I have read about sakkayaditti
Sakkayaditti means something in Buddhism, Pali. please help me to clarify
Buddhism Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people practicing or interested in Buddhist philosophy, teaching, and practice. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
This is a key concept in the Early Buddhist Texts:
MN 64: Anusetvevassa sakkāyadiṭṭhānusayo.
MN 64: Yet the underlying tendency to identity view still lies within them.
Identity View is the view that "I am". For example, we say, "I am Chinese" or "I am educated" or "I am poor", etc.
These personal perspectives contribute to suffering. If "I am poor", then "I want to be rich". If "I am ugly" then "I want to be beautiful". Through study and practice, we step away from personal perspectives and abandon Identity View as not satisfying, not conducive to happiness. To be an Arahant, to be a Realized One, Identity View is abandoned entirely.
Sakkāyadiṭṭhi is the heresy of individuality
To be clear, that does not mean that Buddhists are all alike. The Buddha in fact insisted that each of us find the truth for ourselves. What it means is that Buddhists are alike in dismissing personal cravings as unskillful and unwholesome.
Ime kho, āvuso visākha, pañcupādānakkhandhā sakkāyo vutto bhagavatā
These five clinging-aggregates are the self-identification described by the Blessed One.
The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One
Kathaṃ panāyye, sakkāyadiṭṭhi hotī ti?
But, lady, how does self-identification view come about?
There is the case, friend Visakha, where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.
He assumes feeling to be the self...
He assumes perception to be the self...
He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...
He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
This is how self-identification view comes about.
This is misunderstood by many people today. They say sakkaya ditti means: self view. According to dhamma, when a peraon become 1st entrant (sotāpanna) he uproots the sakkaya ditti. So if sakkaya ditti means self view, then that person no need to go beyond that point, since there's noone (no self view) to attain nibbana. So please think wise and don't get to the trap of self view.
Sakkaya diiti means: giving values to the things (in mind). Eg: Ferrari is a very good car, so its valuable (in mind). The food in ABC restaurant is very tasty so its worth going to that restaurant or eating that food. This view is called sakkaya ditti. When someone become 1st entrant; he understand that its a lie. Its not true. So he uproots the sakkaya dittia and become to samma ditti. Which is knowing that nothing is valuable but the Nirvana. How to understand / realize that things doesn't have a value is a different topic.