(9.70) (Non-Buddhists) If the self were not permanent but perished in the next moment,
There would be no relationship between actions and their effects
Because, if the self perished the moment it committed an action,
Who would there be to experience its fruits?”

Now Shantideva answers some common objections that may arise in response to the explanations given. Again, we need to identify within ourselves the same doubts that the other schools are raising so that we can appreciate the refutation that Shantideva gives.

Here the non-Buddhists are refuting impermanence. To be permanent means to not change. To be impermanent means to be undergoing continuous change, things do not remain even for a moment. Impermanence says that the entire universe is simultaneously utterly destroyed and completely recreated in every moment. Everything changes, there is nothing that remains the same. There is a complete cessation of the previous moment to create the space for the next moment. Indeed, we can say that the process of destruction of one moment and the process of creation of the next moment are simply two sides of the same process viewed from different angles.

The non-Buddhists say if things are impermanent and everything ceases completely every moment, then we cannot establish any connection between cause and effect. Karma is negated. How can we say that we experience the effects of our previous actions if our present self has no relationship with our previous self? The old self has completely ceased and our new self is something that is completely different so therefore there is no continuity between the actions that we created in the past and the effects that we experience now.

(9.71) There is no point in our arguing about this,
Because we both assert that the continuum of a person who commits an action
Is not different from the continuum of the person who experiences its effect;
But at the time of experiencing the effect, the person who committed the causal action no longer exists;

(9.72) And at the time of committing the causal action,
It is impossible to see the person experiencing the effects.
Both the committer of the action and the experiencer of its effects
Are merely imputed upon a single continuum of a collection of aggregates.

The main point here is the impermanence of persons.  The teachings on impermanence explain that things do not remain even for a moment, and that includes people.  In every moment, a person changes completely.  The old self goes completely out of existence, without even the slightest trace remaining.  And an entirely new self is created – a completely new person.  Our view is that minor things on the surface change, but there is an underlying core which remains unchanging.  We feel it is the same person, but even conventionally, it is not. 

But there is nonetheless a continuum, like beads on a mala.  All Buddhists believe in impermanence. But impermanence simply means that there is not a self that remains unchanging eternally. However, there is a continuum to the self. It constantly changes, but we can trace the continuum path or trajectory of those changes. It is upon this continuum that we can say that the person who experiences the effects is the same continuum as the one who created the causes or created the karma.

Why does this matter?  What would happen if I stopped grasping at a permanent self?  One of the main reasons we become discouraged is grasping at a permanent I, is it not?  If we were not to grasp at a permanent I, would we become so discouraged? We would not become discouraged at all.  Geshe-la himself said there’s no valid reason for us to become discouraged. We can become who we want, change is taking place naturally.  Because we are empty, our aggregates are empty, change is taking place moment by moment by moment.  All we have to do is direct that change, that is all.  We can become what we want merely by creating causes for what effect we would like to take place in the future. We create causes whose effects take place in our continuum.  We can become a Bodhisattva or a Buddha in dependence upon creating the right causes.  We can change into whoever we want because we are empty.  It does not seem like we can because we grasp at ourselves as being permanent.  As a result, we don’t even try.  But when we let go of that, everything becomes flexible and we become changeable. 

If we really believe that the person who criticized us, for example, ended the moment the criticism ended, then why would we bother getting angry and retaliate? We would be angry with someone who has not criticized us. They have finished criticizing us, and it’s too late!  What would happen, again from a practical point of view, and this is most important, if we stopped grasping at others’ permanence?  What would happen to the attachment that we have towards people and the anger that we have towards people, and the sufferings that arise from them?  It would cease, wouldn’t it?   It seems as long as we are grasping at permanence we’re not giving ourself a chance and we’re not giving others a chance to change, are we?