Unit MB 103/01
Essential Early Buddha Dharma Ideas Unit MBI 103
LESSON 1
The Three Signata
The Three Fundamental Characteristics
The three signata refer to the three essential marks or characteristics of all "compounded" things, animate or inanimate, microscopic or macroscopic. Because of the universality of their applicability, they might be considered as having the force of universal laws, but since they are observable products of the mind, they cannot really be considered as such.
These characteristics are: Impermanence (anicca), Unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and Insubstantiality (anatta).
Lesson 1
Anicca (Impermanence)
Buddha Dharma asserts that all phenomena are subject to constant change, to rise and fall, and that no permanent states, either physical or animate, exist. That characteristic would appear to be obvious when we see the transient nature of all things. We know that all the planets and stars are constantly changing their form. We see the earth itself in constant change. We even know that our own body is in a constant state of change, but still we cling to the idea of some form of permanence.
The belief in enduring states or characteristics is still an article of faith in many religious systems, and even within Buddhism, the concept of reincarnation as the perpetuity of a single human consciousness is erroneously promoted. The Christian God is seen to be permanent as is the human soul and these are both products of Dual thinking.
Even accepting the transiency of all things, we humans are unable to accept the inevitability of death and cling to life with a tenacity that is beyond the natural life force.
We could postulate other universal characteristics as candidates for the Signata, for example: Chaos, Conflict, Meaninglessness, and Non Duality, all of which are important. Why is Impermanence then chosen above others as one of the Signata?
It is because, although all logic and penetration into the true nature of things shows the truth of impermanence, man still craves permanence more than he craves order, peace, and meaning. Only his existence as a separate entity has equal place in his psyche.
As he has evolved the delusion of permanence through the idea if the continuation of his consciousness or soul, he not only craves permanence, but wants that permanence here and now, in all things, in this world of the senses. Of course, he cannot have it, so he seeks the next best thing, permanence of his lineage, his reputation or his works. All, however, eventually fades and falls and impermanence reigns.
Is there then nothing that is permanent?
What about energy? We are told that it can never be destroyed. That is certain, but we are also told that it is always changing its form. Since energy appears to be the base of all things, there would appear to be no argument. But philosophers love argument and discussion and they will say, “What about the characteristic of Impermanence, is that not Permanent?
Now we move into the area of difficult navigation, where Buddha would declare that there really is no natural law, because these are only words, and there is no permanence nor impermanence either, for they are also just words. When the idea and concept of impermanence is let go, then there is neither impermanence nor permanence. What is there then?
There is an impermanence which has no name and no antithesis. It is this impermanence that is the natural law. When we do not talk about it or describe it, then it ceases to be a characteristic in our minds, but paradoxically it is there, just the same, as an eternal phenomenon.
That is all fine, but Buddhism is not a philosophy, so what is the point of thinking about impermanence? The answer is quite simple. When we see the impermanence of all things, not just the final point of decay and fall, but as “constant change” towards decay and fall, then clinging and craving are seen to be folly. One cannot obtain what is never constant. The best that one can achieve is a temporary illusion of possession, which serves nothing.
We can also ask why change is so distressing. The answer lies in our physiological and psychological makeup. All the senses impinge upon the sense doors. In psychology this is called irritation. It is this irritation that produces the responses that permit the continued existence (not for long) of consciousness.
But psychologically, through the presence of Identity, we have learned in error that “problems” arise with change. Thus the natural irritation conditions a perverse sense of menace which is transmitted as an anxiety, not simply a state of excitation. In order to minimize this anxiety, the system looks for (craves) the absence of change. This, of course is an error, for this limits the natural range of the system, sets up expectations of “no change” and generates suffering.
In order to understand Impermanence better, it may be useful to look at the characteristic of Chaos. You will remember that when we spoke of the dual mind we said that every dual concept brings with it its antithesis, and Chaos is no exception. We cannot posit the existence of Chaos without the existence of Order.
We know that neither really exists, but conceptually, as a tool, we can use the ideas and draw a natural curve of order and chaos.
We can place order on the left and chaos on the right. We know that if we plot chaos and order in terms of the perceptions of dharmas in the world of the senses, there will be nothing that appears totally ordered. Since the further one reaches into chaos the more chaos appears, we can consider the curve to be one of chaos.
Similarly, if we construct a normal curve of impermanence and permanence, we never find complete permanence. If we look in the other direction, there is only more impermanence. Thus there is no order.
Why then do we seek order? It is because chaos, like impermanence, is an irritation to the system. However, you can also see that the concept of “order” is a useful tool.
Imagine that you know nothing of geometry. One day you go to the beach and see a large stretch of sand that the sea has made perfectly smooth. You take a handful of pebbles and throw them in the air randomly and let them fall on the sand.
For curiosity, you look; your mind is looking for something you can learn and use. You see three pebbles which form (with your supreme knowledge) a triangle. Of course the triangle does not exist. You look at the relationship of the three pebbles and declare, ‘I am going to call that relation a triangle’. But that relation is in your mind. Nature did not order that triangle, your mind did. You look further and find more triangles, and you invent other relations, a square, a rectangle, etc. No order exists, but you are inventing order.
The following day you come with your son. “Look,” you declare, “there is a triangle.” Your son then learns of the existence of apparent order. With those ideas, he can recognize and use the concepts and work out a complex system of geometry. But all came from the mind. Geometric order is a tool. Man uses those tools and always seeks more order to better control his world.
Thus we can say that man seeks the ordering in his own mind of the Chaos which exists. We cannot say that he sees the order in Chaos. Do you see the difference?
Similarly, we can say that man invents and uses the concept of Permanence within impermanence. Really, of course neither the Permanent nor the Impermanent exist.
Similarly, man seeks and invents Peace within conflict; Meaning where there is no meaning; and Existence when there is no existence. These are useful tools, - nothing more.
If one can invent, understand and use the tools without believing in the reality of the mind inventions, then there is no problem, but if one believes in the true existence of that which has been invented by the mind, then the seeds of suffering will be sown. That is why Impermanence is included in the Signata.
But from the seed of Impermanence arises the first seedling. That seedling is Suffering.
Dukkha (Suffering, the unsatisfactory states)
With respect to the characteristic of dukkha, Buddha Dharma states that all phenomena in the final analysis, due to their characteristic of impermanence and the duality of the human mind, are unsatisfactory. Let us look again at the process that we discussed in Unit 2, Lesson 12, that produces this state of “unsatisfactoriness”.
The first sign of Unsatisfactoriness arises because of the presence of receptors that are the base and the consciousness of the presence of stimuli. The natural process of sensation first tells us, without conscious identification, that the stimulus has either been experienced before or not. Then a search is internally made for a best fit and externally for more information, until the process completes its task. The system then moves the information to the next stage (Recognition).
In this next stage, the system decides, on the basis of past experience and primordial memory, if the stimulus is a threat, neutral or not a threat. These three are experienced as the emotions, mental elaborations, of the three basic mental states: pleasant, neutral or unpleasant.
On the basis of these signals, responses are prepared, while the system moves to the next process, which is identification and elaboration of the necessary thoughts (Recollection). Finally responses are made.
If the first recognition is flawed and the system views everything with the slightest difference as being novel, and therefore a potential threat, or if it catalogues the majority of stimuli as emotionally unpleasant, then appropriate responses will be impossible and inappropriate responses will be made.
This makes the person suffering-prone. This super sensitivity and the predisposition of the stained mind to perceive all as potentially unpleasant, energizes the mind to constantly seek the pleasant. This is Craving. There are few things in the life of this person then that are neutral. Thus the stained mind becomes charged with extremes of pleasure and displeasure and becomes bent upon seeking the pleasurable and avoiding the unpleasant.
But there arises also the resultant fear of losing the pleasant and this results in constant Clinging.
It is easy to see that the unpleasant may be converted in Suffering, but it is not so easy to constantly see that the craving and clinging is setting the stage for greater dissatisfaction when the pleasant is not realized. It should be clear, however, that this marvellous information processing that is available has been converted into one of constant craving and clinging.
Not only then is Suffering a member of the Signata, but it is constantly consciously present or potentially present. The truth of Suffering is expounded by Buddha as the first of four Noble Truths.
The term 'dukkha' in the teachings of Buddha is normally interpreted as Unsatisfactoriness or Suffering, but we need to let go of our narrow view of that definition and look with a more ample analysis that divides suffering into three types.
Sariputta: "There are these three forms of Dhukka, my friend: the Dhukka of pain, the Dhukka of fabrication, the Dhukka of change. These are the three forms of Dhukka."
Samyutta Nakaya XXXVIII.14
1. Dukkha-dukkhata: the suffering that is mental and the suffering that is a component part of physical pain. This corresponds to the Pali equivalent dukkhavedana' (the experience of suffering that emerges when a disagreeable sensation is experienced).
2. Dukkhata Sankhara: This is the sure and certain sensation that nothing is ever really satisfactory. In other words, nothing ever reaches the perfection that our Identities require. There may be a temporary surge of satisfaction that may last for a while, but always Dukkhata Sankhárá returns.
Our root desires are inflexible and yet paradoxically changing, thus there is a continual chain of changing inflexibility. Nothing, even for a moment, is really satisfactory. Thus we change our focus to another one with another inflexible expectation that cannot ever be realized.
It is this type of Suffering that is present with the mental production of all conditions, both physical and mental.
3. Viparinama-dukkhata: the suffering inherent in change that generates inconsistency in residual happiness. Change, as we saw when speaking of impermanence, is not a satisfactory experience for most people. Even those people who have a high tolerance, and indeed a preference for change, impose certain limits.
As every external change accompanies changes in the degree of pleasurable and agreeable experience, any diminution of pleasure results in an increase in the desire for more pleasant and profitable circumstances. We must remember too that “what goes up must come down”, so the probability of Viparinama-dukkhata being always with the human creature is therefore high.
So we see that his seedling of Suffering in the human creature is constantly growing towards fruition. What is it that sustains this growth? It is a belief in Anatta, the substantiality of an enduring and real “self”.
Anatta (insubstantiality, Identity)
The third characteristic of the Signata states that there is no permanent essence, “self”, ego, or soul in any phenomenon. We have seen that the term originates as the negation of the concept of atta (atman), which was the equivalent in the old Brahmanic system to what religions have called the “soul”.
We have also seen that the mental concept of unsatisfactoriness arose from the mental stain of perceiving impermanence as negative. In seeking its cause, we have found the consequence of suffering.
If we wish to seek the deep rooted mental cause of suffering, what other candidates are in the same cycle of Dependent Origination as Clinging and Craving? We can see immediately that the idea of “self”, identity (Birth), is one of the members of the cycle and is a valid candidate.
However, there are others in the cycle of Dependent Origination that could equally be candidates for membership in the Signata in place of Clinging and Craving. Let us examine them:
“With the six sense bases as condition,
contact (sensation, impression) comes into being;
with contact as condition, emotions;
with emotions as condition, craving;
with craving as condition, clinging;
with clinging as condition, becoming;
with becoming as condition, birth (Identity);
with birth as condition, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair come to be;
with these as a condition arises Ignorance;
with ignorance as condition, volitional formations (intention);
with volitional formations as condition, consciousness;
with consciousness as condition, name-and-form;
with name-and-form as condition, the six sense bases;
Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering.”
We can see that the majority of these are either subconscious components or are quite subjective. Only Identity, the apparent existence of a “self” is clearly perceived in consciousness. For most, the phrase “I think, therefore I am,” is clear enough evidence that the “self” exists.
Buddha recognised that this delusion of “self” was one of the most powerful of human instincts, and at the same time one of the most evident sources of not only suffering, but also of incorrect Attitudes that support the cycle of Dependent Origination, and incorrect Actions that reinforce incorrect Attitudes.
In applying the anatta doctrine to the phenomena of the external world, some care must be exercised. Buddha Dharma does not deny the utility of the concept of the self, but it denies the existence of a real self. Thus it does not refute the legitimate tool of Becoming, which is pure discrimination. It is in this sense, the absence of an independent existence, that the phenomena of the external world are declared to be empty (suñña) or vacuity.
Some schools of Mahayana Buddhism have taken the doctrine of emptiness (suññâtâ) to imply a denial of the reality of concomitants of becoming within the external world. This interpretation is foreign to early Buddhism and much of modern thought. We assert that there is no fixed essence or existence in phenomena, and only the process of becoming (bhâva) is valid as a tool.
We have seen that although the eternalist and partial-eternalist positions represented a wide spectrum of religious views and practices, all appear to have subscribed to a belief in a either a soul or self-entity.
This common belief emphasized the fact that while the soul is something permanent, the body is something perishable. The religious or spiritual view then of the human creature is the theory of the metaphysical self. It was this belief in a permanent spiritual substance within man that came to be represented in the suttas as ‘sassatavada’. In the major belief systems, this soul expresses itself as an Identity.
It is believed by the eternalists that this Identity is contaminated, but it is the Buddhist view that the mental contamination generates the concept of a real existing Identity that is a major factor in suffering.
You will remember that Buddhism states that ANY kind of conceptual entity presented, whether material, mental or spiritual, is atman if it becomes an object of self-identification.
Self identification then is the major concept selected from among the elements of the cycle of Dependent Origination. This includes the “I” of the visceral identification, the emotional self identification or the passionate thinker self identification.
All of these, in the normal waking state, are unconscious, and only become obvious when they are active. There exists, however, the constant awareness of selfhood and, furthermore, the projection of that selfhood as the “ideal” face that is presented to others.
It is no wonder that this complex array of Identities, merged in a single idea of self, causes such conflict and suffering.
Remember once more, “This I am (esoham asmi)”, and “This is my self (eso me atta).” This is a falsehood. It is merely the conscious and false awareness of the presence of an apparent entity, independent of the physical body.
Examine then these words of Buddha with respect to this Self in the Potthapada Sutra:
21. "Is then, Lord, the consciousness identical with a man's self, or is consciousness one thing, and the self another?"
"Potthapàda, do you postulate a self?"
"Lord, I postulate a material self, having form, built up of the four elements, nourished by solid food."
"And if there is such a self, Potthapàda, then your consciousness would be one thing, and your self another. Potthapàda, you can see this by considering the following: if there is a material self, having form, built up of the four elements, nourished by solid food; some perceptions and states of consciousness would arise in the man, and others would pass away. Because of this, Potthapàda, you can see how consciousness must be one thing, and self another."
22. "Then, Lord, I postulate a mind-made self, with all its major and minor parts complete, not deficient in any organ."
"And granting, Potthapàda, that you had such a self, the same argument would apply."
23. "Then, Lord, I postulate a self without form and made of consciousness."
"And granting, Potthapàda, that you had such a self, the same argument would still apply."
24. " But is it possible, Lord, for me to understand whether consciousness is the same or different from a person's self?"
"Potthapàda it is hard for one, such as you, holding different views, with a different faith, with different aims, striving after a different perfection, trained in a different system of doctrine, to grasp this matter!"
Here you see the essential problem for the understanding of Buddha Dharma. Different views, aims, and conditioning in society lead to the full acceptance of the idea of a unlocatable self hidden within the mind, within the body, and yet separated from both.
Citta and Potthapàda Question Buddha about The Self
32. Two or three days later, Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, and Potthapàda, the wanderer, came to the place where the Blessed One was staying. Upon their arrival Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, bowed low to the Blessed One and took a seat to one side. Potthapàda, the wanderer, exchanged greetings and courtesies with the Blessed One and also took a seat to one side. And when he was seated, he told the Blessed One how the wanderers had jeered at him, and how he had replied.
33. "All those wanderers, Potthapàda, are blind and sightless. You are the only one among them with eyes to see. Some things, Potthapàda, I have taught as certain, other things I have as declared uncertain. The latter are those ten questions that you raised, and for the reasons given I hold them to be matters of uncertainty. The former are the Four Truths I expounded, and for the reasons given I hold them to be matters of certainty.
34. "There are some recluses and Brahmans, Potthapàda, who hold the following opinion: 'The self is perfectly happy and healthy after death.' I went to them and asked whether that was their view or not. And they acknowledged that it was. And I asked them whether, so far as they knew and perceived, if there was a place in the world that was perfectly happy, and they answered: 'No.'
"Then I asked them: 'Further, Sirs, have you yourselves ever been perfectly happy for a whole night, or for a whole day, or even for half a night or day? 'And they answered: 'No.'
"Then I asked to them: 'Sirs, do you know a way or a method by which you can realise a state that is altogether happy?' And to that question they also answered: 'No.'
"And then I asked: 'Have you, Sirs, ever heard the voices of gods who had realised rebirth in a perfectly happy world, saying: 'Be earnest, O men, and direct your effort towards the realisation of [rebirth in] a world of perfect happiness. For we, as a consequence of similar effort, have been reborn in such a world.'" And still they answered: 'No.'
"Now what think, Potthapàda? This being so, does not the talk of those recluses and Brahmans turn out to be witless?
35. "Just as if a man should say: 'How I long for, how I love the most beautiful woman in the land!'
"And people would ask him: 'Well, good friend! this most beautiful woman in the land, whom you so love and long for, do you know whether she is a noble lady, or of priestly rank, or of the trader class, or of menial birth? '
"And when so asked, he would have to answer: 'No.'
"And people would asked him: 'Well, good friend! This most beautiful woman in the land, whom you so love and long for, do you know what her name is, or her family name, or whether she is tall, or short, or of medium height; whether she is dark or fair or golden in colour; or in what village, or town, or city she dwells?'
"And when so asked, he would have to answer: 'No.'
"Then people would say to him: 'So then, good friend, you love and long for someone you do not know and never have seen.'
"And when so asked, he would have to answer: 'Yes.'
"Now what do you think, Potthapàda? Would not the talk of that man be witless talk?"
"Certainly, Lord."
Thus we see also that one really knows nothing of this self. It is vacuous and without real substance, existing only in the mind. Yet we love this identity and cling to it. We serve this identity and live for it. Is this not the form of being for a witless man? Think well about that.
36, 37. "And so it also is, Potthapàda, with the recluses and Brahmans who talk about the self being perfectly happy and healthy after death. It is just, Potthapàda, as if a man were to build a staircase for a palace at a crossroad. People would say to him:' Well, good friend! this palace, for which you are making this staircase, do you know whether it faces east or west or south or north? Do you know whether it is high, or low, or of medium size?'
"And when so asked, he would have to answer: 'No.'
"Then people would say to him: 'But then, good friend, you are making a staircase for a palace that you know not of, nor have you seen!
"And when so asked, he would have to answer: 'Yes.'
"Now what do you think, Potthapàda? Would not the talk of that man be witless talk?"
"Certainly, Lord."
38. "And so it is also, Potthapàda, with the recluses and Brahmans who talk about the self being perfectly happy and healthy after death. For they acknowledge that they know no such state in this world now. They acknowledge that they cannot say their own selves have been happy here even for half a day. And they acknowledge that they know no way, no method, of ensuring such a result. Now what do you think, Potthapàda? Does not their talk also turn out to be equally witless?"
"Certainly, Lord."
It is also clear that seeking the satisfaction of these Identities, and the general false state of Happiness that is always partnered by Suffering, is also folly.
Does Buddhism then declare that there is no happiness? No it does not. What it says is that when the mind grasps happiness, it creates the antithesis of suffering. When the mind is absent, there is neither suffering nor happiness, yet an observer, his mind filled with words, would see that man or woman in a constant state of well-being. This is natural Happiness that has no counterpart of Suffering.
The Three Kinds of Self
39. "Potthapàda, there are three kinds of commonly assumed self: material, mind-made, and formless. The first has form, is made up of the four elements, and is nourished by solid food. The second has form, is made by the mind, and has all its limbs and organs complete and perfect. The third is without form, and is made up of consciousness only.
40-42. "Now I teach a doctrine, Potthapàda, that leads to the abandoning of the mistaken assumptions about all three of these assumed selves. If you follow this doctrine, unwholesome mental states disappear and the states which tend to purification increase; and one realises and remains in the full perfection and purity of wisdom here and now.
"Now it might be, Potthapàda, that you think even if one's unwholesome mental states disappear and the states which tend to purification increase; and one realises and remains in the full perfection and purity of wisdom here and now, that one might continue to be unhappy. But, Potthapàda, that would be an inaccurate judgement. When such conditions are fulfilled, then there will only be joy and happiness, tranquillity, continual mindfulness and clear awareness - and that is a happy state.
43. "Potthapàda, outsiders might question us thus: 'What then, Sir, is that material (or that mental, or that formless) self that you preach such a doctrine for the abandoning assumptions about?' And to that I should reply [describing it in the words I have just used to you]: 'Why this very one that you see before you is what I mean.'
45. "Now what think you of that, Potthapàda, this being so, would not the talk turn out to be well grounded?"
"Certainly, Lord, it would."
46. "Just, Potthapàda, as if a man were to construct a staircase, to climb into the upper storey of a palace, at the foot of the very palace itself. If men should say to him: 'Well, good friend! that palace, for which you are constructing this staircase so as to climb into, do you know whether it faces east or west or south north; whether it is high or low or of medium size?'
"And when so asked, he would answer: 'Why! here is the very palace itself ! It is at the very foot of it I am constructing my staircase so as to climb into it.'
"What think you of that, Potthapàda, this being so, would not the talk turn out to be well grounded?"
"Certainly, Lord, it would."
47. "In just the same way, Potthapàda, if others ask me about the assumed self, when I answer as above, does not the talk turn out to be well grounded?"
"Certainly, Lord, it does."
Citta's Question on the Three Kinds of Self
48. Then Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, said to the Blessed One: "At that time, Lord, when the material self is assumed, would if be wrong to assume the existence of the mind-made and formless selves? Is the material self the only one that is real? But if the mind-made self is assumed, then are the other two not real? And if the formless self is assumed, are the other two not real?"
49. "At the time, Citta, when any one of the three assumed selves is present, then we do not speak of the other two. We speak only of the one that is currently assumed.
"If people should ask you, Citta: 'Did you exist in the past, or not? Will you exist in the future, or not? Do you exist now, or not?' - How would you answer?"
"I should say that I existed in the past, and didn't not exist; that I shall exist in the future, and shall not not exist; that I do exist now, and I don't not exist."
50. "Then if they reply: 'Well! that past self that you had, is that your real self; and the future and present selves unreal? Or the future self that you will have, is that real one; and the past and present ones unreal? Or is the self that you have now the real you; and the past and future ones unreal?' - How would you answer?"
"I should say that the past self that I had was real to me at the time when I had it; and the others were unreal. The present self is real to me now; and the others are unreal. In the future, the future self will be real and the others unreal."
51. "Just so, Citta, when any one of the three assumed selves is present, then we do not speak of either of the other two.
52. "Just, Citta, as from a cow comes milk, and from the milk curds, and from the curds butter, and from the butter ghee, and from the ghee junket; but when it is milk it is not called curds, or butter, or junket; and when it is curds or butter or ghee or junket, it is not called by any of the other names.
53. "In the same way, Citta, when any one of the three assumed selves is present, then we do not speak of either of the other two. For these, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. But a Tathàgata [one who has fully realized the truth] makes use of them, but does not misapprehend them."
54. And when he had thus spoken, Potthapàda, the wanderer, said to the Blessed One: "Excellent, Lord! Excellent! Just as if one were to turn upright what had been turned upside down, or to reveal what was hidden, or to point out the right path to one who was lost, or to bring a lamp into a dark place so that those with keen sight could see forms, in the same way, Lord, the Blessed One has revealed the Dhamma in numerous ways. I go for refuge to the Blessed One, to the Dhamma, and to the Bhikkhu Sangha. Let the Blessed One accept me as a lay follower gone for refuge from this day onwards as long as I live."
55. But Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, said to the Blessed One: "Excellent, Lord! Excellent! Just as if one were to turn upright what had been turned upside down, or to reveal what was hidden, or to point out the right path to one who was lost, or to bring a lamp into a dark place so that those with keen sight could see forms, in the same way, Lord, the Blessed One has revealed the Dhamma in numerous ways. I go for refuge to the Blessed One, to the Dhamma, and to the Bhikkhu Sangha. May I receive the going-forth from Blessed One; may I receive admission into his Order."
56. And Citta received the going-forth at the Lord's hand and entered the Order. And the newly ordained Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, remained alone and secluded, earnest, zealous, and resolute. And before long he attained to that supreme goal of the holy life for the sake of which clansmen go forth from the household life to homelessness, having realized here and now by his own super-knowledge and dwelt therein, knowing: 'Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is nothing further beyond this.'
And the venerable Citta, the son of the elephant trainer, became another of the Arahats.
In the Potthapada Sutra Buddha also mentions why he spoke about Suffering.
"Potthapàda, I have taught what dukkha is; I have taught what is the origin of dukkha; I have taught what is the cessation of dukkha; I have taught the method by which one can reach the cessation of dukkha."
30. "And why has the Blessed One taught this?"
"Because, Potthapàda, this is profitable; it is concerned with the Dhamma, it leads to right conduct, to disenchantment, to dispassion, to calm, to tranquillity, to higher knowledge, to the insights [of the higher stages of the Path], to Nibbana. Therefore, Potthapàda, I have taught this."
"That is so, O Blessed One. That is so, O Happy One. And now let the Blessed One do what seems fit to him."
And the Blessed One rose from his seat, and departed.
You can now see why the three Signata were marked for special consideration
All three are concerned with the Dhamma, lead to right conduct, to disenchantment, to dispassion, to calm, to tranquillity, to higher knowledge, to the insights [of the higher stages of the Path], and to the eventual Awakening.
Exercise 1
We have said that Impermanence is the seed, Suffering is the seedling, and Identity is the source of growth towards fruition. Write a page about the potential fruit that you imagine eventually develops from the seed of Impermanence, Suffering and Identity.
Once again, you are reminded that you need not search for Buddha’s answer. Just intuitively write what comes to your own mind or is perceived by your own experience. Then write a short conclusion about what can be done to eliminate the problem of the growth of this dangerous seed in the Pure Land.