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.

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

[Joe Mc]

Originally Posted by janielee

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

Thanks for sharing interesting references :) i shall mull over them. Shanti !

[Gem]

From my point of view, the main thing is a pretty simple matter of self-awareness. Just the truth of 'what is' just as it is as it is experienced by at the moment. It is simply a state of knowing - this is how it is. That's what I consider to be the 'way' of just being conscious of what is true.

[Ariaecheflame]

Originally Posted by Joe Mc

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.

Lol... YouTube - making us all masters of nothing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No one religion or philosophy serves me but many branches from lots of religions and philosophies do.

The concept of 'non self' interests me from a perspective of finding peace which religion can't offer me because other religions direct me to an outward sense of salvation and peace where as I am more interested in fostering and nurturing an inner sense of peace which is not dependant on an outer force


I think that when first posting this I was feeling that their was a key step missing. You mentioned You Tube...I find you tube dangerous in the regard that people who might be searching for 'themselves' who could tend to latch onto all sorts of ideas - as they will regardless through books and through gurus of all sorts.
The ideas may not be directly harmful in and of themselves but when taken literally and from someone with a trauma background they can be damaging... Or any other background not quite as typical of the usual audience.

One example I can think of is you tube pop psychologists, who seem to be in it for mere views... Giving very broad advice as universally acceptable in the context and without disclaimer that it might actually be harmful for people who do not fit into the targeted audience.
I haven't seen anything much like that with this particular topic... Yet.

Licened psychologists have a degree of responsibility to provide disclaimers and be as clear in communicating context then online gurus who do not have the same responsibility.

I was feeling quite overwhelmed and frustrated when I posted here - probably at myself mostly that in the past I have taken the ideas of 'no self' and 'no attachment' so literally and given the context of my background it reinforced unhealthy practices.


I guess as I was posting this I was coming to realise my own desire to be responsible and mindful when communicating with others about any ideas and in particular if these sorts of conversations come up which they inevitably do from time to time.

Though I am learning such habits more broadly anyway - recognising that although we are 'all adults' who have the ability to discern and do our own research (haha)... We are not all coming from level foundations and we all have differing levels and needs of processing information... so I have been pondering how much responsibility I choose to take in my own communication...



Though - it is like you said as well... Language doesn't always cut it.

I think that I can do better though so I will ponder that uncomfortable thought with compassion... Lol

I'll leave my reply at that for now and return again when I am able to :-)

Take care.

[Joe Mc]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Lol... YouTube - making us all masters of nothing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No one religion or philosophy serves me but many branches from lots of religions and philosophies do.

The concept of 'non self' interests me from a perspective of finding peace which religion can't offer me because other religions direct me to an outward sense of salvation and peace where as I am more interested in fostering and nurturing an inner sense of peace which is not dependant on an outer force


I think that when first posting this I was feeling that their was a key step missing. You mentioned You Tube...I find you tube dangerous in the regard that people who might be searching for 'themselves' who could tend to latch onto all sorts of ideas - as they will regardless through books and through gurus of all sorts.
The ideas may not be directly harmful in and of themselves but when taken literally and from someone with a trauma background they can be damaging... Or any other background not quite as typical of the usual audience.

One example I can think of is you tube pop psychologists, who seem to be in it for mere views... Giving very broad advice as universally acceptable in the context and without disclaimer that it might actually be harmful for people who do not fit into the targeted audience.
I haven't seen anything much like that with this particular topic... Yet.

Licened psychologists have a degree of responsibility to provide disclaimers and be as clear in communicating context then online gurus who do not have the same responsibility.

I was feeling quite overwhelmed and frustrated when I posted here - probably at myself mostly that in the past I have taken the ideas of 'no self' and 'no attachment' so literally and given the context of my background it reinforced unhealthy practices.


I guess as I was posting this I was coming to realise my own desire to be responsible and mindful when communicating with others about any ideas and in particular if these sorts of conversations come up which they inevitably do from time to time.

Though I am learning such habits more broadly anyway - recognising that although we are 'all adults' who have the ability to discern and do our own research (haha)... We are not all coming from level foundations and we all have differing levels and needs of processing information... so I have been pondering how much responsibility I choose to take in my own communication...



Though - it is like you said as well... Language doesn't always cut it.

I think that I can do better though so I will ponder that uncomfortable thought with compassion... Lol

I'll leave my reply at that for now and return again when I am able to :-)

Take care.

Yes we can be discerning and enter into healthy cultures, even you-tube lol, and in all things. Your initial post just sounded like you had got yourself into a bind concerning the Theravadin understanding of emptiness or Anatta. I've been there a few times in that bind and can still slip into it. Because its so logical the course of what is generally said concerning it, and it is so convincing that we end up saying to ourselves, at least our intellectual minds do, we say how can 2+2 =4 be wrong. But this morning i thought maybe you should look at the Mahayana or Vajrayana explanation and pointers of 'Emptiness' and what they say ? They say 'Emptiness' is congnisant, luminous, alive in other words..? hmmm just a thought, a suggestion. Anyway all the best in whatever you choose to do ..thanks for the questions and quandries ..makes me think a bit more ...and thanks for your reply :) 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

[Ariaecheflame]

Originally Posted by God-Like

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

Lol... That was a bit of a mind bender - a wonderfully warped journey through the mental matrix.

I think I get what you are saying though.

When I was just realising my dissociative disorder a while back there was a 'self which was realising it!!

This is not something I would have been able to grasp in the initial stages of re-connecting though as my sense of self was very weak and disconnected.

(I have actually had quite a significant shift in 'sense of self' since posting this thread so am having to think back to the motions I was experiencing as a point of reference).

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Ariaecheflame

Lol... That was a bit of a mind bender - a wonderfully warped journey through the mental matrix.

I think I get what you are saying though.

When I was just realising my dissociative disorder a while back there was a 'self which was realising it!!

This is not something I would have been able to grasp in the initial stages of re-connecting though as my sense of self was very weak and disconnected.

(I have actually had quite a significant shift in 'sense of self' since posting this thread so am having to think back to the motions I was experiencing as a point of reference).

It can seem to be a bit of a mind bender for sure, intentionally presented in a way where peeps need to look at what is suggested about no self, non self ..

There was a woman called Suzanne Segal and she thought she had lost herself quite literally after an experience she had . She at one point pretended that everything was normal but inside she felt fearful because she had lost this sense of herself ..

What happens however is there is one sense that replaces another sense and this isn't losing self at all .

It's experiencing another self reflection perhaps inline with what you implied regarding the self that was realizing your dissociative order .

Where there is a thought attained there is self .. there for sure can be many reflections of self and one can express a healthy ego while beating their chests while another floats around almost as if they are invisible to others .

What I feel is presented at times is peeps put out a line of questioning self in such a way where you will never find such an entity that exists in it's own right ..

So therefore self is illusory or doesn't exist .. but one doesn't have to put self into a box that entertains an entity unto itself .

One can simply see that mind-consciousness-matter-awareness is so entwined together that you can't prise self from anything in order to point self out from amongst the union of mind-consciousness-matter-awareness .

You can't ask the question that pertains to self without the thought of it and that self cannot entertain the thought of that question without being consciously aware ..

Peeps are looking for self in the same way one looks for a needle in a haystack ..

you will never find it because it isn't something to be found in that same way .

self is self evident, no need to look anywhere, self is self evident like said through what you are being self aware, being self conscious .


x daz x