Zen and the "self" we are defending

(ECHOES OF LOST KNOWLEDGE)

Buddhism on Marilyn Monroe (Anatta)

Marilyn Monroe Buddha digital art by Mark Ashkenazi (Fine Art America)

Norma Mortenson as Marilyn Monroe

How could it both be the case that Marilyn Monroe (aka Norma Mortenson) existed as possibly the most famous female Hollywood icon of all time and did not exist? It's easy. As with more paradoxical riddles, it is a matter of semantics. In the conventional sense, of course she existed. Look, that's her in Some Like It Hot. However, in the ultimate sense, she did not.

Of course, it sounds crazy and goes against all of our most deeply cherished assumptions about what life is. But this is why the cycle of rebirth goes on and on, wandering unenlightened with next to no chance of ever finding the truth. Most never even begin to fathom the true nature of existence. We fight against it. We won't stand for it. Far from hard truths, we want comforting lies.

The Holy Order of Saint Marilyn

Some people might argue, "Well, of course, the character of 'Marilyn Monroe' was a manufactured Hollywood fantasy." But we would have to counter that that illusion is real, as it were. There really is an illusion, a fable, an image or persona called MM. The argument here is that that doesn't exist. The contention is much bolder that the underlying figure, the Norma J. Mortenson, ultimately speaking, does not now exist and never did before. That's a headscratcher. Surely she had to be for the fairytale built around her to exist. Both are illusory. And a wise way to counter argue is not to deny what the Buddha and the noble (enlightened) ones are asserting as ultimate truth, but to ask, "Then what does exist? What is real? This is a fruitful question to because there is an answer. And this will not be debated until someone wins an argument. One will have to know-and-see directly -- then there is no doubt and no need to argue. This is not a belief; it's a living reality. There is a reality, and it is important to arrive at it rather than drowning again and again in illusory samsara.

That's crazy talk, of course she existed!

Here is an example of how opposite things could be true based on whether we are speaking conventionally or ultimately. A scientist says, "This solid matter is composed mainly of empty space." Is that true?

Well, according to the atomic theory of things, it is. A tiny electron spins around a nucleus. The components of the atom (an indivisible unit) are so infinitesimally small that between them is only empty space. All material things are composed of atoms, so all material things, even the densest, are mostly empty space. Is this true? Scientists swear it is. Doesn't that mean that getting a hit by a lead pipe will feel like a puff of empty air? The assumptions we hold about what it must mean are the problem, not the reality. A lead pipe is both made mostly of empty space and will hurt a lot if struck. In the same way, not only Marilyn, but "I," too, am composed of impermanent, disappointing, and impersonal parts. To really under this is to awaken. (To misunderstand this is to seize a snake by the wrong end and be grievously injured by wrongly grasping it). Understanding what we presume to be impossible is possible by grasping Dependent Origination. But won't we lose ourselves by understanding? There is no "self" to lose. By clinging to ignorance and delusion, we are bringing about a world of incalculable misery, and it wouldn't be this way if we allowed the truth to set us free.

• A better, more useful question to ask than, "Did Marilyn exist?" is, "In what sense can anyone rightly say she did not exist?" The Buddha did not introduce a teaching that so goes against the stream of everything we cling to without a purpose. That reason is because the ego, the clinging to views, holds us apart from Truth. The Buddha taught that people will not even reach the first stage of enlightenment without understanding this principle of not-self. They will not see the Buddha or the Dharma without seeing Dependent Origination. (If we ask, "Well, if there is no self, what is there then?" The answer is "Dependent Origination"). What would be better, to escape to reality or hold views deluded ignorance? It seems we have a deep-seated fear that if we let ourselves believe in "not-self" we would suddenly disappear in "a puff of unsmoke." But belief is neither here nor there. It is the wisdom (insight) to see clearly what is there and what is not that counts by direct experience, not any belief or faith.

The no-self teaching | Buddhism

Marilyn Monroe almost invisible (Mark Ashkenazi/Fine Art America)

.

(SEEKER TO SEEKER) When one says, "I am," what does the word "I" refer to? According to the Buddhist teaching of no-self (anatta), to be able to answer this question correctly is to reach liberation (nirvana via enlightenment). It is to reach the end of all pain and misery.

Let's explore the Buddha's teaching of the Five Aggregates (skandhas or khandhas) clung to as "self." This teaching is variously called anatta, anatman, no-self, egolessness, nonself, the doctrine that all things are impersonal.

Italian poster for Some Like It Hot

The essence of the teaching is that liberation (moksha) and enlightenment (bodhi) come about when one realizes that every model of the self we can have is a wrong model.

When one lets go of clinging -- falsely identifying self with the contents of experience -- only then can one put an end to all pain and suffering (dukkha) once and for all.

⭐ Support channel: seeker2seeker 💰PayPal donation: paypal.com/donate... 📨 Subscribe to the newsletter: mailchi.mp... #wisdom #buddhism #philosophy #existential

• Seeker to Seeker, 10/9/21; Pat Macpherson, Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Why do humans keep dying? (Solution)

Why are you always smiling, Buddha?

"Why must we die?" This question is slightly misguided because "we" don't really die. The Complicated Game, the Samsaric Carousel goes on turning.

If we don't really die, what happens? The problem is in how we define "we." Who dies, what dies? This illusory sense of self separate from its causes and conditions that are the basis of the "self" (the Five Aggregates clung to as self).

How can we say they die if they go on beyond this life. (There is life after life, which is the whole problem, endless cycling through samsara. Why do we cycle? It is because we do not see Dependent Origination. If we do, when we, the problem resolves. In a sense, there never was a problem -- except that in a conventional sense, it was a giant problem. It's hard to give an example, parallel, or analogy, but it is possible that by giving one, a wise person may see the problem.)

First, can two seemingly contradictory things be true? Yes. Look: Is there absolute up and down? Yes, where gravity pulls hardest is "down," and where it doesn't is "up." And it matters. Keeping our orientation is important, even in a pool where the pull of gravity is lessened for our semi-floating bodies. But what about space (in the ether)?

I never asked to be born. - Did you want to stay
where you were? - No, that's not what I meant!

Suddenly, there is no absolute up or down; it doesn't matter. We just float and spin and can't right oursevles because there is no "right" only, maybe, a consensus agreement of this will be up and that will be down like when we're on earth. Now, here's the trick: Are they both true, or is only one true, or are neither true? We see that on earth, it's true. We see that deep in space, it's not true (there is no absolute up or down). How can they both be true, given that they're opposites? Here's the kicker: Where's earth? Earth is in space. So, in a sense, in space it is both true and not true that there is an absolute up and down.

• (The resolution is that it depends, as with most things in life). In the micro it matter, in the macro it doesn't, but they're not separate).

There are two dimensions within one reality (one with up and down, one without them) both at the same time. What we wear matters to others because of looks, except in the dark.

So imagine yourself in prison. It sucks. You don't want to be there. But further imagine that all the time you've been inside, the door to the outside has be "open" in the sense that it hasn't been locked. No one inside knows it's unlocked, so are you locked up or not?

Devas learned more than humans did.

Literally, technically, no. But conventionally, in every important sense, yes. You both are and are not at the same time. There's no confusion. You could explain and explain, but we on the outside already understand. We, unlike you all inside, can see that it's unlocked, so we don't understand the problem. But there is a problem, a big problem, and that is that you don't know. You live in an illusion, and because of it you never even test the door. You dream of getting out, but the easiest exit goes untested. (This is just an example. But isn't life this way?) There is an escape, there is a way out, there is a solution, but we on the inside don't know it.

And if someone who slipped out comes back in to tell us, "Hey, you'll never guess, there's a way out. Follow me, and I'll show you." Will people follow? No way. Only very few with faith in that person would even dream of suspending disbelief and investigating. It is exactly like The Allegory of the Cave by Plato.

It is exactly like the predicament of the historical Buddha Shakyamuni (a Scythian prince who let go, found a way out, came back to save everyone with that wisdom, and found out that "no good deed goes unpunished").

So here we at Wisdom Quarterly are doing the same thing, suffering the same punishment, wondering why we don't shut and just go find that door.

See, as in The Cave, so in the Illusory Prison of Life, there are pleasures here, safety in the familiar, a lack of recognition of what bad is coming our way -- old age, sickness, disappointments of all kinds, death, loss, separation, misery, and big troubles -- all that is going to happen if we stay here.

In The Cave, the beings cling to their chains and aren't going to have some "madman" unchain them and lead them out of the only world and safety and familiarity they've ever known. Though the Buddha comes by banging a pot in the street, announcing that there is a way out of this Illusory Prison of Life, do humans and devas run to him in joy? Or do they hide under their covers or beds, fearing that he is threatening to take away their good times, their petty pleasures and joys to exchange them for hardships and austerities?

Many completely misunderstand that he is offering slightly bitter medicine and stay suckling at the teat of sugary white goo, growing fat and further addicted.

So who will die, what will die?

It's all right to let go now.

We could say that the Five Aggregates clung to as self (form, feelings, perceptions, mental formation, and consciousness) will disintegrate and fall apart. But this can't be death because (a) they reform and (b) they are dying at every moment.

They are not "things" in the sense of compacts, but are "processes" in the sense of being nothing more than constituent parts. It's like thinking that a segment of hose water is ours.

• (Imagine an 11-foot green hose with a one-foot segment in the middle that is clear, and saying that clear portion we can see through, that water is ours. Is it? Sure, let's say we've been deeded it and have enforceable water rights with written documentation that it "belongs" to us. We own no other water, but that water is ours. What is ours? It's never ours really, except in the way an NFT belongs to someone: in name only. If we insist, like that NFT owner, that it is ours, okay, what is ours? That water we "own" is always moving. Do we own the H20 molecules? If so, which ones? The ones now, the ones now, the ones later, the ones that already passed? We don't control the spigot or anything else, but cling to the ones we can see passing right now as "ours.")

What is the water passing in this example? If we wanted to get symbolic, we could say it represents the moisture passing through this body we cling to. Do we cling to the urine the body makes and refuse to relinquish it? No, we understand it's a process and more water is coming. Do we cling to the remainder (poop) of the food we ate? No, not most of us. We gladly relinquish it and get as far away from it as possible.

As for all that is watery, what do we do? Thirst (tanha, the Buddha called it by analogy).

But before it prepares to pass, we cling to it, love it, fear losing "self" (in the sense of the first aggregate, form).

The Buddha has been trying to tell the world of humans and devas this since the first sermon, the Dhammacakkapavatana Sutta. Quick witted Anna Kondanna got it. We have been much slower.

All that is (re)born is born to die

(Lana Del Rey) "Born to Die" - "Not having been, they come to be; once having been, they cease." What all? The Five Aggregates clung to as self.

ANSWER

So in answer to the question, "Why must we die?" (or "Why do humans keep dying?") It is because what we call "we" (we humans and other kinds of beings like angelic devas) are actually compounds of constituent parts called khandha, the Five Aggregates clung to as self. This self is a composite, and each element, each component is ultimately impermanent, disappointing, and impersonal. It true nature, which is not apparent to us in normal mundane consciousness (but can be brought into consciousness by heightening our attention and purifying mind/heart of distractions, hindrances, and obstructions to vision). When we know and see its true nature, we see that things are not at all like they seem. What appears solid, stable, alluring and able to satisfy desires, and personal is actually many streams of form, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousnesses (all processes, not things). We keep dying from moment to moment, every moment, because like moving water, there is nothing stable or permanent about this process of changing elements, guided along by our karma (deeds) and their many faceted results. Knowing and seeing this firsthand, the heart turns away and we can easily let go of clinging. By letting go, no longer seeing any appeal in this dangerous game of clinging to the painful, the mind is freed. We awaken to the first stage of enlightenment called stream entry. (But it's of no use trying to tell this to anyone because the ego will not stand for it, will not listen, will not be convinced, will not accept. It is only by practice that knowledge and vision arise. Then knowing and seeing, there is no doubt, and letting go is as easy as falling down. Look, the prison is open. Look, all the forms, feelings...and all things clung to are not "self." Let go of what is not me or mine. Be set free.

• Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells, Amber Larson, Wisdom Quarterly

Is science on verge of 'consciousness'?

The Origins and History of Consciousness (Erich Neumann)

Is science slowly stumbling on the fact that "consciousness" is impersonal and continues after death? We wouldn't like to think so because that does not accord with what is comfortable, and science doesn't ask big questions with easy answers.

It instead proceeds in tiny increments as it develops theories to explain larger data sets. A recent study on consciousness brings up the suggestion that human consciousness could be a side effect of entropy (sciencealert.com).

*Sarcasm* What? It's not the pinnacle of evolution and existence, the greatest thing in the universe, the end all be all proving that souls exist and are invincible and immortal?

Cosmic Consciousness (R.M. Bucke)

• VIDEO: Consciousness: The Fundamental Reality
• VIDEO: Tracking a thought as it moves through the brain is quite remarkable
• The mystery of "consciousness" shows there may be a limit to what science alone can achieve
• Pantheism: What if absolutely everything is conscious?

Dr. Bruce Lipton, Ph.D.

The shocking truth (anatta) is too much to handle for most people, who invariably misinterpret it to mean that things are eternal or things are annihilated, and there's no other possibility. Imagine if both extremes in view were wrong. They are. We neither carry on through death forever, nor are we annihilated at death. Spiritists and materialists both have it wrong.

Hidden Spring (Mark Solms)

Things are dependently originated. What arises does so dependent on conditions (so they do not really arise except as an illusion with the illusory marks of permanence, fulfillment, and personality).

In fact, we find, the three opposite Marks of Existence (ti-lakkhana) are present. Ultimately, "things" that arise dependent on causes and conditions are impermanent, disappointing, and impersonal.

Brain is not base of consciousness, which pervades all things we are conscious of. Anencephaly

.

Physics of Expanded Consciousness

But will science ever come to that conclusion? Not likely. The goal of science is not enlightenment and liberation from the round of rebirth and suffering. (How can something even be said to be "reborn" if it cannot, like a moving river, be said to persist unchanged for two consecutive moments? It can).

• Study reveals how an anesthesia drug induces unconsciousness
• Human consciousness evolved as a means of social survival, scientists say
• The brain builds emotions regardless of the senses, neuroscientists find
• The larger brains of humans come with a tragic cost, study finds
• The clinic for psychedelic difficulties where people go when the trip never really ends
• Our brains trick us into thinking consciousness can reside outside the body, research argues
• Biobots arise from the cells of dead organisms − pushing the boundaries of life, death and medicine
• Brain waves found to travel in one direction when memories are made and the opposite when recalled
• Scientists find a determining mechanism for synapse formation in the cerebellum
• Study reveals differences in DNA folding between neurons and other brain cells, links them to cell functions
• Researcher explores how we can stretch our mind to grasp quantum entanglement
• Scientists uncover new mechanism of forgetting in brain neurons that could inform Parkinson's treatment
• Scientists show that there is indeed an entropy of quantum entanglement
• A molecular route to decoding synaptic specificity and nerve cell communication
• Magical equation unites quantum physics Einstein's general relativity in a first
• Scientists discovered something kinda alarming: The universe shouldn't actually exist
• The mystery of consciousness shows there may be a limit to what science alone can achieve
• Reality is just a bunch of hallucinations we collectively agree on
• Often seen, never studied: First characterization of a key postsynaptic protein
• Flow state uncovered: We finally know what happens in the brain when we're in the zone
• Wellness therapists say these 6 common habits are fueling our anxiety
• Scientists discover enzyme that reverses muscle loss due to aging
• This is untrue on each count: Dispelling the myths behind hypnosis

Sutra series (SN 25:1-10) abbreviated

Ven. Thanissaro (orig. mistranslation from the Pali canon, SN 25:1-10, dhammatalks.org); Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

The Eye: Cakkhu Sutta

The eye that see, the third eye that knows?

(SN 25:1) Thus have I heard. When the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī, he said: “Meditators, the eye is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. The ear… The nose… The tongue… The body… The mind is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.

“One who has confidence and conviction that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the right path, entered the plane of the noble ones, transcended the plane of the ordinary uninstructed worldlings.

“Such a person is now incapable of doing any deed (karma) by which one might be reborn in hell, in an animal womb, or in the realm of hungry ghosts. One is incapable of passing away until one has realized the fruit of stream-entry (the first stage of enlightenment).

“One who, after contemplating with even a small amount of wisdom (discernment), has accepted that these phenomena are this way is called a Dharma-follower: one who has entered the right path, entered the plane of the noble ones, transcended the plane of ordinary uninstructed worldlings. One is incapable of doing any deed by which one might be reborn in hell, in an animal womb, or in the realm of hungry ghosts. One is incapable of passing away until one has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

“One who knows-and-sees that these phenomena are this way is called a stream-enterer, steadfast, never again destined for [subhuman] states of woe, headed for full awakening.”

• See also: MN 70, SN 55:25

Forms: Rūpa Sutta

(SN 25:2) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, forms are inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Sounds.… Fragrances.… Flavors.… Tactile sensations.… Ideas [mind objects] are inconstant, changeable, impermanent.… 

Consciousness: Viññāṇa Sutta

(SN 25:3) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, eye-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Ear-consciousness.… Nose-consciousness.… Tongue-consciousness.… Body-consciousness.… Mind-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.…

Contact: Phassa Sutta

(SN 25:4) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, eye-contact is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Ear-contact.… Nose-contact.… Tongue-contact.… Body-contact.… Mind-contact is inconstant, changeable, impermanent… 

Feeling: Vedanā Sutta

(SN 25:5) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, feeling born of eye-contact is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Feeling born of ear-contact.… Feeling born of nose-contact.… Feeling born of tongue-contact.… Feeling born of body-contact.… Feeling born of mind-contact is inconstant, changeable, impermanent…

Perception: Saññā Sutta

(SN 25:6) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, perception of forms is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Perception of sounds.… Perception of fragrances.… Perception of tastes.… Perception of tactile sensations.… Perception of ideas [mind objects] is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.…

Intention: Cetanā Sutta

(SN 25:7) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, intention [motivation] for forms is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Intention for sounds.… Intention for fragrances.… Intention for tastes.… Intention for tactile sensations.… Intention for ideas [mind objects] is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.…

Craving: Taṇhā Sutta

(SN 25:8) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, craving for forms is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Craving for sounds.… Craving for fragrances.… Craving for tastes.… Craving for tactile sensations.… Craving for ideas [mind objects] is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.…

Elements: Dhātu Sutta

(SN 25:9) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, the earth element [quality, characteristic of materiality] is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. The water element.… The fire element.… The wind element.… The space [delineating solid objects] element.… The consciousness element is inconstant, changeable, impermanent.…

Aggregates: Khandha Sutta

(SN 25.10) Near Sāvatthī. “Meditators, form is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. Feeling.… Perception.… Mental formations (fabrications).… Consciousness is inconstant, changeable, impermanent. More

I am that I am? Buddhism's No-Self Teaching

Seekertoseeker.com (YouTube), Oct. 9, 2021; Dhr. Seven (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly

"I Am That" | about a nun's awakening to life | Prime Video (amazon.com)

I thought I was consciousness itself. Isn't it so?

(SEEKER TO SEEKER) One says, "I am," but what does the word "I" refer to? According to the Buddhist Teaching of No-Self (the Anatta Doctrine), to answer this question correctly is to reach enlightenment and liberation.

It is to reach the end of all disappointment, suffering, pain, and unhappiness. To answer this is to explore the Buddha's teaching of the Five Aggregates (skandhas or khandhas), the categorical constituents of the ego, self, or soul:

1. form (body)
2. feeling (sensation)
3. perception (cognition)
4. formations (will)
5. consciousness (awareness).

This teaching is variously called anatta (Pali), anatman (Sanskrit), no-self, non-self, impersonality, soullessness, egolessness.

The essence of the teaching is that enlightenment (bodhi, awakening) and liberation (moksha, nirvana) come about when one realizes that every view of the self we can have is a wrong view.

When one lets go of grasping, of falsely identifying with the contents of experience, only then can one put an end to all suffering (dukkha) once and for all. That is bliss, this is peace, that is ultimate truth and happiness the Buddha called nirvana.

• Why did God call itself “I AM THAT I AM”? (chicagobible.org)
• Hebrew: "I will become whatsoever I will become"/"Whatever"
• Facebook: facebook.com/groups/32571...
• Website: seekertoseeker.com
• To learn more about the Five Aggregates (pancha khandha) as found in the original Buddhist texts, visit: accesstoinsight.org
• For an in-depth study into the Buddhist no-self doctrine, see:
• Identity and Experience by Sue Hamilton
• Selfless Persons by Steven Collins

The Five Hindrances in Daily Life (video)

Ayasma Aggacitta (Sutta Workshop); Anagarika E., Dhr. Seven (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

The Five Hindrances in Meditation and Life (Ayasma Aggacitta)

The Five Hindrances in Meditation and Daily Life

(Sutta Workshops by Āyasmā Aggacitta, premiered July 30, 2022) This is an edited video of an online Dhamma (Dharma) talk on January 9, 2022, organized by Stay Alive (SA) and Zest Connection.

• 00:00 Start
• 01:25 Āvarana Sutta (AN 5.51)
• 03:08 Āhāra Sutta (SN 46.51)
• 03:49 Sensual Desire
• 05:32 Ill-Will
• 06:16 Sloth and Torpor (Drowsiness and Weariness)
• 06:48 Restlessness and Worry
• 08:23 Skeptical Doubt
• 09:05 How to Nourish the Five Hindrances
• 13:58 How to Denourish the Hindrances
• 17:50 How to Prevent the Hindrances from arising according to the Commentary
• 19:10 Conditions for Prevention of Sensual Desire according to the Commentary
• 25:18 Conditions for Prevention of Ill-Will according to the Commentary
• 28:04 How to Remove Ill-Will (AN 5:161)
• 31:24 Conditions for Prevention of Sloth and Torpor according to the Commentary
• 33:39 How to overcome Drowsiness (AN 7.61)
• 39:50 Conditions for Prevention of Restlessness and Worry according to the Commentary
• 42:10 Conditions for Prevention of Doubts according to the Commentary
• 45:13 How to abandon the Hindrances – Nīvarana Sutta (AN 9.64)
• 47:51 The Five Hindrances in Life – Worthy Deeds (AN 4.61)
• 54:30 What is accomplishment in wisdom?
• 58:25 Q&A
• 58:44 Is it correct that I do not send loving-kindness (mettā) to the opposite sex?
• 1:00:47 How to overcome the challenge when the Hindrances are not from within but are influenced by external factors?
• 1:01:50 Is it recommended for someone with OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) to practice meditation?
• 1:02:59 How does one gaze beyond the wall without imagining during Open Mindfulness Meditation?
• 1:03:54 Can we put in more effort to stop or indulge in the proliferating mind before we sleep?
• 1:05:46 Is it advisable to change meditation object for beginner?
• 1:06:29 How to cultivate Faith (Confidence) in Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha?
• 1:08:07 What is Open Mindfulness Meditation?
• 1:08:54 Is it a suitable conversation between spiritual friends when someone expresses negative feelings towards me?
• 1:09:48 Can we practice Open Mindfulness in open and noisy places?
• 1:11:31 What is the difference between sati-sampajañña (mindfulness and clear comprehension) and vipassanā (insight) practice?
• 1:11:59 Can BARR Test and inclining the mind be used to verify the causes and conditions and the Five Aggregates simultaneously? Seems like one is intellectual and the other is intuitive?
• 1:16:45 What is the difference between Open Mindfulness Meditation and Watching the Breath?
• 1:18:00 How to draw the line between suitable and unsuitable conversation?
• 1:19:24 Are youngsters practicing de-focused mindfulness when they ignore their parents?
• 1:20:18 The End

Attributions: Graphics designed by 30000009006 from "lovepik.com/image-401898097/t..."

Mara, O, Mara (the defilements)

Eds., Wisdom Quarterly Wikipedia edit of Mara (demon)

Mara's daughters Craving, Lust, Aversion

Etymology The word māra comes from the Sanskrit form of the root verb mṛ. Māra is a verbal noun from the causative root that means "causing death" or "killing" [4].

It is related to other words for "death" from the same root, such as Pali maraṇa and Sanskrit mṛtyu. [In English we have mort and mortuary, French le morte, Spanish Muerte.]

• Mara's daughter Arati, Arāti, Ārati, Ārāti (wisdomlib.org)

The latter is a name for Death personified and is sometimes identified as the kind judge Yama, the King of the Dead. The root mṛ is related to the Indo-European verbal root *mer, meaning "die, disappear" in the context of "death, murder, or destruction."

It is "very widespread" in Indo-European languages suggesting it to be of great antiquity, according to Mallory and Adams [5].

Four types of Māra

In traditional Buddhism, four or five metaphorical forms of Māra are given [6]:

• Kleśa-māra: Māra as the embodiment of all defilements (unskillful root intentions, underlying motives, pernicious emotions, kleshas, kilesas), such as greed, hate/fear, and delusion.
• Mṛtyu-māra: Māra as Death personified.
• Skandha-māra: Māra as metaphor for the entirety of conditioned existence [explained in terms of the Five Aggregates clung to as self].
• Devaputra-māra: The deva (being of light, lit. "shining one") of the [top of the] Sensuous Sphere, who tried to prevent the Bodhisattva Siddhartha Gautama from from becoming a buddha by attaining liberation from the Cycle of Endless Rebirth (samsara) on the night of his great enlightenment.

Character

Early Buddhism acknowledged both a literal and psychological interpretation of "Mara" [7, 8].

• EDITOR'S NOTE: It is easy to believe nowadays that Mara is only a metaphor for the subtlety of the mental defilements. But this is contradicted by extensive texts describing his deeds. It would be very difficult to read the collection of Mara texts (Mara Samyutta in the fourth section of the SN, S.i.103 27) and come away thinking he is anything but real.
• Indeed, there are many maras, at least one in each world-system. The word may also refer to ogres (yakkhas), as Mara seems to be their chief, as on the night under the bodhi tree at the great awakening.
• In the Mara Sutra, Rādha asks the Buddha what is meant by "Māra.” Anything that perishes, answered the Buddha -- such as [the Five Aggregates clung to as self, namely] form (this body), feelings, perceptions, mental formation, and consciousness..." (S.iii.188.).
• FOR MUCH MORE ON THIS SUBJECT, SEE Māra

Mara is described both as an entity having an existence in the Sensuous Sphere (kāma-loka) [9] and coming down to interact with the Buddha and also as described in the description of Dependent Origination (pratītya-samutpāda) as, primarily, the guardian of passion and the catalyst for lust, hesitation, and fear that obstructs meditation among Buddhists.

The Denkōroku refers to him as the "One Who Delights in Destruction," which highlights his nature as a light being among the Parinirmitavaśavarti devas [10]. More

Ajahn Brahm explains the Five Aggregates

Understanding the Five Aggregates (video)

Cliff Wallshein (Won Bup Shin), WonBuddhism Manhattan, 3/26/16; Eds., Wisdom Quarterly

Understanding the Five Aggregates (skandhas)

WBM member shares his understanding of the Five Aggregates: The Buddha turned his mind inward and realized that all he and we could ever know about the world was what we could be conscious of.

This holds true even today, for no matter how powerful the instruments we create, they are ultimately just extensions and/or augmentations of our existing senses.

It's only the last 100 years that the West broke the mind into two parts, the conscious and unconscious. There's that which is experiential yet unknown, and there's information that is potentially available to be known to our “field of consciousness.”

The Buddha observed that for there to be consciousness, there has to be consciousness of something. He pointed out that there are only two basic objects of which we can be conscious.

There are physical objects in the physical world, which is the consciousness of the senses -- the stimulus of nerves of the corresponding sense organs, and contact with mental objects. And there are thoughts, ideas, memories, visualizations, creations, desires, and so on arising in the mind.

The body is considered the source of the physical sense organs. It is called rupa (Pali “form”). And the mind is the source of mental objects or nama (Pali “name”). Together these are known as the six sense bases.

These are the building blocks from which we create our reality, and this is where our sense of “self” arises.

This misconception, assuming that consciousness is a “self,” is called ignorance (Pali avijja). In Buddhism, ignorance (delusion, illusion, wrong view) is considered the root of all suffering.

How science / Buddhism study consciousness

Dr. Joel Frohlich (UCLA's Monti Lab), Pam Weintraub (ed.), Aeon.co; Eds., Wisdom Quarterly

To say what "consciousness" is, science explores where it isn't

Who needs a brain, eh Gazoo?

In 2014, a month-long bout of dizziness and vomiting brought a 24-year-old woman in China to the hospital. She was no stranger to these symptoms: She’d never been able to walk steadily and suffered from dizziness nearly her whole life. These were serious, debilitating symptoms.

Yet, they might have seemed almost mild once CT ("cat scan") and MRI scans presented a diagnosis: The woman was missing the majority of her brain. Most of the parts of her brain were present:

• cerebral cortex, the largest, outermost part of the brain responsible for most of our thinking and cognition,
• subcortex and the midbrain, with their myriad functions involving movement, memory, and body regulation,
• brainstem, essential for controlling breathing, sleep, and communicating with the rest of the body.

Dr. Joel Frohlich, Ph.D., UCLA post doc

But none of these areas hold the majority of the brain’s currency, neurons, the cells that fire impulses to transmit information or relay motor commands.

This distinction goes to the cerebellum, a structure situated behind the brainstem and below the cerebral cortex. Latin for "little brain," the highly compact cerebellum occupies only 10 per cent of the brain’s volume yet contains somewhere between 50 and 80 per cent of the brain’s neurons.

.

Neurons are the "currency" of the brain (wiki).

It was in this sense that the hospitalized Chinese woman was missing the majority of her brain.

Incredibly, she had been born without a cerebellum, but she had made it through nearly two and a half decades of life without even knowing it was missing.

The crude instruments of science chasing blood

Compare that with strokes and lesions of the cerebral cortex, whose neuron-count is a fraction of the cerebellum’s. These patients can lose the ability to recognize colors or faces and to comprehend language -- or they might develop what’s known as a "disorder of consciousness," a condition resulting in loss of responsiveness or any conscious awareness at all.

Understanding consciousness might be the greatest scientific challenge of our time [the hard problem of consciousness].

.

How can physical stuff like electrical impulses explain mental stuff like dreams or the sense of self? Why does a network of neurons in the brain feel like an experience when a network of computers or a network of people does not? More

• Dr. Joel Frohlich is a postdoctoral researcher studying consciousness in the laboratory of Prof. Martin Monti at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Department of Psychology. He is also a content producer at "Knowing Neurons," an Aeon.co partner.

Does Buddhism have a better way to study consciousness?

Dhr. Seven, Sayalay Aloka, Wisdom Quarterly, May 20, 2020

The "mind door" is in the heart not head.

The massive collection (pitaka) of Buddhist literature known as the Abhidharma ("Higher Doctrine" or the "teaching in ultimate terms," which means all things explained not in the conventional language of the discourses or sutras but in ultimate technical terms) explains consciousness in excruciating detail.

One does not embark upon an intellectual study of it if one hopes to really directly understand consciousness.

Many scholar-monks waste their time commenting and splitting hairs. But practitioners come to know-and-see these things.

The Buddha (Gandhara)

That is the purpose of Buddhism, to directly see mind-and-body (nama-rupa, defined as the Five Aggregates clung to as "self"), by Buddhist physics and psychology, to let go and awaken to reality.

This is done through a process (path) of mental purification first, to strengthen the medium through which this understanding will arise.

Scientists should take a cue from this and abstain from alcohol and obtunding drugs, junk foods, toxins, distractions, sleep deprivation, rushing and hurrying, and ego inflation before doing their science of experimental design, research execution, and honest reporting of results. The process purifies:

• virtue (peace-inducing morality)
• concentration (collectedness, mental coherence)
• insight (wisdom, direct knowledge).

It is not empirical and objective to prove what is true to everyone else, but personal and subjective to prove what is true to oneself.

Man, this is cool, all scientifical like Spock!

Meditators realizing enlightenment (awakening) know-and-see four things and are thereby liberated by wisdom. It becomes possible to let go and make a complete end of suffering.

Scientists, on the other hand, are likely to be karmically destroyed by their discoveries and inventions, the knowledge they develop that then gets out of their control and abused, or the technology and weapons that are then developed based on their basic research.

Ah, this is much better. The Buddha was right!

Where does psychology ("the study of mind") go? To help increase sales, control people, get them addicted to gambling and other things, develop dangerous pharmaceuticals, public relations, and so on. Where does enlightenment ("personal realization") go? To complete peace, to the marriage of wisdom and compassion, to the end of all suffering. It's good that we have both science and Buddhist practice in the world.