OK. So let's have a little bit of a
discussion about the three marks of existence.
So just very briefly, we'll just talk about those 3 marks that
that are characteristics of conditioned existence,
impermanence, suffering or unsatisfactoriness and not self.
So is there does anyone have one of those that are your like,
favorite go to one of those ones that you really want to talk
about? Give us a couple minutes maybe.
So when I look at them, it wasn't so much an individual
mark of existence that caught my attention.
It's that when I look at them collectively, they say emptiness
to me. So that is a Direct Line to
every empty because if it exists, if it has a, if it has
the, the capacity to exist, it has one, one of the three
remarks of existence are all the three marks of existence, which
means it's empty. So that's that's just where my
head was when I was really thinking about this.
I think that's a really good point.
And I think that the concept of emptiness is one of the most
difficult concepts in Buddhism. I think especially, you know,
when I'm trying to teach and talk to people because they,
because it's kind of like emptiness means like not empty
of anything. It's, it's full of everything
else. It's empty only of, of itself.
And so I think you're right that thinking through the three marks
can help us understand like, what do you mean it's full of
everything because it's empty of its own existence.
And so impermanence really helps with that because we can think
about like everything being in a dynamic flux and changing.
Overall, I think that the the concept of not self is, is
really perfect for emptiness because that is another one of
those. I think emptiness and not self
are two of the most complicated concepts in Buddhism.
And they both relate to the idea of like, mostly like it's just
not what you think and and that it's full of everything else so
that it's not like independent without interacting with all the
other things that gave rise to those conditions.
I think part of that is the cultural context too, and I know
Glenn has talked about this, where in the Western world is so
focused on individualism and defining yourself and.
Who are you? What are you?
Doing What's your 32nd spiel? If you talk to a person, it's so
like self-centered that the idea of not self or emptiness or not
having something like mind with. That.
Self oriented and the capitalism instead of what it's meant as in
a more collective society it comes across as.
Mealism. So it's more the connotations of
the word once you put it in the cultural context, and that that
translation hasn't fully come over yet.
Those words don't work the same way over here as they did in
their original context. You know, that's kind of my hang
up too, where it seems as though sometimes we just don't have the
proper language and or cultural backing of the language to have
a discussion in the in the way that these topics need to be
discussed or need to be thought of.
Because like, for example, like I study philosophy and John
Locke roots his idea of ethics in the self, right or in the
personhood, right. So he actually has two distinct
differences. There's a self which is like
animals have selves. There are things that kind of
have like process information they can react to, excuse me,
pleasure and pain, but then there's a personality that can
actually make like take accountability and take
responsibility for those things. Like with animals, we don't
really see having personhood in that way.
And so so too, like some kids and some people with
neurodivergent developmental disabilities also are kind of
vary according to Locke anyway, as to how we can perceive.
And I think that's kind of where I get kind of hung up because a
lot of the pragmatic negotiation seems to suggest that there is
something by which we are being appropriate in the situation.
So responding in a, in a accepting way versus a suffering
way. There's some kind of, and I know
like sometimes maybe I'm, I'm, I'm, I make it too much, but it
could be just as simple as the algorithm.
As we practice this information gets a little bit more refined
as we don't need the language as much.
We get a better algorithm for processing pain and suffering
and the things that distress us. But on the other hand, it seems
as though when you think about how to not how the self or the
no self is interacting with the community at large, and we're
trying to determine what is that appropriate response.
There seems to be some kind of other mechanism at play and I
have a hard time really identify what that might be to refine so
but. One of the phrases that I was
recently introduced to that really has has helped me a lot
is if it arises from causes and conditions and it's empty.
And that translates to not self too, because myself, my, you
know, the, the, the thing I am has arisen from causes and
conditions and those causes and conditions continue and they
shift who I am. You know, I'm not the same
person I was 30 years ago. And since that's true, I have no
fixed, distinct, never changing self.
So I I about the vocabulary and and this sort of addition to my
vocabulary helped me a lot. Yeah.
Joe, do you have anything that you wanted to comment on about
the three marks of existence? You know, I, I agree with a lot
of what everybody is saying. I think when I was reviewing
them, Sidis, my dog is being an idiot.
Hi, I was amazed at how I, I guess I hadn't really thought
about it. The deeper is how much they are
all kind of connected to each other, that's they almost build
on one another to change the conceptual framework from which
we view the world. I think the three marks of
existence for me are simply a way of saying that, you know,
the way you think the world works is not how it works.
Look at these things that you think are hallmarks of what
existence is, like permanence, a self, these kinds of things.
And they are not that when you look a little bit deeper, and
here's why. But that's not the end of the
story. Once you to go along with your
kind of it doesn't lead to nihilism.
It's like once you are able to let go of these things,
something magical happens, right?
Once you understand these things on a embody level, it's not just
a an intellectual understanding. Once these things you understand
to the point where they become your outlook in life, they
change the way the world works for you.
And in that way, something altogether different happens
with your life. You exist in a different way
than you did before. And so I think for me, that was
AI mean. That was a cool reminder when I
was reviewing this was like, Oh yeah, like well, look at the
world is right. There's a better way of doing
it. And when I do do that, I'm more
in like the way, you know, with an outlook that is to suits to
and like or what it like to this.
So that's what that's what I have here.
You know, I agree with that. I think that one of the things I
find most helpful about this idea of the three marks of
existence is to think about what we assume to be true about our
lives and about the world and how we can question that.
I think one of the most beneficial things about Buddhism
is that it gives us a direction to question what we assumed to
be true, unreal about the world. And I think that it is hard
living in this human body and seeing the world through our own
perception influences the way that we understand.
And so the the way that we understand the world and
interact with the world. So I think that, you know,
thinking about these marks of existence as about ways of, of
being in the world and if we can understand them, it it's really
quite, I think it's really quite liberating, right?
So we're afraid of impermanence where we want things to stay
exactly the same or we want them to change in a particular way.
And that causes us a lot of, of suffering because we're afraid
about what we're going to lose. And instead, it can be really
helpful to think about like embracing the experience that
we're having, knowing that this moment is the only moment that
is going to exist right now. It was all of these kinds of
variables and it's going to change in another moment.
And so it's thinking about impermanence that way has really
helped me to try to embrace the, the all the experiences that I'm
having because it's the only experience that I'm going to
have that's exactly like that. And it's going to change into
something else. And then, I mean, the hardest
part about that, honestly, is mapping that to the concept of
the self. Because, you know, I think we
all want to think of ourselves as like we have a history, we
have an existence. We we think of of ourselves.
And, and we tend to look back on our past and see it through the
lens of our present and say, like, see, I've always been that
way. And it's really helpful to be
like, yeah, but look, how much we have changed.
I mean, I doubt that any of us today like built a literal pie
out of mud and ate it, but I sure as hell did that, you know,
when I was a child, right? That is, that's something that
has changed. And I think that is like a
really it's, it's helpful to think of it that way, the way
that things are so dynamic. And then the, the last one, the
idea of this suffering or unsatisfactoriness, it helps me
to think of this being a characteristic of human
existence, how we see the world suffering.
Unsatisfactoriness is a part of that, and it's a necessary part
of that. Because if I don't know what
unsatisfactoriness feels like, how am I going to know what
satisfactoriness feels like? If I'm always in the place of
what I say is happy, then it just means that it's shifting
that it means that there's a, you know, a, a smaller band of
what's unhappy and happy, but it's still going to be in there
because otherwise let's how are we going to how else do we
experience that if we don't know that there is this whole
spectrum of experiences and one side helps define the other side
because they're all kind of connected.
So I know we're about out of time but does anyone have like a
take home thought that we want to leave each other with before
we close on this topic? I, I think we've been talking a
lot retrospectively about how we interpret past and current
events. But as it occurs to me, as we're
closing that I kind of do a little bit of that sometimes now
where I tried to like boss hands me something at, you know, 435
on a Friday and I say, oh, that's a future Joss issue, you
know, but I mean like jokingly, but I mean, the idea there is
that, you know, to the extent that we can recognize that
things are impermanent, that we can change is implicitly telling
us that that should be give us hope, right?
That if we're if we can identify that we can be a better person,
that's like the first step in becoming the person that we want
to be. And that we can change our
current aid situation in ways that makes us more of the person
we want to be, that our community more in the way that
we like our community to be. And I I just thought that was a
whole full message. That sounds awesome.
Thanks. That's that's I think good for
us to end on. And I'd like to when we close,
though I feel like this is part of our Dahmer practice.
So I'd still like to do the dedication of merit.
And then at the center in Saint Louis, when we close, we always
say, may the fruit of our practice extend to all living
beings. Spaha.