Non-self

ThailandTom

grrrrr, no I am not a bear I am mildly angry. I have been trying to gain an insight into non-self within my own body, other people and objects via reading materials and observing things in day to day life. I understand the concept on an intellectual level and have done for a couple of years now, but applying it to everyday life just doesn't click with me. I think I am not ready to accept that such a thing exists, or doesn't exist for that matter, that the teaching is a reality.

I have tried for example observing my partner via the Five Aggregates, form, sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness, yet still I get wrapped up in the situation and things lead to 'I' and 'her' and I lose my train of thought. It is said that a mind fit for work, ie one with good concentration is readily available not only on the cushion and often it is better to gain such insights not on the cushion but in everyday life. Any tips people?

pegembara

If you go to the movies, you get totally caught up in the story of the movie. And it could be the movie of a monk in a cave or it could be the movie of somebody enjoying life fully, but then you look up and see the beam of light going through the theater and landing on the screen, and you realize nothing is happening! There's nothing happening on the screen. It's all an appearance. I think that if we get too caught up in which appearance is the right appearance or which appearance is more spiritual, it completely misses the point that freedom is not about which movie is playing; it's in the mind being free of clinging, whatever the form. J. Goldstein

"This world, Kaccāyana, for the most part, bases its views on two things: on existence and non-exis­tence. Now, Kac­cāyana, to one who with right wisdom sees the arising of the world as it is, the view of non-existence regarding the world does not occur. And to one who with right wisdom sees the cessation of the world as it really is, the view of existence regarding the world does not occur."

"`Everything exists', Kaccāyana, is one extreme. `Nothing ex­ists' is the other extreme. Not approaching either of those ex­tremes, Kac­cāyana, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma by the middle way: Kaccayanagotta Sutta

Nevermind

There isn't much to get really. The concept of no-self is very simple. Perhaps it is too simple and that's the problem. We think it must be more than what it is? The basis of no-self is simply impermanence. That's it. Everything changes, apparently, therefor nothing lasts. No-self = no enduring self.

ThailandTom

Nevermind said:

There isn't much to get really. The concept of no-self is very simple. Perhaps it is too simple and that's the problem. We think it must be more than what it is? The basis of no-self is simply impermanence. That's it. Everything changes, apparently, therefor nothing lasts. No-self = no enduring self.

I've understood that for a long long time, but applying it to everyday life and my practice, there is something missing in between. It feels as if I understand the concept but it doesn't have any ability to be used with regards to insight, I just can't get it and I don't know why.

Nevermind

I'm thinking that it's basically clinging or attachment, ThailandTom. We all deal with that every day, so you're in good company.

taiyaki

In seeing just the seen no seer.

The seer or subject is just an thought after the fact.

There is only, always just the seen.

Just the heard, sensed, colors/shapes.

Jeffrey

There is always space for the next thought. No thought is the set final thought on the matter. The mind drifts out and then focuses on an idea. Soon the dead hand of mara kills the idea because it is trying to fix the idea in place and hang onto it.

Dakini

ThailandTom said:

grrrrr, no I am not a bear I am mildly angry. I have been trying to gain an insight into non-self within my own body, other people and objects via reading materials and observing things in day to day life. I understand the concept on an intellectual level and have done for a couple of years now, but applying it to everyday life just doesn't click with me. I think I am not ready to accept that such a thing exists, or doesn't exist for that matter, that the teaching is a reality.

I have tried for example observing my partner via the Five Aggregates, form, sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness, yet still I get wrapped up in the situation and things lead to 'I' and 'her' and I lose my train of thought. It is said that a mind fit for work, ie one with good concentration is readily available not only on the cushion and often it is better to gain such insights not on the cushion but in everyday life. Any tips people?

There is definitely a "you" and a "her". The Buddha, as I understand, never denied that. What he said was that your qualities and her qualities are always changing, each of you is a process, not a static thing. So it would be inaccurate to think, "I'm the down-to-earth, rational one, she's flakey and flighty", for example. Each of you is a work in progress. Don't get too attached to your view of yourself, or to the momentary clash or crisis. It all changes, and life moves on.

ThailandTom

Dakini said:

ThailandTom said:

grrrrr, no I am not a bear I am mildly angry. I have been trying to gain an insight into non-self within my own body, other people and objects via reading materials and observing things in day to day life. I understand the concept on an intellectual level and have done for a couple of years now, but applying it to everyday life just doesn't click with me. I think I am not ready to accept that such a thing exists, or doesn't exist for that matter, that the teaching is a reality.

I have tried for example observing my partner via the Five Aggregates, form, sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness, yet still I get wrapped up in the situation and things lead to 'I' and 'her' and I lose my train of thought. It is said that a mind fit for work, ie one with good concentration is readily available not only on the cushion and often it is better to gain such insights not on the cushion but in everyday life. Any tips people?

There is definitely a "you" and a "her". The Buddha, as I understand, never denied that. What he said was that your qualities and her qualities are always changing, each of you is a process, not a static thing. So it would be inaccurate to think, "I'm the down-to-earth, rational one, she's flakey and flighty", for example. Each of you is a work in progress. Don't get too attached to your view of yourself, or to the momentary clash or crisis. It all changes, and life moves on.

This helps quite a bit thanks Dakini, things are a little clearer now when it comes to non-self. I know we exist and there is an I and a her, we are not nihilistic people around these parts lol, but I just couldn't understand why it is so important to understand that we are constantly changing and not separate from the world around us. I tried applying this notion to an every day situation and it was as if I was trying to light a fire with damp kindling, it just wouldn't click.

misecmisc1

my understanding of Buddha's teachings says: theoretically understanding anicca(impermanence), dukkha(unsatisfactoriness) and anatta(non-self or not-mine) helps the mind to think about a situation usually post-event - but only after direct experience of these 3 characteristics in meditation through insights, has the mind got the wisdom, then the mind shall be able to apply these characteristics when the event is in-progress - until then, the mind shall behave as per its level of conditioning.

ZendoLord84

to me
non-self is same as emptyness.

YOU don't exist, your a bunch of variables and connections of events.

Tosh

iamthezenmaster said:

YOU don't exist, your a bunch of variables and connections of events.

If that's correct, why do Buddhists try to develop love and compassion for a bunch of variables and connections of events?

ThailandTom

iamthezenmaster said:

to me
non-self is same as emptyness.

YOU don't exist, your a bunch of variables and connections of events.

But we do exist, like I said we are not nihilists

ZendoLord84

well.

If emptiness is the coffee.
Metta is the sugar and milk.

Emptiness is a major part of buddhism. Nihilism is kinda depressing, however, the first noble truth states that life is suffering. The second, third and fourth truth offer a way out.

ThailandTom

iamthezenmaster said:

well.

If emptiness is the coffee.
Metta is the sugar and milk.

Emptiness is a major part of buddhism. Nihilism is kinda depressing, however, the first noble truth states that life is suffering. The second, third and fourth truth offer a way out.

Agreed, but I was just stating that in fact we do exist, of course there are things and a reality out there, just we observe it through our own way via a small amount of sense, I am sure there are many many parts of reality we cannot observe due to our limitations.

ZendoLord84

do you need to in order to live a good peaceful life?

ThailandTom

iamthezenmaster said:

do you need to in order to live a good peaceful life?

Exist? Well yes in the literal sense otherwise you would be dead or simply never in existence, in a spiritual sense no, there is no self to be found in a person.

ZendoLord84

for me....
we're just monkeys with a efficient brain.
i've been looking for the existence-answer but it's nowhere to be found.

ThailandTom

iamthezenmaster said:

for me....
we're just monkeys with a efficient brain.
i've been looking for the existence-answer but it's nowhere to be found.

So you conform to nihilism?

Jeffrey

Buddha said we are NOT the skhandas. So we are not a fluxional process. There IS a fluxional process but that is not US.

BhanteLucky

The experience of anatta, or non-self/emptiness/ whatever you call it, is not something that can be arrived at through thinking and mental effort.
Is is an experience that just happens, usually through meditation. It just suddenly comes and drenches you, and the world, the body, thoughts, are experienced as not you, not me, not mine. The sense of self extinguishes like a blown-out candle, but there is still thinking and responding and normal life.
Almost impossible to describe.
After that everything changes, it's an AHA! moment which is extremely powerful.
I have experienced it once, but hope some day to make it permanent.

So don't worry about trying to understand it intellectually.
Meditate!!
Sorry I can't help with how to experience it in daily life. I only have experience of it during a retreat.

ThailandTom

JamestheGiant said:

The experience of anatta, or non-self/emptiness/ whatever you call it, is not something that can be arrived at through thinking and mental effort.
Is is an experience that just happens, usually through meditation. It just suddenly comes and drenches you, and the world, the body, thoughts, are experienced as not you, not me, not mine. The sense of self extinguishes like a blown-out candle, but there is still thinking and responding and normal life.
Almost impossible to describe.
After that everything changes, it's an AHA! moment which is extremely powerful.
I have experienced it once, but hope some day to make it permanent.

So don't worry about trying to understand it intellectually.
Meditate!!
Sorry I can't help with how to experience it in daily life. I only have experience of it during a retreat.

Ah I see, that puts things into perspective a little more thanks. So what would you call this brief aha moment you had, was it a brief insight? Also, can anybody on here say that they have pierced through the notion of there being a self totally and had this AHA moment to a permanent extent? I ask this because this board is one of the best if not the best Buddhist forums, it is full of all kinds of Buddhists at all different degrees, I am curious to know if anybody has made such a progress as it would validated the path even more to me than it already is.

BhanteLucky

ThailandTom said:

So what would you call this brief aha moment you had, was it a brief insight?

Yes, an Insight into Anatta is what the monks I asked afterwards called it. A pre-taste of nibanna.
The Visuddhimagga says I'm now a "Cula Sotapanna", which means I will attain to sotapanna in this very life. I answer Yeah Right to that. :om: I mean, hopefully, but really...? :wtf: Besides, it's the Visuddhimagga, and not to be swallowed without a grain of salt.

ThailandTom said:

Also, can anybody on here say that they have pierced through the notion of there being a self totally and had this AHA moment to a permanent extent?

In the Theravada tradition, they call someone who has that permanent non-self awareness a sotapanna.
I know Ajahn Brahm says he's met two or three in Australia, so I dunno, surely they are more common somewhere like Thailand.
I wouldn't think so on the internet though. Seeing that internet forums are mostly just egos pouring out words, the net might be unattractive for someone with no ego left.
It's a pity monks aren't really allowed to talk about it, otherwise we might hear a lot more about it.

lobster

It's a pity monks aren't really allowed to talk about it, otherwise we might hear a lot more about it.

Don't worry I have taken no vows and am happy to talk about it to an extent.

The problem is, some people think an experience of non-self, makes you inclined to teach or act in a certain way.
Insight does not necessarily give you the capacity, inclination or intention to transmit or reveal a similar experience in others. If you have any good sense, which I abandoned long ago, you continue without so much as a rainbow.

The important thing to attest and understand is it is 'there', as revealed and experienced. Non-self is attainable in this lifetime, in this body, given practice and a following wind . . .

It is as we know: 'empty of form and formed of emptiness.'

When you meditate, look for the source of self, independent of the causes giving the impression of 'self'. You will soon understand the nature of self, engaging in an awareness centred around this non-self, can also come about . . .

irmasdream

I find it useful to think about any being, any thing - as a composite - made by causes - which are not them self - e.g. your girlfriend didnt decided to look like she looks, to be born where she was born, to have a job that she has - even now - it looks like we have choices and like we act - - but in reality we usually dont have them - like a thirsty man standing in front of an empty and a full glass of water - it looks like choice - but it isnt . so constantly we are MADE - people or circumstances make us angry, or lucky ,others feed us, others dress us - there is not a ME - that makes this all - its the world around us - constantly - creates, changes, influences. consider every step you do - what triggered it ! not you ! so there is no SELF.
I think on this view is not much wrong - but
The problem on this view is the determinism - it looks like a completely predetermined world - so in order to act good and avoid bad - there must be a point where beings are able to decide to act - and this is another problem and another good topic for a discussion - cheers

ZendoLord84

ThailandTom said:

iamthezenmaster said:

for me....
we're just monkeys with a efficient brain.
i've been looking for the existence-answer but it's nowhere to be found.

So you conform to nihilism?

No.
If there is no real reason why we exist.
It is only logical to make the most out of it.
And by most I mean cultivate metta and act upon it.

swaydam

Realize you have never actually seen a self before. You have only seen attributes that are rumored to be attributes of the self. We can talk of a square circle and give it a name and a history and stuff, yet its a non-sense term.

lobster

Meditate!!

OK :grumble:

footiam

ThailandTom said:

grrrrr, no I am not a bear I am mildly angry. I have been trying to gain an insight into non-self within my own body, other people and objects via reading materials and observing things in day to day life. I understand the concept on an intellectual level and have done for a couple of years now, but applying it to everyday life just doesn't click with me. I think I am not ready to accept that such a thing exists, or doesn't exist for that matter, that the teaching is a reality.

I have tried for example observing my partner via the Five Aggregates, form, sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness, yet still I get wrapped up in the situation and things lead to 'I' and 'her' and I lose my train of thought. It is said that a mind fit for work, ie one with good concentration is readily available not only on the cushion and often it is better to gain such insights not on the cushion but in everyday life. Any tips people?

I am not sure if one should get so specific, looking so much into the details of things. It probably would take the simplicity out of life and its joy, too.