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.
One of the core tenets of the Buddha’s teachings is “Anatta” = no-self no-soul selflessness soullessness,( however one likes to translate it) and for the most part one could say that when practicing the Dharma one is gradually chipping away at the self, bit by bit dissolving it in the clear pool of awareness…
bingo!
However, it would seem "Atta"=self, sense of self, is a tough cookie, and does not want to go down this path ( to “give up the ghost” so to speak)…Its prepared to fight tooth and nail, kicking and screaming, fighting for its life…It will try all the tricks in the book to keep itself afloat….
hence our friend,and teach our friend the art of balance. ask the friend awareness be the teacher.
Or as @how once put it “From the ego's perspective, the process of letting go is tantamount to suicide!”
lol
In the West more often than not we are fed on a diet of “I me my” , conditioning reinforced by social norms & standards…
So from a Buddhist perspective, how often do thoughts of Anatta crop up in your busy day to day lives ? (Paradoxically… how often do “you” grapple with your “self” ? Or should I say attempt to lose your “self” ? )
life...the key...be no one with friend "self'
As the ol’ saying goes “There’s more to life than what meets the eye “I”
zen heart transformer
Attempting to spark up an internal conversation with oneself about oneself can leave oneself in a state of confusion.... (which one is left confused ? That I couldn't say...It's too confusing . .. )
So.....Welcome to "The Twilight Zone" (The Mind's Eye)
>
my bodhi practice, state of mind, change i into eye--just aware. our eye is the most use sense organ to be aware
so our minds eye is see our self/nonself is one coin two sides. be/do
I'm not convinced that we can live and act in the world without a sense of self.
.
yep. make the two role as one. self/action get things done. awareness rest/self
**Emptiness is form and form is emptiness. **
gone, gone,supreamly gone to empty to self is bodhi, be so
You are very much right.
The conventional self, sense of being, identity, body, continuum from ignorance still exists unless we become a beam of tinkerbell light . . . good luck with any fairy dust, experiences, realisations, wisdom etc etc . . .
So we have a conventional existence in form. However free and however uppermost the unborn, emptiness, anatta awakening is.
Now we move into paradox: The unborn, deathless, empty, anatta does not exist. Therefore one can not attain or realise it, except through being.
**Emptiness is form and form is emptiness. **
We practice increasingly to find the space or emptiness in the I that clings to its form. The form has many facets or delusions, some skilful, some little more than empty posturing, which we might discern as 'full of it' posturing.
The 'I AM' in its most purified ideal state is empty of being 'I AM'. In essence it is anatta.
So we have a duality to move towards and dissolve. We have the sense of being and the potential 'experience' of emptiness.
Every person here has this emptiness, unborn, deathless, non arising. It is always present but in its presence no 'I AM this form or that' exists.
@Shoshin said:
Thank you to all the non-selfies who have tricked their selves into contributing some insightful comments...From Anatta to Anatta "I" thank you all...
Quote from A Buddhist neuroscientist (I can't remember which one-there seems to be quite a few floating around in Samsara . .. I posted this elsewhere on the forum so it's a bit of an oldie, but still stands the test of time...It sums the act of self-ing up in a neat tidy package....
"Its not so much that we have a self, it's that we do self-ing...The self has no inherent, unconditional, absolute existence apart from the network of causes it arises from, in, and as !"
self-ing is be-ing. be is our aware state.ing is our actions/karma
The topic of self and not-self can seem awfully complex or paradoxical from the Buddhist POV, but I think it’s helpful to see it this way: The word self, atta, is defined as that which is constant, completely under one’s control, and happiness/comfort. Not-self, on the other hand, anatta, is defined as that which is inconstant, conditioned, not fully under one’s control, unsatisfactory/painful. And one of the practices that the Buddha advises a practitioner to develop is mindful awareness, first analyzing the body and searching for such a self. Then the same for mental states, feelings, and the confluence of object, sense base, and the sense consciousness that arises from it. And even in the depths of meditative states of concentration and pleasure. Along the way, one notices that neither our body nor our mental states constant or fully under our control. And, if one is fortunate enough to be able to develop and sustain them, one may even find the same for deep and subtle states of meditative absorption. Some may seem more constant than others (e.g., the body vs. mental states, the latter of which arise and cease much faster), and some may be more pleasant (like the jhanas obviously); but ultimately, we begin to see that none are truly stable, lasting, and under our total control. And so, the perception arises that the body isn’t self, mental states aren’t self, and even blissful states of consciousness within meditation aren’t self. We also start to see the causes and conditions that go into their arising and ceasing, as well as the limits of control we have over that arising and ceasing and our experiences related to them, i.e., “When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that. When this isn't, that isn't. From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that” (Ud 1.3). And eventually, we come to realize that what we tend to think of as self is less of a solid reality and more an active process of self-identification with the objects, organs, and qualia of our experience—a realization that makes it easier to unidentify when appropriate, reducing our attachment and the suffering that arises from our clinging to that which is inconstant, not fully under our control, and not truly fit to be metaphysically labeled as self. Perhaps there’s something underlying our experience that we can touch or realize that is constant, blissful, and totally sovereign over itself. But for the most part, that’s not the case. Nevertheless, we can still use this process of selfing skillfully in our practice, as well as our day-to-day lives, in order to reduce our suffering and increase our happiness and ease. And who knows how much more.
Comments
Yes, it's seems to be about identifying with the aggregates as me and mine.
bump
important discussion. i will discuss who are still here.
bingo!
hence our friend,and teach our friend the art of balance. ask the friend awareness be the teacher.
lol
life...the key...be no one with friend "self'
zen heart transformer
>
my bodhi practice, state of mind, change i into eye--just aware. our eye is the most use sense organ to be aware
so our minds eye is see our self/nonself is one coin two sides. be/do
yep. make the two role as one. self/action get things done. awareness rest/self
gone, gone,supreamly gone to empty to self is bodhi, be so
>
great bodhi thoughts.
self-ing is be-ing. be is our aware state.ing is our actions/karma
still empty of intinsinct nature
free to be-nobody
[
when your nobody you can be everything, dao in empty form.
sukkha on my nobody friends.....emptyness is rich
eye see u from metta
born free
ty liberty sam earth
born wise
ty wisdom--mom earth--justified by her children.
The topic of self and not-self can seem awfully complex or paradoxical from the Buddhist POV, but I think it’s helpful to see it this way: The word self, atta, is defined as that which is constant, completely under one’s control, and happiness/comfort. Not-self, on the other hand, anatta, is defined as that which is inconstant, conditioned, not fully under one’s control, unsatisfactory/painful. And one of the practices that the Buddha advises a practitioner to develop is mindful awareness, first analyzing the body and searching for such a self. Then the same for mental states, feelings, and the confluence of object, sense base, and the sense consciousness that arises from it. And even in the depths of meditative states of concentration and pleasure. Along the way, one notices that neither our body nor our mental states constant or fully under our control. And, if one is fortunate enough to be able to develop and sustain them, one may even find the same for deep and subtle states of meditative absorption. Some may seem more constant than others (e.g., the body vs. mental states, the latter of which arise and cease much faster), and some may be more pleasant (like the jhanas obviously); but ultimately, we begin to see that none are truly stable, lasting, and under our total control. And so, the perception arises that the body isn’t self, mental states aren’t self, and even blissful states of consciousness within meditation aren’t self. We also start to see the causes and conditions that go into their arising and ceasing, as well as the limits of control we have over that arising and ceasing and our experiences related to them, i.e., “When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that. When this isn't, that isn't. From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that” (Ud 1.3). And eventually, we come to realize that what we tend to think of as self is less of a solid reality and more an active process of self-identification with the objects, organs, and qualia of our experience—a realization that makes it easier to unidentify when appropriate, reducing our attachment and the suffering that arises from our clinging to that which is inconstant, not fully under our control, and not truly fit to be metaphysically labeled as self. Perhaps there’s something underlying our experience that we can touch or realize that is constant, blissful, and totally sovereign over itself. But for the most part, that’s not the case. Nevertheless, we can still use this process of selfing skillfully in our practice, as well as our day-to-day lives, in order to reduce our suffering and increase our happiness and ease. And who knows how much more.
Ah Ha!
I knew there was a simple explanation. Thanks @Jason