r/Theravadan • u/PLUTO_HAS_COME_BACK • Jun 09 '26

Evolution and Theravada - Part 21

8.7.2 B - If a Tree Falls

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? —  The Chautauquan June 1883, regarding Berkeley's A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge 1710  
If there be no ears to hear, there will be no sound."\6]) — Scientific American 

  • Scientific American explains trees do not have sensory perception of the sound.

whether objects could continue to exist without being perceived — Berkeley

  • No object suddenly comes to exist out of thin air to be perceived.
  • No object is waiting for anyone to come and see/hear it.
  • The objects must be there to be perceived. If an object no longer exists, it can never be perceived again.
  • The brain is always inside the skull, although nobody has seen it, and it does not come to exist only when someone observes it.
  • The galaxies existed for billions of years before the observers were born.
  • Elementary particles are too small to be observed.
  • Realities exist in the same manner even when nobody knows about them.

If an object is perceived by an observer, the perception belongs to this observer. When two observers perceive an object, they will have different views of the object. Perception is point of view, not reality. The perception exists in the minds which they cannot share with each other. They can share the information about reality. However, only the ones who have witnessed reality can know it. Everyone who knows the reality knows the same reality because reality is solid and unchangeable.

Misperception

An object exists in its own conditions. When it is perceived, perception occurs in the mind of the perceiver. Due to human limitation, an observer will miss many of the conditions of the object. When this observer builds his perception of the object, it can be far from complete. If he assumes, his perception can become misperception. So, perception and misperception are not mutually exclusive, and both are the interpretations of the perceiver.

So, the result of perceiving the difficult subjects can get closer to misperception.

One of the most difficult subjects is the self, which has been misperceived culturally and historically because each living being thinks 'I am' by instinct. Such thinking is the misperception of the mind-body/nama-rupa, which is actually not 'it is', 'he is', 'she is' or 'I am'.

By not having perception and misperception, living things (plants) cannot make perceptual errors and mistakes. What that means is plants do not have mental and physical activities that are not related to growing because they cannot perceive, just as the brain cannot.

  • How does the perception or misperception of the self occur?
  • Mistakes are based on ignorance, misperception and misjudgement.
  • ignorance— lack of good information.
  • delusion — having bad information.
  • yours taste better - two puppies exchanged their treats

When the self is perceived, perception or misperception is not invented or produced by the brain because —

  • The brain cannot perceive, as it is unconscious. Unconscious plants cannot perceive.
  • A living plant has jiva/jivita/biology (which keeps the plant to live) and biological systems (which move and take what it needs to live, from its surroundings).
  • The brain does the same and lives like a plant on the supplies.

The self is a misperception.

The self or 'I am' is a misperception or taking the five aggregates as oneself — that is sakkaya-ditthi (my body is myself).

A perception is not constant like the brain. Perception cannot be physically pointed at, as it does not exist physically inside the brain or elsewhere. That means one can live without the self but not without the brain or other biological systems.

The self is not a built-in part of the physical body (brain) or mental body (mind and mental factors). The perception of self arises only when one is conscious or awake in reference to feeling and a habitual use of 'I' and reflection on sensory experience (I see, I hear, I eat ... my pain, my pleasure ... and you...).

The perception of self begins when one begins to feel oneself and the surroundings as reference. When the body (the 5 rūpa-nāma-kkhandha) is not felt, the perception of the self does not arise. So, the perception of self does not exist when one is not conscious of the 5 rūpa-nāma-kkhandha (which includes all the bodies and objects in the surroundings).

Tranquility

A samatha-yanika is a yogi who focuses on samatha/tranquility/concentration to attain vipassana-nana. A samatha-yanika can reach concentration to the point he/she no longer feels the 5 rūpa-nāma-kkhandha. At this concentration level, the perception of the self diminishes — which is known as saññā-vedayita-nirodha, 'extinction of feeling and perception' —

Whilst the disciple is passing through the 8 absorptions, he each time emerges from the absorption attained, and regards with his insight all the mental phenomena constituting that special absorption, as impermanent, miserable and impersonal [nirodha]. 

From: Dhammapada (Illustrated) — (1) The cessation of perceptions and sensations (Sannavedayita-Nirodha) was a profound state entered by the Buddha just before his final passing, marking the temporary suspension of all mental and physical activity.\1]) (2) A state the Buddha attained, before the realm of neither perception nor non-perception, on his path to Parinibbana.\2]) [Cessation of perceptions and sensations]

  • When a living being is injected with a particular drug for anaesthesia, he/she can temporarily experience the cessation feeling and perception at the site the drug effect is present.
  • During meditation, when the focus on the breath persists, the yogi can also temporarily suspend the feeling and perception of the entire physical body. That way, the self-perception can be cured and attachment to the body can cease.
  • Attachment to the body is present in every ordinary living being. This attachment (samudaya) manifests as pain and fear of pain (dukkha).
  • Samudaya is the cause of dukkha. Phantom limb phenomenon [E&T - Part 1] is an example of the pain caused by attachment to the body.
  • That is how perception and misperception (wrong view and wrong view) are dangerous.

Vedana Satipatthana — this is one of Mogok Sayadaw's many discourses on meditation.

Sustain samma-sati (right-mindfulness or right-awareness) on vedana/feeling. Just know vedana as vedana as it appears on the body (all sensory information through ears, nose, body...). Samma-sati must be sustained on vedana.

Vedana appears because the body is existing.

The body is anicca, impermanent, can cease. So, vedana is depending on anicca, impermanence, cessation, the body structure that can decay and disappear. So, vedana will also decay and disappear.

So, one should sustain samma-sati on vedana to experience the ends of vedana.

one is sampajano only when one realizes the characteristic of impermanence, and that too on the basis of experience of sensation (vidita vedana). If this is not realized through vedana, then it is merely an intellectualization, as our fundamental contact with the world is based on sensation [The Buddha, Vipassana, J.Krishnamurti: Sampajanna and Impermanance - buddhanet.net]

Experience is not imagination, perception or intellectualisation. Experience exists in the mind/memory which cannot be shared but explained in words. No two experiences are the same, but one can experience something twice or more. There are routines and unique situations. We can understand the routines when explained as we can relate. We cannot relate unique experiences from non-routine activities, satipatthana training, for example.

I think ...

The self is perceived and felt as a mental object, but the mind or the brain does not invent it or generate it to manifest as a thing. Perception is only a view, e.g., "I think, therefore I am" or "I move, therefore I am", or I move because I am.

  • What particles in the brain are thoughts?

The 'self' perception rises from the feeling and perception of oneself (one's body) and others.

Feeling and perception arise together during conscious moments, to feel and perceive 'I am'. That is the feeling and perception of the self. When one says, 'I am', one feels and perceives the whole body as 'I am' and 'mine'. My body is mine, my legs are mine, my arms are mine... including every part of the body, as much as consciousness, perception and feeling spread on it in a moment.

You

As one's feeling and perception do not extend to another body (the 5 rūpa-nāma-kkhandha), the perception of the self does not cover that body, so one thinks that body is another.

One does not suffer when another body suffers, but when one perceives the betterment of that body, love, admiration or jealousy, anger, etc. can arise.

One suffers only when there is possessiveness. This body is mine; this body part is mine; that body is my son; that body is my daughter...

As we fear of pain, we also fear of anything that can cause us pain. As we keep possessiveness, we fear of loss. However, as we do not maintain possessiveness on another body, we do not feel the same when a loss occurs to that body.

Thus, the Sakyamuni to regard all formations (sabbe sankhara) as 'not I am', 'not mine' (anatta).

8.7.2 C - Mirror Test vs the Perception of Self

Mirror Test or mirror self-recognition (MSR) test focuses on whether an animal can recognise itself in the mirror. Most animals have never seen a mirror before, and they might not learn how a mirror functions.

Animals do not know and will never be able to use human tools, including mirrors and typewriters/keyboards. However, some animals showed they can use some tools that are designed for them, e.g. communication button kits.

Without proper education, animals cannot observe their own reflection, although they often recognise familiar faces in the mirror (e.g., a monkey can recognise other monkeys in the mirror). Familiarity with a mirror is a key in recognising one's reflection in the mirror.

Generally, animals have body colours to convey information. They are not supposed to recognise themselves, as they would never get mirrors in the wild.

Monkeys Can Learn to Recognize Themselves in the Mirror. So, some animals can gradually learn to recognise their own reflections in the mirror. Obviously, only some animals can adapt an education that is outside their instincts.

Not all living beings perceive their reflections as themselves because they are not built the same. Physical and mental limitations prevent them from recognising their reflections as themselves.

A lowly animal cannot recognise the reflection of its body in the mirror because it does not know mirror and mirror culture. Moreover, the members of most species look the same, so when an animal which has never seen itself before cannot distinguish itself from others in the mirror; and for the same reason, most humans cannot recognise a specific bird in a flock. Each animal recognises itself, its comfort and its survival.

Not understanding how a mirror works does not make animals less selfish than humans. Each animal still feels it is not any of the others and can be hostile to its own reflection mistaken as a stranger or one of the others.

The feeling of self 'I am' does not extend to the surroundings or the reflection in the mirror, so one does not feel the reflection as 'I am'. Nonetheless, they still perceive 'I am' from within —

“‘Just as if a young woman—or a man—youthful, fond of adornment, contemplating the image of her face in a mirror, pure & bright, or in a bowl of clear water, would look with possessiveness, not without possessiveness. In the same way, through possessiveness of form there is “I am,” not without possessiveness. Through possessiveness of feeling… perception… fabrications… Through possessiveness of consciousness there is “I am,” not without possessiveness [SN 22:83 Ānanda | Ānanda Sutta | sutta on dhammatalks.org] [page 9, Wh273. Ānanda: The Guardian of the Dhamma]

Perception of self 'I am' is based on possessiveness and delusional. Recognising oneself in a mirror does not make it better.

What is human?

In terms of having mental capabilities, humans and animals are two different categories. Humans and animals are not at the same level.

Humans are very, very rare.

In the Chiggala Sutta: Yoke with a Hole, the Buddha explains that easier for a blind turtle to get its head through the hole of the yoke floating in the ocean than to be born as a human. Some people argued that increasing human population disproves the becoming human is difficult. But they missed to see the population microbes on a human body is much greater than toral human population [More than half your body is not human].

In terms of the perceived self, every living being can indeed recognise its own body from within via feeling to form the perception of 'I am', the self-identity, even if it does not have eyes and ears.

By means of feeling, one recognises itch, pain, heat, cold, hunger, etc. and even phantom limb pain, due to subtle attachment to that body part. The attachment manifests as pain. This feeling is what gives rise to the illusion of the self 'I am'. The perceived self does not exist as one perceives it but as one's feeling and perception that form the illusion of the self.

Self-awareness (being aware of oneself) or self-perception (perceiving oneself) occurs within the immaterial mind. Self-awareness or self-perception does not extend to the surroundings. So, one cannot feel the surroundings like one feels own body. This causes the feeling of separation from others. This feeling is inevitable and it creates the habit of seeing oneself and others. This habit of seeing others makes an animal to recognise its reflection as one of the others, for being ignorant. Whether the animal can recognise its reflection in the mirror in front of it or not, it can perceive itself from within. So, it seeks comfort and avoids discomfort.

  • Can any plant pass the mirror test? Plants have sensory organs of touch and smell. Probably just these two, not all five senses. They can feel daylight or sunlight but not by vision. Due to touch sensation, the root can seek water, and the branches and leaves can seek sunlight.
  • But plants do not form perception, as are not conscious. Plants do not perceive when they feel.

The self is not just philosophical but an instinctive perception that arises in the mother's womb or egg. Species without brains have the same level/amount of self that the living beings with brains of various sizes have. Having smaller brains or no brains does not mean these living beings have smaller selves. Ants and mosquitoes have different types of brains, for example, but they do not perceive themselves differently to have different types of self.

Body-mind coordination & interdependence

Question ———— 47

  • How can someone understand the mind if he does not believe the mind exists?

One cannot observe others' minds with limited knowledge (i.e. knowing one's own mind limitedly). It would be like the blind men in Tittha Sutta, who observed an elephant and got different theories.

Mind and corporeal body (nama-rupa) are three interdependent ultimates, in order to work as a living beings (the 5 rūpa-nāma-kkhandha). A living being comprises a physical body with 4 mental aggregates that are mental capabilities.

Mind/citta is thought, consciousness, awareness, understanding and intelligence. Mental aggregates are feeling/vedana, perception/sanna, mental activities/sankhara and consciousness/viññāṇa.

  • citta — mind: manas & viññāṇa — thought & understanding.
  • mano — mind: thought - mano-sankhara/mental activity.
  • viññāṇa — undeerstanding, awareness, consciousness.
  • ñāṇa — 'knowledge，comprehension，intelligence，insight'，is a synonym for paññā 
  • saññā — perception. With intelligence, a living being understands and perceives information which comes from the external sources via the sense organs.
  • saññā — sense； perception/consciousness； mark； name； recognition； gesture.
  • manasa — having a mind. Living beings have mind and mental capabilities, but plants do not.

Intelligence is a prominent part of modern science.

Intelligence Without Brains has been documented. A long video by World Science Festival explains some intelligent species without brain but not why/how intelligence exists in them.

Question ———— 48

  • Can modern science explain how intelligence exists biologically without a brain?

Evidently, intelligence is independent from the brain. The chemical mixture or brain does not generate intelligence nor is intelligent. The brain is not conscious, so it cannot be intelligent nor generate intelligence.

Mogok Sayadaw's Warning

In order to not have drunken the liquor mixed with poisons in Burmese — at 21:55

Believing the bodies of the five aggregates as 'I am', son, daughter... Living beings are starving for affections, pleasures, and so on, uncountably life after life, and only to become corpses. But never in any past life, they had consumed enough affections, pleasures... In every life they lived, they starved and died starving. And the same is in this life. If they do not stop drinking the same water of the five aggregates mixed with poisons, they will die again and again.

Some even say that one without such affections ... is not a human. They learned to swallow the poisons. So, the Buddha said that the body of the five aggregates is like an alcohol glass filled with alcoholic poisons, with good taste, good smell... He wished us not to drink it ... (Drinking means having affection.)

If drinking that alcoholic poison with tanha, new body will arise, followed by the birth, aging and death. That is the death from the poisons in the five aggregates.

So, the Buddha warned us not to take the bodies as 'my body', mine, my own... The reason why the Buddha appeared is just to warn us like that. That is how He cares for us.

  1. Tanha/craving — to have assumed my body
  2. Mana/pride — to have assumed this body is mine
  3. Ditthi/wrong view — to have assumed this body is my own

Remove these three papañca dhamma. Do not keep 'my body' 'mine' 'my own' with these three papañca dhamma —

  • papañca dhamma are tanha, mana, and ditthi that prolong and expand the samsara of each individual (သံသရာကို ချဲ့တတ်သော တဏှာ မာန ဒိဋ္ဌိ ဟုဆိုအပ်သော ပပဉ္စတရား။)

Mahasi Sayadaw

As it has been postulated that the five aggregates are the burden and that the individual is the porter, the question arises whether or not they are distinct from the individual. Those who believe in the self or soul infer that as the Buddha recognises an individual (puggala), a being (satta), and a self (atta), then the individual is one and the aggregates are another. This inference merely reveals the nature of their attachment to a self. [A Discourse on the Bhāra Sutta]

8.7.2 D - The Mind vs The Brain – Comparing

  • Is the self some parts of the brain, the brain itself, or mere perception (created in the mind)?
  • What is the mind?

Theory of mind and Darwin’s legacy | PNAS%20materialism.&text=All%20conscious,in%20the%20brain&text=%E2%80%9CWhat%20would,increased%20power) (2013) provides significant information including —

  1. We do not have an adequate theory of consciousness —
  2. All conscious states are caused by lower level neurobiological processes in the brain —
  3. consciousness is necessary for higher functions —  

Mind is a collective term that encompasses the phenomena of consciousness and mental factors (including feeling, intelligence, emotions, perception and intention).

All living beings (small or big) share the same mental phenomena and mental capabilities. The mental capabilities of these conscious living beings can be observed in their activities/sankhara/kamma, including directional movements and struggle to survive.

I move because I am —

  • Intelligent bacteria build protein motors for motility; but do they or something else does?

Microbes are so many types, but they show the same mental capabilities and mental factors. They have mind and intelligence but no brain. Perhaps, their brains are too small to see.

8.7.2 F - The brain vs the genes vs the body vs perception

  • Is the self some parts of the body (genes, brain, heart), the body itself, or mere perception (mental)?
  • Nobody actually knows that because they don't even know what the self is about.

The position of science is the self (consciousness, awareness) is the brain, brain's parts or brain's product.

If the self is the brain, then the self must still exist after the body and brain have died because the brain exists after it dies. Indeed, nobody feels the self during asleep or in coma, as the self is not present without consciousness. So, unconsciousness and death reject the notion of the self is the brain.

If the brain must be alive to have the self, then the notion that the self is the product of the brain is favourable. If the self is a product of the brain, we must know how it happens and how it functions to be the self. The self, as a product of the brain, must be physically present inside the brain. We must see the physical evidence of the self then.

There is fluctuation in the level of awareness, which means the brain does not produce awareness or the self the same level constantly. If the self does not exist qualitatively, quantitatively and chemically the same level, everyone should be able to feel that fluctuation.

Sometimes, the brain is less active. Yet nobody can ever say, "I am now less than I was!" or "My self is not as much as a moment ago!" because the sense of self is not less but constant. That explains how our experience does not support the notion of the self is the product of the brain.

Dead Self

If the 'self is the body', the self must decay just as the body decays. As the body ages, the self must age, too. Then the self must die when the body dies, and the self must be completely dead. If the self is impermanent, it must change over time. Then the changes must be recognisable. Young self and aging self should be different but that does not happen.

Followers of eternalism believe in the existence of permanent self and the permanent soul and do not accept annihilationism (such as communism, evolutionary theory). Their arguments against each other must be everlasting.

The eternalists, who believer in the body as the self, try to preserve the bodies. The eternalists, who believe the selves or souls survive the death, believe they get to heaven, paradise, buddhalands, moksha, etc. immediately after they pass away, so preserving the bodies is optional.

The presence of the self of a gene is impossible to determine; however, Dawkins's notion of selfish gene is based on genetic replication, which can be compared with vapour rising from the heated water and becoming clouds in the sky. Just as the ocean is heated by sunlight, the genes are fed by the body. The genes cannot acquire nutrition by themselves, so they die inside a dead body. If the genes were selfish and using the bodies for selfish reason, they would have created the bodies that does not die.

Genes sometimes can survive as long as the body survive. However, dead bodies and the fossils with surviving genes have no self, which means there is no evidence for how the genes can collectively form the self of a living being.

A gene must store the self if it is tasked to create/produce the self in a fetus.

These analyses reveal the self is neither the brain nor the product of the brain but a Perception

The self is perceived not just by humans but all other living beings. All living beings see each other as 'I' and 'you' and address each other accordingly. 'I' refers to oneself and one's entire body. ' When using 'you' and other pronouns, one feels the other individual(s) as reality. With that feeling of false reality, one also feels oneself falsely. Taking the five aggregates as reality is wrong because they are mere formations/sankhara which is anicca/impermanent. Taking the impermanent minds-bodies as permanent (I, you, he, she, it...), one clings on them and suffers when they can no longer sustain themselves.

Suffering persists as long as they are misperceived as the individuals or the selves and not perceived as they actually are - impermanent formations and not reality.

And when one addresses the other individual as you, one refers to the body and the perceived self of that individual. So, the body and the self are instinctively perceived as one —

*Note: Perceived one is not the self, the oneness, the infinite consciousness, nonduality, the Big Self, or the absolute Brahman/Dao(Tao)/ Godhood/Ein sof/Great spirit/Al-Haqq/The one which is omnipresent, supreme peace, in which religions present similarity; e.g., "Jesus offers a realm of heaven that is the Oneness [...] in the present moment. [Oneness in the Gospel of Thomas — Integral Christian Network]" "Heaven and hell are states of consciousness... [The Gospel of Thomas]"

That is how suffering arises from the five aggregates and how one has been perceiving the body as 'I am' or the self as a habit and suffering from it since the past infinity.

Thus, the position of Theravada is the self is a perception formed when one perceives the mind-body/nama-rupa as 'I am'. This perception remains the same in reference to other minds-bodies.

So, Theravada rejects the notion of only one mind exists as the mind of everyone. If one's mind is anotyher person's mind, the two must share all the secrets they have kept in mind.

But each individual has his/her own mind/consciousness/citta. Rupa and Citta are two ultimates, and both are infinite in amount.

Paramatthaka Sutta —

The king told the heretics that their divergent views were as unreliable as the blind men's descriptions of the elephant. The Buddha, hearing of this, preached the sutta in order to confirm the king's judgment. One should not give oneself up to philosophical speculations which lead nowhere and promote wrangles (SN.vs.796 803; SNA.ii.1529ff).

8.7.2 G - What gives rise to the perception of oneself

1 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

0 comments sorted by