The crucial concern is to understand the concept of *pervasiveness & continuity* of the Self (Atta/Atman) in Hindu's cosmology.
Hindus still think nowadays, that they have to merge with everything in the world. They appropriate all nāmarupa's khandhas and its other constituents, as theirs. (Read Sadhana by Tagore - It will give you a good grasp on how Hindus must pervade the all cosmos to get liberated - How their self (atta) is part (and the whole in itself) of the Self (Atta), and should pervade the Self (Atta)).
.
This was definitely not Buddha's conception; who saw the pseudo-self (atta) as being impermanent (and therefore yielding dukkha) - And that cannot be Self, said Buddha). Not to speak of the fact that the appropriation of nāmarūpa's khandhas, was a wrong position.
This was definitely not Buddha's conception; who saw the pseudo-self (atta) as being impermanent (and therefore yielding dukkha) - And that cannot be Self, said Buddha). Not to speak of the fact that the appropriation of nāmarūpa's khandhas, was a wrong position.
Self is a pervasive concept, through the all Hindu's cosmology.
By considering satta as an inherent part of the Self (making it a little self/atta), satta appropriates the khandhas of nāmarūpa - like the Vedists, and now the Hindus are doing it with awareness, (and the rest of the world, unconsciously). That appropriation does trigger the "I" making process.
"I" making is when the ayatanas (senses like the eye) become operational (with sensuality,) through the descent of the indriyas (sense faculties/functions). This is stated in SN 22.47.
"I" making is when the ayatanas (senses like the eye) become operational (with sensuality,) through the descent of the indriyas (sense faculties/functions). This is stated in SN 22.47.
.
Buddha didn't see it that way.
When the eye sees a form, he said that there should be no appropriation (idea of Self/self) and no consequent "I" making process.
The eye-consciousness should be just a raw consciousness. An engagement between the eye/internal ayatana, with the signs-of-the-form/external ayatana. No indriya involved in the process. No descent of the sensual-function (indriya) in the eye-ayatana.
Buddha says in the well known Bahiya sutta (but more seriously in SN 35.95 (SA parallel)):
"When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized; then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two.
What is meant is: dont get involved (don't see nāmarūpa's signs and details in the external sphere of senses as "you" or "yours"), and there will be no "you" (no "I") in that. Do not appropriate nāmarūpa's khandhas and constituents as "you" or "yours", through the external sphere of senses. Don't look at the form of a tree as "you" or "yours". Don't hear the sound of a lute as "you" or "yours". Don't let your senses-functionalities (indriyas) get in the way.
Don't let that raw consciousness turn into a sensuous personal matter; with its lots of ensuant clinging khandhas: feelings > perceptions > (thoughts &) intentions that will alter even more that sense-consciousness.
**Those clinging-khandhas are still not "yours".**
Don't let that raw consciousness be contaminated by an idea of a Self/self, that will trigger the personal sensuous process, with the descent of the indriyas.
.
The "I" is just the process of nāmaṛupa's ultimate actualisation ; through the feedback of the senses.
There is an answer to be found in the paṭiccasamuppāda's process, that starts with "first order" ignorance.
Nāmarūpa "creates" satta for a purpose. It needs a feedback from the senses.
An ignorance of the "second order" (avijjādhātu) is found just after the descent of the indriyas in saḷāyatana's internal sphere of senses. Answering that ignorance is also answering the ignorance of the "first order".
.
Just knowing that this recursive process is vitiated (see the loop in the diagram,) should suffice to end the process and still the roaring saṇkhāras in Saṅkhāra nidanā.
.
The "I" is just the impermanence of nāmarūpa's khandhas, "going through" the actualisation process of the senses in saḷāyatana; when the senses (internal ayatanas,) sort of appropriate the process.
.
The problem being in the pervasiveness of the "idea of a self", and the appropriation that ensues.
There is no permanent self (atta) or Self (Atta) - Just an appropriation of impermanent signs and resulting dhammas.
________
*