Is all knowing state same as Higher Self?

[Green5]

Is all knowing state same as Higher Self?

Thanks

[PadmaVonSamba]

Please define each term.

[odysseus]

"Higher self" is mostly Hindu philosophy, also adopted by the New Age movement. All-knowing (omniscience) comes with enlightened mind.

[oushi]

Is all knowing state same as Higher Self?

Thanks

As far as I know, there is no such thing as all knowing state, although many desire it.

[AlexanderS]

Is all knowing state same as Higher Self?

Thanks

As far as I know, there is no such thing as all knowing state, although many desire it.

Isn't one of the qualities of buddhahood omniscience?

[Wayfarer]

'Higher self' is not an expression that is characteristic of Buddhism. That is not to say there is anything wrong with the idea, but it is not the kind of expression that the Buddha used. Furthermore, it is not particularly useful to speculate about being 'all-knowing'. The aim with Buddhist practice is generally awareness of the factors that cause suffering in your own life and mind. Start small and work up.

[Osho]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

[oushi]

Is all knowing state same as Higher Self?

Thanks

As far as I know, there is no such thing as all knowing state, although many desire it.

Isn't one of the qualities of buddhahood omniscience?

There is a difference between knowing and believing. For comparing purposes, beliefs are totally useless. As long as one does not know all, he cannot compare it to anything.

[PadmaVonSamba]

omniscience?

Well, that is such a loaded word.
The problem that one will deal with is that "omniscience"
as understood in the ordinary way, knowing everything, suggests a sort of god-like super knowledge
But it is really more accurate to say that realization brings with it
complete understanding of the true nature of things,
and thus how they will manifest
through the perfection of infinite wisdom.

You can sort of compare this to, say, a surgeon
who, while knows how to remove an appendix from anybody who needs one removed
doesn't have to know exactly what the inside of everbody's abdomen looks like.

So, it's a level of knowing that can guide you clearly through every situation
and not so much that one becomes a walking encyclopedia.
.
.
.

[Son of Buddha]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

The Higher Self is also found in Buddhism.

The Samyutta Nikaya(Pali canon) speaks highly of the Self.

Also Third Turning Buddhism is based on the True Self through the 4 virtues.
The Buddha is said the Buddha Nature is the True Self in all the Tathagatagarbha(buddha nature) sutras.
Check out the Nirvana Sutra and Queen Srimala Sutra
The term True Self can also be found in most the tantras of Buddhism also.

[wisdom]

My understanding is this...

Since all labels whatsoever are merely conceptual designations, we *could* call Buddha Nature the "higher self", but to do so would be to easily lead astray anyone who hears us speak of Buddha Nature as the higher self who doesn't understand our meaning. Since the meaning of Buddha Nature is important, its best to not call it the higher self since higher self tends to always indicate a kind of entity that exists in a permanent fashion. In short; higher self philosophies tend to always veer towards eternalism.

Typically the "higher self" is thought of under two forms:

1. The higher self as a entity that guides us in life and protects our spiritual pursuit. This is a kind of "guardian angel" which many people seek contact with.
2. The higher self as a reified, actually existing "soul" which exists beyond our normal, "lower self" which is thought of as our ego. In this case a spiritual seeker tries to make contact with this inner, higher aspect of their own being in order to transcend worldly experiences.

Both of these concepts can bring benefit to those who are unable to hear teachings of Dharma or are unable to understand them, so there is no reason to denigrate such ideas. At the same time, neither of them are Buddhadharma although the philosophies surrounding both may have Dharmic elements to them. People who truly adhere to these philosophies tend to be kind souls who want to do good in the world and for others, although they may also have many delusions regarding many things and still suffer a lot, so we should have compassion for them.

As for omniscience, the all knowing state is to know, without error, the true nature of any and all phenomena whatsoever without any obscuration, doubt, or delusion. Hence, Buddhas are "all knowing". It is not meant to indicate that a Buddha knows rocket science, complicated quantum maths, how to fly a plane, and so forth the moment they attain Buddhahood. But because of the vast mental power of a Buddha, none of these are outside of the range of possible experience or possible ability of a Buddha. What a Buddha knows and learns is based entirely on the needs of the sentient beings that need to be liberated.

[PadmaVonSamba]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

The Higher Self is also found in Buddhism.

The Samyutta Nikaya(Pali canon) speaks highly of the Self.

Also Third Turning Buddhism is based on the True Self through the 4 virtues.
The Buddha is said the Buddha Nature is the True Self in all the Tathagatagarbha(buddha nature) sutras.
Check out the Nirvana Sutra and Queen Srimala Sutra
The term True Self can also be found in most the tantras of Buddhism also.

This is a frequent backwards understanding.
the true self is Buddha nature.
Buddha nature is not the true self.

Cling to a "true self" it it makes you feel better...
for now.


.
.
.

[PadmaVonSamba]

If one asserts a "true self"
that is a "true" self as compared to a a "false" self?
then, for that comparison to be accurate, a false self must also exist.

Is it like, "this is who you really are,
as though through countless lives there has been a "you"
that had the wrong identity,
and now that "you" has the right identity?
Then, where in time or space does this "real you" exist?

But even more important,
who is it that is clinging to the notion of a true self?
Who is that person?
how is this anything more than just another subtle trick of the ego?

Please tell me:
Who is it that regards their "self" as being either true or false?

.
.
.

[Osho]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

The Higher Self is also found in Buddhism.

The Samyutta Nikaya(Pali canon) speaks highly of the Self.

Also Third Turning Buddhism is based on the True Self through the 4 virtues.
The Buddha is said the Buddha Nature is the True Self in all the Tathagatagarbha(buddha nature) sutras.
Check out the Nirvana Sutra and Queen Srimala Sutra
The term True Self can also be found in most the tantras of Buddhism also.

'Higher Self' as a concept under that exact name I was meaning.
That tends to be a new agey term of vaguely Theosophist provenance implying ... "the force of spiritual will” .
Thank you for those links though, most interesting

[Son of Buddha]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

The Higher Self is also found in Buddhism.

The Samyutta Nikaya(Pali canon) speaks highly of the Self.

Also Third Turning Buddhism is based on the True Self through the 4 virtues.
The Buddha is said the Buddha Nature is the True Self in all the Tathagatagarbha(buddha nature) sutras.
Check out the Nirvana Sutra and Queen Srimala Sutra
The term True Self can also be found in most the tantras of Buddhism also.

This is a frequent backwards understanding.
the true self is Buddha nature.
Buddha nature is not the true self.

Cling to a "true self" it it makes you feel better...
for now.


.
.
.

as you can see in (pink) the True Self is Buddha Nature
and as you can see in (blue) the Buddha Nature IS the True Self
so you are backwards when you say the Buddha Nature is not the true self

CHAPTER TWELVE: ON THE TATHAGATA-DHATU
“Kasyapa said to the Buddha: "O World-Honoured One! Is there Self in the 25 existences or not?" The Buddha said: "O good man! "Self" means "Tathagatagarbha" [Buddha-Womb, Buddha-Embryo, Buddha-Nature]. Every being has Buddha-Nature. This is the Self. Such Self has, from the very beginning, been under cover of innumerable defilements. That is why man cannot see it.

peace and love

[Son of Buddha]

If one asserts a "true self"
that is a "true" self as compared to a a "false" self?
then, for that comparison to be accurate, a false self must also exist.

Is it like, "this is who you really are,
as though through countless lives there has been a "you"
that had the wrong identity,
and now that "you" has the right identity?
Then, where in time or space does this "real you" exist?

But even more important,
who is it that is clinging to the notion of a true self?
Who is that person?
how is this anything more than just another subtle trick of the ego?

Please tell me:
Who is it that regards their "self" as being either true or false?

.
.
.

I'll let the Buddha tell you
Nirvana sutra Chapter 12
For example, even when a person is told of the unholy self, he cannot know the true quality of the Self.
The same is true of my disciples. As they do not befriend a good teacher of the Way, they practise non-Self and do not know where it [Self] is.
They do not know the true nature of selflessness. How, then, could they know the true nature of the Self itself?
Thus, O good man, the Tathagata says that all beings possess the Buddha-Nature. This is like the good doctor's making the wrestler see where the adamantine jewel rests. All these beings are reigned over by innumerable defilements and thus do not know the whereabouts of the Buddha-Nature. When illusion is dispelled, there arises knowledge and brightness. This is like the wrestler's seeing the gem in the mirror. O good man! It is thus the case that what rests undisclosed [latent] in the Tathagata is innumerable and is difficult for beings to think about.

peace and love

[Son of Buddha]

Some paths teach the idea of a 'Higher Self' but Buddhism doesn't.
HS is one of those labels that brings baggage with it.
Best to focus on Buddhist terms and concepts if one is interested in a Buddhist path.

The Higher Self is also found in Buddhism.

The Samyutta Nikaya(Pali canon) speaks highly of the Self.

Also Third Turning Buddhism is based on the True Self through the 4 virtues.
The Buddha is said the Buddha Nature is the True Self in all the Tathagatagarbha(buddha nature) sutras.
Check out the Nirvana Sutra and Queen Srimala Sutra
The term True Self can also be found in most the tantras of Buddhism also.

'Higher Self' as a concept under that exact name I was meaning.
That tends to be a new agey term of vaguely Theosophist provenance implying ... "the force of spiritual will” .
Thank you for those links though, most interesting

not a problem peace and love

[PadmaVonSamba]

I'll let the Buddha tell you

What do you suppose "They do not know the true nature of selflessness" means?

And, just curious...
is this understanding of the Nirvana Sutra something your teacher gave you,
or are you making this interpretation all on your own?

The story of the wrestler with the jewel that gets stuck in his forehead is a teaching that explains that all beings possess the potential for realization. that potential is one's buddha nature.
There was a wrestler who wore a jewel on his forehead, and one time during a wrestling match, he landed on his forehead and the jewel gets sort of pushed into his skull. he looks all over for it but thinks he has lost it. But looking everywhere outside of himself is pointless, because it is inside him. the doctor (Buddha) points this out to him by holding a mirror up to his face, and the wrestler sees that he had the jewel all along.

All beings strive to be free from suffering, which is why they are constantly engaged in actions (look everywhere except within their own minds) that they think (usually in error) will bring lasting contentment. Lasting contentment, peace of mind, no more striving, no more wanting, no more restlessness, whatever you want to call it, is the essence of Buddhahood.
It is the perfect cessation of suffering and the causes of suffering.
In fact, it is precisely because beings are constantly striving for happiness
that it can be determined that perfect cessation of suffering (Buddhahood) is ultimately
the true state of being (mind) of all beings.

This is mind's original, natural state.
That is what "Self' in this sutra refers to,
not some sort of "true self' identity.
That is why it is accurate to say the true self is buddha nature
but not accurate to say that buddha-nature is a true self,
because buddha-nature isn't any kind of 'self' at all.

Another story that is often told is
that true state of water is clear and still
but if you stir up all the mud at the bottom of a pond, the water becomes cloudy.
if you let the silt settle, and the water become still again,
it will return to its original clear and calm state.
in this story, water is analogous to the mind's true state and
mud is all the conflicts of samasara.
So, it's like, you can say that the true state of water is clear and still
but you can't say that the true nature of "clear and still" is water.
Likewise, the true nature of (what appears as) the self
is really Buddha-nature, which is perfect
But buddha nature isn't some kind of perfect "self".

Peace.
.
.
.

[odysseus]

Talking about "higher self" and "true self" are friendly ways of explaining our innate spiritual potential, but it´s not really Buddha´s teaching.

[muni]

All knowing is not same as knowing all things. When thought I is not there, there is no thing there, and no thing to compare, no thing to prove. There are no levels in all-knowing/awaken is said. No idea.