Spiritual Forums

Spiritual Forums (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/index.php)
-   Buddhism (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=52)
-   -   Anattā (no self) (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=127631)

ketzer 24-01-2019 01:39 PM

Anattā (no self)
 
This is a concept I often think I understand. However, when I do I can't help but wonder who or what is doing the understanding.

How do you understand (or not understand) the buddhist concept of "anatta" (no-self)?
How do you buddhists see it misconstrued by non buddhists?
And finally, for those who do believe they understand this concept, who is doing the understanding?

sky 24-01-2019 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ketzer
This is a concept I often think I understand. However, when I do I can't help but wonder who or what is doing the understanding.

How do you understand (or not understand) the buddhist concept of "anatta" (no-self)?
How do you buddhists see it misconstrued by non buddhists?
And finally, for those who do believe they understand this concept, who is doing the understanding?




If you read this Article it may help. It is ' Not Self ' rather than ' No Self '

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/.../notself2.html

God-Like 24-01-2019 02:38 PM

Any understanding / knowing / experiencing of the mind / world is related to a self that is.

So you are right to question who is doing the understanding of no self if there is no self.

What I would say is that there is indeed no self or there is indeed beyond self, but it is not of this worldly mind understanding such concepts.

It can become muddled to say the very least when there is an individual saying there is no self present for it would be likened to pointing at one's own reflection saying there is no-one here or there pointing or perceiving the pointing lol.

What I see said a lot is that just because there is Self awareness or Self existence / being .. then when there is awareness of the individual mind-body experience it must be true that there is no self present because of what is beyond self.

It's misunderstood in my eyes. You are either self aware or you are not. If you are not then there would not be the thought that I am not.


x daz x

jonesboy 24-01-2019 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ketzer
This is a concept I often think I understand. However, when I do I can't help but wonder who or what is doing the understanding.

How do you understand (or not understand) the buddhist concept of "anatta" (no-self)?
How do you buddhists see it misconstrued by non buddhists?
And finally, for those who do believe they understand this concept, who is doing the understanding?


There is no Ketzer that continues on with the identification of what you think of as you.

I am sure you are familiar with mindfulness, the ability to observe your thoughts. All that is you, is like a thought that you are attached too.

You are not a soul, that is located someplace, or made up of things.

Beyond the local mind (you) there is the universal mind. A Buddha is a being that has realized the emptiness of that universal mind.

The best way to describe it is using the Tao Te Ching :)

From the Dao (emptiness) came the One (universal mind) from the One, begot Two (Siva/Shakti, male/female energy/polarities) and from the Two created the Ten Thousand Things.

In the Buddha's time there was Brahmaism which believed there is only One. That the One is all there is and we are just aspects of the One playing a game to realize itself again.

What Buddhism is saying is that if you realize the emptiness of the One, you realize that you are a separate One, that there are limitless One's.

Each Buddha is a unique bubble you could say, that has no true location because it is everywhere, is not made up of anything because the true nature of everything is emptiness.

Who is doing the understanding?

If it is an understanding it is local mind, intellectual. Buddhism is about Wisdom, about realizing it.. that is what the path is about.

Gem 24-01-2019 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ketzer
This is a concept I often think I understand. However, when I do I can't help but wonder who or what is doing the understanding.

How do you understand (or not understand) the buddhist concept of "anatta" (no-self)?
How do you buddhists see it misconstrued by non buddhists?
And finally, for those who do believe they understand this concept, who is doing the understanding?





The word 'anatta is used in different contexts, such as not-me, mine, my or I in meditation; no substance of things in in the universe (or emptiness); no continuous self that endures time; and/or no actuality of ego - and each these aspects have their own elaborate philosophical tangents.



Anatta is generally misconstrued by non-Buddhists as 'you don't exist', whereas in a very general sense it means there is no fundamental identity to anything.



No one actually understands the concept, but Buddhist philosophy unifies both intellectual learning for the acquired knowledge, and meditation practice for deeper insight and wisdom.

Still_Waters 30-01-2019 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gem
The word 'anatta is used in different contexts, such as not-me, mine, my or I in meditation; no substance of things in in the universe (or emptiness); no continuous self that endures time; and/or no actuality of ego - and each these aspects have their own elaborate philosophical tangents.



Anatta is generally misconstrued by non-Buddhists as 'you don't exist', whereas in a very general sense it means there is no fundamental identity to anything.



No one actually understands the concept, but Buddhist philosophy unifies both intellectual learning for the acquired knowledge, and meditation practice for deeper insight and wisdom.


That is very well put, especially ".. in a very general sense it means there is no fundamental identity to anything." :smile:

NoOne 30-01-2019 09:55 PM

It simply means realising the Truth, that there is no individual self, there is only One Self, shared by everyone. We erroneously think that we exist as selves separate from everyone else, when in Truth we all are just aspects of the same One, Universal Self that takes pleasure in expressing itself in Myriad forms. I believe that is also the teaching of the Upanishads.

Gem 31-01-2019 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne
It simply means realising the Truth, that there is no individual self, there is only One Self, shared by everyone.



In Buddhist philosophy there isn't any self-theory, and anatta shouldn't be directly translated as 'self'. The concept of anatta is not the same as self or individuality. Individuality is called 'santana' which is another philosophical concept in Buddhism which talks about how the body/mind are momentary (or impermanent) and no substance thereof endures from one moment to the next. In this way, santana is anatta because it is 'substanceless' or 'impermanent'.



However; the santana does carry forward because the manifest in one moment bears characteristics of the last and will pass its characteristics to the next through the processes of kamma - which is a whole 'nuther thing again



Quote:

We erroneously think that we exist as selves separate from everyone else, when in Truth we all are just aspects of the same One, Universal Self that takes pleasure in expressing itself in Myriad forms. I believe that is also the teaching of the Upanishads.




It could be from the Upanishads; and it might well be true, but it's not really part of Buddha's teaching. He didn't teach any self-theories because he thought self-theory will only give rise to suffering. In the sutta he explained all that, he also said that the Brahamans had misrepresented him by saying he teaches Nihilism. After babbling on for a while, Buddha reminded of what he does teach: there is suffering; suffering has a cause; suffering can end and; there is a way to end suffering.

Rain95 31-01-2019 03:21 AM

for those who do believe they understand this concept, who is doing the understanding?

The understanding is being aware now of what you are not, so I am this understanding. Awareness.


If you read this Article it may help. It is ' Not Self

Yes it is the awareness of what you are not that is manifesting in the moment. Not conceptually, but actually present to be observed.

I am self awareness that is non-identified with its content.

sky 31-01-2019 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne
It simply means realising the Truth, that there is no individual self, there is only One Self, shared by everyone. We erroneously think that we exist as selves separate from everyone else, when in Truth we all are just aspects of the same One, Universal Self that takes pleasure in expressing itself in Myriad forms. I believe that is also the teaching of the Upanishads.




The Upanishads teach that there is a permanent self/soul, Buddhism is the opposite.

Mahayana teach that we are not really separate, autonomous beings, other Schools differ...


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums