How can 'non - self' be relevant to people with no pre -existing sense of self

[Ariaecheflame]

Hello,

I hope that you are well

I would like to start off by quickly introducing myself.

I am a (biological) woman who does not strongly identify with the concept of gender beyond mere energy.

I am probably an agnostic - I am curious but adhere to no particular beliefs.

My childhood upbringing was influenced by NEW testament biblical influences and my teenage life was influenced by a mixture of Buddhism, New Ageism, Catholicism, and a generic mash up of Paganism.

My childhood years, church influenced were fairly un-diverse but my teenage years were multi cultural, multi- religious and diverse in perspectives.

I had a number of friends who were actively following Buddhist principals and thought but I note that they were well IDENTIFIED individuals with fairly anchored perceptions of self to begin with where as I was raised to view the collective before the individual - God before person-hood, charity and the needs of the collective before individualism and women in servitude to other...so...
I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

[Joe Mc]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Hello,

I hope that you are well

I would like to start off by quickly introducing myself.

I am a (biological) woman who does not strongly identify with the concept of gender beyond mere energy.

I am probably an agnostic - I am curious but adhere to no particular beliefs.

My childhood upbringing was influenced by NEW testament biblical influences and my teenage life was influenced by a mixture of Buddhism, New Ageism, Catholicism, and a generic mash up of Paganism.

My childhood years, church influenced were fairly un-diverse but my teenage years were multi cultural, multi- religious and diverse in perspectives.

I had a number of friends who were actively following Buddhist principals and thought but I note that they were well IDENTIFIED individuals with fairly anchored perceptions of self to begin with where as I was raised to view the collective before the individual - God before person-hood, charity and the needs of the collective before individualism and women in servitude to other...so...
I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

I would just like to say find out what serves you ? What religion or what 'spiritual' tradition or not meets your needs. The view of many paths leading to the mountain top is one endorsed by such people as the Dalai Lama. A type of modernism that we can overcome anything, conquer all truths and reach the bottom of what they are saying is probably hailing from the internet itself. Not saying this is related to yourself but I have used YouTube to do things I would have never been able do previously without it, fix a car, build something etc etc. ( and I'm glad of it) but it doesn't mean that I have a leaning towards becoming a car mechanic or learning calculus or that I'm even good at it ? So is this a problem nowadays with the birth and spread of the internet ? A jack of all trades and a master of none was the olden day saying.

Sorry if what i say sounds rude or presumptuous. There are lots of principles such as Harmony, peace, love, unity ..pick one which relates to Anatta ? I can feel the classical Buddhist Scholars lining up to give me a kicking lolol..But that has been my problem because i grew up in a place where some people couldn't read and write i probably know a few other languages good and bad besides the written language and often i feel very inadequate when people quote chapter and verse at me to prove a point ? Maybe the last point i'd like to make is ...do we accept that language is not the be all and end all of everything ? If I believe that language is an end in itself and not a symbolically based system of codifications then sincerely i believe I will be chasing my tail ad infinitum ? The glories of language are evident particularly in song for me personally and poetry ...its wonderful but it still remains on some level just a type of pointer. Hey thanks for stirring the thoughts in me and the opportunity to share. This post probably says more about me than it does about your questions regarding Self and Anatta. All the best. Joe.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Hello,

I hope that you are well

I would like to start off by quickly introducing myself.

I am a (biological) woman who does not strongly identify with the concept of gender beyond mere energy.

I am probably an agnostic - I am curious but adhere to no particular beliefs.

My childhood upbringing was influenced by NEW testament biblical influences and my teenage life was influenced by a mixture of Buddhism, New Ageism, Catholicism, and a generic mash up of Paganism.

My childhood years, church influenced were fairly un-diverse but my teenage years were multi cultural, multi- religious and diverse in perspectives.

I had a number of friends who were actively following Buddhist principals and thought but I note that they were well IDENTIFIED individuals with fairly anchored perceptions of self to begin with where as I was raised to view the collective before the individual - God before person-hood, charity and the needs of the collective before individualism and women in servitude to other...so...
I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

Hi ..

Where there is awareness and a reflection of what you are there is an association had between that which is aware and that which is perceived .

If there was no association there would never be books and scriptures written about no self, non self etc etc ..

Where is this no self, non self awareness that wrote about it, that had the thought about it, that made sense of it?

Who/m identifies with a path? Who/m identifies with following a buddhist path?

You see it doesn’t even matter if one can identify with self as being an imaginative thought or a dream or just a reflection of an illusion because there in the midst of it all is someone-thing that concludes that, makes sense of that, and someone-thing that should have a comparison for all of that .


x daz x

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

Hi there Ariaecheflame

I will answer in two ways:

1. Put aside "anatta" - anatta is not a theory, it's not a philosophy and most of all, in my opinion - it's not a belief system.

Some people pick it up and draw elaborate theories about it, they miss the point - big time.

You ask - how does someone with a sense of no strong identity relate? Well I would say use what is useful to you - put aside (this does not mean dispel or disbelieve, it simply means put aside) that which is not yet.

The path changes and you would know that more than anyone, what is opaque now may be clearer in future - or not. It doesn't matter. It's your life so what matters is your happiness and peace of mind. Really, Buddhism is just about that - a peace of mind that hopefully stands you in stead through all your life.

If you are interested in Buddhism, a good book is "What the Buddha taught" by Rev Walpola Rahula. If you're not, it doesn't really matter, what matters is your happiness.

Just my 2c.

2. how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self

For a practicing Buddhist (of which no-one needs to be one btw) everything becomes groundwork for the patch. So even a shy self, an insecure self, an unsure self, a weaker self - is merely observed, watched, known for what s/he is.

A friend once said to me that base psychological health is important so - there is also that. In Buddhism there is no-one that will tell you you have to do x or you have to do y. Sure there are encouragements and directions, and each follows what they will. But under that child, there is possibly the hurt, the shame, the history - all of this will eventually be cared for, and tended to, within a practice.

There is no need for talk or thought about anatta per se, all you need to do is start meditating. Buddhist meditation is not like others on this forum - it's a meditation with no bells and whistles and in its simplicity, it offers much in return.

Namaste,

JL

Originally Posted by Joe Mc

Sorry if what i say sounds rude or presumptuous. There are lots of principles such as Harmony, peace, love, unity ..pick one which relates to Anatta ? I can feel the classical Buddhist Scholars lining up to give me a kicking lolol..But that has been my problem because i grew up in a place where some people couldn't read and write i probably know a few other languages good and bad besides the written language and often i feel very inadequate when people quote chapter and verse at me to prove a point ? Maybe the last point i'd like to make is ...do we accept that language is not the be all and end all of everything ? If I believe that language is an end in itself and not a symbolically based system of codifications then sincerely i believe I will be chasing my tail ad infinitum ? The glories of language are evident particularly in song for me personally and poetry ...its wonderful but it still remains on some level just a type of pointer. Hey thanks for stirring the thoughts in me and the opportunity to share. This post probably says more about me than it does about your questions regarding Self and Anatta. All the best. Joe.

Thanks for your post, Joe, agree that language is not the be all and end all. As Le Petit Prince aptly noted: “And now here is my secret, a very simple secret: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.”

That's the real Buddhism, all this other stuff is just window dressing / icing.

Bhikkhus, the teaching is merely a vehicle to describe the truth. Don’t mistake it for the truth itself. A finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. The finger is needed to know where to look for the moon, but if you mistake the finger for the moon itself, you will never know the real moon.

JL

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Hello,

I hope that you are well

I would like to start off by quickly introducing myself.

I am a (biological) woman who does not strongly identify with the concept of gender beyond mere energy.

I am probably an agnostic - I am curious but adhere to no particular beliefs.

My childhood upbringing was influenced by NEW testament biblical influences and my teenage life was influenced by a mixture of Buddhism, New Ageism, Catholicism, and a generic mash up of Paganism.

My childhood years, church influenced were fairly un-diverse but my teenage years were multi cultural, multi- religious and diverse in perspectives.

I had a number of friends who were actively following Buddhist principals and thought but I note that they were well IDENTIFIED individuals with fairly anchored perceptions of self to begin with where as I was raised to view the collective before the individual - God before person-hood, charity and the needs of the collective before individualism and women in servitude to other...so...
I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

Not exactly sure how to approach this subject.
So I’ll narrate a story of two sisters – both ½ Papua New Guinean ½ British.

The one sister I see as having a PNG soul. When she goes to PNG she just plonks herself down on the ground with the other village women – an instant relief, instant contentment. She has ‘arrived’ – she is whole – she is in her real-reality element. She has a collective/tribal self id.

The other sister whom I see as having a British soul cannot really enter the circle, she cannot quite figure out what the women silently share or have in common and why she is on the outside of it – looking in ... as if there was an invisible barrier. So she communicates with concepts and whatnot but feels quite alienated – she only feels in her real-reality element, when she is with her Western white friends. She has a separate-self-id.

*

My primary caregiver till I was about 5–6 was my grandmother, who had a collective/tribal self id. She didn’t have a-separate-self ego, she only lived in connection to ‘things’. So that became my id.

When I moved to live with my (now passed away) partner’s Aboriginal ‘mob’ – I was instantly ‘at home’ – I had ‘arrived’. I was in my real-reality element, despite the racial and cultural difference (though similar really).
This is something my Western white friends could/cannot get in a million years and wondered why I would choose to pretend to be ‘aboriginal’, when obviously (to the eye) I am not.
But without my aboriginal friends I would have felt like a ‘lost soul’ in Oz.

So I am familiar with the difficulties living in and juggling both worlds. I have never fully ‘achieved’ this separate-self-id myself, plus my inner ‘value system’ goes against it. So perhaps the best thing one can do is to carve a path for one’s self in-no-man’s-land …. in-between-the-2-worlds.

*

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Hello,

I hope that you are well

I would like to start off by quickly introducing myself.

I am a (biological) woman who does not strongly identify with the concept of gender beyond mere energy.

I am probably an agnostic - I am curious but adhere to no particular beliefs.

My childhood upbringing was influenced by NEW testament biblical influences and my teenage life was influenced by a mixture of Buddhism, New Ageism, Catholicism, and a generic mash up of Paganism.

My childhood years, church influenced were fairly un-diverse but my teenage years were multi cultural, multi- religious and diverse in perspectives.

I had a number of friends who were actively following Buddhist principals and thought but I note that they were well IDENTIFIED individuals with fairly anchored perceptions of self to begin with where as I was raised to view the collective before the individual - God before person-hood, charity and the needs of the collective before individualism and women in servitude to other...so...
I have really struggled with the idea of "ANATA" - Non self... it seems like such a terrifying idea to me as someone who has been encouraged to put 'other' before self -
It seems like a sacrifice I just cannot afford to take...


So I wonder - what is it that I am possibly misunderstanding and how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self? As opposed to someone who is raised with a strong sense of identification to self.

Anatta literally means 'an' or 'ana' (no) and 'atta' (self), but 'self' is used to mean a fundamental identity, and 'no self' merely means there is no such thing, but rather, all phenomena arise interdependently, sans a fundamental substance. Most of the rhetoric says something about 'non-self' in this context.


There is a more practical application of the idea which affirms how the things we experience are 'not-self'. This is related to Buddhism's core tenet of impermanence with is directly derived from the substanceless nature of phenomena. Simply, because experience comes and goes in a continuous flux of change, no phenomena in the world can be regarded as 'me, mine, my or I'.

I think the two Buddhist philosophies that provide a rich context to the idea of anatta are 'dependent origins' and the '5 skandas' (5 aggregates). These two are closely related but whereas the former explains the continued rising of subjective phenomena, the latter more directly addresses a person. Please do your own googling on those two subjects.

The key to this is not to take any of it personally because none of this is supposed to pertain to your existence. It really only pertains to the insubstantial, temporal nature of things.

Except it does ..

[sky]

Originally Posted by janielee

Except it does ..

I wonder sometimes why Buddhists spend their lives translating Suttas/Sutras if non of Buddha's Teachings pertain to our existence.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by janielee

Hi there Ariaecheflame

I will answer in two ways:

1. Put aside "anatta" - anatta is not a theory, it's not a philosophy and most of all, in my opinion - it's not a belief system.

Some people pick it up and draw elaborate theories about it, they miss the point - big time.

You ask - how does someone with a sense of no strong identity relate? Well I would say use what is useful to you - put aside (this does not mean dispel or disbelieve, it simply means put aside) that which is not yet.

The path changes and you would know that more than anyone, what is opaque now may be clearer in future - or not. It doesn't matter. It's your life so what matters is your happiness and peace of mind. Really, Buddhism is just about that - a peace of mind that hopefully stands you in stead through all your life.

If you are interested in Buddhism, a good book is "What the Buddha taught" by Rev Walpola Rahula. If you're not, it doesn't really matter, what matters is your happiness.

Just my 2c.

2. how can this concept be relevant to someone like me who has actively had to develop a path towards knowing, cultivating and embodying a sense of self

For a practicing Buddhist (of which no-one needs to be one btw) everything becomes groundwork for the patch. So even a shy self, an insecure self, an unsure self, a weaker self - is merely observed, watched, known for what s/he is.

A friend once said to me that base psychological health is important so - there is also that. In Buddhism there is no-one that will tell you you have to do x or you have to do y. Sure there are encouragements and directions, and each follows what they will. But under that child, there is possibly the hurt, the shame, the history - all of this will eventually be cared for, and tended to, within a practice.

There is no need for talk or thought about anatta per se, all you need to do is start meditating. Buddhist meditation is not like others on this forum - it's a meditation with no bells and whistles and in its simplicity, it offers much in return.

Namaste,

JL

Nice post.