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.
@Sova......*putting down my strawberry biscuit* hahaha
"...the Sun is empty of the universe that surrounds the sun. The Universe [that surrounds the sun] is empty of the sun."
OK, I like where you went with that. Would that analogy apply to all things? Like....is an acorn empty of the tree it fell from? And the tree empty of the acorn? The grass the tree sits on included. They are co-dependant,right?
Ok, now the leap. lolololol If the acorn is empty/full of itself...then what? How does one apply this co-dependent to anything? Is all this empty/full talk just fancy for Interconnectedness?
I remember a nun saying that the lungs would not exists without the air, the trees would not exist without the water etc, everything is dependent on everything else.
This is one of the teachings that can help me so so much, I understand it but yet I do not realise it. I cannot get away from the notion of the self, me, I. I do understand there is an ever changing non permanent illusion of a person, but beyond this I cannot escape this. It would help so much if I had a direct realisation of the non self, but I think that comes from deep meditation and insight into emptiness which I have yet to obtain.
Don't you see a problem with the self having 'a direct realization of the non self'?
I don't think I have had enough insightful meditation practice to actually realise this properly no. I have said before, in October in my town there are meditation classes set up again and for the first time in 5 years of my Buddhist path I am not alone if I go. But yes I UNDERSTAND your question, but I cannot get my head around it if that makes sense?..
We are simply talking about the lack of a Self existent "I" @FairyFeller Normally we think of ourself as being solid and fixed and we grasp at it as true and Independent from everything else but in reality this is not the case because "I" is actually an imputation upon various parts specifically the various collections of aggregates of body and mind(s) So the Self existent "I" is actually non existent because we are a dependent originated phenomena and Buddhists meditate upon this lack of "I" to reduce and finally abandon the delusion of Self grasping that is grasping at the "I" which is the root of our Samsaric suffering, By realizing the Emptiness of "I" we can abandon all delusions in the mind and attain liberation and eventually full enlightenment after removing the subtle imprints of delusion.
Make no mistake while there is no Self existent "I" there is a conventionally existent I, Buddhists are seeking to negate the Self existent "I" because it is a cause of suffering as previously said what we are left with is the conventional existent I which we just recognise as mere appearance and in turn do not develop grasping towards thus leaving us with no problems.
This is one of the teachings that can help me so so much, I understand it but yet I do not realise it. I cannot get away from the notion of the self, me, I. I do understand there is an ever changing non permanent illusion of a person, but beyond this I cannot escape this. It would help so much if I had a direct realisation of the non self, but I think that comes from deep meditation and insight into emptiness which I have yet to obtain.
Buddhism isn't about obtaining something, it's about letting go.
Seeing no-self will be closer to dying than anything else. Ready for it?
I don't think I have had enough insightful meditation practice to actually realise this properly no. I have said before, in October in my town there are meditation classes set up again and for the first time in 5 years of my Buddhist path I am not alone if I go. But yes I UNDERSTAND your question, but I cannot get my head around it if that makes sense?..
Well, you said: "I cannot get away from the notion of the self, me, I. I do understand there is an ever changing non permanent illusion of a person", so at least intellectually you know that the 'person' (which is you) is an illusion. Can an illusion realize truth, or is truth the absence of illusion? 'Getting your head around it' is just intellectually grasping a notion.
I don't think I have had enough insightful meditation practice to actually realise this properly no. I have said before, in October in my town there are meditation classes set up again and for the first time in 5 years of my Buddhist path I am not alone if I go. But yes I UNDERSTAND your estion, but I cannot get my head around it if that makes sense?..
Well, you said: "I cannot get away from the notion of the self, me, I. I do understand there is an ever changing non permanent illusion of a person", so at least intellectually you know that the 'person' (which is you) is an illusion. Can an illusion realize truth, or is truth the absence of illusion? 'Getting your head around it' is just intellectually grasping a notion.
I have known on an intellectual basis for a long while that the notion of this self is an illusion, there is no permanent self etc, but that is as far as I have gone with this teaching, this is why I feel I need a teacher or at least a meditation class. The thing with me is I have severe social anxiety, so to let go of this notion of the self would help so so much.
For me, and I practice within the TB tradition, thinking about and understanding what the teachings on emptiness point to begins with the three characteristics of existence - as I think Tom indicates above.
For me, and I practice within the TB tradition, thinking about and understanding what the teachings on emptiness point to begins with the three characteristics of existence - as I think Tom indicates above.
Can you elaborate on the 3 characteristics please?
You say 'the idea of self', but you are the self! So, you, the self wants to let go of the restrictions of self consciousness. That's what you want, yes?
You say 'the idea of self', but you are the self! So, you, the self wants to let go of the restrictions of self consciousness. That's what you want, yes?
hmm, you, me, I.. I guess I have been clinging to what I can see and touch as the self yes, if you call it the self consciousness then the answer is yes I do. But to strive at such a thing would be unwise, that would also be grasping, this is where I get stuck.
ok @sova..I read it. Pretty much agreed/understood 99% of it. I think you misunderstood my question or I did'nt ask the right one.
Buddha nature seems to be bed fellows with emptiness, and i'm trying to understand why. I am trying to link/connect help me bridge that part of the understanding. For example....
from the link "So we can be quite accepting of the fact that since we are not arahants, we still have greed and hate. It isn't a matter of blaming oneself for having them: it's a matter of understanding where these come from. They come from the delusion of me. I want to protect this jewel which is me. That is how they arise. But with the continued practice of meditation, the mind can become clearer and clearer. It finally understands. And when it does understand, it can see transcendental reality. Even if seen for one thought-moment, the experience is of great impact and makes a marked change in our lives"
Could that clarity be Buddha nature? It's covered by the delusions?? Where the 'arise' starts?? I know...people scream..." Oh Shit, No thats duality thinking". Not in my mind. I assure you, I have a clear understanding of no-me, and interconnectedness. I dont blame me. My goals/practice is for all sentiment beings, not just 'me'. I was taught to use my visulization for Buddha nature as a way to invision something that I have not, but am practicing to awaken to realize one day. The reality. It makes sense in my head. lololol
my current understanding of it is like we have planted numerous seeds through our actions and the world as-we-perceive-and-know is the blooming/blossoming/growth of these seeds emptiness is like an ultimate remedy that, as a sacred state, can cleanse the "mental slate" if you will, of harmful/bad seeds / misapprehensions about the nature of reality
buddha nature would then be the pristine untarnished 'mind' or 'mental slate'
so I don't think buddha nature and emptiness are the same thing (synonyms) but i think it makes sense to say that an understanding of emptiness leads to uncovering our covered-up buddha nature.
hope that helps ^.^
all beings have buddha nature and it [inter]penetrates the entirety of the cosmos. just in case any other readers/users had any doubts whether they have it or not
Vastminds, there is this beautiful book I am reading and I think you would really like it. It's called The Garden: A Parable by Geshe Michael Roach
From what I have gathered from reading various books is that through meditation one can abide in pure illumination and clarity for a brief moment, a glimpse at emptiness, and as your practice furthers then you can abide in this state for longer and longer periods of time. However, this is not enough to consist as a deep realisation by itself. It needs to be combined with buddha nature, basically compassion and the entire 8 fld path dealio to step forward towards a profound realisation or awakening. That is a VERY sketchy tug from my memory at nearly 7am without any sleep so sorry if it does not make much sense :-/
You say 'the idea of self', but you are the self! So, you, the self wants to let go of the restrictions of self consciousness. That's what you want, yes?
hmm, you, me, I.. I guess I have been clinging to what I can see and touch as the self yes, if you call it the self consciousness then the answer is yes I do. But to strive at such a thing would be unwise, that would also be grasping, this is where I get stuck.
Of course, you don't want to strive for it, because the desire is born of the grasping itself. What did that zen guy say? "To study Buddhism, is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self". The etymological meaning of the word 'forget' is to forgo grasping.
I was reading a book recently and they were talking about the concept of 'I' not existing but they don't go into much detail. They talk about it like it's one of key concepts of Buddhism.
Does anybody know of any clearer explanations of this?
Basically, what you see is what you get. You have a body, you have feelings, sensations and thoughts. But that's about it.
People put all this together and think it's an "I", a unique, static personality, but really it's just a body, feelings, sensations. They come, they go. Your body isn't the same it was 10 years ago, or even 10 minutes ago.
Think of the famous saying: you can't step into the same river twice, and you'll get the idea.
We do exist but not as material shape, feelings, perception, habitual formations, and sensory consciousness. This is what the Buddha taught.
“But monks, an instructed [aryan] disciple of the pure ones...regards material shape as: ‘This is not mine, this am I not, this is not my self;’ he regards feeling as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self;’ he regards perception as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self;’ he regards the habitual tendencies as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self;’ he regards consciousness as: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ And also he regards whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognised, reached, looked for, pondered by the mind as: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self’” (M.i.136).
As long as I believe I am this body and when it craps out, so do I, I am one lost sick puppy.
'I' have this idea of who I am. I have a mental picture of my physical appearance whether it's tall, slim and handsome or short fat and ugly but that person doesn't exist as a person it's just a bag of flesh that doesn't represent me. I might think of this whole me as being intelligent, witty etc. but that is just something that has been created by my experiences and people telling me who I am but I need to re-discover what is underneath all that, the core before any influences?
For only stress is what comes to be; stress, what remains & falls away. Nothing but stress comes to be. Nothing ceases but stress.
You don't need to discover anything; Buddha Nature discovers itself. But the mental picture is stress, because if you weren't stressed, you wouldn't make one. And if you don't make one, you aren't stressed.
'I' have this idea of who I am. I have a mental picture of my physical appearance whether it's tall, slim and handsome or short fat and ugly but that person doesn't exist as a person it's just a bag of flesh that doesn't represent me. I might think of this whole me as being intelligent, witty etc. but that is just something that has been created by my experiences and people telling me who I am but I need to re-discover what is underneath all that, the core before any influences?
Or am I still way off mark?
If this is how you put the question, I think an answer is that we cannot believe any story about who we are; not the superficial “story of our life”; not the spiritual concepts of pure mind or Buddha Nature. When we are looking for the final and correct narrative about who we are, we are chasing a mirage.
When we don’t stick any labels; things happen anyways. Reality apparently can function without our narrative added on top of it.
'I' have this idea of who I am. I have a mental picture of my physical appearance whether it's tall, slim and handsome or short fat and ugly but that person doesn't exist as a person it's just a bag of flesh that doesn't represent me. I might think of this whole me as being intelligent, witty etc. but that is just something that has been created by my experiences and people telling me who I am but I need to re-discover what is underneath all that, the core before any influences?
Or am I still way off mark?
Do that, then look into the "core" to see it's also empty. If you look at the most inner core and see it's empty, coreless, you understand what "I don't exist" means.
It's like an onion. Keep peeling off layer after layer, you'll find no core. That's the whole joke of life, actually. There are just things happening without any solid center. (Some people claim otherwise, I say they need to peel a bit more )
How you do the peeling is not thinking it through. In fact, one of the outmost layers is thought. Peel that away first in meditation.
'I' have this idea of who I am. I have a mental picture of my physical appearance whether it's tall, slim and handsome or short fat and ugly but that person doesn't exist as a person it's just a bag of flesh that doesn't represent me. I might think of this whole me as being intelligent, witty etc. but that is just something that has been created by my experiences and people telling me who I am but I need to re-discover what is underneath all that, the core before any influences?
Or am I still way off mark?
If you can, I'd look up the Five Aggregates sometime. It helps explain a lot of this, but basically yes you got it.
People are a tenuous combination of physical form, sensation, thoughts, etc. They're dependent on each other, and all subject to change.
The mind takes all these experiences though and reifies it as a sense of self (after all, only you had them). Things you think and do now help build on this. Rev. Tagawa's book Living Yogacara is a pretty darn good read on the subject by the way. Highly recommended.
Also, on a practical note, your sense of self-image probably doesn't match how other people see you. Then again, each person who sees you will also have a slightly different perspective based on their accumulated experiences.
I think that's why some people have eating disorders: in their minds they've built up this self-image based on negative experiences, and this leads to harmful actions, even though everyone around them sees that they're normal, attractive, etc.
In fact, much of what we see and perceive in the world is colored by those same experiences and thought processes.
Comments
"...the Sun is empty of the universe that surrounds the sun.
The Universe [that surrounds the sun] is empty of the sun."
OK, I like where you went with that.
Would that analogy apply to all things?
Like....is an acorn empty of the tree it fell from?
And the tree empty of the acorn?
The grass the tree sits on included.
They are co-dependant,right?
Ok, now the leap. lolololol
If the acorn is empty/full of itself...then what?
How does one apply this co-dependent to anything?
Is all this empty/full talk just fancy for
Interconnectedness?
Don't you see a problem with the self having 'a direct realization of the non self'?
Make no mistake while there is no Self existent "I" there is a conventionally existent I, Buddhists are seeking to negate the Self existent "I" because it is a cause of suffering as previously said what we are left with is the conventional existent I which we just recognise as mere appearance and in turn do not develop grasping towards thus leaving us with no problems.
Hope this helps
Seeing no-self will be closer to dying than anything else. Ready for it?
@Vastminds
check this out
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/khema/bl095.html
I think you misunderstood my question or I did'nt ask the right one.
Buddha nature seems to be bed fellows with emptiness, and i'm
trying to understand why. I am trying to link/connect help me
bridge that part of the understanding.
For example....
from the link
"So we can be quite accepting of the fact that since we are not arahants, we still have greed and hate. It isn't a matter of blaming oneself for having them: it's a matter of understanding where these come from. They come from the delusion of me. I want to protect this jewel which is me. That is how they arise. But with the continued practice of meditation, the mind can become clearer and clearer. It finally understands. And when it does understand, it can see transcendental reality. Even if seen for one thought-moment, the experience is of great impact and makes a marked change in our lives"
Could that clarity be Buddha nature? It's covered by the delusions?? Where
the 'arise' starts??
I know...people scream..." Oh Shit, No thats duality thinking".
Not in my mind.
I assure you, I have a clear understanding of no-me, and
interconnectedness. I dont blame me. My goals/practice is for
all sentiment beings, not just 'me'.
I was taught to use my visulization for Buddha nature as a way to
invision something that I have not, but am practicing to awaken
to realize one day. The reality. It makes sense in my head. lololol
my current understanding of it is like
we have planted numerous seeds through our actions and the world as-we-perceive-and-know is the blooming/blossoming/growth of these seeds
emptiness is like an ultimate remedy that, as a sacred state, can cleanse the "mental slate" if you will, of harmful/bad seeds / misapprehensions about the nature of reality
buddha nature would then be the pristine untarnished 'mind' or 'mental slate'
so I don't think buddha nature and emptiness are the same thing (synonyms)
but i think it makes sense to say that an understanding of emptiness leads to uncovering our covered-up buddha nature.
hope that helps ^.^
all beings have buddha nature and it [inter]penetrates the entirety of the cosmos. just in case any other readers/users had any doubts whether they have it or not
Vastminds, there is this beautiful book I am reading and I think you would really like it. It's called The Garden: A Parable by Geshe Michael Roach
here is an amazon link
I found a copy at the library =D yay libraries!
ANICCA, DUKKHA, ANATTA
IMPERMANENCE, SUFFERING, SOULLESSNESS
Mara:
By whom was this living being created?
Where is the living being's maker?
Where has the living being originated?
Where does the living being
cease?
Sister Vajira:
What? Do you assume a 'living being,' Mara?
Do you take a position?
This is purely a pile of fabrications.
Here no living being
can be pinned down.
Just as when, with an assemblage of parts,
there's the word,
chariot,
even so when aggregates are present,
there's the convention of
living being.
For only stress is what comes to be;
stress, what remains & falls away.
Nothing but stress comes to be.
Nothing ceases but stress.
People put all this together and think it's an "I", a unique, static personality, but really it's just a body, feelings, sensations. They come, they go. Your body isn't the same it was 10 years ago, or even 10 minutes ago.
Think of the famous saying: you can't step into the same river twice, and you'll get the idea.
'I' have this idea of who I am. I have a mental picture of my physical appearance whether it's tall, slim and handsome or short fat and ugly but that person doesn't exist as a person it's just a bag of flesh that doesn't represent me. I might think of this whole me as being intelligent, witty etc. but that is just something that has been created by my experiences and people telling me who I am but I need to re-discover what is underneath all that, the core before any influences?
Or am I still way off mark?
When we don’t stick any labels; things happen anyways. Reality apparently can function without our narrative added on top of it.
It's like an onion. Keep peeling off layer after layer, you'll find no core. That's the whole joke of life, actually. There are just things happening without any solid center. (Some people claim otherwise, I say they need to peel a bit more
How you do the peeling is not thinking it through. In fact, one of the outmost layers is thought. Peel that away first in meditation.
People are a tenuous combination of physical form, sensation, thoughts, etc. They're dependent on each other, and all subject to change.
The mind takes all these experiences though and reifies it as a sense of self (after all, only you had them). Things you think and do now help build on this. Rev. Tagawa's book Living Yogacara is a pretty darn good read on the subject by the way. Highly recommended.
Also, on a practical note, your sense of self-image probably doesn't match how other people see you. Then again, each person who sees you will also have a slightly different perspective based on their accumulated experiences.
I think that's why some people have eating disorders: in their minds they've built up this self-image based on negative experiences, and this leads to harmful actions, even though everyone around them sees that they're normal, attractive, etc.
In fact, much of what we see and perceive in the world is colored by those same experiences and thought processes.