No self theory do I get it right?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
auto
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by auto » Mon May 13, 2019 1:50 pm

Jerafreyr wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 11:02 pm
I'm not sure what you mean. Could you clarify without using suttas?
The no self idea(sam harris, goldstein, all sorts of others) is based on when you are being aware. Being aware of watching television etc.

they claim there is no self.

but "being aware" is possible a gross acquisition of various beings through sense media. DO - birth step.

The no-self idea is out of place, it doesn't belong here when it is talked about awareness, manasikara. What is actual is the self and dissecting self out of its form, that they are not same.

how important is to find the self, following sense of self. Its called self-realization, not no-self realization.

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm

Since everything is changing, like manasikara itself, there is nothing stable within or without; what importance is your so called self realization? This is not the objective of the Buddha dharma.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5763
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by DooDoot » Mon May 13, 2019 11:35 pm

Jerafreyr wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 11:02 pm
I'm not sure what you mean. Could you clarify without using suttas?
This is a Buddhist forum.
Jerafreyr wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm
Since everything is changing
I have never read Buddhism says "everything is changing".
Jerafreyr wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm
like manasikara itself, there is nothing stable within or without; what importance is your so called self realization? This is not the objective of the Buddha dharma.
The suttas contain phrases, such as: " ... there will be no change in the lucidity of the Tathagata's wisdom" (MN 12) and "His release, being founded on truth, does not fluctuate" (MN 140).
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

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Tue May 14, 2019 1:04 am

Hi there. By everything I mean all that exists. Now you got me thinking... Is a Buddha's wisdom a thing subject to existence, non existence, both or neither. I've read a few suttas but I don't claim expertise. I've always thought wisdom is what we call when there is a lack of phenomena not a thing that arises based on conditions.

User avatar
bridif1
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 8:42 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by bridif1 » Tue May 14, 2019 2:47 am

Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 1:04 am
Hi there. By everything I mean all that exists. Now you got me thinking... Is a Buddha's wisdom a thing subject to existence, non existence, both or neither. I've read a few suttas but I don't claim expertise. I've always thought wisdom is what we call when there is a lack of phenomena not a thing that arises based on conditions.
Hi Jerafreyr!

I don't to go too much off-topic, but I think wisdom is conditioned, because it depends on experiences and on the right understanding of those experiences.
Generally, "understading" means to use language in such a way that it explain properly what processes are going on, and how processes interact with each other.
If language and concepts are refined and based on Right View, and if one acquires direct comprehension of any situation, then wisdom is developed.
Considering all of the above, I see wisdom as a conditioned phenomenon.

That's at least how I understand wisdom, but I may be wrong.

Kind regards!

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Tue May 14, 2019 8:18 am

bridif1 wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 2:47 am
Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 1:04 am
Hi there. By everything I mean all that exists. Now you got me thinking... Is a Buddha's wisdom a thing subject to existence, non existence, both or neither. I've read a few suttas but I don't claim expertise. I've always thought wisdom is what we call when there is a lack of phenomena not a thing that arises based on conditions.
I see wisdom as a conditioned phenomenon.

That's at least how I understand wisdom, but I may be wrong.

Kind regards!
I'm not so sure that wisdom (which is understood as enlightenment) is conditioned. Something doesn't seem right however, in MN 44 an arahant does say:
“The eightfold Noble Path, friend Visākha, is conditioned." So maybe I'm wrong again, wouldn't be the first or last :toilet:

User avatar
bridif1
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 8:42 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by bridif1 » Tue May 14, 2019 8:37 am

Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 8:18 am
bridif1 wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 2:47 am
Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 1:04 am
Hi there. By everything I mean all that exists. Now you got me thinking... Is a Buddha's wisdom a thing subject to existence, non existence, both or neither. I've read a few suttas but I don't claim expertise. I've always thought wisdom is what we call when there is a lack of phenomena not a thing that arises based on conditions.
I see wisdom as a conditioned phenomenon.

That's at least how I understand wisdom, but I may be wrong.

Kind regards!
I'm not so sure that wisdom (which is understood as enlightenment) is conditioned. Something doesn't seem right however, in MN 44 an arahant does say:
“The eightfold Noble Path, friend Visākha, is conditioned." So maybe I'm wrong again, wouldn't be the first or last :toilet:
If I were to be pressed to define these terms, I'd say that enlightenment is equivalent to the term 'bodhi', which is better translated (IMO) as "awakening". This awakening is seeing things as they truly are, a vision that makes conduct and mind processes to go according to that truth, and that produces dispassion, disenchantment and, finally, the destruction of the taints of the mind: Nibbāna. Awakening and its wisdom lead to Nibbāna.

Consequently, wisdom and awakening would be conditioned phenomena, while Nibbāna wouldn't.

Again, I may be wrong about this difficult subject-matter.

Kind regards!

auto
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by auto » Tue May 14, 2019 12:57 pm

Jerafreyr wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm
Since everything is changing, like manasikara itself, there is nothing stable within or without; what importance is your so called self realization? This is not the objective of the Buddha dharma.
1.when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while the arising perishing and change is evident, then it is conditioned.
2.the other case is when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while no arising no perishing no change is evident then it is unconditional.

perception of impermanence is to be established when you see change is evident in immovable permanent phenomena.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.47/en/sujato
https://suttacentral.net/an6.102/en/sujato

auto
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by auto » Tue May 14, 2019 3:44 pm

https://suttacentral.net/an1.268-277/en/sujato
“It is impossible, mendicants, it cannot happen for a person accomplished in view to take any condition as permanent. That is not possible. “Aṭṭhānametaṃ, bhikkhave, anavakāso yaṃ diṭṭhisampanno puggalo kañci saṅkhāraṃ niccato upagaccheyya. Netaṃ ṭhānaṃ vijjati.
But it is possible for an ordinary person to take some condition as permanent. That is possible.” Ṭhānañca kho etaṃ, bhikkhave, vijjati yaṃ puthujjano kañci saṅkhāraṃ niccato upagaccheyya. Ṭhānametaṃ vijjatī”ti.
nicca - http://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/n/nicca
Nicca,(adj.) [Vedic nitya,adj.-formation fr.ni,meaning “downward”=onward,on and on; according to Grassmann (Wtb.z.Rig Veda) originally “inwardly,homely”] constant,continuous,permanent
according to Rig Veda , inwardly, homely.
---
when phenomena dissolve in the eyes center(the front body channel), the flow will turn in- and downwards. Seem like words literal first meaning is more precise than appropriations.

it is when the flow is turned inwards, the person is accomplished in view.

"niccato upagaccheyya" - on and on downward.


its not possible for someone who is accomplished in view has conditions flowing on and on downwards.
Last edited by auto on Tue May 14, 2019 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Tue May 14, 2019 4:00 pm

auto wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 12:57 pm
Jerafreyr wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm
Since everything is changing, like manasikara itself, there is nothing stable within or without; what importance is your so called self realization? This is not the objective of the Buddha dharma.
1.when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while the arising perishing and change is evident, then it is conditioned.
2.the other case is when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while no arising no perishing no change is evident then it is unconditional.

perception of impermanence is to be established when you see change is evident in immovable permanent phenomena.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.47/en/sujato
https://suttacentral.net/an6.102/en/sujato

AN 3.47

“Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the unconditioned. What three? No arising is seen, no vanishing is seen, and no alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the unconditioned.”

By seen the Buddha is referring to perception and cognition. You will not perceive the unconditioned element nor directly cognize it. It is beyond the intellect and can only be understood by what it is not. Similar to the space element. The Buddha had said on many occasions the unconditioned is anatta. There is not one thing that can be called self.

I do not understand the reference to the other sutta.

auto
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by auto » Tue May 14, 2019 4:13 pm

Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 4:00 pm
auto wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 12:57 pm
Jerafreyr wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 4:47 pm
Since everything is changing, like manasikara itself, there is nothing stable within or without; what importance is your so called self realization? This is not the objective of the Buddha dharma.
1.when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while the arising perishing and change is evident, then it is conditioned.
2.the other case is when the being what appears to be immoveable and permanent while no arising no perishing no change is evident then it is unconditional.

perception of impermanence is to be established when you see change is evident in immovable permanent phenomena.

https://suttacentral.net/an3.47/en/sujato
https://suttacentral.net/an6.102/en/sujato

AN 3.47

“Bhikkhus, there are these three characteristics that define the unconditioned. What three? No arising is seen, no vanishing is seen, and no alteration while it persists is seen. These are the three characteristics that define the unconditioned.”

By seen the Buddha is referring to perception and cognition. You will not perceive the unconditioned element nor directly cognize it. It is beyond the intellect and can only be understood by what it is not. Similar to the space element. The Buddha had said on many occasions the unconditioned is anatta. There is not one thing that can be called self.

I do not understand the reference to the other sutta.
there are things what feel permanent and unchanging compared to other ones it is impotant distinction to be made where you can ditch one and follow the best which is permanent..
in meditation where you do progress is you rooot to the host or the original things, true mind, luminosity vs poor qualities. Here permanent is superior than impermanent.


You have no idea how boring Suttas were, but when have sensitivity to feel what different words mean its better. If you go for intellectual, dry meaning without how it works on body or reality then idk why you read Sutta.

also i don't rely on Sutta, i do progress independently from these.

i think my body is where i go in as like you go in to a Mobile Suit. And im ok to born idk what heaven as long it is heaven and i don't need go into physical unless it is super useful for gaining stats, labels and such things.

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Tue May 14, 2019 6:04 pm

Some things do seem solid and stable I agree. However, they are like the presentation of a rainbow from a distance. When you closely look you will find no essence. When you wake up from the dream of self you will breathe relief and your body will be suffused with joy; the mind and appearances become luminous.

Also, I really like the suttas. They are imprinted with the awakened mind. It's only the intellect that contaminates the their magic. You should find a teacher that understands them and doesn't interrupt with commentary too much.

auto
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by auto » Wed May 15, 2019 11:16 am

Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 6:04 pm
Some things do seem solid and stable I agree. However, they are like the presentation of a rainbow from a distance. When you closely look you will find no essence. When you wake up from the dream of self you will breathe relief and your body will be suffused with joy; the mind and appearances become luminous.

Also, I really like the suttas. They are imprinted with the awakened mind. It's only the intellect that contaminates the their magic. You should find a teacher that understands them and doesn't interrupt with commentary too much.
when persisting or staying is evident, the object is always on, there is no change or vanishing or appearing evident, it is unconditional, it is not from a cause. These are the characteristics how you know to recognize it.
Jerafreyr wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 4:00 pm
By seen the Buddha is referring to perception and cognition. You will not perceive the unconditioned element nor directly cognize it. It is beyond the intellect and can only be understood by what it is not. Similar to the space element. The Buddha had said on many occasions the unconditioned is anatta. There is not one thing that can be called self.
Mental faculties is for to know unconditinal, unborn thing. It is You who is aware of it and attains it. Its your mental faculties what notice it then also you will use your own will to do it too.

And it reeks of self, it is concetration upon yourself, samadhi. It is union with self, you try and try to get more and more come equal to the undying. It is you concetrate on it but can't attain onepointed concetration on it what would be always on, the mechanics how you eventually do it is written in the descriptions of 8th jhana prior to attaining cessation of perception and feeling.


the unmoving awareness comes really evident when everything else is ceased, and becoming out of that state, you gain knowledge, and can use that knowledge.
It is there where you get to know how the small self or being is not your self, impermanent etc.
In addition you get energetical body adjustments..

also it starts to repeat on several levels, in 3rd person, in first person, but its not the same, it comes more substance-like, the clear cut ice state comes soft warm and substance-like..and its not all there is things about breath and sensual desires related, the objective will move there and the self realization thing comes secondary bias

I can talk practically since i have experience and a lot it seem, you(and others who talk everything illusion thing) skip all things practical i have put quetly into my sentences..


you can use different word on self, but it reeks self and being aware. Exactly what identification tastes like how you would know your self and can refer it in 3rd person. Like wiki says it is neurological, if you don't have it it would be a rare neurological malfunction, so don't even pretend you know what is meant with the no self and on what.


also all states are in body origin- knotting in body and if you go "beyond mind" then there will be winds/breath go through these spots and you can use your mind and rather have to use it to unknot go through these points and repeat it in different event in real life where you usually where unware and unspiritual you do attain there skill to use breath to untie knots etc.

User avatar
Jerafreyr
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:22 am

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Jerafreyr » Wed May 15, 2019 3:51 pm

auto wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:16 am
so don't even pretend you know what is meant with the no self and on what...

unknot...untie knots etc.
It was nice chatting when there was less pride.

If there is a self then where did it come from? Your mother or father? The self is the origin of knots and you will tire yourself into their webs by clinging to identity.

Sol
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:27 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: No self theory do I get it right?

Post by Sol » Wed May 15, 2019 4:50 pm

Jerafreyr wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 3:51 pm
auto wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:16 am
so don't even pretend you know what is meant with the no self and on what...

unknot...untie knots etc.
It was nice chatting when there was less pride.

If there is a self then where did it come from? Your mother or father? The self is the origin of knots and you will tire yourself into their webs by clinging to identity.
How do we find continuity in the stream of a river? There has to be a change in the location of its water, (inter-being). Time must have passed and the nature must have gained a new position, (impermanence). Also, the nature is not-self, empty of independent existence, (not-self). When consciousness exists in the universe, the illusion comes from its fragmented state. You are noticing there is a self, separate from "other", but in fact, inter-being is one consciousness, spread out over several locations in the universe where everything is dictated by the absolute causality of logical continuity, but in emptiness, does not have a real location. Just like the universe itself, it exists without having a location relative to something else.

Identification of self-nature is the continuity from life to life, there has to be a change in its location, there must have passed some time, and since self-nature can manifest as any lifeform, you can't really pin down a "self". They can't be completely identical, because then there's no difference to mark impermanence, and it can't be completely different, because then there's no continuity.

When we identify as everything and nothing at the same time, we enter the unconditional. No self-preference, because what's the point?

The sphere of merits is where we take care of all that lives and breathes in this universe. Namely ourselves.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], holylotus, Lankamed, Majestic-12 [Bot], Sam Vara and 130 guests