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.
Nonself
Jerbear
Veteran
In another thread, I started thinking about non self and it's implications. I realize that a separate "entity, being" does not exist that is Jerbear. I am just a collection of cells in a certain configuration that makes this organism that thinks its Jerbear. Got that.
How does this help? I've experienced alot of things in the past few months that I'm sure something experienced and most were quite painful. What are some thoughts on this? Trying to use this for my own good as there is a possibility that I may have a serious mental disorder that I would love to treat like Russel Crowe did in "A Beautiful Mind". "You're not real!" I realize this is not a therapy group, but just how do others use it in their every day lives to face that dirty R word, reality.
How does this help? I've experienced alot of things in the past few months that I'm sure something experienced and most were quite painful. What are some thoughts on this? Trying to use this for my own good as there is a possibility that I may have a serious mental disorder that I would love to treat like Russel Crowe did in "A Beautiful Mind". "You're not real!" I realize this is not a therapy group, but just how do others use it in their every day lives to face that dirty R word, reality.
0
Comments
Nonself is a practice instruction, not an ontological statement. Hold the question "What is experiencing this?", look and see that there is nothing experiencing it. There is peace when resting in this state of looking. These podcasts explain in more detail.
To put it simply, when you you say "I" and "me" in the sense of being this person with these responsibilitlies, that is a real and practical reference.
But when observing this self, this person, this observing is not "I", it does not belong to anyone. it is not an entity apart from what is observed. It is just a basic, ownerless space.
This is innaccurate in so far as there is a reference at all, to observing and so forth. This is why we are told to do.
This quote by Seung Sahn is pretty clear.
Everybody says, "I" -- "I want this, I am like that..." But nobody understands this "I." Before you were born, where did your I come from? When you die, where will your I go? If you sincerely ask, "what am I?" sooner or later you will run into a wall where all thinking is cut off. We call this "don't know."
Zen is keeping this "don't know" mind always and everywhere.
lying down, speaking, being
silent, moving, being still.
At all times, in all places, without
interruption -- what is this?
One mind is infinite kalpas.
Finally, your don't-know mind will become clear. Then you can see the sky, only blue. You can see the tree, only green. Your mind is like a clear mirror. Red comes, the mirror is red; white comes the mirror is white. A hungry person comes, you can give him food; a thirsty person comes, you can give her something to drink. There is no desire for myself, only for all beings. That mind is already enlightenment, what we call Great Love, Great Compassion, the Great Bodhisattva Way. It's very simple, not difficult! So Buddha said that all beings have Buddha-nature (enlightenment nature). But Zen Master Joju said that a dog has no Buddha-nature. Which one is right? Which one is wrong? If you find that, you find the true way.
NO!!! SOCKS!!! :eekblue:
But seriously .....that is nicely put.
Simple, straightforward answer.
The Buddha's teachings were only concerned with dukkha, so they all need to be looked at within that context.
Not-self is one of the marks of existence. It's true whether we're aware of it or not. But when there is ignorance, there is clinging to things as if they were. The Buddha taught that clinging to things as I/self/mine leads to dukkha, because all things are impermanent and, as such, are not fit to be clung to as I/self/mine.
The teachings need to be explored as a whole. If you don't explore the nature of dukkha and anatta, the role of clinging, etc. together, then it won't be of much use.
As Fivebells said, it's a teaching instruction. When you meditate on it, the insight gained will naturally begin to carry over into your daily life. You'll begin to notice the process of dukkha arising through self-identification and clinging, and cut it off at its roots.
2. The realization of selflessness reveals the impermanence of our own bodies and mind. With wisdom do we perceive nothing we do for ourselves lasts either.
3. The realization of dependent arising gives us our purpose. We awaken.
....suppress the five hindrance [which] provide undistorted perceptions, one able to see things as they truly are.
i found this is very true
Jer, we all have that big ego!
As for understanding, don't force it. It will come, and not through your cognitive struggles to understand, but through your practice, both on and off the meditation cushion. It will probably take years ... but what else are you going to do with that time that has any real significance?
I think it is also an clearly ontological statement at lower levels of Abstraction:)
Trying to figure that one out also. What am I going to do until then? Hmmm, keep sitting, keep studying, keep trying to put into practice what I learn. I try to follow the K.I.S.S. ( Keep It Simple, Son) method of life. You ladies may substitute sister if you like.
I've spent many years helping others and right now I'm taking a break to take care of me. It may sound selfish, but there are some things that I must get addressed and a plan of action determined and put into practice so that I can get back to helping others with right intention. I got a medical diagnosis the other day that threw me for a loop. In learning how to deal with this, I hope to help others. If not, getting back to work ASAP so I have less time to think about things and get back to what I love, nursing.
That's your problem right there. Being really smart can cause mental disorders. My grandfather was a genius and he was nuttier than a fruitcake.
Hi Jerbear
This is the problem when just reading discussions of emptiness on the web. Runnnig around saying that Jerbear doesn't exist is not quite right. Saying who Jerbear is now may also not tell the complete story, but that is an entirely different ball game, realisable only through genuine practice and not mere intellectual deduction (IMO).
In terms of real life, I think it would be good for you to address this in a counselling room, and or alternatively take up and continue a disciplined meditation practice. Then just take up whatever means and friends and family you have available to support you throgh your difficulties. Sport, yoga, all these means can be adopted also if they help. Then keep up your meditation, and adopt a non harming path to self and others - as much as you can muster.
Buddhism's teachings are not untrue, but they are not mere panaceas either. ie. They are only true until they are true. Until then, it is only a whitewash. But that takes practice, sometimes years and years of practice. Genuine practice too. ( What practice is is of course more encompassing but this is a different topic and most meaningful to practitioners so allow me to be concise here only )
In the meantime, don't neglect yourself, and the help you may need.
Running around saying or even thinking you or your problems and fears don't exist may not yet be the right thing, if it is not your own true realisation.
I have not read the remainder of this thread so apologies if I am repeating anything already mentioned.
Best wishes, and please take good care of yourself, Jerbear.
Metta,
Abu
Not Self, Impermanence and Dukkha walk hand to hand.
Imagine a section of a river. The fact that the water and the fish in that section won't be the same in a few hours is impermanence, translated in the idea that "things change".
The fact that there is no single entity in that river that is everlasting is not self. There isn't a drop of water in that place that you can count on to be there always, nor grains of sand, nor fish. That is not self, translated in the idea that "this thing changes". In other words, not self is impermanence applied to a single entity: to a table, to me or to a river.
Dukkha refers to the impermanence of the conditions that make sentient beings fulfilled. Let's say animals drink water from this river, but when it is winter it freezes over. When it is winter they will be distressed by the fact that they will have to look for another source of water. (this might be a very poor explanation of Dukkha x-) )
Emptiness is a different thing altogether. In the case of the river we can't say that what constitutes it is the sand, or the fish, or the water. We can't say that all of these together are the essence of the river because it changes over time. We can't say there is an entity outside these that contain the essence of river. So "river" is a label for a number of aggregates, it exists by being merely labeled by mind.
I wouldn't use the emptiness approach, but craving and aversion are usually linked to a strong sense of self, and they might diminish a bit after emptiness meditations.
In that movie his visions were a major annoyance. He did shout "You are not real!", but that didn't work and at a point he befriended his illusions, and if I am not mistaken apologized to them and said he wouldn't be talking to them anymore. Guess what? They continued appearing, but they started appearing more in the background, and he managed to go back to being a professor.
It is the same with pain, once you stop trying to run from it, or trying to make it not exist, it will give you some space, even though it won't go away. That just means your aversion stopped adding to the problem.
[ooo now after posting on experienced practitioners part of the forum I feel annointed :-x joking :P]