Dear Hugo,

Thanks; and as I said, that is in fact what the Buddha answered in the citation below. But is it not a valid question to ask "Who realizes the  four noble truths?" or "Who experiences Nibbāna?"

That is my question. There is no (intrinsic) self, but indeed there seems to be some kind of "consciousness" (which is not the fourth aggregate) which still remains when the self/aggregates are extinguished, as the Buddha says in the Kevaddha sutta. The phenomenologists would call this "pure subjectivity" I believe (that is, subjectivity devoid of an ego).

In answer to the Buddha's (re-formulated) question

"Where do earth, water, fire, and wind,
And long and short, and fine and coarse.
Pure and impure, no footing find?
Where is it that both name and form
Die out, leaving no trace behind?"[1]

 He answers

viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ, anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ.
ettha āpo ca pathavī tejo vāyo na gādhati,
ettha dīghañ ca rassañ ca aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ?
ettha nāmañ ca rūpañ ca asesaṃ uparujjhati,
viññaṇassa nirodhena etth’ etaṃ uparujjhatī ti.


"Where consciousness is non-manifesting, endless, shining everywhere, there earth, water, fire and wind, ...with the cessation of consciousness all this ceases."
Presumably the first viññāṇaṃ is a supramundance consciousness and the second (which ceases) is the fourth aggregate (or at least that's how Walshe interprets it on page 558 of Long Discourses),

Mettā,

Bryan
[1] Rhys-Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, 283. DN 1, 2237-10: kattha āpo ca pathavī tejo vāyo na gādhati?
kattha dīghañ ca rassañ ca aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ?
kattha nāmañ ca rūpañ ca, asesaṃ uparujjhatī ti?







From: Hugo <eklektik@...>
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 10:34:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Re: Buddha and the present moment.

 
Hello Bryan,

The question "who is it that is doing this?" is not valid because asking "who" is implying a self.

It is like asking:  "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

If you answer yes, you imply that you used to beat her.

If you answer no, implies that you currently beat her.

Somebody that has never beat his wife, would deem this question "not valid".


I can't remember the details but there is an anecdote about some layman that was very enthusiastic about a book he read that was titled "Who dies?", he took the book to a monk and suggested that he should read it, the monk took the book read the title and returned it to him saying "wrong question".

Regards,
Hugo


On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Bryan Levman <bryan.levman@...> wrote:
Dear Stefan and Nina,

I also interpret Dhp 348 this way. The Buddha's teaching transcends any kind of duality and the "present" is simply another duality with the past or the future. This is also stated clearly in Sutta Nipāta 949, which is at least as old or older than Dhp 348:

Yam pubbe, tam visosehi, pacchā te māhu kiñcanaṃ,

majjhe ce no gahessasi, upasanto carissasi.
Dry up the past, may the future be nothing. If you do not grasp in the present, you will
wander in peace.
 

This also brings up a point which I think Robert is alluding to: when we are mindful, have abandoned the atta, and transcended the duality of time (and space), who is it that is doing this?


I'm not sure what the Buddha's answer to this might be. At Sn 2, 61 (Avijjapacayasutta) he is asked for whom is there old age and death, birth and volitional formations and he answers that this is "not a valid question" (no kallo pañho), and then he reiterates the 12nidānas. 

In the  Utpadyananirudhyanasūtra of the Mahāvastu he is asked ( in Ven. Ananadajoti's translation  at http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Short-Pieces-in-Sanskrit/Utpadyananirudhyanasutram.htm)



“Since bodily form, it seems, is surely not-self,
(since) feeling, perception, (volitional) processes, and consciousness are not-self,
then who is the maker, or the one who makes,
who is the animator, or the originator, or the one who puts (them) down,
who takes up these processes or puts them down,
for whom are these processes empty, not capable of being self,
or having a self or with a capability of being self?"

to which he answers

"The processes arise and the processes cease,
they arise with causes, and they cease with causes,
with causes for the process of rebirth, [thus] monks, does the Realised One [explain] ‘self’ and ‘the one who takes up.’" And then again, he repeats the nidānas.


The phenomenologists assert that there must be some basic subjectivity which realizes these truths (not an atta, but nevertheless some fundamental awareness or beingness). Khristos has a very good article on this subject in the current issue of the Buddhist Studies Review.

Nina, perhaps this question is addressed in the Abhidhamma?

Mettā,

Bryan




________________________________
 From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...>
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 9:43:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Re: Buddha and the present moment.



 
Dear Stefan,
Op 20 aug 2013, om 12:37 heeft stefan_karpik het volgende geschreven:

> I think Dhammapada Verse 348. Reaching The Further Shore, advises
> against present moment awareness:
> Let go before, let go the after,
> let go the middle, beyond the becoming.
> With mind released in every way
> you'll come no more to birth, decay.
-------
N: I would take it this way: do not cling even to the present.
As I understand the teachings, the Buddha speaks all the time about seeing, hearing etc. of this moment. How otherwise could one realize their characteristics? If it would not be the present reality we can only think and speculate. The Buddha's teachings would be mere theory.
You find that the citta is so fast. That is right. There can only be mindfulness of what has just gone but we can stll call it the present reality. Take attachment. It can and should be object of mindfulness, otherwise it could never be eradicated. Mindfulness accompanies kusala citta and it could not accompany akusala citta with attachment. But it can still be aware of the characteristic of the lobha that has just gone. Indeed, cittas arise and fall away succeeding one another extremely rapidly.
We should not try to catch the present moment, than the self is at work. Mindfulness is anattaa it does not belong to anyone. It can only arise when there are the right conditions, namely, listening and considering the Dhamma over and over again. Above all, understanding that also sati and pa~n~naa are anattaa. Any wishing or trying works counteractive.

Nina.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
[Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
[Pali Document Framework] http://www.tipitaka.net/forge/pdf/
[Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
[Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Pali-digest@yahoogroups.com
    Pali-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Pali-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




--
Hugo