannot explain it well, but I believe the answer is yes, yes, and yes, yes, and yes.
I did state that "those who Awake to the true nature of Reality do not pass into some parallel Universe or some other dimension." To me, that means they then remain subject to the same laws we un-awakened, here, are subject to, they just understand them in a way we cannot, as yet.

Interesting thoughts, Asia! Thanks!

Do you think that "in" all this change and impermanence there is also something eternal and unchanging -something “Real”?

PS: Happy New Year to everyone!

Asiaprod

maitri wrote:

Interesting thoughts, Asia! Thanks!

Do you think that "in" all this change and impermanence there is also something eternal and unchanging -something “Real”?

PS: Happy New Year to everyone!

IMO, yes. You, me and everyone else are "real," are in a state of constant change, have an eternal aspect, and believe in something that is unchanging:)

maitri

Asiaprod wrote:

IMO, yes. You, me and everyone else are "real," are in a state of constant change, have an eternal aspect, and believe in something that is unchanging:)

Oh, I hope you are right!:) I wonder what that "something" is, though...
It's an interesting topic... I think I'll come back to it some time.

Asiaprod

maitri wrote:

Oh, I hope you are right!:) I wonder what that "something" is, though...

Thats the bit each of us have to find out for ourselves. Thats the reason we became Buddhists in the first place. I have always suspected that Buddhism, unlike other religions, is not specific on these issues, but leaves us to supply the answers based on our own experience. One could almost call Buddhism the ultimate D.I.Y* course.

<* Do-It-Yourself>

I think the buddha was clear enough that there isn't anything unchanging and permanent, which is why we have anatta/anatman - no soul.
As for impermanence, I think in day to day life it's just useful to remember this to keep things in perspective. i.e. while having a house and car etc can be great, they're not any permanent measure of security etc and they shouldn't be, say, your only source of happiness. Your house could burn down tomorrow!

scojones

bluewolf wrote:

As for impermanence, I think in day to day life it's just useful to remember this to keep things in perspective.

Definitely, and it's one aspect of buddhism that really helps my day to day life.
For instance, alot of people I know, whom I am friends with get upset on a Monday morning when they are on their way to work and it's raining. Genuinely depressed. In this sort of scenario it's important to remember that it's only a job, be glad you have one and that you're not in major debt, and soon it will be Friday again. Now this is an over simplified example but it is one that I see every week. I try not to let my job get me down because I am constantly putting things into perspective. However I am not perfect and it can get me down from time to time, but when it does this way of thinking brings me around again.

Putting things into perspective can also detach us from personal items, which is also great. Being in a frame of mind where you want to have the best car, house, et al is certainly not a healthy way of thinking, because when you lose one of these items your world will come crashing down - and it's all avoidable.

I'm sorry for rambling, and I sometimes find it hard to get my point across but I hope I'm able to convey my frame of mind with regards to putting things into perspective. I turned to Buddhism in 2003 when I was in a serious accident in which three of my friends died. I really think that if it wasn't for Buddhism I would be a mental wreck, and I owe alot of this to everyone on this forum. Thanks again for introducing me to this wonderful way of life, and apologies if I've made this thread go off on a tangent.

maitri

bluewolf wrote:

I think the buddha was clear enough that there isn't anything unchanging and permanent, which is why we have anatta/anatman - no soul.

Hi Bluewolf!:)

I'm not too sure... Take a look, for instance, at this excerpt from what is said to be the Buddha's last teachings (from the Mahaparinirvana Sutra). It seems to be not so well known by a lot of the Mahayana Buddhists, and I was also first very surprised when I came across it:

When the Buddha was dying, he said to his followers: ”Just as the earth has hills and grass, healing herbs and nourishing grains for all beings to use, the truth that I have taught is also so. It produces the flavour of wonder and is the healing medicine for the ailments of human kind. I have brought you to abide peacefully in this great treasure. But if you have any doubts, you must ask about them now. Whatever your doubts are, I will try to answer them.”
“Honored One, we understand the ideas of no self, of no permanent state, and of the suffering caused to the person by the belief that he has a self and is permanent. He is like one who is drunk and sees the hills and rivers, moons and stars wheeling dizzily about him. Such a one will never understand selflessness and will wander on endlessly in a miserable state. It is because of such an undesirable state that we cultivate the idea of no self.”

Then the Buddha was roused from the calm of coming death and said, “Listen closely! You have used the metaphor of a drunken person but you know only the words and not the meaning! The drunk believes the world is spinning when it is not. You still think the self is a something if you believe you should be selfless in order to save yourself. You believe you should see the eternal as impermanent, the pure as impure, happiness as suffering. But these are concepts and you have not penetrated the meaning. The meaning is that the real self is truth. The eternal is existence. Happiness is nirvana, and the pure is things as they are.

You should not practice ideas of impermanence, suffering, impurity and selflessness as though they are real objects like stones or rocks but look instead for the meaning. You should use expedient means in every place and cultivate the ideas of permanence, happiness and purity for the sake of all beings. If you do this, you will be like one who sees a gem in the muddied water among the stones and rocks and waits for the water to settle before he skilfully plucks it out. It is the same with cultivating the idea of the self as with permanence, happiness, and purity.”

The monks were taken aback. They said, “Honored One, according to all you have taught and spoken, we have been asked to cultivate selflessness, leading to the dropping out of the idea of a self. But now you tell us we should cultivate the idea of a self – what is the meaning of this?”

“Good,” replied the Buddha. “You are now asking about meaning. You should know that, like a doctor, you should find the right medicine for an illness. It is as a doctor that I observed the ailments of the world. I saw that ordinary people believe they have a self and that whoever they meet has a self. They think of the self as within the body. But it is not like that. Because it is not like that, I have shown the fallacy of all the ideas of self and shown that the self is not there in the way it is thought to be. In everything I have said I have shown that the self is not as people think of it, for this is expedient means, the right medicine.

But that doesn’t mean that there is no self. What is the self? If something is true, is real, is constant, is a foundation of a nature that is unchanging, this can be called the self. For the sake of sentient beings, in all the truths I have taught, there is such a self. This monks, is for you to cultivate.”
(Mahaparinirvana Sutra, quoted from the Pocket Buddha Reader, ed. Anne Bancroft)

Here's another translation of a part of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra:

http://www.nirvanasutra.org.uk/selectedextracts1c.htm

This sutra seems to me to say that there really is a self - and permanence -, but that it is very different from how we normally perceive it to be. And perhaps it's beyond all or concepts.

It reminds me, BTW, of something MeditationMom said in the Lankavatara Sutra thread:

“The very moment we say anything about any of this, we also need to drop the ideas instantaneously. Enjoying them as a butterfly flying by, but not making a new teaching, philosophy or religion out of it. And most of these statements/sutras are usually made to dislodge either a wrong idea, or a right idea that is being held onto, or to confirm an idea that is right and expressed in the right mind state of non-attachment.” (MeditationMom)

PS: I agree with what you and Sjones say about "keeping things in perspective" ( - and I don't think that you've "made this thread go off on a tangent" at all, Sjones )

maitri

Asiaprod wrote:

I have always suspected that Buddhism, unlike other religions, is not specific on these issues, but leaves us to supply the answers based on our own experience. One could almost call Buddhism the ultimate D.I.Y* course.

<* Do-It-Yourself>

Cool!:) I think you can find very similar ideas if you look at the mystics of other religions, though.

I might be wrong, but it seems to me that they all teach that at some point we'll have to leave our concepts, dogmas and ideas and just trust our experience.

Asiaprod

maitri wrote:

Cool!:) I think you can find very similar ideas if you look at the mystics of other religions, though. I might be wrong, but it seems to me that they all teach that at some point we'll have to leave our concepts, dogmas and ideas and just trust our experience.

I think you might be right:) I have a great respect for all paths that teach one to trust in experience and seek independent thought and action. I just do not see the point of humanity being on a conveyer belt system where every step is dictated by for example writings in a book.
The only point I would disagree with you on is that "they all teach that at some point we'll have to leave our concepts, dogmas and ideas and just trust our experience." Many indeed have used there influence to create cults. I experienced the chaos of the Aum religion here in Tokyo. The cult leader Asahara was treated as a Buddhist mystics:eek: and he ended up creating a doomsday cult that so nearly could have ended in thousands of innocent deaths.

Asiaprod

sjones wrote:

I'm sorry for rambling, and I sometimes find it hard to get my point across but I hope I'm able to convey my frame of mind with regards to putting things into perspective.

You do very well:)

I turned to Buddhism in 2003 when I was in a serious accident in which three of my friends died. I really think that if it wasn't for Buddhism I would be a mental wreck, and I owe alot of this to everyone on this forum. Thanks again for introducing me to this wonderful way of life, and apologies if I've made this thread go off on a tangent.

Strange how so many of us found Buddhism during our darkest moment. It is a constant source of joy for me to switch on the computer to see what new posts have been added to this forum. I think we all owe a lot to all the contributers on this forum. I view this as Buddhism in Action. The value gained from this forum is incalculable. Its nice to have a place to call home:)

maitri

Asiaprod wrote:

The only point I would disagree with you on is that "they all teach that at some point we'll have to leave our concepts, dogmas and ideas and just trust our experience." Many indeed have used there influence to create cults. I experienced the chaos of the Aum religion here in Tokyo. The cult leader Asahara was treated as a Buddhist mystics:eek: and he ended up creating a doomsday cult that so nearly could have ended in thousands of innocent deaths.

Oh, such things are horrible!
Maybe not "all" then... or we could say that people are not really mystics at all when they create suffering instead of helping people.

Asiaprod wrote:

Its nice to have a place to call home:)

Yes.:)

scojones

Asiaprod wrote:

Strange how so many of us found Buddhism during our darkest moment. It is a constant source of joy for me to switch on the computer to see what new posts have been added to this forum. I think we all owe a lot to all the contributers on this forum. I view this as Buddhism in Action. The value gained from this forum is incalculable. Its nice to have a place to call home:)

Definitely. Thanks once again.

MeditationMom

by Asiaprod -Strange how so many of us found Buddhism during our darkest moment. It is a constant source of joy for me to switch on the computer to see what new posts have been added to this forum. I think we all owe a lot to all the contributers on this forum. I view this as Buddhism in Action. The value gained from this forum is incalculable. Its nice to have a place to call home

Yes, yes, yes, and I have missed hanging out with you guys. I had to finish up an important project and am back

Impermanence and Emptiness are my favorite subjects. Asiaprod, you gave it a great treatment. Here is one problem with this subject. The Buddha has not just arrived at this idea, or understanding, of impermanence or emptiness through reflection and contemplation. He is this emptiness! and is trying to describe and explain it to us. It is a first hand experience, but there is no-one there to experience it. You could say that the experience of impermanence is experiencing itself as the experience of impermanence. The true self is infinite and eternal. Finally realizing oneself as "that", everything "else", even though this "else" is contained in it, obviously is empty and impermanent, and the world seems indeed a topsy, turvy place full of madness in its delusion, for which then compassion arises.

If we think of it as, the Buddha "not being blind anymore" and explaining colors to the "still blind", or "awake" talking to the "still asleep", we can see that there is a limit to what can be said, explained and understood. The false self can never intellectually understand or "get" the true self. Even the Buddha cannot give "it" to anyone. He can ease our suffering by giving us a new way to interpret our experience, but no matter how well we understand it all, we still have to "become it", in other words transcend our minds and bodies, only to claim what was ours to begin with. We still have to wake up ourselves. How? By great effort - with all the millions of teachings and methods invented by the masters - until all has been tried, and then, letting go, with tremendous trust, love and courage. It happens, seemingly all by itself, when we have had enough sleep. Until then we do suffer no matter how much we understand.

If I go back to the original question - how does impermanence relate to our lives - I would say it is our koan. Impermanence can only be truely known as such, when eternity, eternal being, is also known. Then both, simultaneously, are known "in the no-mind" - beyond duality.