Anattā (no self)

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Gem

... Buddhism doesn't have a self theory.

Every word of Buddha and of Buddhism is directed at a self.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Every word of Buddha and of Buddhism is directed at a self.

The purpose of a teaching such as non-self isn't to convince anyone they don't exist, but to undermine the 'cause' of suffering by making people conscious of it. The whole practice is the insight into the nature of reality and the way JK put it, 'it is the truth that liberates, not your efforts to be free'.


It is just true that there is a conscious experience, albeit subjective, and only you know what is like for you. This is the sense of talking to people as individualised conscious experiences, but in essence I am having a different experience in each moment in the same way as you are having a different experience to me now, and I think it is only the identification with the experience that makes it seem as if we are each enduring as different, disparate individual selves.

[Rain95]

identification with the experience

I would say we can't really identify with experience. The true self has experience. Experience is what is happening now. What we can identify with is a memory or thought of an experience though.

The conceptual is the problem, not the real, not reality. Experience is reality. Memories about an experience is conceptual. Thoughts about an experience is conceptual. Opinions about experience is conceptual.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Rain95

I would say we can't really identify with experience. The true self has experience. Experience is what is happening now. What we can identify with is a memory or thought of an experience though.

Yes. That makes sense.

The conceptual is the problem, not the real, not reality. Experience is reality. Memories about an experience is conceptual. Thoughts about an experience is conceptual. Opinions about experience is conceptual.

Indeed, this sounds right.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Rain95

I would say we can't really identify with experience. The true self has experience. Experience is what is happening now. What we can identify with is a memory or thought of an experience though.

The conceptual is the problem, not the real, not reality. Experience is reality. Memories about an experience is conceptual. Thoughts about an experience is conceptual. Opinions about experience is conceptual.

Isn't this just a conceptual idea also that is being identified with?

There is in my eyes no way round identifying with experience.

What is happening now is what is being identified as happening now.

'now' is just another concept, a linear perspective concept.

non-self doesn't apply to awareness of experience / experiencing I would say.


x daz x

[Rain95]

This now moment has a lot of potential. We can experience anger, conflict, peace, love, hate, frustration, joy, bliss. What determines which of these potentials we experience? Circumstance?

According to these teachings, circumstances do not determine our experience, what we "think" about the circumstances does. Our natural resting state is one of peace and joy. Resisting and judging now is what creates the self caused suffering.

Maybe now we just fell down and broke our leg, maybe now is getting a phone call that we just lost our job, maybe now is getting married or having someone tell us that they love us, maybe it is winning the lottery or having a physical illness or pain finally go away. Maybe now is dying and leaving the body or maybe now is being born and merging with a body.

Experiences come and go. Some we control and others we do not. But in each experience we have the freedom to experience it at peace within. Yes we are in each experience, we are conscious and alive, but the conflict causing noise in our heads being a part of the experience is optional. That we do not have to identify with.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Rain95

This now moment has a lot of potential. We can experience anger, conflict, peace, love, hate, frustration, joy, bliss. What determines which of these potentials we experience? Circumstance?

According to these teachings, circumstances do not determine our experience, what we "think" about the circumstances does. Our natural resting state is one of peace and joy. Resisting and judging now is what creates the self caused suffering.

Maybe now we just fell down and broke our leg, maybe now is getting a phone call that we just lost our job, maybe now is getting married or having someone tell us that they love us, maybe it is winning the lottery or having a physical illness or pain finally go away. Maybe now is dying and leaving the body or maybe now is being born and merging with a body.

Experiences come and go. Some we control and others we do not. But in each experience we have the freedom to experience it at peace within. Yes we are in each experience, we are conscious and alive, but the conflict causing noise in our heads being a part of the experience is optional. That we do not have to identify with.

Buddha taught that our mind creates our experiences and what goes on inside is more important than the outside, so experiences can be controlled. All of our experiences are based on the thoughts we create in our heads about situations , learning how to control our thoughts also controls our experiences..

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Rain95

This now moment has a lot of potential. We can experience anger, conflict, peace, love, hate, frustration, joy, bliss. What determines which of these potentials we experience? Circumstance?

According to these teachings, circumstances do not determine our experience, what we "think" about the circumstances does. Our natural resting state is one of peace and joy. Resisting and judging now is what creates the self caused suffering.

Maybe now we just fell down and broke our leg, maybe now is getting a phone call that we just lost our job, maybe now is getting married or having someone tell us that they love us, maybe it is winning the lottery or having a physical illness or pain finally go away. Maybe now is dying and leaving the body or maybe now is being born and merging with a body.

Experiences come and go. Some we control and others we do not. But in each experience we have the freedom to experience it at peace within. Yes we are in each experience, we are conscious and alive, but the conflict causing noise in our heads being a part of the experience is optional. That we do not have to identify with.

These are just more self identified conceptual understandings.

Where does non-self-non identity figure in all of this?

This has been my point.

Non-self / non identity relating to self has no bearing on experiencing experiences in this world environment.

The 'now' is just another self reference for self identifying the 'now' instead of the past or the future or anything related to a linear perspective.

Could you perhaps give me an example of a buddhist monk experiencing a 'now' moment without identifying self in the 'now'.

Would the monk be aware of self in someway?

Would the monk be aware of breathing? Seeing? Hearing?

Would the monk be perceiving in someway?


x daz x

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by God-Like

These are just more self identified conceptual understandings....

Unless the teachings are actualized, lived. Then they move from being ego's playthings to being that which destroys ego.

Originally Posted by God-Like

Could you perhaps give me an example of a buddhist monk experiencing a 'now' moment without identifying self in the 'now'.

It's not a monk thing, it's a human thing, an everyone thing. It's in every act of unselfish love.

Even a monk can pursue it because they want to end suffering, caused to others and oneself. Then it too is an act of love.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Unless the teachings are actualized, lived. Then they move from being ego's playthings to being that which destroys ego.



It's not a monk thing, it's a human thing, an everyone thing. It's in every act of unselfish love.

Even a monk can pursue it because they want to end suffering, caused to others and oneself. Then it too is an act of love.

Can you give me an example of what is actualised that no longer becomes a concept when in experiencing life in someway .

The experience that relates to a non identified self.

I used the buddhist monk reference because of the buddhist understanding on non-self, non identity of self.

I am trying to establish how anyone goes about their business while not self identifying.

For example, how would anyone be able to identify with tea, without self identifying tea in reflection of themselves.


x daz x