Is this an ok definition of anatta?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
salty-J
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, California

Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by salty-J » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:12 am

the Buddhist teaching of “anatta”, or non-self, which teaches there exists no separate self that truly “is” a thing as we perceive it, but that everything and everyone is a combination of various components, the way they are because of causes and conditions, that give the illusion of having a separate “self”.
I am writing a paper for art 1 at school and am making the argument that the pointillism technique of Georges Seurat illustrates the doctrine of anatta, and wanted to try and get some feedback from some of you who are qualified to judge my definition above.
:thinking:
"It is what it is." -foreman infamous for throwing wrenches in fits of rage

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18556
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:49 am

Greetings,

That looks OK. A minor point might be to focus, as the Buddha does, on 'experience' and not whether something 'exists' or 'does not exist'. The five aggregates are the sum of experience, and all aspects of experience are not-self, impermanent, and unsatisfactory. The Middle Way of the Buddha transcends notions of 'existence' and 'non-existence' (see SN 12.15 for details).

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
OcTavO
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:27 am

Re: Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by OcTavO » Mon Jul 26, 2010 12:55 am

That's an interesting analogy to pointillism. I like it. :thumbsup:

You may find this link of interest also, in case you haven't already seen it before: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... self2.html

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 15230
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 1:21 am

Hi Salty,

If you have time you might have a listen to some of Steve Armstrong's talks here:
http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/170/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The talk: "Not Who I Am" - Anatta Characteristic
I believe should contain a simile that he often uses that is rather similar to yours, but using a woven picture, rather than a piontillist picture. It may give you some inspiration...

If it's not that it would be one of the older talks involving anatta...

Mike

User avatar
salty-J
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by salty-J » Mon Jul 26, 2010 1:26 am

thank you, gentlemen! I did go with "not-self" as opposed to no-self, like the link talks about, but I see the point about existing and what does or does not! Thank you so much! :namaste:
I changed it like this:
the Buddhist teaching of anatta, or “not-self”, which says there can not be found any separate self that truly “is” a thing as we perceive it, but that everything and everyone is a combination of various components, the way they are due to causes and conditions, which form the illusion of a separate “self”.
"It is what it is." -foreman infamous for throwing wrenches in fits of rage

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10927
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: Is this an ok definition of anatta?

Post by DNS » Mon Jul 26, 2010 1:38 am

salty-J wrote: I am writing a paper for art 1 at school and am making the argument that the pointillism technique of Georges Seurat illustrates the doctrine of anatta,
I like it, it sounds like an analogy for the chariot story, originally from the bhikkhuni Vajjira and then later in detail by Nagasena. See:

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Anatta" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bhikkhu Cintita, Bing [Bot] and 71 guests