Quote:
|
Originally Posted by God-Like
The parts of the chair would be more delusional parts that are identified as that. The non-self doesn't identify. All you are doing is creating an example of illustrating the chairs composition in different ways, when identification is absent there are no descriptive analogies to be made. This is what I am pointing out. The non identified, non self buddhist is bogus when engaging and interacting in this world.
The chanting buddhist sitting crossed legged that perhaps says they are unidentified would in my eyes be a false statement.
A non self, non identified individual would not be sitting, standing, chanting or speaking with an absence of identification.
The individual that is blissed out in a trance type of state that doesn't have a sense of their individual self, that doesn't entertain a thought of chanting or meditating or speaking of non self is what I would call unidentified, there is just awareness of this world but there is no central point of self observing, because self has no central point.
If the buddhists agree that non self only applies to the trance states then I would agree, so there would be no need to speak about delusional aspects of the chair that are comprised of this and that for these descriptors will be null and void.
Maybe you would believe a non identified buddhist who offered you tea to be unidentified, I certainly wouldn't because I know the difference between being able to identify and not..
x daz x
|
See if this helps you understand what Buddha was explaining regarding ' Anatta '.
Everyone seems to be getting their info: from different places and trying to join them together which doesn't always work and can confuse others.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipi....059.nymo.html
I know that the experience of ' Anatta ' beats the written explanation but it does help to read Buddhas Teachings to understand Buddhism, imo anyway.