Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Religions & Faiths > Buddhism

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 16-06-2019, 07:33 AM
Ariaecheflame Ariaecheflame is offline
Master
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2,265
  Ariaecheflame's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentient
Not exactly sure how to approach this subject.
So I’ll narrate a story of two sisters – both Papua New Guinean 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.

*

That was a beautiful post, thank you so much for sharing.

It struck something in me. A cord of recognition.

I know what you mean by the two worlds comment but it is a difficult thing for me to explain...
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 24-06-2019, 07:46 AM
Ariaecheflame Ariaecheflame is offline
Master
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2,265
  Ariaecheflame's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
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.

Thanks Gem.

The core tenant of impermanence is something I am quite comfortable with and speaks to a sense which I was brought up with. Framing it in terms of personal ownership is not a connection I have made prior to reading your response though, so thanks for that perspective.

The rest of your post I will have to consider some more at this particular time.
Though I do think I somewhat grasp what your saying about the lack of person- ablity in regards to temporal nature of... well life and nature... stuff just happens in response to other stuff lol.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums