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.
Just because there is no 'abiding self' doesnt mean the idea of self is a delusion...!
Zenmyste, a simple question. Do you see any merit in Buddhism ?
Me personally, no i dont!
Ive read peoples blogs though and authors who practice buddhism 'for' enlightenment. They practice meditation hoping that they will attain such a state of no more suffering etc
But like i said, i personally dont believe there is any merit in 'anything '
I do good because its just in my 'nature' My mother is very 'nice and compassionate' so ive always followed her steps 'naturally' (not for any merit)
Why do you ask?
If you see no merit in Buddhism, why are you here?
Interest... Hobbie... ??
Just because i dont think there is any merit doesnt mean im not gonna do something
Some parts of buddhism really reasonate with me, i like it in general! Ive spent months in thailand few times and i just love the monks and the 'peaceful' side it seems to bring out in people (not people on here, coz most seem pretty hot headed and not at peace at all - lol)
I especially like Zen! The simplicity of it!
But like i said , im not after any merit! Its more just an interest!
Especially since you believe each of us is an illusion.
Just because there is only being doesn't mean that all aspects of being would be identical.
I believe that we are each an illusion? Anyway, a duplicate would still be being different from an original.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
Especially since you believe each of us is an illusion.
Just because there is only being doesn't mean that all aspects of being would be identical.
I believe that we are each an illusion?
Sorry, I meant no disrespect, I was only going by your post which said "You is a delusion"
A delusion is a false belief. If there is no "you" then what typed that?
Anyway, a duplicate would still be being different from an original.
I don't know what you're saying here... A duplicate of what?
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
If everything is interdependant then it stands to reason it is all a part of the same thing even if said thing is really a cycle.
And if you can agree that you don't exist by yourself, can you also agree that there is a you?
This is why no-self is as mistaken a view as abiding self.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
edited January 2013
"One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the results of kamma and takes rebirth? Second...
In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self?"
If you see no merit in Buddhism, why do you call yourself "zenmyste"?
WHAT??? What are you talking about?
How is calling myself zenmyste a merit?
Why the Buddhist username? "Seeing merit in" something means valuing something. If you "like" Buddhism and find it worth doing, it means you see some merit in it. So you must put some value in zen. Why are you so angry? It seems like you want people to disagree with you, even though some of us have agreed with your position on self.
If you see no merit in Buddhism, why do you call yourself "zenmyste"?
WHAT??? What are you talking about?
How is calling myself zenmyste a merit?
Why are you so angry?
Who said im angry?
I certainly didnt!
I like to ask questions out of interest! I dont only ask questions on this site, im on alot of philosophy sites, religious sites, music sites, poetry sites etc etc and i ask alot of questions (some good some bad) but im just interested!
I also like asking questions that i believe others might also be interested in but not necessarily ask,
i like to ask questions that can 'spark' curiousity..
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
If everything is interdependent then it stands to reason it is all a part of the same thing even if said thing is really a cycle.
Well, for one example, I don't depend on you. I could have no further interaction with you and it wouldn't make any difference. But, I know there is a purpose for the notion that everything is interdependent, just like there is a purpose for the notion that I am independent.
The idea of self is just thinking. All thinking is just thinking. Smile about it. Yet the shit hits the fan eventually and it's nice to have a sound tactic for dealing with the distressed mind.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
If everything is interdependent then it stands to reason it is all a part of the same thing even if said thing is really a cycle.
Well, for one example, I don't depend on you. I could have no further interaction with you and it wouldn't make any difference. But, I know there is a purpose for the notion that everything is interdependent, just like there is a purpose for the notion that I am independent.
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
If everything is interdependent then it stands to reason it is all a part of the same thing even if said thing is really a cycle.
Well, for one example, I don't depend on you. I could have no further interaction with you and it wouldn't make any difference. But, I know there is a purpose for the notion that everything is interdependent, just like there is a purpose for the notion that I am independent.
I dont think im an 'illusion' and i dont believe i am living in ignorance
@zenmyste: is there anything which you like and is there anything which you dislike? if there is any of these two things, then you can know that there is ignorance.
How is liking something and disliking someone ignorance??????
I dont like the fact there are murderers and rapists, (i accept that these things do exist) and of course i dont like it! (But shit happens)
How the hell is that ignorant???
@zenmyste: do you know what is that ignorance (which is the root cause of all delusion)?
@zenmyste: you did not replied to the above query. seems like the above question's answer is where the confusion you are having. just try to answer it, then it can be tried to remove your confusion a little bit. if you do not have answer, then also tell, then it can be answered to you a little bit.
If you see no merit in Buddhism, why do you call yourself "zenmyste"?
WHAT??? What are you talking about?
How is calling myself zenmyste a merit?
Why are you so angry?
Who said im angry?
I certainly didnt!
I like to ask questions out of interest! I dont only ask questions on this site, im on alot of philosophy sites, religious sites, music sites, poetry sites etc etc and i ask alot of questions (some good some bad) but im just interested!
I also like asking questions that i believe others might also be interested in but not necessarily ask,
i like to ask questions that can 'spark' curiousity..
@zenmyste: asking questions is good, but getting answers from others will only increase our knowledge, but getting answers from inside will increase our wisdom. so we should try to get the answers to our questions from inside us.
Sorry @misecmisc1, but Buddhist doctrine about ignorance can only be learned outside of us.
@Nevermind: Sorry, but my understanding of Buddha's teachings says: ignorance can only be learned inside us by seeing our own mind and its conditioning.
Sorry @misecmisc1, but Buddhist doctrine about ignorance can only be learned outside of us.
@Nevermind: Sorry, but my understanding of Buddha's teachings says: ignorance can only be learned inside us by seeing our own mind and its conditioning.
Sorry? you confirm what I've pointed out. You say, "Buddha's teachings say..." This did not come from your insight, it's what others say. It did not come from your mind. It came from elsewhere.
Sorry @misecmisc1, but Buddhist doctrine about ignorance can only be learned outside of us.
@Nevermind: Sorry, but my understanding of Buddha's teachings says: ignorance can only be learned inside us by seeing our own mind and its conditioning.
Sorry? you confirm what I've pointed out. You say, "Buddha's teachings say..." This did not come from your insight, it's what others say. It did not come from your mind. It came from elsewhere.
@Nevermind: yes, it was taught by Buddha, but it need to be practiced inside you. when you see your mind is conditioned, then you come to know that you have ignorance inside you. what we learn from outside is knowledge, but what we learn from inside is wisdom. it is wisdom that really matters - which we can know only by seeing inside us in our own minds.
Sorry @misecmisc1, but Buddhist doctrine about ignorance can only be learned outside of us.
@Nevermind: Sorry, but my understanding of Buddha's teachings says: ignorance can only be learned inside us by seeing our own mind and its conditioning.
Sorry? you confirm what I've pointed out. You say, "Buddha's teachings say..." This did not come from your insight, it's what others say. It did not come from your mind. It came from elsewhere.
@Nevermind: yes, it was taught by Buddha, but it need to be practiced inside you. when you see your mind is conditioned, then you come to know that you have ignorance inside you. what we learn from outside is knowledge, but what we learn from inside is wisdom. it is wisdom that really matters - which we can know only by seeing inside us in our own minds.
You are talking about your interpretation of Buddhist doctrine. At least it sound kind of like Buddhist doctrine. Your understanding seems original, but the doctrine itself did not come from your mind.
Im reading a buddhist book and i dont agree with this no self'
It says;
"What we call 'self' is an imagined entity. The idea of self is a delusion because there is no abiding self...."
Im sorry but i think there is a huge difference;
Its not rocket science that there is no abiding self, we dont 'need' buddhism to tell us that.. We have all seen and had family, friends who have passed away so obviously we are all gonna be gone soon! Not rocket science..
However; how does that mean that the self is a delusion???
Although there is no 'abiding self, there is still a 'self' right NOW isnt there????
I do wonder if the translation from the original script into English makes it so. Perhaps, when looking at this self thing, one should not look at it from the normalusual angle. It is like looking at the star; someone told me the star is a sphere but if you were to view it from my house, it is far from that. You would think it is a star fish in outer space! That self is considered a delusion most probably is due to its impermanent nature. You see it there and you think it is there but you cannot grasp it because each time you try, if eludes you.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
It isn't that you are in reality nothing, it is that in reality, there is nothing that isn't partly you.
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
That I don't exist by myself doesn't mean that there is nothing that isn't part of me. Isn't it obvious that it doesn't matter how you slice, or do not slice something up???
If everything is interdependent then it stands to reason it is all a part of the same thing even if said thing is really a cycle.
Well, for one example, I don't depend on you. I could have no further interaction with you and it wouldn't make any difference. But, I know there is a purpose for the notion that everything is interdependent, just like there is a purpose for the notion that I am independent.
Comments
Just because i dont think there is any merit doesnt mean im not gonna do something
Some parts of buddhism really reasonate with me, i like it in general! Ive spent months in thailand few times and i just love the monks and the 'peaceful' side it seems to bring out in people (not people on here, coz most seem pretty hot headed and not at peace at all - lol)
I especially like Zen! The simplicity of it!
But like i said , im not after any merit! Its more just an interest!
What are you talking about?
How is calling myself zenmyste a merit?
A delusion is a false belief. If there is no "you" then what typed that? I don't know what you're saying here... A duplicate of what?
You don't exist by yourself... This doesn't mean you don't exist.
And if you can agree that you don't exist by yourself, can you also agree that there is a you?
This is why no-self is as mistaken a view as abiding self.
In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self?"
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
Buddha thought this line of reasoning/questioning best put aside.
Why are you so angry? It seems like you want people to disagree with you, even though some of us have agreed with your position on self.
I certainly didnt!
I like to ask questions out of interest!
I dont only ask questions on this site, im on alot of philosophy sites, religious sites, music sites, poetry sites etc etc and i ask alot of questions (some good some bad) but im just interested!
I also like asking questions that i believe others might also be interested in but not necessarily ask,
i like to ask questions that can 'spark' curiousity..
~Donovan
Clearly, there is a being and there is also being. :clap: yippee!
I do wonder if the translation from the original script into English makes it so. Perhaps, when looking at this self thing, one should not look at it from the normalusual angle. It is like looking at the star; someone told me the star is a sphere but if you were to view it from my house, it is far from that. You would think it is a star fish in outer space! That self is considered a delusion most probably is due to its impermanent nature. You see it there and you think it is there but you cannot grasp it because each time you try, if eludes you.
Why would aspects of being be duplicates but beings be unique?
There is no individual being absolutely because that would mean there is an abiding self.
I still have no idea what you are trying to say with your questions but since you conceded that "you" is not a delusion I'll leave you be.