Attainment of Buddhahood is impossible

[Sherab]

If your nature is changeable, buddhahood is not attainable since if your nature is changeable, the buddhahood attained could also change.
If your nature is unchangeable, no amount of practice will enable you to attain buddhahood, since your nature is unchangeable.

Yet Buddha taught that there is path to buddhahood.
And Buddha also taught that buddhahood is not attained.

[ground]

Maybe attainment of Buddhahood is impossible.

However what is attainable is the cessation of obscurations and with this comes the cessation of papanca.

Kind regards

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

If your nature is changeable, buddhahood is not attainable since if your nature is changeable, the buddhahood attained could also change.
If your nature is unchangeable, no amount of practice will enable you to attain buddhahood, since your nature is unchangeable.

Yet Buddha taught that there is path to buddhahood.
And Buddha also taught that buddhahood is not attained.

It seems important to distinguish here between the conditioned (sankhara, samsara) and the unconditioned.

The N8P is a conditioned path that leads to the unconditioned. If it removes all traces of conditioning/forming/fabricating, then I see no inherent conflict.

Maitri,
Retro.

[Astus]

The fault lies in the original idea itself that there is such thing as nature (svabhava/dhatu). It is no different from the view of self.

[Sherab]

If it removes all traces of conditioning/forming/fabricating, then I see no inherent conflict.

So something changeable can become unchangeable?

[Sherab]

The fault lies in the original idea itself that there is such thing as nature (svabhava/dhatu). It is no different from the view of self.

So if there is no nature, does it mean that there is completely nothing?

[Sherab]

... what is attainable is the cessation of obscurations and with this comes the cessation of papanca.

So something changeable can become something unchangeable, or something become completely nothing?

[Astus]

So if there is no nature, does it mean that there is completely nothing?

I think the most detailed and logical explanation of the attainment of buddhahood is what you find in yogacara's transformation of mind from the eight consciousnesses to the four wisdoms, or an upgraded vajrayana version with 5 wisdoms and four bodies. In brief, the mind-stream contains defilements and if those are eliminated, thus have no more effect, the mind-stream becomes pure, so from a sentient being we get a buddha. Also, it can't be polluted again because defilement was sustained by the mind itself therefore once the corrupting factors are removed they're forever gone.

[Sherab]

So if there is no nature, does it mean that there is completely nothing?

I think the most detailed and logical explanation of the attainment of buddhahood is what you find in yogacara's transformation of mind from the eight consciousnesses to the four wisdoms, or an upgraded vajrayana version with 5 wisdoms and four bodies. In brief, the mind-stream contains defilements and if those are eliminated, thus have no more effect, the mind-stream becomes pure, so from a sentient being we get a buddha. Also, it can't be polluted again because defilement was sustained by the mind itself therefore once the corrupting factors are removed they're forever gone.

So are you saying that something that is previously conditioned by various factors can become something that can no longer become conditioned again, ie., something previously conditionable can become something unconditionable?

[Astus]

So are you saying that something that is previously conditioned by various factors can become something that can no longer become conditioned again, ie., something previously conditionable can become something unconditionable?

No. A mind-stream is not a single thing but the causal continuum of mental factors. Among those factors we find the three roots of samsara. If they're removed the functioning of the mind-stream changes from defiled to pure, from ignorance to wisdom. It doesn't mean it becomes unchanging per se since there is wisdom. But it doesn't become defiled again because there is no cause for defilements any more.

[muni]

No changing wave attain the unchanging ocean.

[Sherab]

So are you saying that something that is previously conditioned by various factors can become something that can no longer become conditioned again, ie., something previously conditionable can become something unconditionable?

No. A mind-stream is not a single thing but the causal continuum of mental factors. Among those factors we find the three roots of samsara. If they're removed the functioning of the mind-stream changes from defiled to pure, from ignorance to wisdom. It doesn't mean it becomes unchanging per se since there is wisdom. But it doesn't become defiled again because there is no cause for defilements any more.

"the three roots of samsara" - do these have a changeable nature or unchangeable nature?

"It doesn't mean it becomes unchanging per se since there is wisdom" - so the mind-stream is changeable because there is wisdom?

"But it doesn't become defiled again because there is no cause for defilements any more." - So no ignorance implies wisdom just as no apple implies orange?

[Astus]

"the three roots of samsara" - do these have a changeable nature or unchangeable nature?

All composite things (samskara) are impermanent and dependently arisen. Because they're dependently arisen they're empty of nature (nih-svabhava). Also, if by changeable you mean disappearing and by unchangeable you mean eternal, these are the extremes of annihilation and permanence.

"It doesn't mean it becomes unchanging per se since there is wisdom" - so the mind-stream is changeable because there is wisdom?

No, the mind-stream is a stream of causal continua similarly to a river where you find no permanent component.

"But it doesn't become defiled again because there is no cause for defilements any more." - So no ignorance implies wisdom just as no apple implies orange?

Lack of inhibiting factors means freedom, from the freedom of perception comes insight into dependent origination and that is wisdom.

[Sherab]

All composite things (samskara) are impermanent and dependently arisen. Because they're dependently arisen they're empty of nature (nih-svabhava). Also, if by changeable you mean disappearing and by unchangeable you mean eternal, these are the extremes of annihilation and permanence.

So composite things have no nature and are therefore unreal/untrue but there are real/true connections between them?

No, the mind-stream is a stream of causal continua similarly to a river where you find no permanent component.

So there is a permanent continua even though the components are impermanent? If so, is it not possible for all components to cease and therefore a cessation of the permanent continua?

Lack of inhibiting factors means freedom, from the freedom of perception comes insight into dependent origination and that is wisdom.

What is it that previously has no such insight but now has this insight?

[muni]

[What is it that previously has no such insight but now has this insight?

Wave can recognize being empty vast ocean and wave just its play. changing experienced play, life is dependent of nature 'before' mind, cannot exist independently.

[Sherab]

[What is it that previously has no such insight but now has this insight?

Wave can recognize being empty vast ocean and wave just its play. changing experienced play, life is dependent of nature 'before' mind, cannot exist independently.

What are you referring to as wave?
What are you referring to as ocean?

[Astus]

So composite things have no nature and are therefore unreal/untrue but there are real/true connections between them?

Like true love between imagined lovers? Unlikely, don't you think?

So there is a permanent continua even though the components are impermanent? If so, is it not possible for all components to cease and therefore a cessation of the permanent continua?

To suppose a continuum besides components is like saying that there is a body besides the arms, legs, torso and head.

What is it that previously has no such insight but now has this insight?

Insight is a direct understanding just like one understands how to ride a bike. To conceive there is a separate self understanding it is, again, falls under the concept of self-view, about which you may read in general Buddhist books.

[muni]

[
What are you referring to as wave?
What are you referring to as ocean?

Wave = Empty appaerances/phenomena disolving by themselves in empty vastness.

ocean = Vastness of pure nature.

[gregkavarnos]

If your nature is changeable, buddhahood is not attainable since if your nature is changeable, the buddhahood attained could also change.
If your nature is unchangeable, no amount of practice will enable you to attain buddhahood, since your nature is unchangeable.

Yet Buddha taught that there is path to buddhahood.
And Buddha also taught that buddhahood is not attained.

Don't you have some practice to do?

Well, what you waiting for then?

DO IT!

[Malcolm]

If your nature is changeable, buddhahood is not attainable since if your nature is changeable, the buddhahood attained could also change.
If your nature is unchangeable, no amount of practice will enable you to attain buddhahood, since your nature is unchangeable.

Yet Buddha taught that there is path to buddhahood.
And Buddha also taught that buddhahood is not attained.

Your whole line of reasoning is predicated in the idea of buddhahood being a thing. There is no substantial person, and no substantial buddhahood. Therefore, ignorance is possible, and also liberation.