Why is everything which is a product - impermanent ?

[sam_r]

Hi,

It is often asserted that "sound is impermanent because it is a product".

The implication is that whatever is a product is impermanent.
Why is it true?

Logical reasonings, and references are both welcome.

P.S. I believe that the meaning here is subtle impermanence - change moment by moment.

[Malcolm]

Hi,

It is often asserted that "sound is impermanent because it is a product".

The implication is that whatever is a product is impermanent.
Why is it true?

Logical reasonings, and references are both welcome.

P.S. I believe that the meaning here is subtle impermanence - change moment by moment.

Simply put, because all products are compounded phenomena.

[PadmaVonSamba]

Hi,

It is often asserted that "sound is impermanent because it is a product".

The implication is that whatever is a product is impermanent.
Why is it true?

Logical reasonings, and references are both welcome.

P.S. I believe that the meaning here is subtle impermanence - change moment by moment.

Simply put, because all products are compounded phenomena.

...and compounded phenomena arise from conditions.
Since conditions provide the cause, when the conditions cease the result will be that whatever is a product will also cease, hence it is impermanent.

[PadmaVonSamba]

ANITYANA SUTRA
https://read.84000.co/translation/UT22084-072-009.html

[SilenceMonkey]

Context: There were some philosophies in India saying that sound was permanent as it is primordial and uncreated. (ie. It's always there.) Buddhists said that sound starts and stops (eg. someone's voice "creating" sounds), therefore it's impermanent.

The lower tenet schools (ie. hinayana) give the examples of a pot that one can break with a hammer, and a cloth that can be taken apart by pulling its threads. The pot (made of clay) can be broken into shards, and they can be further smashed into little pieces until all you have are atoms left. Same with the cloth being pulled apart thread by thread.

Like Malcom said, all products are compounded phenomena. In layman's terms, this means that everything that is created is made up of stuff. Because these things are compounded phenomena, they can be disassembled into their parts (ie. they can be taken apart).

[sam_r]

Daniel Perdue in his book "The Course in Buddhist Reasoning" makes the distinction between subtle and gross impermanence

Course impermanence is easy to see, for example, when someone passes away, or a building falls down... It's just that things fall apart, and that is obvious for us to see. That's coarse impermanence.
It's harder to see subtle impermanence, though it is said to be going around us all the time. Subtle impermanence is that change in impermanent phenomena that most Buddhists say happens 360 times every moment

and Venerable Thubten Chodron writes
http://thubtenchodron.org/2017/02/chang ... y-moment/

To realize impermanence isn’t just to realize coarse impermanence: the fact that buildings fall down, people die, retreats end, retreats begin, and things like that. It means also to really see that things are changing moment by moment. Because you can’t have the coarse endings of certain things without having the subtle change that happens in each moment. So it isn’t like we built Chenrezig Hall, and then it remains permanent, and then at some future time, it’s taken down. It’s not like that. The Hall, from the moment it was complete (which is actually difficult to find, which moment when it was actually complete, but anyway, from that moment) it’s been in the process of changing and decaying, never remaining the same. The idea is that because of this subtle change that occurs each moment you don’t need any other cause to make things change moment by moment. And if you wait long enough you don’t really need anything for the coarse change to happen either. Because eventually things are changing moment by moment, the coarse change is going to happen and they’re going to collapse.

The reason I am bringing this up, is because it seems that most of you think that in the saying that "all products are impermanent", the reference is to coarse impermanence - the fact that things end.

PadmaVonSamba :

when the conditions cease the result will be that whatever is a product will also cease, hence it is impermanent.

SilenceMonkey :

they can be taken apart

Did I understand you correctly?

[sam_r]

The reason I take issue with such an interpretation is because it seems to me to contradict reality (and other Buddhist ideas).

The mindstream is a product; it is created from causes and conditions. As far as I understand, the substantial cause for the mind is the previous moment of mind; the conditions are the external phenomena (such as the things we see) and the body (such as the brain).

However, according to Mahayana Buddhism (and to reason), the mind is eternal. It is not subject to gross impermanence. It changes moment by moment, but remains eternally.

Alex Berzin writes about it

https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-s ... phenomena

Existent, validly knowable phenomena include both static (rtag-pa) and nonstatic (mi-rtag-pa) phenomena, usually translated as "permanent" and "impermanent" phenomena. The distinction between the two, however, is drawn not in terms of how long a phenomenon exists. Rather, it is drawn in terms of whether or not the phenomenon changes from moment to moment while it exists, no matter for how long that might be.

...

Nonstatic phenomena are those things that:

Arise from or are supported by causes and conditions
Change from moment to moment
Produce effects.

There are four types of nonstatic phenomena. Those that:

Have a beginning and an end – such as our gross bodies, a relationship with someone, or an episode of anger
Have no beginning and no end – such as our mental continuums
Have no beginning, but have an end – such as the presence of unawareness (ignorance, confusion) accompanying our mental continuums
Have a beginning, but no end – such as the death of a loved one, or the functioning of our mental continuums as omniscient minds of Buddhas.

So, if I am correct in interpreting your position as that sound is not eternal because of being a conditioned phenomena, I have issue with such an interpretations. Not every conditioned phenomena is not eternal - the mind is conditioned but eternal.


My own opinion is that the syllogism means that sound is a changing, nonstatic phenomenon because of being a product. That seems reasonable to me, but I don't understand why that's true.

[Ayu]

Mind is not eternal.

And from a practical view I don't understand how such a fragile thing like sound (that consists of feeble vibrations only) can be considered as eternal.
Where is the eternal sound, if nothing produces those waves and no ear is perceiving it?

Are you thinking of AUM? It's only the product of all sounds in universe together. It is not eternal.

[Malcolm]

The reason I take issue with such an interpretation is because it seems to me to contradict reality (and other Buddhist ideas).

The mindstream is a product; it is created from causes and conditions. As far as I understand, the substantial cause for the mind is the previous moment of mind; the conditions are the external phenomena (such as the things we see) and the body (such as the brain).

However, according to Mahayana Buddhism (and to reason), the mind is eternal. It is not subject to gross impermanence. It changes moment by moment, but remains eternally.

There is a difference between "eternal" and "permanent." Nirvana, for example, is permanent, but it is not eternal. Mind streams are permanent in the sense only that they are a ceaseless continuum of moments. Space is eternal, since it was never created. All eternal phenomena are permanent as well, but not all permanent phenomena are eternal.

[sam_r]

Mind is not eternal.

And from a practical view I don't understand how such a fragile thing like sound (that consists of feeble vibrations only) can be considered as eternal.
Where is the eternal sound, if nothing produces those waves and no ear is perceiving it?

Are you thinking of AUM? It's only the product of all sounds in universe together. It is not eternal.

According to Tibetan Buddhism (and Gelug specifically), mind is eternal (in the sense that it has no beginning and no end). And there are rational arguments for this as well (in Dharmakirti's Pramanavartika).

I think that the the term 'impermanent' in the syllogism "sound is impermanent" means non-static. I understand this syllogism to mean that sound changes moment by moment, not that it's eternal. But I'm not sure that people here agree with me on this interpretation...

[Ayu]

Mind is not eternal.

And from a practical view I don't understand how such a fragile thing like sound (that consists of feeble vibrations only) can be considered as eternal.
Where is the eternal sound, if nothing produces those waves and no ear is perceiving it?

Are you thinking of AUM? It's only the product of all sounds in universe together. It is not eternal.

According to Tibetan Buddhism (and Gelug specifically), mind is eternal (in the sense that it has no beginning and no end). And there are rational arguments for this as well (in Dharmakirti's Pramanavartika).

I think that the the term 'impermanent' in the syllogism "sound is impermanent" means non-static. I understand this syllogism to mean that sound changes moment by moment, not that it's eternal. But I'm not sure that people here agree with me on this interpretation...

Well, I study within the Gelug lineage in Germany and here the terms are used differently. Eternity is no Buddhist term in my perception. "No beginning and no end" is not at all equal to being eternal. Malcolm explained it perfectly above and there is no need to repeat it again.
In my studies it occurred to me that 'eternal' is not possible, because it implies 'unchangeable'. Therefore in my understanding 'eternal' equals 'static'. Within dependend origination there is few possibility for anything eternal then. I can't imagine any movement in a state of unchangeablity. Rather everything consists of change IMHO.

Space is one of few exceptions that are 'uncompounded' (I forgot the other two). But here as well I never heard the term 'eternal' before.

[sam_r]

Well, I study with in the Gelug lineage in Germany and here the terms are used differently. Eternity is no Buddhist term in my perception. "No beginning and no end" is not at all equal to being eternal. Malcolm explained it perfectly above and there is no need to repeat it again.
In my studies it occurred to me that 'eternal' is not possible, because it implies 'unchangeable'. Therefore in my understanding 'eternal' equals 'static'. Within dependend origination there is few possibility for anything eternal then. I can't imagine any movement in a state of unchangeablity. Rather everything consists of change IMHO.

Space is one of few exceptions that are 'uncompounded' (I forgot the other two). But here as well I never heard the term 'eternal' before.

Perhaps you are correct, and I wasn't using standard terminology when saying "eternal". The dictionary definition of eternal
https://www.google.com/search?q=define+ ... e&ie=UTF-8 is precisely precisely says 'without beginning or end', so I thought this word to fit. Also, Alex Berzin says

Our individual mental continuums, which are the continuities of our individual subjective experiencing of things, have no beginning and no end. They are eternal; they last forever.

--------------------------------

Anyway, regarding the topic itself:
As far as I understand, the standard Buddhist assertion is that whatever is a product, is subject to change.

I quote from 'Insight into Emptiness' by Khensur Jampa Tegchok :

All conditioned phenomena are impermanent because they depend on the causes and conditions that produce them. That means they are in a state of constant flux, never remaining the same in the next moment.

What I fail to understand is precisely this pervasion. Why does everything that depends on causes and conditions, in a state of constant flux?

[PadmaVonSamba]

Why does everything that depends on causes and conditions, in a state of constant flux?

Because all of the causes and conditions
are also in a state of flux.
Imagine building a house of bricks,
And the bricks are made of ice,
And the ice is slowly melting, so slowly that you can’t even perceive it. It doesn’t appear to be melting at all, but it is.
What will eventually become of the House?
It will melt. Then we will be dissatisfied, unhappy, maybe angry, envious of someone else’s ice house, whatever.

This is precisely the point that The Buddha is making.
All composite phenomena are like this.
We cannot even see our own bodies changing, growing older. Then one day you see you are old. And even what we think of as the “self” changes constantly, even though we have the experience if a fundamental “me” as unchanging.

By looking for lasting satisfaction in things which will not last, we repeat the same cycle of samsara, grasping at illusions, over and over and over again.

By grasping at the illusionary experience of an unchanging “self” and by clinging to the illusionary experience of unchanging phenomena, this is the cause of suffering. By ceasing grasping and clinging, this is the cause of the cessation of suffering.
...

[SilenceMonkey]

Why does everything that depends on causes and conditions, in a state of constant flux?

Powerful question

[SilenceMonkey]

Is an atom constantly in a state of change?

[sam_r]

Is an atom constantly in a state of change?

Yes. The electrons, according to modern science are in a state of constant change.
Therefore, since presumably all matter is made of atoms ( I don't know whether that is 100% true) , matter is in a constant state of change, too subtle to be perceived by the eye.

Good argument, thanks.

[sam_r]

I would still be interested not only in the point of view of modern science, but in the classical Buddhist explanations.

The Buddhist thinkers did not have direct access to the structure of the atoms, so how were they able to deduce that matter (and not only matter, but everything which is composed) is in a state of constant flux?

[Aemilius]

I would still be interested not only in the point of view of modern science, but in the classical Buddhist explanations.

The Buddhist thinkers did not have direct access to the structure of the atoms, so how were they able to deduce that matter (and not only matter, but everything which is composed) is in a state of constant flux?

They had recourse to the penetrating vision and wisdom attained through the practice of the dhyanas. This includes the six abhijña, and the three vidya. Buddha and some or the best of his followers could perceive the formation and disintegration of worlds, and even world-systems. and They could see the arising and disintegration of human beings and of beings in other realms of existence.
The perception of impermanence of matter and material worlds occurs through the knowledge and vision that arises in the practice of the dhyanas.

Here is a description of the destruction of the world system from Path of Purification of Buddhaghosha chapter XII. You can find this kind of knowlegde in the Abhidharma works like Vasubandhus's Abhidharmakosha-Bhashya:

34. For then the sense-sphere deities called world-marshal (loka-byúha) deitiescome to know that at the end of a hundred thousand years there will be the emergence of an aeon, and they travel up and down the haunts of men, their heads bared, their hair dishevelled, with piteous faces, mopping their tears with their hands, clothed in dyed cloth, and wearing their dress in great disorder.They make this announcement: “Good sirs, good sirs, at the end of a hundred thousand years from now there will be the emergence of an aeon. This world will be destroyed. Even the ocean will dry up. This great earth, and the Sineru King of Mountains, will be consumed and destroyed. The destruction of the earth will extend as far as the Brahmá-world. Develop loving-kindness, good sirs, develop compassion, gladness, equanimity, good sirs. Care for your mothers, care for your fathers, honour the elders of your clans.”
35. When human beings and earth deities hear their words, they mostly are filled with a sense of urgency. They become kind to each other and make merit with loving-kindness, etc., and so they are reborn in the divine world. There they eat divine food, and they do the preliminary work on the air kasióa and acquire jhána. Others, however, are reborn in a [sense-sphere] divine world through kamma to be experienced in a future life. For there is no being traversing theround of rebirths who is destitute of kamma to be experienced in a future life.They too acquire jhána there in the same way. All are eventually reborn inthe Brahmá-world by acquiring jhána in a [sense-sphere] divine world in this way.
36. However, at the end of a long period after the withholding of the rain, a second sun appears. And this is described by the Blessed One in the way beginning, “Bhikkhus, there is the occasion when ...” (A IV 100), and the Sattasuriya Sutta should be given in full. Now, when that has appeared, there is no more telling night from day; as one sun sets, the other rises. The world is uninterruptedly scorched by the suns. But there is no sun deity in the aeon-destruction sun as there is in the ordinary sun Now, when the ordinary sun is present, thunder clouds and mare’s-tail vapours cross the skies. But when the aeon-destruction sun is present, the sky is as blank as the disk of a looking-glass and destitute of clouds and vapour. Beginning with the rivulet, the water in all the rivers except the five great river dries up.
37. After that, at the end of a long period, a third sun appears. And when that has appeared, the great rivers dry up too.
38. After that, at the end of a long period, a fourth sun appears. And when that has appeared, the seven great lakes in Himalaya, the sources of the great rivers, dry up, that is to say: Sìhapapáta, Haísapátana, Kaóóamuóðaka, Rathakára, Anotatta, Chaddanta, and Kuóála.
39. After that, at the end of a long period, a fifth sun appears, and when that has appeared, there eventually comes to be not enough water left in the great ocean to wet one finger joint.
40. After that, at the end of a long period, a sixth sun appears, and when thathas appeared, the whole world-sphere becomes nothing but vapour, all its moisture being evaporated. And the hundred thousand million world-spheres are the same as this one.
41. After that, at the end of a long period, a seventh sun appears. And when that has appeared, the whole world-sphere together with the hundred thousand million other world-spheres catches fire. Even the summits of Sineru, a hundred leagues and more high, crumble and vanish into space. The conflagration mounts up and invades the realm of the Four Kings. When it has burnt up all the golden palaces, the jewelled palaces and the crystal palaces there, it invades the Realm of the Thirty-three. And so it goes right on up to the plane of the first jhána.When it has burnt three [lower] Brahmá-worlds, it stops there at the Ábhassara-world. As long as any formed thing (formation) the size of an atom still exists it does not go out; but it goes out when all formed things have been consumed. And like the flame that burns ghee and oil, it leaves no ash.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... on2011.pdf

[Aemilius]

When Theosophy had come to the western world in 1800's some persons attained, through the spiritual practices outlined in Theosophy, the ability to see clairvoyantly the atomic level of matter. In the buddhist Abhidharma the Sarvastivadins and/or Vaibhashika adamantly held that atoms nevertheless exist, when they had been refuted by logical reasoning by other Buddhist schools, who said that atoms do not exist. Some of this Buddhist discussion, whether atoms exist or don't exist, can be found in Vasubandhu's Vimshatikarika (Twenty Verses with a Commentery) and the Abhidharmakosha Bhashya.
I take it for granted that Sarvastivadins had perceived matter to consist of atoms in their practice of meditation/dhyana.

Occult Chemistry: Investigations by Clairvoyant Magnification into the Structure of the Atoms of the Periodic Table and Some Compounds (originally subtitled A Series of Clairvoyant Observations on the Chemical Elements) is a book written by Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater, who were all members of the Theosophical Society based in Adyar, India. Besant was at the time the President of the Society having succeeded Henry Olcott after his death in 1907.
The first edition reprinting articles from The Theosophist was published in 1908, followed by a second edition edited by Alfred Percy Sinnett in 1919, and a third edition edited by Curuppumullage Jinarajadasa in 1951.
Since the first edition was published in 1908, the book is in the public domain, and available in whole or in excerpts, on many sites on the internet.
Occult Chemistry states that the structure of chemical elements can be assessed through clairvoyant observation with the microscopic vision of the third eye. Observations were carried out between 1895 and 1933. "The book consists both of coordinated and illustrated descriptions of presumed etheric counterparts of the atoms of the then known chemical elements, and of other expositions of occult physics."

[PadmaVonSamba]

I would still be interested not only in the point of view of modern science, but in the classical Buddhist explanations.

The Buddhist thinkers did not have direct access to the structure of the atoms, so how were they able to deduce that matter (and not only matter, but everything which is composed) is in a state of constant flux?

This can be determined by deductive reasoning.
If your shoes eventually wear out (or anything decomposes), there must be a reason, a cause.
And, if composite things, such as shoes, decompose, then whatever they are composed of must likewise be decomposing.
One can also apply this in terms of the body aging.
Even though we cannot see the gradual aging process occurring in real time as it occurs, nonetheless one day you look into a mirror and see that your skin is wrinkled and your hair is grey. From this, we can deduce that the aging process must be occurring constantly, in very slowly and tiny increments.