The Buddhist doctrine of Anicca, the transience of all phenomena, finds a classic expression in the often recurring formula: Sabbe sankhaaraa aniccaa and in the more popular statement: Aniccaa vata sankhaaraa. Both formulas boil down to the fact that all conditioned things or phenomenal processes, both mental and material, that make up the Sa.Msais plane of existence, are transient or transitory. This law of impermanence is not the result of metaphysical research or mystical intuition. It is a simple judgment that results from investigation and analysis, and as such, its basis is entirely empirical. It thus becomes obvious that the Buddhist teaching of Anicca, on which the teachings of Dukkha and Anatta are also based, can rightly be called the basis of the whole edifice of Buddhist philosophy and ethics. This explains why the Buddha explained that the mere perception of this fact, namely that everything that comes into existence is also subject to dissolution (ya.m ki~nci samudaya-dhamma.m sabba.m ta.m nirodhadhamma.m), is in fact the emergence of the stainless eye of doctrine (dhamma-cakkhu). A logical later development of this theory of moments is the refusal of movement. Because if all the elements of existence are momentary, they do not have time to move. In the case of momentary elements, wherever the appearance takes place, a disappearance itself takes place (yatraivotpattih tatraiva vinaasah). In accordance with this theory, the movement takes on a new definition.
According to this definition, movement should not be understood as the movement of a material element from one place in space to another (desaantara-sa.mkraant), but as the appearance of momentary elements in neighboring places (desaantarotpatti), thus creating a false image of movement. The best example in this case is the light of the lamp. The so-called lamp light, it is argued, is nothing more than a common term for an uninterrupted generation of a series of flashing dots. When the production site changes, it is said that the light has changed. But in reality, other flames appeared in a different place. The second quality of his teaching was the concentration on the characteristic of Anicca, impermanence. The Buddha described reality as having three characteristics or qualities: impermanence, dissatisfaction, and the absence of a true self. In mindfulness practice, observing what is, and focusing attention on these true signs of reality breaks false vision and weakens attachment, U Ba Khin taught that the most direct access to understanding the process of life is through awareness of impermanence, anicca.
He felt that anicca is the most obvious and easy to understand of the three signs and that understanding it leads naturally to others. Thus, observing the change or change of all phenomena at ever more subtle levels was the true purpose of his Vipassana technique. It is precisely in this sense, in the midst of the battlefield between science and religion and on the eve of a world war, that the children of the first half of the 20th century had to face the death of a scientifically and infallibly calculated physical and moral destruction, as experience would prove. But just beyond the edge of our intellectual horizon, at least for science, a time arose when we would take a completely different position on the problem of impermanence and relativity, which affected the world`s deepest subatomic structure – a position much closer to the Buddhist idea of Aniccam. Although the concept of anicca applies to all things composed and conditioned, the Buddha is more concerned with what is called being; Because the problem lies in humans and not in dead things. Like an anatomist dissolving a limb into tissues and tissues into cells, the Buddha, the analyzer (Vibhajjavaadi), analyzed the so-called being, the sankhaara pu~nja, the group of processes, into five ever-changing aggregates and made it clear that in this confluence of aggregates (khandhaa santati) there is nothing permanent, nothing eternally preserved. These are: — — the material form or the body; sensation or sensation; Perception; mental training; Conscience. In modern etymology, the adjective anicca (volatile term) is derived from the negative prefix a- plus nicca (permanent: cf. Vedic Sanskrit nitya from the prefix ni- and means “forward, down”). The Paramatthama~njuusaa (commentary on Visuddhimagga) and also the Poraana-Tiikaa (one of the three commentaries on the Abhidhammatthasa”ngaha) agree that “because it denies eternity, it is not permanent, therefore it is transitory” (na niccan ti anicca.m: VisA.
125). The Vibhaavinii-Tikaa and Sankhepava.n.nanaa (the other two commentaries on the Abhs.) prefer to derive from the negative prefix an- plus root i: “Cannot be gone is inaccessible, as a permanent and eternal state, therefore it is transient” (. na iccam, anupagantabban ti aniccam). The Pali word for impermanence, anicca, is a compound word composed of “a” for non-, and “nicca” for “constant, continuous, permanent”. [1] While “nicca” is the concept of continuity and permanence, “anicca” refers to its exact opposite; lack of coherence and continuity. The term is synonymous with the Sanskrit term anitya (a + nitya). [1] [2] The concept of impermanence is important in Buddhism and is also found in various schools of Hinduism and Jainism. The term also appears in the Rigveda. [3] [4] Imagine watching a beautiful sunset. The whole western sky shines with pink-red hues; But you are aware that in half an hour all these glorious shades will have faded into a dull ashy gray.
You see how they are already melting before your eyes, although your eyes cannot present you with the conclusion that your reason draws. And what is that conclusion? This conclusion is that you never see, even for the shortest period that can be named or designed, a permanent color, a real color. In a millionth of a second, the entire glory of the painted sky has undergone an incalculable series of mutations. One tint is replaced by another with a velocity that puts all measurements on resistance, but because the process is a process for which no measurement applies. Reason refuses to make an arrest at any time during the passing scene or to declare that it is so because it is not being made; He gave way to something else. It is a series of fleeting colors, none of which is due to the fact that each of them constantly disappears into another. The ephemeral, called Anicca (Pāli) or Anitya (Sanskrit), appears abundantly in the Pali canon[1] as one of the essential teachings of Buddhism. [1] [5] [6] The doctrine affirms that all conditional existence is invariably “transitory, fleeting, fickle.” [1] All temporal things, whether material or mental, are composite objects in constant state evolution, subject to decomposition and destruction.
[1] [2] Not all physical and mental events are metaphysically real. They are neither constant nor permanent; They arise and dissolve. [7] The central issue in this conflict between science and religion, at least since our youth at that time, was, of course, the problem of anattaa (“non-soul”), to use the corresponding Buddhist term. However, the laws governing cause-and-effect processes have been scientifically explained – or at least understood by our immature minds, under the impression of the open conflict between science and (Christian) religion. The explanations were not yet in the sense of the scientific equivalent of a pure anicca-vaado (theory of impermanence), which would imply a denial of the underlying material substantiality of the world. Instead, the explanations given to us at that time still followed the classical Greek model of mechanistic materialism or static atomism, which came closest to the Buddhist understanding of uccheda-vaado (theory of destruction), whose believers are described in the Pali texts as follows: All partial things – that is, all things that arise as an effect of causes, and which in turn produce effects – can be found in the single word anicca, Transient, crystallization.