King Pasenadi was taught,
"Four people are found in the world"
Wandering from life to life,
In the darkness or in the light.
Worldly established by the Teacher,
How can it be said they don't exist?
Worldly established as the wandering four,
How can it be said they don't wander?
Holding to acquired and pernicious views,
Some misguided people ...
Is a person (puggala) reborn into future lives?
A person can not be pinned down as a truth or reality even in this life, let alone a future life.
However if you are talking in terms of the doctrine of self, then you can talk about real things being grasped with wrong view to be personal or a person, a self or a being.
If you are then talking about a person, ...
Each mind can know one in 3 kinds of objects...
Arising&Vanishing Realities (trillion moments per second;sankhata)
Nibbana Reality (asankhata)
(All of them have names[nāma] which is a kind of pannatti)
Everybody, included the noble one, must know Sankhata and Pannatti switching rapidly to live their life.
What is a person (puggala) in Buddhism?
It's just a concept, e.g. like a "being".
What is the difference between a person (puggala) and other terms like self (atta) and sentient being (satta)?
There is no difference - they are all concepts with no real reference point to reality.
Words such as a person, a being etc. is used for conventional sake ...
the person is the thing that when u say 'i dont exist' observes that referent object freshly
the self is the innate misapprehension we have always had when the person appears.
for instance the power that endured you into this next moment is such a grasping of a self to the person
like everything else the person is hard to notice without much concentration ...
Is the self like a rainbow and is it just as real?
A rainbow is not real. It is a concept. What is really going on is the process of seeing, i.e. visible forms come into contact with the eye faculty whereafter eye-consciousness arises and passes away. After that arises a mind-door process wherein the object just seen is being cognized. If one is not mindful ...
Excellent question, and the analogy is very appropriate in a Buddhist context. I would point to instructions that one receives for meditation practices, to meditate on the meditator (in different ways). The objective is to see the ‘self’ that we habitually cling to, as you have described seeing a rainbow up close. When we, as you say, fly up to it in a ...
Someone may say the rainbow doesn't exist.
But you can see it with your eyes and you can take photos of it, so it surely exists.
Similarly, someone told the Buddha that the self-doer doesn't exist at all.
But the Buddha said, hey, one could decide to move forwards and backwards by his own volition, so a self-doer surely exists. Or I may say, if it looks like ...
If a rainbow was a mind created phenomenon, then a camera, which has no mind or consciousness, would not be able to photograph it.
Hold on. If rainbow was mind created phenomena, wouldn't the camera also be mind created, wouldn't the eye be mind-made and if these are likewise mind-made then why wouldn't the camera be able to photograph it? Seems like ...
OP: "No one can deny that a rainbow is as real as the term can be defined
in any meaningful way."
In fact, I can define 'real' as follows:
real (adjective): actually existing in just the same way it appears to exist
In this sense, then neither the self nor the rainbow can be considered real. In the case of the rainbow, it appears to exist as a ...
the buddha didnt asset that not-self is the dissolution of the self. nor that nonapprehension of yourself is the meaning of selflessness.
that deluded ppl lose the capacity to clearly ascertain in deep sleep or even recognise dreams as dreams is standard but has nothing to do with examples of ascertaining reality. falling asleep and failing to ascertain ...