No self and self not exist

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
TRobinson465
Posts: 680
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by TRobinson465 »

The five aggregates are not self. Namely, your form, sensations, perception, mental formations and conciousness are not self and you shouldnt cling to them or think of them as such. That is the teaching of the Buddha.

You should not however, extrapolate this teaching of the Buddha to mean something he didn't, such as annihilationism. As it is dangerous for the unenlightened to go around inserting meanings into the Buddha's teachings through imperfect conjecture rather than direct insight.

Then in the evening Ven. Sariputta left his seclusion, went to Ven. Yamaka, and on arrival exchanged courteous greetings. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Yamaka, "Is it true, my friend Yamaka, that this evil supposition has arisen to you: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'

"Yes, my friend Sariputta. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"What do you think, my friend Yamaka: Is form constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."

"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?"

"Stressful, my friend."

"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?"

"No, my friend."

"Is feeling constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Is perception constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Are fabrications constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Is consciousness constant or inconstant?

"Inconstant, my friend."

"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?"

"Stressful, my friend."

"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?"

"No, my friend."

"Thus, friend Yamaka, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: Every form is to be seen with right discernment as it has come to be: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Any feeling whatsoever...

"Any perception whatsoever...

"Any fabrications whatsoever...

"Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: Every consciousness is to be seen with right discernment as it has come to be: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is released. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

"How do you construe this, my friend Yamaka: Do you regard form as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard perception as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard fabrications as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard consciousness as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?... Elsewhere than consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"

"Previously, my friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Dhamma, I have abandoned that evil supposition, and have broken through to the Dhamma."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... than.html
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"At Varanasi, in the Deer Park at Isipatana, the Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

"Go forth, monks, for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and men. Let no two of you go in the same direction." - First Khandhaka, Chapter 11, Vinaya.
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

In this DW topic of Dhammakaya replaces "anatta" with "atta" in their Tipitaka!

discussions on existence of explicit teachings about true self can be found, like:
Khemadhammo Bhikkhu wrote: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:21 am
...
...
Luang Pu taught that the attainment of Nibbāna is attā, because when someone has attained it, it is a state that is permanent, happiness and true self.
...
...

In the history of Theravāda Buddhism, there have been both scholars who said that Nibbāna is attā, and those who said that Nibbāna is anattā. Even in the Thai forest tradition, there is as you know Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu, who has views on this matter which differ from mainstream opinion.
...
...
.


🅢🅐🅑🅑🅔 🅓🅗🅐🅜🅜🅐 🅐🅝🅐🅣🅣🅐

Self ...
  • "an entirely and perfectly foolish idea" :D ~ MN22
TRobinson465
Posts: 680
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by TRobinson465 »

This is pretty off topic and has nothing to do with the OPs question. But since this is isn't even accurate I think i should point out this thread here.

https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?p=482775#p482775

Included are literal copies of the 2015 critical edition of the tripitaka sponsored by WPD. You will find there were no such find and replaces.

Admins you should probably consider doing something about that DW topic since the title is demonstrably false. It looks like not everyone who read that old topic has seen the later one, which basically proves the claim wrong with actual copies of the tipataka version in question on the 5th post down of the second topic.
Last edited by TRobinson465 on Sun Aug 30, 2020 6:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"At Varanasi, in the Deer Park at Isipatana, the Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

"Go forth, monks, for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and men. Let no two of you go in the same direction." - First Khandhaka, Chapter 11, Vinaya.
TRobinson465
Posts: 680
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by TRobinson465 »

Actually i take back what i said in the first part of my post above. It actually is relavent to the OPs question. I was too quick to judge. Apologies. :anjali:
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"At Varanasi, in the Deer Park at Isipatana, the Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

"Go forth, monks, for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and men. Let no two of you go in the same direction." - First Khandhaka, Chapter 11, Vinaya.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5114
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by cappuccino »

takso wrote: There is no self,
There is a self,
On Self, No Self, and Not-self
nmjojola
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 2:29 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by nmjojola »

Your question:
sentinel wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:13 pm ...natthattā’ti (self does not exist) is the same as anatta ?
The Buddhas teaching indicates that no statement about atta (such as 'it (self) exists', or 'it (self) does not exist', and so on..) can be justified; whereas anatta, in sutta, is always used descriptionally (i.e. as an adjective ) in statements about the khandas (i.e. all phenomena).

So how to interpret the Buddhas teaching depends on what you're asking about, if you're asking about self (such as 'does it, or does it not, exist?') then know you are asking an invalid, or unjustifiable, question; if you're asking about phenomena then know the answer is it is not self.

It all depends on whatever the focus of your inquery is on, now if you want to address "well, what about self as a phenomenon then?", well there isn't one at all for the arahant, but for an ordinary unenlightened person it's a mirage fallen for, a deception; and for the steam-winner through non-returner, then it is a mirage understood as such, a deception seen.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8798
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by DooDoot »

nmjojola wrote: Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:17 pm The Buddhas teaching indicates that no statement about atta (such as 'it (self) exists', or 'it (self) does not exist', and so on..) can be justified; whereas anatta, in sutta, is always used descriptionally (i.e. as an adjective ) in statements about the khandas (i.e. all phenomena).
Lol - u must follow Nagarjuna or Nanananda to post about "it" as "self". :roll:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Post Reply