The identity-view problem

These days, sakkāya—diṭṭhi is often translated as “identity-view” which pertains to mistakenly identifying our self or ātman with any of the conditioned (and corrupt) five aggregates such as physical form, feeling, perception, volition (i.e., choice) and consciousness.  We see it evident in this passage to give an example.

"Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling [puthujjano] … regards form as self … feeling as self … perception as self … volitional formations as self … consciousness as self … or self as in consciousness. This, bhikkhus, is called the way leading to the origination of identity [sakkāya]. When it is said, ‘The way leading to the origination of identity,’ the meaning here is this: a way of regarding things that leads to the origination of suffering” (SN 22:44).

Such passages like these in for us that the average person (puthujjana) regards his or her temporal body as primary (this is all I got!).  In such a deluded state, form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness are misjudged and wrongly identified with as being who I am. 

The Buddha saw the nub of the problem, not with our self or the ātman but, mistakingly, identifying our self with what was not our self, namely, the five aggregates or in Pali, khandhas which, as a result of mis-identification, keeps us in the stream of samsara (the cycles of birth and death).  In the following passage from the Paṭipadā Sutta (The Way Discourse) we see a clear-cut disassociation with the five aggregates which is the true way.

“And what, bhikkhus, is the way leading to the cessation [nirodha] of identity [sakkāya]?  Here, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple … does not regard form as self … nor feeling as self … nor perception as self … nor volitional formations as self … nor consciousness as self … nor self as in consciousness. This, bhikkhus, is called the way leading to the cessation of identity. When it is said, ‘The way leading to the cessation of identity,’ the meaning here is this: a way of regarding things that leads to the cessation of suffering” (SN 22:44).

And one more from the Mahāpuṇṇama Sutta:

“But, venerable sir, how does identity view not come to be?” “Here, bhikkhus, a well-taught noble disciple, who has regard for noble ones and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, who has regard for true men and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, does not regard material form as self, or self as possessed of material form, or material form as in self, or self as in material form. He does not regard feeling as self…perception as self…formations as self…consciousness as self, or self as possessed of consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. That is how identity view does not come to be”(M. iii. 18).

This is not the difficult to understand, yet Buddhism’s many scholars and Buddhist practitioners, including the curious public, only understand the Buddha to teach, there is no self.  They conveniently overlook many other passages which, in regard to the previously mentioned five aggregates, say of each aggregate: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.  Does this imply a self?  Yes, a self not identified with the five aggregates.  What else would wrongly identify then correcting, not identify?  According to the Dhammapada (165), "Purity and impurity belong to the very self [paccattaṁ]."

 

Comments

[david brainerd]

sakkāya—diṭṭhi is being translated "identity view" despite sakkāya meaning "existing body." sakkāya—diṭṭhi is then clearly the view that the existing body is the self. The existing body is, of course, exactly what is proclaimed to be anatta.

[Adasatala]

Yeah, it's quite sad! And actually, this dilemma reminds me of the another problem we're facing, where we have people saying that there's no need for practice, just because some old monk tried telling people about Pure Mind a long time ago, and now everyone immediately says they don't need put forth any effort what so ever, since everything is perfection as it is, LOL. What a load of horse-shit. Those who have planted innumerable seeds of goodness under countless Buddhas have a higher affinity with the teaching, and might have their minds open up in full bloom just by encountering a single utterance of the Dharma. But this is not the case for the rest of us. There's work to be done! But the work cannot commence without the establishing of Correct View, and Correct View cannot arise if people maintain these opinions.

And besides, which monk was it, in that one case, who said, "It's not that there aren't any practices, it's just that it cannot be defiled" (paraphrasing)? Ordinary people don't get to say things like that. Whoever has had the blessing of going through a similar experience to that of the monk in question, on their own accord, might perhaps offer up a word or two of their. But only after investigating that experience, or those experiences, to their fullest.

Some people think they've accomplished something, just because of false thinking :(
And some people think there's nothing special about the teaching, because of false thinking :(

[Jung]

In today´s snowflake climate, permeating most universities, treat a "no-selfer" as an IT and they will take offense.

Slap them in the face, and they will whine about the deed against their person.

Remind them of their belief, and they will deny the ignorance.