Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
santa100
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by santa100 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:59 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:50 am
The short answer is yes. It is impossible for anyone to do anything without knowledge. It is how we learn to function in the world and with others. You simply refer to your bodily actions as mine, not his or hers. This doesn't imply that there is an actual entity inside of the body. It is just how we communicate simple facts to each other so there is no confusion.

Keep in mind that James is not a native english speaker and his posts often have grammatical errors, etc. I also find it difficult to follow some of his posts because of this.
Why do you keep lumping together all this "actual entity" stuff? As I already mentioned, had the OP already been clearly provided with all the technical Buddhist definitions up front about self, inherent permanent entity, the five aggregates, etc. then why bother asking the question for even a run-of-the-mill wouldn't possess enough Buddhist technical knowledge about the self to qualify. Now that doesn't mean one has to acquire all those mentioned Buddhist jargons to have a sense of "I", "mine", and "myself". Unless that kid in James Tan's case was a complete mentally disabled, with just the experience gained simply by living/surviving in natural habitat, any normal human would naturally possesses a sense of "I", "mine", "myself", without any technical knowledge nor education.

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by Saengnapha » Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:10 pm

santa100 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:59 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 6:50 am
The short answer is yes. It is impossible for anyone to do anything without knowledge. It is how we learn to function in the world and with others. You simply refer to your bodily actions as mine, not his or hers. This doesn't imply that there is an actual entity inside of the body. It is just how we communicate simple facts to each other so there is no confusion.

Keep in mind that James is not a native english speaker and his posts often have grammatical errors, etc. I also find it difficult to follow some of his posts because of this.
Why do you keep lumping together all this "actual entity" stuff? As I already mentioned, had the OP already been clearly provided with all the technical Buddhist definitions up front about self, inherent permanent entity, the five aggregates, etc. then why bother asking the question for even a run-of-the-mill wouldn't possess enough Buddhist technical knowledge about the self to qualify. Now that doesn't mean one has to acquire all those mentioned Buddhist jargons to have a sense of "I", "mine", and "myself". Unless that kid in James Tan's case was a complete mentally disabled, with just the experience gained simply by living/surviving in natural habitat, any normal human would naturally possesses a sense of "I", "mine", "myself", without any technical knowledge nor education.
You asked a question, I answered it. I never mentioned technical knowledge. Just by living a normal life, one develops the sense of 'me'. But you have to have knowledge, which is the result of experience, in order to develop this sense of 'me' and articulate it. I don't understand the difficulty of explaining this. Don't you agree that this sense of 'me' is learned?

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by Bundokji » Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:22 pm

The work of Noam Chomsky might be relevant to the topic in hand

And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

santa100
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by santa100 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:55 pm

Saengnapha wrote:Just by living a normal life, one develops the sense of 'me'. But you have to have knowledge, which is the result of experience, in order to develop this sense of 'me' and articulate it. I don't understand the difficulty of explaining this.
I'm certainly not the one who made it difficult or complicated. You added all the unneeded stuff like: "A being in possession of a self doesn't get reborn. This would go against the Buddhist teachings of anatta. The sense of self is a fabrication appearing when a body has developed a psychological persona." These are your words and they have no bearing on my simple questions. Now you're trying to lump together the sense of "self" AND the ability to articulate. That's 1 more new thing that was not part of the original OP.

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by Saengnapha » Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:03 am

santa100 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:55 pm
Saengnapha wrote:Just by living a normal life, one develops the sense of 'me'. But you have to have knowledge, which is the result of experience, in order to develop this sense of 'me' and articulate it. I don't understand the difficulty of explaining this.
I'm certainly not the one who made it difficult or complicated. You added all the unneeded stuff like: "A being in possession of a self doesn't get reborn. This would go against the Buddhist teachings of anatta. The sense of self is a fabrication appearing when a body has developed a psychological persona." These are your words and they have no bearing on my simple questions. Now you're trying to lump together the sense of "self" AND the ability to articulate. That's 1 more new thing that was not part of the original OP.
Discussions evolve.

santa100
Posts: 3048
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Without the knowledge , is there a self ?

Post by santa100 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:44 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:03 am
santa100 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:55 pm
Saengnapha wrote:Just by living a normal life, one develops the sense of 'me'. But you have to have knowledge, which is the result of experience, in order to develop this sense of 'me' and articulate it. I don't understand the difficulty of explaining this.
I'm certainly not the one who made it difficult or complicated. You added all the unneeded stuff like: "A being in possession of a self doesn't get reborn. This would go against the Buddhist teachings of anatta. The sense of self is a fabrication appearing when a body has developed a psychological persona." These are your words and they have no bearing on my simple questions. Now you're trying to lump together the sense of "self" AND the ability to articulate. That's 1 more new thing that was not part of the original OP.
Discussions evolve.
Sounds more like papanca.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: StormBorn, Yahoo [Bot] and 94 guests