1

An argument why a question "mind vs. matter" will not be given free points on:

That’s why, when it comes to this mind, an uneducated ordinary person is unable to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed.

Given that certain "Buddhist" say that matter is more secure, lasting and higher, why do they at the same time not get disillusioned about the mind?

Or what does the Buddha here say, when praising the abounding of the "more lasting" first:

But an uneducated ordinary person would be better off taking this body made up of the four primary elements to be their self, rather than the mind. Why is that? This body made up of the four primary elements is seen (perceived) to last for a year, or for two, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, or a hundred years, or even longer.

May there be not-uninstucted and masters of Vipassana, who could enlighten the topic a little, for those who had abound "the longer lasting" already.

(Note that this pixles here will by far not last as long as your mental imprints beyound it, so be quick in penetrating)

1

From SN 12.61:

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

The body appears to last for many years, and then becomes old, ill and drops off. If one associates his self with the body, at least, he will see that the body must drop off and will become disillusioned with the body.

But the mind (including intellect and consciousness) changes much more frequently than the body, but has a seamless appearance. It is therefore not unusual, that one considers his same consciousness wanders on from youth to old age in this body and then wanders on to another body in future. This is what the monk Sati mistakenly thought in MN 38.

So, if one cannot see that the mind or intellect or consciousness is not permanent, then he does not have a reason to become disillusioned with it.

No religion preaches the immortality of the physical body, because it obviously perishes. However, many religions preach the eternity of the soul and the continuity of consciousness through the eternal soul in other bodies, which are physical or celestial. They say you can meet and talk to your loved ones in heaven, after you have passed away. The reason for this is that they cannot see how consciousness is impermanent. That's because it's not obvious.

MN 38 has a discussion on the impermanence of consciousness (i.e. eye-consciousness, intellect-consciousness etc.).

Everyone tries to find something permanent to associate their self with, so that they can be permanent. You can find a discussion of this in the River Sutta.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.