Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Quiz Time - Self
buddhafoot
Veteran
Okay... there are some caveats to posting on this.
This is for Buddhism 101 - nobody is going for their doctorate thesis on Pali, sanskrit or anything else like that. I find this thread going that way and I'm gonna have to kick some ass.
Self
Part of this was touched upon during our discussion of the Three Dharma Seals. The Three Dharma Seals deal with Impermanence, Non-Self (atman) and Nirvana. "Self" is discussed in regards to the "Three Marks".
We've already discussed Impermance and Nirvana (and Suffering) on various threads - and we've beaten the dead horse of "self" to death quite a bit. But I thought it needed to be addressed for us newbies in terms that it can be assimilated into our daily thinking and life.
What is self? Do the five aggregates come into play regarding self?
Your job for this exercise is to post, from Buddhas teachings, some examples of what and how he described "self". You can either post as an advocate for "non-self" or "self" depending on how you interpret Buddha's teachings.
Nothing over 1000 words - for those that are going to cut and paste us to death
Answers on Friday! You're going to have to do some digging because I'm wanting to know what YOU think - not what link you can direct us all to.
-bf
This is for Buddhism 101 - nobody is going for their doctorate thesis on Pali, sanskrit or anything else like that. I find this thread going that way and I'm gonna have to kick some ass.
Self
Part of this was touched upon during our discussion of the Three Dharma Seals. The Three Dharma Seals deal with Impermanence, Non-Self (atman) and Nirvana. "Self" is discussed in regards to the "Three Marks".
We've already discussed Impermance and Nirvana (and Suffering) on various threads - and we've beaten the dead horse of "self" to death quite a bit. But I thought it needed to be addressed for us newbies in terms that it can be assimilated into our daily thinking and life.
What is self? Do the five aggregates come into play regarding self?
Your job for this exercise is to post, from Buddhas teachings, some examples of what and how he described "self". You can either post as an advocate for "non-self" or "self" depending on how you interpret Buddha's teachings.
Nothing over 1000 words - for those that are going to cut and paste us to death
Answers on Friday! You're going to have to do some digging because I'm wanting to know what YOU think - not what link you can direct us all to.
-bf
0
Comments
~Vimalakirtinirdesha Sutra
Easy Tiger...It's only Thursday......;)
Yes, I hope this will be fun and ... educational.
-bf
You won't have to worry about kicking my ass then! I am the dumb one that did not understand that other thred that was going on about "self". :scratch:
Easy there, Ms. Teacher's Pet. You are the one that always cheats and answers the question before Friday!!
My point for this subject exactly, Yoda.
I want this to be educational - not another thread where everyone gets to point out all these links and interpretations and huge chunks of text from various websites, etc.
Self can be a deep subject - given your particular mindset regarding it - but teaching of "self" has to begin somewhere - and with baby steps.
Hopefully, everyone will play nicely
-bf
http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamayeshe/whoareyou.shtml
_/\_
metta
If you post anything else before Friday, I'm gonna have to pull down yer pants and spank yer fanny.
And you won't enjoy it like last time
-bf
It was a good link.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
Bring it on!!
:rarr:
Take that!, biatch!
Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!
-bf
P.S. Actually ,it is a good post and I'm reading it right now.
:werr:
That was nice!
http://buddhism.about.com/library/weekly/aa070702a.htm
Plenty more where that came from.
I have never once, ever done anything of the kind*, and I resent the insulting implication that I am the teacher's pet! How dare you come up with such an outrageous accusation! I shall consult my lawyer immediately! This is scandalous and nothing short of Libel - !!
(Nick's going to be a lawyer....just practising.....:tongue2:
*Deny, deny, deny!!
Oh, man! That was a great read!! It's more than a good link. I've never, ever understood it better than that. That's just opened up all sorts of doors!
Once again, thank you, Not1.
Oh. Great, Brigid.
Way to encourage Mr. Thread Anarchist.
Now he's going to be posting everything he's got before tomorrow!
-bf
Actually, there's a slight chance I may not have my post ready by tomorrow (I may just participate in the discussion). But that first link was so good, I felt compelled to post it.
take care
_/\_
metta
I am looking forward to when his reincarnation is old enough to start giving public teachings.
_/\_
metta
HA HA BEAT YA!
Palzang
The question of 'Self' is a highly pertinent one to me at present, because the First Noble Truth's iron skillet is whanging me on the cranium with alarming consistency and precision in its aim, at the moment - !!
The only way I can describe my interpretation of 'Self' and how I actually bring the concept to reality - and live in the Now - is to literally stop everything I'm doing, and to be still....
I just focus on my breath, and retreat inwardly....
I separate my physical body - the Material Organism - from what is happening, because my arms, legs, feet, hands and internal organs are not what is 'suffering'.... They are fine, in good health, even if they are getting a little worn....So my 'suffering' does not lie there....
I separate my daily constant mental machinations - my Consciousness - from what is happening, because "There is nothing either good nor Bad but that thinking makes it so".... My Consciousness can only be assaulted if I choose to label events as depressing or negative....but my Consciousness is affected by my weakness in perception - and Perception is often DEception - So my 'suffering' does not lie there.....
I separate the way I physically feel and sense things - my Sensation - from what is happening, because events and situations are not tangible....they do not affect me because I cannot touch them - I cannot smell them - I cannot hear them, or see them, although I am either spoken to or I read ABOUT them, through communication with relevant and/or pertinent parties....And I certainly cannot taste them - although they might leave a bitter taste in my mouth should I let them - !l My brain, as a sensory organ, which houses and manifests through these other five senses, and by association therefore transforms and manifests them - is also, by consequence, unaffected.... So my 'suffering' does not lie there.....
I separate my understanding and opinion - my Conception - from what is happening, because this is apt, more than any other of the five aggregates, to deceive me, as it is home-grown....Without other input, I am unable to weigh up without judgement or prejudice, that which drives others to think, say and do, that which they choose to think say and do.... they must remain responsible for everything that comes form them...But I must view it in Compassion, LOve and Wisdom.... whatever the xonsequences upon me, I have to recognise that they are sentient beings and also 'suffering'.....So my 'suffering' does not lie there.....
I separate my will and desire - my Volition - from what is happening, because it is this aspect which is not only at the source of suffering, but it is where my Karma is generated.... If I permit my Will and desire to cloud my Judgement - my perception, my View of Things as They Really Are - then this more than anything else, has the powere to shape my Life and render it unsatisfactory..... I sit and contemplate that, if I move outwards, I can see other human beings in my village, in the town nearby....And all these people have issues and problems of their own....many, I'm sure, far more serious than mine..... and look - Mr. Blair, and Mr. Bush have huge, monumental colossal problems of their own....So in the great scheme of things, what I want and wish for, is really very trivial, and in the Great Scheme of Things, something so trite and inconsequential, that it becomes laughable....So my 'suffering' does not lie there.....
So what is it, that is suffering.....? If my suffering has no abode, because I can compare myself to the existential components of a tree, or a cloud..... what is it that is suffering? Where is the suffering?
Gone.....
If ever it was here at all.....
Because even if it exists, there is nothing that it can affect...... I have myself at the centre of this whirling maelstrom of events which seem to be conspiring to pull me down....(At least the Titanic eventually hit the bottom!) yet there is No Self to endure the suffering....
Simple, really.....
But I'm still waiting for more posts!
C'mon people! Get with the program! I can't stop people posting until a certain day and then when that blessed day arrives, I find you sleeping at your posts (no pun intended).
-bf
Kind thoughts to each one of you!
LOVE your name! Welcome, welcome, welcome!
It's very nice to meet you and I was delighted to see your picture in your avatar. One gets a little tired sometimes of the anonymity of the internet and to see a bright, smiling face is a wonderful sight.
I'm looking forward to discussing things with you as well.
Much joy and peace to you today and every day.
Brigid
That name rings a bell.....
and where have I seen that face before.....?
Hello Patience! Welcome to the site!!
Grab a pew, we'll make you a cuppa and a slice of cake - Brigid and I are good at that!!
:wavey:
Great discussion here folks -
Patience, feel free to join in and jump in any place, any time, any where....
We have 3 kinds of Green (incl. non-fermented Japanese Sencha!), 3 Darjeelings (including First Flush!), 2 White, 5 Orange Pekoes, Japanese Blooming Flower tea, 17 Herbals (or Tisanes if you're in France), local grade 1 (light) honey (well, local to me but let's pretend, shall we?), white and raw organic sugars, artificial sugars, skimmed milk, 2%, 1% and whole fat milk, cream, unsweetened organic soy milk and organic vanilla soy milk.
We also have spring water ice cubes if you prefer your tea chilled and served in a tall glass with a slice of lemon or lime and finished with a sprig of mint.
Our tea is brewed with only pure Canadian spring water in your choice of bone china, clear glass (recommended for the lovely Japanese Blossoming Flower tea) or traditional Asian cast iron (House specialty, highly recommended).
I am, Madame, at your service day or night (Global Time).
I think we should try to keep this one on topic....)
back to "QUIZ TIME - SELF" ...
What a wonderful welcome! Thank you so much. The tea sounds great, and I'll leave the choice up to you!!!!!
Brigid, you have a lovely face and and even lovlier smile! And, Federica, I KNOW YOU!!!
About SELF - well, gee, I guess that is the real inner 'me' that I still need to do a lot of work on! It is also something I don't often show other people. I'm learning, though!
Hmmm.... Looks like it's about time to take a stab at this 'self' thing. Excuse me if this is disjointed or hard to follow, as I'm going to just wing it.
Alright, it seems to me that 'self' is a useful distinction created by the mind which distinguishes patterns and objects. It is basically another word for the subjective experience to me. The sense of a continuous 'person' is basically created by the mind's memory faculty. Now, as buddhism seems to describe this 'person' as simply a chain of nama-rupas (mind-body moments), the continuity is caused by the reappearance of similar qualities. That is how the mind makes any sort of distinction.
When we are babies we don't really make a lot of distinctions in our environment. The most we really notice is our feelings of hunger, temperature, & bodily sensations. We don't really have any contextual understanding of how our bundle of mind/body sensations relates to the environment, how it is seperate, or the possibility that there are other bundles of mind/body sensations.
Gradually, through repeated exposure to environmental conditions beyond our body, we begin to notice the patterns and distinctions that are made in our environment, though this sense is pretty weak at first. As time goes by, the mind gets more and more absorbed in these distinctions, and starts to give more importance to it, as it is necessary for survival and functioning. Then, our non-distinction making mind gets lost in this whole process. It's still there, but we don't consciously pay attention to it. We begin to accept the mind of distinctions as our primary or only 'Reality'.
To me, what the teachings on emptiness of self do is to make us realize how the world of distinctions is not so solid or substantial. This helps us to start becoming aware of the non-distinction making mind. The one that just abides and is present underneath all our distinctions. It is always there, but we have learned to shut it out of our experience. This is what the Original Face koan ('What is your face before you were born?') is getting at, IMO. It is also what the 'MU' koan is getting us to.
When we really begin to see the emptiness of all conditioned phenomenon and mental designations, we become less bound to the world of distinctions and conventions, and our experience becomes lighter and freer.
Also, when we begin to start seeing our experience in terms of the 5 aggregates, the 6 sense spheres, dependent co-arising, and really beging to see the unsatisfactoriness and impermanence of all our experience, we start to see a lot of things we didn't see before. We start to realize that our sense of self was very narrow and largely selective. We would accept some things as 'ourselves' and throw other things out. This caused the things we throw out to unconsciously affect us, and caused us to be under the sway of the things we accepted as ourself.
Bringing these new ways of distinguishing into our world of mental designation skillfully opens up our experience to this 'Original Mind' or 'Pristine Awareness'. By continued application through practice, our world opens up, and we see the sky behind the clouds. We no longer divide and compound our experience in ways which bring about suffering. Eventually, we achieve the state of unbinding (nirodha) or liberation, never to be born again.
_/\_
metta
Or it can be the answer to what is self is a non answer.
Or, like myself, others see nothing to add to the previous responses.
Patience
Try going to usre control panel-> edit options-> misc. options on the bottom of the page and change skin to 3.5 with black, large type
Russell
I guess we'll begin with the Dhammapada. It has a whole chapter on self (XII attavagga)! For brevity's sake, we choose a single stanza:
Next, we'll look to the Mahaparinibbanasutta.
First we might quote the following:
later,
The Blessed One speaks of his own demise: The blessed one also earlier in the sutta is shown to encourage the monks to make refuge for self.
In the Devatta Samyutta of the Samyutta Nikaya, amidst several question/answer stanzas, we find the following:
Many more available, but with a limit on word count I don't want to push it. Finally, I'll cap this mini compilation off with a passage from the khandhasamyutta:
That's it for now
in friendliness,
V.
In the teachings of Christian mystics there is an emphasis on the need to become 'empty' of 'self' - and I have always thought that this meant detachment from 'desires' and self interest.
The goal being to become centred upon the spiritual rather than the material - to 'let go' of those things which are transitory and impermanent - but then, isn't it true that nothing is permanent? One of my favourite ladies, Saint Teresa of Avila, said 'Let nothing disturb you, nothing afright you, All things are Passing' and I think she had the right idea there.
I must admit that I am finding this very difficult to do, in my life, but I can see the truth in it - in my MIND, but my HEART is a bit slow to learn!
I find it much wiser to simply lay such questions aside:
To debate either side seems like a waste of time to me.
Jason
:thumbsup:
_/\_
metta
* Our more erudite, scholarly and verbose experts might like to cast their eye on the Thread Founder's original first post regarding the conditions for contributing to this subject -
And consider that yet again, inspite of requests, this discussion has taken on a decidedly "202" hue..... *
Rather then chase down examples from ththe Buddha's teachings I will take on the later and interpret from my own understandings, reader's digest style.
Just to make sure we are clear-
Webster's 1913 Dictionary : Definition: \ Self \, a . Having its own or a single nature or character , as in color , composition , etc ., without addition or change ; unmixed ; as , a self bow , one made from a single piece of wood
the ego is "the representative of the outer world to the id "
Self implies that one has a single nature or character.
Ego is the product of mental processes that act as a sign post designating, "You are here!"
In Brahman, everything was related as being part of this one great self. The Buddha came along and said there is "no-self", because the self is made up of non-self elements.
What is this?
-bf
I like that, Iawa.
-bf
what a pity,you'll all have to stay deluded till next time.
dont you just love deadlines..that lovely wwhoooshing sound they make as they pass.
I was still going to post but couldnt bring myself to do it.:ukflag:
well wishes
Or Not-Plank.....:D:p
To be honest, I think that my post represents the Buddha's point regarding "self" quite well. He never described a "self". All direct questions regarding whether or not there was a "self", no "self", if the "self" was the same as the body, or if the "self" was one thing and the body another, etc. were left unanswered. He only taught how to perceive what was unsatisfactory and inconstant as not-self in order to end suffering. The five aggregates are both unsatisfactory and not-self, so why attach to them as "self"? Beyond that, the question of "self" is left untouched. So, what I think in less than one thousand words is that the question of "self" takes the practitioner away from the Path, and into a "wilderness of views". If newcomers to Buddhism wish to venture into this "wilderness" against the advice of others, that is fine. But, they should at least be forewarned that the Buddha left such debates alone, and I am pretty sure he had a good reason for it. It's just something to keep in mind. I do apologize, however, if I am off topic, or taking this into thread into "202" territory.
Sincerely,
Jason
Perhaps you could be more specific as to how this is getting too advanced?
in friendliness,
V.
His conditions and requests for contributors is quite clear:
"Nothing over 1000 words, for those who cut & paste to death".... and
"I'm wanting to know what YOU think....."
Brian resisted creating a forum for those who liked to engage in long, complex and detailed discussion, with constant analysis of sutras, translations, and interpretations.
However, after much pressure, he relented.
The forum was finally created, as Buddhism 202.
I have copied and moved a thread (Mindfulness, 202-style) on there so that you could continue your debate and discussion there.
needless to say, that thread has been abandoned. I suspect (although I may well be very wrong) because there is no suitable audience....
This forum is not about demonstrating a personal ability to quote, paste and fill threads with reams and reams of small print.
It's about helping people New to Buddhism to learn - in an easily absorbable and user-friendly kind of way.
Please let this be my final word on the matter. *
This is just a thought, but I think that it might also help to question whether the Buddha was talking about a healthy "sense of self" when he did mention one, or a "self" (i.e. soul). Many times it seems that when he did mention "self", it was in a very pragmatic way. Let's not forget that a healthy sense of self is important on the Path all the way up until stream-entry. For example, how could you know what wallet was "yours" and what wallet was "not yours" if you had no sense of self? How could "you" not steal if "you" were unaware of what was "not yours"? So, when the Buddha mentioned something like "be your own refuge", it helps to keep in mind his other teachings on where the work was to be done (i.e. this fathom-long body). Even though he mentions this fathom-long body, we know that the body is not a "self", yet it is still "ourself" (at least until all views of self are removed with the first level of awakening). When it came to the "self", however, the Buddha left such questions unanswered (i.e. SN 44.10). I may be completely wrong about this, but I think that it is something to keep in mind when reading the Suttas.
Jason
So, while on one hand it would be ideal for the more studied practitioners to get the words down to the 101 level, it would also be ideal that the beginners study to get up to the 202 level. I think we need to be more understanding of both of these ideals and how difficult it actually is to achieve them.
Us 202'ers need to work harder on getting more on a basic level, low on terminology, and the 101'ers can always just skip over the complex stuff and ask for clarification when they want/need it. Honestly, it is to the beginners benefit to come across actual sutta references from time to time, and then have the suttas broken down. Perhaps we should intentionally do something along those lines, where we have some basic sutta/sutra discussion in the 101 forum, just to get a feel for them and to ask questions. This way, beginners would become more familiar with the structure and vocabulary found in the suttas and the 202'ers would become more experienced in breaking down the suttas into begginner's language.
Anyway, just some thoughts.
_/\_
metta
doh !!!
ya plank ? not a term im familiar with federica ?
i hope its a french compliment :ukflag:
I wrote a four page essay on this but when i re-read it i realised i had no Buddha back up for it,and it was long winded and boring.lol
start again !
patience
Great idea buddhafoot !