Is understanding the nature of the self the most important endeavor in Buddhism?

Thus

It seems that once you see through the false I, everything else would naturally fall into place. Compassion, impermanence, dukkha, clinging - all of these things are rooted in ignorance that gives rise to the false self. It's sort of the foundation that, once dissolved, brings down the rest of the house with it and everything else falls into place.

federica

I'm not sure it is the most important thing - I myself am getting to grips with the origin of suffering, and the cessation of suffering.
Once I have realised this, and made it my daily consideration, maybe THEN other things will fall into place.

Just my view.

Thus

Seems the origin of suffering is a transient, false self that clings to transient things it can never really own, no? And without a sufferer to suffer, no suffering can arise, except in a purely phenomenal way.

federica

I didn't say I was an advanced Buddhist.
Frankly, something has to see something, whether you regard it as false or not.Preliminary understanding has to take place before advancing to questioning the existence or otherwise, of the self.
Considering the Self/Not-Self (as opposed to non-self, which for some, is a more nihilistic term, as opposed to an aspect of duality) is something a Buddhist does gradually, after some study.
Some study, takes time. Different times for different people.
Saying the above to a beginner would merely baffle them.

(thread moved to 'Advanced Ideas')

Thus

"Something has to see something" is only an idea...if I look for the seer, there is just more I-thought, unless I drop everything and abide in being. But even being is perceived, in a way...

Cloud

@Thus, I agree with you, not the least because the loss of self-view is the turning point, the entrance into the stream leading toward Nirvana. It all begins to fall away after that.

Talisman

Understanding the nature of suffering, how suffering arises, the cessation of suffering, and the path that leads to the cessation of suffering is what Buddhism is "all about."

Cloud

And the delusion of self is a large part of that. Seeing this, breaking through this major fetter (which brings two other fetters down with it), opens up the ability to transform the mind through further stages of enlightenment. The Four Noble Truths are what we're trying to ultimately penetrate, but it's slow going; not until final liberation do we fully understand those. Until then we're breaking through bit-by-bit.

Seeing impermanence, dukkha and not-self in all things is what I recommend.
Anicca-Dukkha-Anatta.
This is what the Thai Forest tradition teaches and I agree, and when self-view drops you're on your way.

patbb

"Is understanding the nature of the self"
"realizing" would have been a more appropriate choice of word instead of "understanding".

Then you can actually see the ego and all of the attachments (literally, not figuratively), looking at them as if you were looking at a external object like a table (or looking at the ego like a file cabinet containing all of the recorded reactions, which you can open and close at will so you can deal with them individually...)



But this isn't enough, many people have realized their true self, with or without Buddhism or proper meditation. And then proceed to interpret their experience based on the paradigm from which they usually interpret their reality. Not knowing or understanding what they are looking at or what is happening... (so a religious man would call this god or whatever...)
Which only leads to many misinterpretations and being lost.

Understanding and realizing the true nature of reality is also very important.

federica

Yes, but look at the question: is understanding the nature of self, THE most important endeavour in Buddhism?

The delusion of self is a large part of understanding and accepting the concept of suffering/cessation of suffering.
But is it the most important endeavour?

That's what this thread is attempting to establish.
If it is - why so?
If it isn't - why not?

patbb

If it is - why so?
If it isn't - why not?

understanding and realizing the true nature of reality is the most important because it liberates us from all suffering permanently.


ps: All i write is based on my own realizations and understanding from my own experience, just my opinion and not the interpretation of the texts. I'm not a Buddha (yet ) so take it for what it's worth to you. I wish my writing would reflect this always but my communication skills are minimal and i have no plan on spending any time or effort to improve them for now.

Simonthepilgrim

I do wonder if attempting to understand the nature of the self isn't somewhat self-defeating (LOL). It can lead to clinging to some notion or other of the self, whereas the aim must surely be to see that the whole notion is delusion and 'empty'. The objective is to abandon ahamkara, not to know more about it.

Linc

I would say the most important endeavor is just to practice. Studying philosophy seems like it may help or hinder that process depending on how it's done. Ditto Simon's remark.

andyrobyn

I also see that what is most important depends on the individual at that time ... to think on what is most important could become a problem !

MindGate

I would largely agree with OP. But some people may not be able to grasp it. They may need other things. But you're right, once you understand not-self than that really opens everything up.

Jeffrey

Socrates was known to always tell his students 'know thyself'. It is said that one of his students said 'socrates you are always going around saying know thy self, but do you know yourself'? He said 'no but I understand something about this not knowing'.

Vajraheart

Understanding the nature of suffering, how suffering arises, the cessation of suffering, and the path that leads to the cessation of suffering is what Buddhism is "all about."

The cause of suffering is clinging to the false "I" and the cause of liberation is seeing it's emptiness directly. So... yes, seeing the emptiness (true nature) of the self is priority.

IronRabbit

Classification of anything as the "most important endeavor" in buddhist practice seems to be antithetical to understanding "mind", much less "nature of mind". Yet, the pursuit of nature of mind is - and isn't most important. It is if great effort is expended to integrate knowledge of mind with interdependence. It isn't if awareness of the least important quality of an independent consciousness congratulating itself upon individual achievement is not had. Rather than "most important endeavor" - the most skillful activity is "great effort" in practice. Maybe.

genkaku

Let's not forget that the "false I" is just another aspect of the "false I."

Jeffrey

Its ok to have a glass eye, just not a false I.

Cloud

@Jeffrey,

@genkaku, Indeed! There's no actual "thing" that is the "false self"; there is wrong view and right view. With wrong view (ignorance), there is greed, aversion and delusion; self; craving that leads to attachment and clinging.

Thus

Classification of anything as the "most important endeavor" in buddhist practice seems to be antithetical to understanding "mind", much less "nature of mind". Yet, the pursuit of nature of mind is - and isn't most important. It is if great effort is expended to integrate knowledge of mind with interdependence. It isn't if awareness of the least important quality of an independent consciousness congratulating itself upon individual achievement is not had. Rather than "most important endeavor" - the most skillful activity is "great effort" in practice. Maybe.

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense, and more or less the "conclusion" I've come to in the days spent thinking about this question since I posted it.

Vajraheart

Let's not forget that the "false I" is just another aspect of the "false I."

Yes, that too! Genkaku... You might remember me? I'm Hari from E-Sangha. =^)

Vajraheart

@Jeffrey,

@genkaku, Indeed! There's no actual "thing" that is the "false self"; there is wrong view and right view. With wrong view (ignorance), there is greed, aversion and delusion; self; craving that leads to attachment and clinging.

This is true, which is why I'm more inclined to say, "see through."

Whoknows

It seems that once you see through the false I, everything else would naturally fall into place. Compassion, impermanence, dukkha, clinging - all of these things are rooted in ignorance that gives rise to the false self. It's sort of the foundation that, once dissolved, brings down the rest of the house with it and everything else falls into place.

Sometimes a poor understanding of selflessness can result in disregard of others. This is because the meditator has eliminated positive and negative habits of behaviour without understanding the interconnectedness of the individual with others. Selflessness is flawed if it doesn't result in connection to others, after all if self is negated then the differentiation between self and others is also negated. But if there is a good understanding of karma and compassion and the desire to help others, then these positive qualities will become integrated into the knowledge of selflessness and the individual will be much more likely to end up without a flawed understanding.

If a meditator is interested in investigating non-self, they should very seriously ask themselves why. Is it a sense of exploration, a desire to reduce pain in others, the wish to be a great respected teacher, to be highly knowledgeable, the reduce pain in oneself,..... Although the goal will change with the meditator, he/she should still be aware of their goal and be mindful when it changes. Even a goal of being "a great respected teacher" while not being a particularly wholesome goal, due to the egocentricity of it, would tend to even out with time. Basically, it is good to know your motivation to the best of your ability.

Finally, I think that the house would fall down, once the foundations have been destroyed. Cut the root of the tree and it will no longer be supported.

Cheers, WK

Talisman

The cause of suffering is clinging to the false "I" and the cause of liberation is seeing it's emptiness directly. So... yes, seeing the emptiness (true nature) of the self is priority.

You are oversimplifying extremely complex processes. There is no "true nature" of the self because the "self" is an illusion and transitory. The cause of suffering is all forms of attachment, not just attachment to self. Attachment is also caused by other codependent factors, the primary of which is ignorance. Liberation is causeless and beyond speculation or analysis. I kept my original post (regarding the 4 noble truths) simple because to extrapolate upon them IS BUDDHISM and would be impossible to convey in a short internet post. Trying to confine the "most important endeavor" is like trying to trap sunlight in a glass jar.

Vajraheart

The cause of suffering is clinging to the false "I" and the cause of liberation is seeing it's emptiness directly. So... yes, seeing the emptiness (true nature) of the self is priority.

You are oversimplifying extremely complex processes.

Everythings true nature is simply emptiness, which also does not inherently exist as a real or true nothing, because emptiness means dependent origination. The ramification is all complexity and is also very simple.

Mystification

You're right, the key is to lose all attachment. But, I often simply refer to losing all notions of self, when what I really mean is understanding that no thing has any true lasting nature, of course, including yourself. I think other people do the same.

taiyaki

Yes, Buddhism is all about finding your true nature. Anything other than that is not Buddhism. True Buddhism points to your true nature and finally even Buddhism is thrown away. Our true nature is beyond concepts, religion, and everything.

Floating_Abu

taiyaki, answer me this: And then WHAT ?

Regards,
Abu

DhammaDhatu

Is "our true nature" the same as "the universal nature of all conditioned things"?

How is our true nature beyond concepts? For example, the mind of a jellyfish is probably free from all concepts. Is our true nature the same as the mind of a jellyfish?

taiyaki

Lol. I can try to answer that question. Truth embodies you and you see what is preventing you from seeing this truth. So sudden awakening then years of cultivation! There is a natural flow to life. I am still life in this world, but there is always a space in me that is the silent awareness and at times this awareness is everywhere. There's really nothing to do anymore, except to drink tea. haha

Mystification

Is "our true nature" the same as "the universal nature of all conditioned things"?

How is our true nature beyond concepts? For example, the mind of a jellyfish is probably free from all concepts. Is our true nature the same as the mind of a jellyfish?

Being free of all concepts does not mean being outside of them. To be outside of concepts would still be conceptual. It is free from all concepts and things, and yet interwoven with it all.

taiyaki

Is "our true nature" the same as "the universal nature of all conditioned things"?

How is our true nature beyond concepts? For example, the mind of a jellyfish is probably free from all concepts. Is our true nature the same as the mind of a jellyfish?

Child grows up. Learns all these fancy ideas. Learns to be separate because of these ideas. Adult throws away all concepts. Realizes he is the silent awareness behind all concepts. Awakens to his true nature, which he already was when he was a child. A dog understands his nature. He goes bark bark when you come near. Human nature is Buddha nature. When someone is hungry, you feed them. When someone needs help, you help them. This is Buddhism. This is enlightenment. Take it or leave it. Figure it out for yourself.

DhammaDhatu

A dog understands his nature. He goes bark bark when you come near. Human nature is Buddha nature. When someone is hungry, you feed them. When someone needs help, you help them. This is Buddhism.

Human beings have been waging war against eachother and have been exploiting eachother since the dawn of time. Are you saying these human natures are Buddha nature?

Also, when dogs have offspring, they feed their offspring when their offspring are hungry. Are you saying dogs have both human nature & Buddha nature?

Are you saying feeding hungry things is Buddha nature?

Like, sometimes, when a woman has a baby, if her mind hears another baby crying, her breasts will spurt milk automatically. Are you saying this breast milk spurting is Buddha nature?

DhammaDhatu

Figure it out for yourself.

Have you heard about the Bodhisatva vow? I can't figure it out. What about you?

taiyaki

Human nature is Buddha nature. That which is before ideas is Buddha/Human nature. People "think" they are separate. People "think" they are different. They think this and that. Think of communism. Think of democracy. Think of peace. Think of war. I am better. This is better. This needs to change in the world. On and on and on and on and on. Throw away all thinking. What comes before thinking? Who are you? You are that which is like space. Like a nothingness. That which watches. Your notion of human nature is your notion of human nature. What I am pointing at is before all notions. Look and be. You are already what you are looking for. The seeker is sought.

Floating_Abu

Lol. I can try to answer that question. Truth embodies you and you see what is preventing you from seeing this truth. So sudden awakening then years of cultivation! There is a natural flow to life. I am still life in this world, but there is always a space in me that is the silent awareness and at times this awareness is everywhere. There's really nothing to do anymore, except to drink tea. haha

Nothing except drink tea? What about work, make decisions, choose life roads, earn money, buy milk? No?

How do you make these decisions, taiyaki. Silent awareness, what a start! But its only a start..

_/\_

IMO

taiyaki

You do what is most obvious in all situations.

DhammaDhatu

So when Buddha said human minds can dwell enlightened, dwell as gods, dwell as humans, dwell as hungry ghosts (in craving), dwell in hell (in suffering) or dwell as animals (in ignorance), are you saying his perception of difference was not Buddha nature?

DhammaDhatu

What comes before thinking? Who are you? You are that which is like space. Like a nothingness. That which watches. Your notion of human nature is your notion of human nature. What I am pointing at is before all notions. Look and be. You are already what you are looking for. The seeker is sought.

taiyaki

I tried to do what you suggested but my mind has been unable to discern "I am" or "you are" like space. My mind can only discern the mind itself can be like space.

Is this OK or have "I" failed in discerning "my" and "our" true nature?

taiyaki

All comes from the unmanifest, all goes back to the unmanifest. Everything has a common ground in it's emptiness/no-self.

taiyaki

What comes before thinking? Who are you? You are that which is like space. Like a nothingness. That which watches. Your notion of human nature is your notion of human nature. What I am pointing at is before all notions. Look and be. You are already what you are looking for. The seeker is sought.

taiyaki

I tried to do what you suggested but my mind has been unable to discern "I am" or "you are" like space. My mind can only discern the mind itself can be like space.

Is this OK or have "I" failed in discerning "my" and "our" true nature?

What is aware of not knowing the space?

DhammaDhatu

But I have heard the Buddha taught many things come from ignorance. Was the Buddha wrong & are you right? Are you, like, the next Buddha, like Matrieya?

:bowdown:

Mystification

So when Buddha said human minds can dwell enlightened, dwell as gods, dwell as humans, dwell as hungry ghosts (in craving), dwell in hell (in suffering) or dwell as animals (in ignorance), are you saying his perception of difference was not Buddha nature?

All of those things are the result of perception. Our true self IS the perception. The awareness.

DhammaDhatu

What is aware of not knowing the space?

taiyaki

i am sorry if my query was not clear

i will repeat

i said my mind could not find how "I am space"

my mind could only see "the mind" is like space

i have not found "my" or "our" true nature

did I fail in not finding the "true self"?

:dunce:

taiyaki

But I have heard the Buddha taught many things come from ignorance. Was the Buddha wrong & are you right? Are you, like, the next Buddha, like Matrieya?

:bowdown:

Everyone already is the Buddha. You are right, many things do come from ignorance. But the awareness prior to thinking is clear and can ever be tainted.

DhammaDhatu

All of those things are the result of perception. Our true self IS the perception. The awareness.

OMG!

More "our true self".

Why cannot my mind find this "our true self" of enlightenment?

OMG!

:bawl:

taiyaki

What is aware of not knowing the space?

taiyaki

i am sorry if my query was not clear

i will repeat

i said my mind could not find how "I am space"

my mind could only see "the mind" is like space

i have not found "my" or "our" true nature

did I fail in not finding the "true self"?

:dunce:

It's like telling your eye to find itself. You are the space. The space is that which is looking for the space. You look within, you find space. You create a subject/object relationship. That space is there. I am here. Well, I am saying that you are the space. Feel what the space feels like. Open up to the space. Surrender to the space. That is all.

Much love.

Mystification

All of those things are the result of perception. Our true self IS the perception. The awareness.

OMG!

More "our true self".

Why cannot my mind find this "our true self" of enlightenment?

OMG!

:bawl:

Cuz there's no thing to find. By trying to find it, you are missing it.

DhammaDhatu

Everyone already is the Buddha. You are right, many things do come from ignorance. But the awareness prior to thinking is clear and can ever be tainted.

If that is the case, why did the Buddha teach awareness can be tainted, as follows:

If there is water in a pot mixed with red, yellow, blue or orange color, a man with a normal faculty of sight, looking into it, could not properly recognize and see the image of his own face. In the same way, when one's mind is possessed by sensual desire, overpowered by sensual desire, one cannot properly see the escape from sensual desire which has arisen; then one does not properly understand and see one's own welfare, nor that of another, nor that of both; and also texts memorized a long time ago do not come into one's mind, not to speak of those not memorized.

— SN 46:55

:eek2: