The 8th International Conference Buddhism & Australia
will be held on 7-9 February, 2019 in Perth, Western Australia.
READ MORE

Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia Illustrations
Some of the Buddhist Illustrations created by Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia
FREE for everyone to use

We would also appreciate your feedback on Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia. Please write feedback here
Here you can read media articles about the Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia which have been published all over the world.

Paypal-logo.jpg
Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Introduction to the Three Signs

From Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Please consider making little donation to help us expand the encyclopedia    Donate Paypal-logo.jpg    Enjoy your readings here and have a wonderful day  


BeoJlePCfd.jpg
Bass Ring.jpg
Smile-mind-trainin.jpg
D34ilbc.JPG
Budngffg.jpg

 Heed­ful­ness is the path to the death­less, care­less­ness is the path to death.

    The heed­ful do not die; the care­less are as if already dead.

     

Intro­duc­tion

The pri­mary Bud­dhist tenet that all things can be sep­a­rated into com­po­nent parts is not intended to sug­gest a sta­tic world of com­pos­ite objects. Rather, all things are seen to exist in the form of a stream. Each con­stituent ele­ment of that stream comes into being in depen­dence on other ele­ments in an unbro­ken flow of appear­ance and decline. No sin­gle ele­ment has an inde­pen­dent fixed iden­tity; they are all imper­ma­nent and unsta­ble. Indeed, the fluid nature of phe­nom­ena is pos­si­ble owing to the inter­de­pen­dence and insub­stan­tial­ity of their components.

This stream of con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena is con­stant (dhamma-dhātu) and cer­tain (dham­maṭṭhiti), and it is a part of a nat­ural order (dhamma-niyāma).1 It does not rely for its exis­tence on a god, reli­gion or prophet. In Buddha-Dhamma the role of a Teacher is that of dis­cov­er­ing and explain­ing this truth to others.

The Bud­dha pre­sented the teach­ing of the Three Char­ac­ter­is­tics (tilakkhaṇa) to describe this nat­ural law of flux.2 The teach­ing is out­lined in this way:

    Whether Bud­dhas appear or not, this truth (dhātu) is con­stant and sta­ble … that is:

    All con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena (saṅkhāra) are impermanent….

    All con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena are dukkha….3

    All things (dhamma) are nonself….

    Hav­ing fully awak­ened to and pen­e­trated to this truth, a Tathā­gata announces it, teaches it, clar­i­fies it, for­mu­lates it, reveals it, and ana­lyzes it: that all con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena are imper­ma­nent, all con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena are dukkha, and all things are non­self. 4

Def­i­n­i­tions of the three char­ac­ter­is­tics are as follows:

Anic­catā: imper­ma­nence, insta­bil­ity, and incon­stancy; the con­di­tion of aris­ing, dete­ri­o­rat­ing, and disintegrating.

Dukkhatā: state of dukkha; the con­di­tion of oppres­sion by birth and decay; the inher­ent stress, resis­tance and con­flict within an object due to alter­ation of its deter­mi­nant fac­tors, pre­vent­ing it from remain­ing as it is; the inter­nal imper­fec­tion of things, which pre­vents true sat­is­fac­tion for some­one whose desires are influ­enced by crav­ing (taṇhā), and causes suf­fer­ing for a per­son who clings (upādāna).

Anat­tatā: the con­di­tion of anattānon­self; the con­di­tion of things being void of a real abid­ing self that owns or con­trols phenomena.5

The Pali adjec­ti­val terms for these char­ac­ter­is­tics are anicca, dukkha, and anattā, respec­tively. The abstract noun forms are anic­catā, dukkhatā, and anat­tatā. As char­ac­ter­is­tics they are known as anicca-lakkhaṇa, dukkha-lakkhaṇa, and anatta-lakkhaṇa. The com­men­taries occa­sion­ally refer to the three char­ac­ter­is­tics as ‘uni­ver­sal char­ac­ter­is­tics’ (sāmañña-lakkhaṇa).

All con­di­tioned things exist in a state of flux, made up of inter­de­pen­dent con­di­tion­ing fac­tors, which arise and pass away in unbro­ken suc­ces­sion: things are imper­ma­nent. Because of their insta­bil­ity and causal depen­dence, con­di­tioned things are sub­ject to stress and fric­tion, reveal­ing an inher­ent imper­fec­tion. And all things, both con­di­tioned things and the Uncon­di­tioned, exist accord­ing to their nature; they pos­sess no self that acts as owner or gov­er­nor of phenomena.

Human beings too are com­prised of con­stituent ele­ments. The ‘building-blocks’ for human beings are the five aggre­gates (khandha); noth­ing else exists besides the five aggre­gates. When we exam­ine the five aggre­gates in turn, we see that each one is imper­ma­nent. Being imper­ma­nent, they are dukkha; they are dis­tress­ing for one who grasps them. Being dukkha, they are self­less. They are self­less because each aggre­gate arises from causes; they are not inde­pen­dent enti­ties. Fur­ther­more, they are not truly sub­ject to a person’s con­trol or own­er­ship. If one were to truly own the five aggre­gates, one would be able to con­trol them accord­ing to one’s will and pro­hibit them from change, for exam­ple from debil­ity or disease.

Many schol­ars have tried to prove that the Bud­dha acknowl­edged a self exist­ing apart from the five aggre­gates. They claim that he only repu­di­ated a self within con­di­tioned phe­nom­ena and that he affirmed an ulti­mate self. More­over, they explain that Nib­bāna is the same as ātman/attā: Nib­bāna is the Self. I will elab­o­rate on this mat­ter in Part IV of Bud­dhad­hamma, on Nibbāna.

Most peo­ple, espe­cially those who have grown up in a cul­ture espous­ing a soul, tend to seek out and seize some con­cept of a fixed iden­tity. Act­ing in this way sat­is­fies a hid­den, uncon­scious need. When their self-identification as one or more of the five aggre­gates becomes unten­able, they cre­ate a new con­cept of self in which to believe. But the aim of Buddha-Dhamma is not to release one thing so as to grasp another, or to be freed from one thing only to then be enslaved by some­thing else. As men­tioned ear­lier, things exist accord­ing to their own nature. Their nature of exis­tence is deter­mined by self­less­ness; if things were to pos­sess a self then by def­i­n­i­tion they could not exist as they do.

End­notes:

1 The Abhid­hamma com­men­taries divide niyāma, nat­ural laws, into five kinds:

Utu-niyāma (phys­i­cal laws): laws con­cern­ing human beings’ exter­nal envi­ron­ment, e.g., laws gov­ern­ing tem­per­a­ture, weather and seasons.

Bīja-niyāma (genetic laws): laws con­cern­ing repro­duc­tion, includ­ing heredity.

Citta-niyāma (psy­chic laws): laws con­cern­ing men­tal activities.

Kamma-niyāma (karmic laws): laws con­cern­ing inten­tion and human behav­iour, i.e., the law of actions (kamma) and their results.

Dhamma-niyāma: gen­eral laws of nature, espe­cially those of cause and effect; laws con­cern­ing the inter­re­la­tion­ship of all things.

(DA. II. 432; DhsA. 272)

2 Another key teach­ing by the Bud­dha is on Depen­dent Orig­i­na­tion (paṭic­casamup­pāda). This teach­ing describes the law of flux from a dif­fer­ent angle and illus­trates the same truth. The Three Char­ac­ter­is­tics shows the prop­er­ties of all things, prop­er­ties that com­ply with the rela­tion­ship out­lined in Depen­dent Orig­i­na­tion. Depen­dent Orig­i­na­tion describes the con­di­tioned flow of phe­nom­ena, reveal­ing the three characteristics.

3 [The word dukkha is noto­ri­ously dif­fi­cult to trans­late. The most com­mon trans­la­tions include: Suf­fer­ing, unsat­is­fac­tori­ness, stress, pain and mis­ery. Many mis­un­der­stand­ings have arisen by trans­lat­ing the sec­ond char­ac­ter­is­tic as: ‘Every­thing is suf­fer­ing’ or ‘Life is suf­fer­ing.’ For the dif­fer­ent con­texts in which the term dukkha is used see below. Please note that when I use the terms ‘stress­ful’ and ‘under stress’ I am refer­ring to the pres­sure and ten­sion inher­ent in all things.]

4 A. I. 286.

5 [Note that I have trans­lated anattā as ‘non­self,’ ‘not-self,’ or ‘self­less,’ accord­ing to the con­text. The Pali attā (San­skrit ātman) is most often trans­lated as ‘self’ or ‘soul’; I have used both, again accord­ing to the con­text. The words ‘self­less’ and ‘self­less­ness’ here should not be con­fused with the stan­dard def­i­n­i­tion of being altruistic.]

Source

www.buddhistteachings.org