Understanding the Ten Fetters

[Michel]

Yes, I'm willing to consider it. But I'm not certain. I still think the Culavedalla sutta, MN 44.7, shows that identity view is bound up in the 5 aggregates. If the sutta has been mistranslated, then it could be the case that identity is bound up in race, culture, nationality, language, gender, class, family or origin, etc., as you say. This requires some research to ascertain. It's on my do list. The GWV's a Contemplative's Pali to English Dictionary defines "sakkáya-ditthi" as being bound up in the 5 aggregates.

sakkáya-ditthi: 'personality-belief', is the first of the 10 fetters (samyojana). It is entirely abandoned only on reaching the path of Stream-winning (sotápatti-magga; s. ariya-puggala). There are 20 kinds of personality-belief, which are obtained by applying 4 types of that belief to each of the 5 groups of existence (khandha, q.v.): (1-5) the belief to be identical with the body, senses, perception, mental structures or cognition; (6-10) to be contained in them; (11-15) to be independent of them; (16-20) to be the owner of them (M. 44; S. XXII. 1). See prec., ditthi, upádána 4.

sakkáya: 'existing group'. 'this word is usually translated by 'personality', but according to the commentaries it corresponds to sat-káya, 'existing group', hence not to Sanskrit sva-káya, 'own group' or 'own body'. In the suttas (e.g. M. 44) it is said to be a name for the 5 groups of existence (khandha): "Sakkáya, o Brother Visákha, is said by the Blessed One to be a name for the 5 'groups as objects of clinging' (upádána-kkhandha), to wit: soma, sensing, perception, mental structures, and cognition." - See foll.

ditthi (lit. 'sight'; Ö dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammá, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion, and only in a few instances to right view, understanding or insight (e.g. ditthi-ppatta, q.v.; ditthi-visuddhi, purification of insight; ditthi-sampanna, possessed of insight).

[Michel]

For what it's worth, here's the Culavedalla sutta, MN 44.7 in Pali, from the Pali Text Society. The key word is "Sakkàyadiññhi", which I think is a compound word, consisting of the word "Sakkàya" and the word "diññhi", which some translate as meaning self-illusion, and may also be a synonym for "sakkáya-ditthi.

7. Kathaü panayye sakkàyadiññhi na hotãti?.

Idhàvuso visàkha sutavà ariyasàvako ariyànaü dassàvã ariyadhammassa kovido ariyadhamme suvinãto, sappurisànaü dassàvã sappurisadhammassa kovido sappurisadhamme suvinãto na råpaü attato samanupassati, na råpavantaü và attànaü, na attani và råpaü, na råpasmiü và attànaü.Na vedanaü attato samanupassati, na vedanàvantaü và attànaü, na attani và vedanaü, vedanàya và attànaü na sa¤¤aü attato samanupassati, na sa¤¤à vantaü và attànaü, na attani và sa¤¤aü, na sa¤¤àya và attànaü.Na saükhàre attato samanupassati, na saükhàravantaü và attànaü, na attani và saükhàre, na saïkhàresu và attànaü na vi¤¤àõaü attato samanupassati, na vi¤¤àõavantaü và attànaü, na attani và vi¤¤àõaü, na vi¤¤àõasmiü và attànaü. Evaü kho àvuso visàkha sakkàyadiññhi na hotãti.

And again to compare is Bodhi's english translation:

(IDENTITY VIEW) 7. “Lady, how does identity view come to be?” “Here, friend Visākha, an untaught ordinary person, who has no regard for noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for true men and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards material form as self, or self as possessed of material form, or material form as in self, or self as in material form. He regards feeling as self, or self as possessed of feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling. He regards perception as self, or self as possessed of perception, or perception as in self, or self as in perception. He regards formations as self, or self as possessed of formations, or formations as in self, or self as in formations. He regards consciousness as self, or self as possessed of consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. That is how identity view comes to be.”462

Bodhi, Bhikkhu; Nanamoli, Bhikkhu (2005-06-10). The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya: New Translation (Teachings of the Buddha) (Kindle Locations 6790-6798). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

The GWV dictionary is not very comprehensive. I can't  find good dictionaries online. The PTS dictionary doesn't work. Do you know where I can get good online Pali to English dictionaries?

[Michel]

Having one's identity derived from being bound up in race, culture, nationality, language, gender, class, family or origin, etc. is the source of much of the conflict and violence that has gone on throughout all times. If having such a view is not a fetter - then it should be. I think the Buddha's view of identity is with all beings, great or small, throughout the entire multi-universe. His discourses on metta, the brahma-viharas, etc imply this view. What a perfect idea this is. It would solve so many of our problems if we had this beautiful harmonious attitude. His teachings are so full of wisdom. Truly awesome.

[Jhanananda]

"Sakkàyadiññhi" is "sakkáya-ditthi. The Pali is just written differently, depending upon the system of Romanization of the language.

The GWV dictionary is not very comprehensive. I can't  find good dictionaries online. The PTS dictionary doesn't work. Do you know where I can get good online Pali to English dictionaries?

No Pali to English dictionary is comprehensive.  The GWV dictionary would be far more comprehensive, if there had been sufficient funding at the time I was working on that project to keep me alive while doing it.

While I appreciate your help, and the help of others who support the GWV; I have given up on expecting sufficient funding to keep me alive while advancing the work of the GWV.  I have decided that I will have to fund it myself, which means I will not have the time to do the work of the GWV.

[Alexander]

I have split part of this topic into Icons

[Cal]

Yes, I'm willing to consider it. But I'm not certain. I still think the Culavedalla sutta, MN 44.7, shows that identity view is bound up in the 5 aggregates. If the sutta has been mistranslated, then it could be the case that identity is bound up in race, culture, nationality, language, gender, class, family or origin, etc., as you say. This requires some research to ascertain. It's on my do list. The GWV's a Contemplative's Pali to English Dictionary defines "sakkáya-ditthi" as being bound up in the 5 aggregates.

sakkáya-ditthi: 'personality-belief', is the first of the 10 fetters (samyojana). It is entirely abandoned only on reaching the path of Stream-winning (sotápatti-magga; s. ariya-puggala). There are 20 kinds of personality-belief, which are obtained by applying 4 types of that belief to each of the 5 groups of existence (khandha, q.v.): (1-5) the belief to be identical with the body, senses, perception, mental structures or cognition; (6-10) to be contained in them; (11-15) to be independent of them; (16-20) to be the owner of them (M. 44; S. XXII. 1). See prec., ditthi, upádána 4.

sakkáya: 'existing group'. 'this word is usually translated by 'personality', but according to the commentaries it corresponds to sat-káya, 'existing group', hence not to Sanskrit sva-káya, 'own group' or 'own body'. In the suttas (e.g. M. 44) it is said to be a name for the 5 groups of existence (khandha): "Sakkáya, o Brother Visákha, is said by the Blessed One to be a name for the 5 'groups as objects of clinging' (upádána-kkhandha), to wit: soma, sensing, perception, mental structures, and cognition." - See foll.

ditthi (lit. 'sight'; Ö dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammá, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion, and only in a few instances to right view, understanding or insight (e.g. ditthi-ppatta, q.v.; ditthi-visuddhi, purification of insight; ditthi-sampanna, possessed of insight).

I would agree that all listed above is part of an Identity. Ask yourself, "who is Michel?" What ever comes to mind is a part of a cultured Identity. Your identity. This is one of the topics that I struggled with, it seems like it could be an endless loop leading back to Dependant Origination. Before i get too off topic, I also believe that labeling oneself as a Noble one to be a faculty of Identity.

When i was furthering my own practice I had experienced several moments when i became an observer to my physical self. These moments were while doing a task, outside of meditative absorption. During these moments I observed a free thinking person, seperate from what I truly am. It had its own thoughts, impulses and what im calling its own developed way of thinking. What i was observing was myself, myself is my identity, and it is seperate from what i really am. So when you read things like the 5 aggregates and definitions to identity its a means to an end, a process. The goal isnt to remove these fetters, its to remove you from yourself, like what is experienced in the 4th Jhana.

Im sure alot of this isnt going to make sense. Also, I couldnt point you to anything written to confirm this. It is only of my own experiences. Jhananada points the path out in almost everything that he writes. Lead a rigirous, self-aware, contemplative life and these things will come.

[Jhanananda]

I agree, Cal, in much of what you say, which I get as an expression of the non-dual experience of deep meditation drives us into being a passive observer of not just the world, but the psyche.  However, when we spend enough time in deep meditation, then we become more "identified" with the passive observer that the identity begins to unravel.  Here I am speaking of dependent origination, and the 5 aggregates.

[Cal]

I agree, Cal, in much of what you say, which I get as an expression of the non-dual experience of deep meditation drives us into being a passive observer of not just the world, but the psyche.  However, when we spend enough time in deep meditation, then we become more "identified" with the passive observer that the identity begins to unravel.  Here I am speaking of dependent origination, and the 5 aggregates.

Annihilation...I was reading the thread on Dependent Origination again this morning. You said "The deep meditation experience is where we unravel the tangled thread of identity and find pure awareness." One finds pure awareness, and one continues to go back to deep meditation until the identity has been shed. Suffering is gone. Ones day become filled in the deep meditation state. This seems like the end to me. Whats after this? After one takes that leap?

[Michel]

I would agree that all listed above is part of an Identity. Ask yourself, "who is Michel?" What ever comes to mind is a part of a cultured Identity. Your identity. This is one of the topics that I struggled with, it seems like it could be an endless loop leading back to Dependant Origination. Before i get too off topic, I also believe that labeling oneself as a Noble one to be a faculty of Identity.

When i was furthering my own practice I had experienced several moments when i became an observer to my physical self. These moments were while doing a task, outside of meditative absorption. During these moments I observed a free thinking person, seperate from what I truly am. It had its own thoughts, impulses and what im calling its own developed way of thinking. What i was observing was myself, myself is my identity, and it is seperate from what i really am. So when you read things like the 5 aggregates and definitions to identity its a means to an end, a process. The goal isnt to remove these fetters, its to remove you from yourself, like what is experienced in the 4th Jhana.

Im sure alot of this isnt going to make sense. Also, I couldnt point you to anything written to confirm this. It is only of my own experiences. Jhananada points the path out in almost everything that he writes. Lead a rigirous, self-aware, contemplative life and these things will come.

I'm aiming in the same direction that you describe, Cal. The idea of "myself" which is bound up in the 5 aggregates is a fiction, a construct of the mind. Yes I do experience my body, sensations, perceptions, thinking and cognition, but I simply want to be the observer of these phenomena without being attached to them. They are not myself, nor are they mine in the sense that if I have control over them. They arise and pass away like all conditioned phenomena. They are impermanent and continuously changing, and because they are impermanent they lead to suffering if you cling to them. They are non-self as we all agree. Much better to keep ones attention on whatever Devin feelings you are capable of. Which in my case happens to be bliss. You guys have the bliss, joy and ecstasy as well as the still mind.

[Jhanananda]

Annihilation...I was reading the thread on Dependent Origination again this morning. You said "The deep meditation experience is where we unravel the tangled thread of identity and find pure awareness." One finds pure awareness, and one continues to go back to deep meditation until the identity has been shed. Suffering is gone. Ones day become filled in the deep meditation state. This seems like the end to me. Whats after this? After one takes that leap?

What is after unraveling the identity is not relevant at this time.  We can discuss it in private when you are done unraveling your identity.

Much better to keep ones attention on whatever Devin feelings you are capable of. Which in my case happens to be bliss. You guys have the bliss, joy and ecstasy as well as the still mind.

You are doing fine.  Just keep moving forward, and you will get there when it is time.

[Michel]

You are doing fine.  Just keep moving forward, and you will get there when it is time.

Thank-you for the words of encouragement, Jhananda.

[Michel]

The 8th Fetter is 'Conceit.' It is an underlying perception that the unenlightened have of self-identity. It is one of the 5 higher fetters which only the arahants have overcome.  In the Pali Canon, we come across three types of conceit: ‘I am superior to,’ or ‘I am equal to,’ or ‘I am inferior to’ others. I think if we look at our own self-experience, we all have experienced all three types of conceit when we have compared or measured ourselves to others.

The self-view that one is superior to others might lead to a tendency to arrogance and contempt for others. The self-view that one is equal to others might lead to a tendency of rivalry. The self-view that one is inferior to others may lead to a tendency of envy. There are many other tendencies that can arise as well, I imagine.

This sutta is interesting, since it shows the relationship between conceit and the egoic self-identity (the Five Aggregates).

Soṇa (1)

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrel Sanctuary. Then Soṇa the householder’s son approached the Blessed One…. The Blessed One then said to Soṇa the householder’s son:

“Soṇa, when any ascetics and brahmins, on the basis of form—which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves thus: ‘I am superior,’ or ‘I am equal,’ or ‘I am inferior,’ what is that due to apart from not seeing things as they really are?

“When any ascetics and brahmins, on the basis of feeling … on the basis of perception … on the basis of volitional formations … on the basis of consciousness—which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves thus: ‘I am superior,’ or ‘I am equal,’ or ‘I am inferior,’ what is that due to apart from not seeing things as they really are?

“Soṇa, when any ascetics and brahmins do not, on the basis of form—which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves thus: ‘I am superior,’ or ‘I am equal,’
or ‘I am inferior,’ what is that due to apart from seeing things as they really are?

“When any ascetics and brahmins do not, on the basis of feeling … on the basis of perception … on the basis of volitional formations … on the basis of consciousness—which is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves thus: ‘I am superior,’ or ‘I am equal,’ or ‘I am inferior,’ what is that due to apart from seeing things as they really are?

“What do you think, Soṇa, is form permanent or impermanent?”—“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir.”

“Is feeling permanent or impermanent?… Is perception permanent or impermanent?… Are volitional formations permanent or impermanent?… Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?”—“Impermanent, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?”—“Suffering, venerable sir.”—“Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?”—“No, venerable sir.”

“Therefore, Soṇa, any kind of form whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’

“Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever … Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever … Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present,
internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’

“Seeing thus, Soṇa, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”

Here is the question: 

How are we to view ourselves relative to others if we are beyond conceit? We are after all unequal and different from one another and thus we are at times either superior to, equal to, or inferior to others. How does an arahant see it?

[Jhanananda]

Here is the question: 

How are we to view ourselves relative to others if we are beyond conceit? We are after all unequal and different from one another and thus we are at times either superior to, equal to, or inferior to others. How does an arahant see it?

Thank-you, Michel, for the dhamma discussion and sutta quote.  In answer to your question, if we maintain mindful self-awareness, with a still, mind in every moment, then there is no opportunity for conceit or any other fetter to arise.

[jay.validus]

The 8th Fetter is 'Conceit.' It is an underlying perception that the unenlightened have of self-identity. It is one of the 5 higher fetters which only the arahants have overcome.  In the Pali Canon, we come across three types of conceit: ‘I am superior to,’ or ‘I am equal to,’ or ‘I am inferior to’ others. I think if we look at our own self-experience, we all have experienced all three types of conceit when we have compared or measured ourselves to others.

How interesting.  A situation came up at work regarding conceit.  A co-worker of mine was sharing how she has developed confidence. She said in order to keep going, one would need to keep that confidence and inspiration going.  Others are uncomfortable around those with confidence, and they would try to bring you down.  You cannot let them..

While having this discussion, I am thinking how this applies to me and my ultimate salvation.  Pride and vanity are qualities that can take one away from their ultimate truth, however, everything she said about confidence is true.  If I take what Michael quoted, "I am superior, I am equal, I am inferior," and then apply this to a situation where choices are warranted, it seems like one just has to follow their heart.   Can it really be that simple?  I have noticed a difference between saying what I want to say, to saying what I need to say.  When I follow what needs to be said, my mind will naturally still, and I will keep mindful and aware.

[bodhimind]

Hmm... I feel like conceit has its basis on differentiation, which means there must be a subject-object and a circle drawn around it demarcating the difference between the included and excluded.

But if we move away from those thoughts... there seems to be this subtler meaning where if we grasp to the notion of an ego or a self, and as a consequence of that, these fetters are able to take root.

"I practice the dharma and hence have a more superior fruit than others" seems to be able to be seen in both ways... in conceit, or pure logic. Conceit seems to be that "me vs you" thing, while if it is seen as pure logic, it is what it is, rather than the mental projections placed upon the situation. However, others might see it as conceit simply because they still have a "me vs you" perspective?

Just running my thoughts here... I really have no idea if I'm on the right line.