Non-Self: What am I missing ?

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
[N.B. This is the forum that was called ‘Exploring Buddhism’. The new name simply describes it better.]
dreambow
Posts: 434
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 12:59 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by dreambow » Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:15 am

sealion, I get your drift. Certainly the itch is yours. Perhaps another way of putting it is.....Can you count without the number one?
There's a lot of chatter about enlightenment, the truth is its beyond words so who is able to capture it in words and own it?

Odsal
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by Odsal » Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:40 am

SeeLion wrote:I see that the Self does exist, it being a center/place/locus of being, of existence.

Existence includes includes awareness and inter-action. The Self organizes those.

"Existence" has a localized feature, for example, I am scratching MY itch with MY finger, and not your itch with your neighbors finger.

I am hypothesizing that the self is built starting from a core, upon which each creature builds, expands as it goes through life. Maybe like a snowball ?

I'm not sure what the "core" is, it could be the "soul" or simply the localized aspect of the interaction between the senses and the mind.

It is possible that the core is unable to "see" itself. Maybe it doesn't have any sense organs able to perceive itself.

----

All that considered, I don't understand the "non-self" claim.

From my understanding, Buddhism claims that meditation can result in transcending the self.

I can see that meditation could help master the mind, so that it manufactures any imaginable reality, possibly a reality where the self does not exist. But I don't see why this would be beneficial or relevant.

And according to my understanding, transcending the self would require to de-localize existence, which is a pretty heavy claim and I have not found yet anything to support it.

So ... am I missing something or have I figured it ALL out ? :lol:
HI,
From my understanding of Buddhism, a self is anything that has at its core an established unchangeable nature. The problem with asserting the existence of an established unchangeable nature is that nothing in reality expresses the quality of solidied unchangeability. In fact, the actual manifestation of phenomena negates the existence of an established unchangeable nature. Why? Because if something is ultimately established it cannot change or manifest without contradicting its very definition. Reality is contuously manifesting and changing and therefor it is unestablished, it expresses the qualities of non-self.
So with that, the lack of a self does not negate the continuum of experience, it actually allows for it. Lack of self does not mean we lack a continuum of experience, rather it is that we lack the nihilism of solidification and expressionlessness.

undefineable
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:34 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by undefineable » Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:53 am

Saoshun wrote:If you cannot be relaxed you will never realize no-self
_ _ and instead you will de-realise into a feeling of absolute non-existence :tongue:

User avatar
avisitor
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 8:03 pm

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by avisitor » Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:33 am

Non-self: What am I missing?

Self is made up of the seamless workings of the five aggregates
The six senses ... sight, hearing, taste, feel, smell, mind ... help feed the five aggregates
The five aggregates ... Form, Sensation, Perception, Mental formations, Consciousness ... create the sense of self

This sense of self feels very real
However, one is taught that it is an illusion
Only awakening or seeing original nature allows one to understand the meaning of that

Don't stress what is not yet in one's realm of experience to understand this issue
Practice ... with a teacher and sangha ... good luck

smcj
Posts: 5858
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by smcj » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:41 am

The whole is not greater than the sum of the parts.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

joy&peace
Posts: 1013
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 4:53 pm

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by joy&peace » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:39 pm

It's not?

Maybe it both is and is not.

;)
Om Gate Gate Paragate Parasamgate bodhi svaha

Saoshun
Posts: 638
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 11:16 pm

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by Saoshun » Wed Jun 17, 2015 3:01 pm

joy&peace wrote:It's not?

Maybe it both is and is not.

;)
Maybe understand that those kinds of word play it's just thought-intellectual bubble which creates more samsara.

User avatar
avisitor
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 8:03 pm

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by avisitor » Sun Jun 28, 2015 1:00 am

smcj wrote:The whole is not greater than the sum of the parts.
The whole is always more than just its parts

A hydrogen atom is composed of one electron and one proton
Water is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom
Put together its parts correctly and one has something wonderful

One can not drink hydrogen or oxygen
But put together right and it satisfies thirst and feeds the plants
keeps the temperature of the earth moderate enough for life

A person is more than just parts.
Does amputating a leg or arm make one less human??

The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts
If it weren't then why put things together???

smcj
Posts: 5858
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by smcj » Sun Jun 28, 2015 5:28 pm

avisitor wrote:
smcj wrote:The whole is not greater than the sum of the parts
The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts
If it weren't then why put things together???
The investigation is looking for a permanent, identifiable and isolatable essence. It is not found among the components. The arrangement of components in turn is temporary/impermanent. The normal assumption that our personality is our essence and therefore a reliable/stable/inviolate basis for living is factually incorrect. In fact that error is the source of our participation in the cycle of suffering, and thus the true source of all the dangers we experience directly and also read about in the newspapers.

Or so I've heard...
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by tomschwarz » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:14 pm

of course "self" is de-localized see Lion )))). proof? you are in my mind. i am in your mind. when you do things it is often because of your relationship to other people. look how you mirror your mom and dad in many ways. that is all the delocalization of your mind. the standard buddhist approach to this line of thinking is to look at the profundity of dependent origination, composition and something else.... i forgot )))))) but you know that post about 90% not you, that would be "delocalization" based on composition, something like "the sum is actually the parts"

enjoy dear friend. this is the wisdom practice of buddhism, 1/3 of buddhist practice. then there are the other two thirds which go hand in hand with the wisdom practice: meditation, you got to do that at least twice a day, 1/2 hr in morning and 1/2 in evening, and the ethics practice. i mention that, because it is with those aspects (ethics == being good person and meditation == non-conceptual absolute truth/emptiness) that "profundity" becomes a reality.
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
avisitor
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 8:03 pm

Re: Non-Self: What am I missing ?

Post by avisitor » Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:29 am

smcj wrote:
avisitor wrote:
smcj wrote:The whole is not greater than the sum of the parts
The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts
If it weren't then why put things together???
The investigation is looking for a permanent, identifiable and isolatable essence. It is not found among the components. The arrangement of components in turn is temporary/impermanent. The normal assumption that our personality is our essence and therefore a reliable/stable/inviolate basis for living is factually incorrect. In fact that error is the source of our participation in the cycle of suffering, and thus the true source of all the dangers we experience directly and also read about in the newspapers.

Or so I've heard...
This universe is all temporary. Life is temporary
All on a different scale ... but temporary
We are all dust in the wind
But this doesn't negate life
It affirms its importance
Cause only in this human life can one have the opportunity to awaken to one's original nature

Don't get trapped in essence or not essence ... that is duality
Non-permanent and permanent are two sides of the same coin ... dependent arisings

This arrangement of components is the five aggregates that seamlessly work together to create the sense of self or essence as you would put it.
Nothing wrong in that if one moves forward instead of being stuck in the mire of looking at it as this or that
The source of all dangers is also the source of one's opportunities to awaken
Dismiss it and one dismisses one's chances to see into one's original nature

Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests