[esconsise]

Hi,

Does this basically just mean that everything in existence, including ourselves, are constantly in the process of change and therefore nothing remains fixed from one moment to the next? Is this what the term 'non-self' means?

I've always struggled to understand the meaning of this word. Is it that we don't have a 'fixed', permanent self or identity?

[Bwvapays]

Is it that we don't have a 'fixed', permanent self or identity?

Yes, goes around that. Try to contemplate how things are impermanent by nature... and of those "things" ours is too. So to get attached, to cling to an identity or to crave for it... sooner or later will lead to Dukkha. Things are at the end, all, unsatisfactory. Discerning about that will prevent us from painful and useless attachments.

At least this is my actual understanding...

[VottCetaVeivE]

Things are at the end, all, unsatisfactory.

Thanks, you're cheery!!

Yes, that is much as I thought Kaarine...thank you.

Saw this paragraph on page 26 of the 'Handbook for Mankind' by Buddhadasa Bhikku and liked it:

‘Things are more dangerous than fire because we can at least see a fire blazing away and so don’t go too close to it, whereas all 'things' are a fire we can’t see. Consequently we go about voluntarily picking up handfuls of fire which is invariably painful‘.

[Pataacculakp]

Hi Aasha this might be helpful:

"Three Universal Characteristics"

http://www.buddhanet.net/budasa6.htm


and this :

"Anatta and Rebirth"

http://das-buddhistische-haus.de/pag...nd_Rebirth.pdf

[DoctorAlexandro]

Thanks Aloka-D for the links...

[ChexEcodece]

Does this basically just mean that everything in [conditioned] existence, including ourselves, are constantly in the process of change and therefore nothing remains fixed from one moment to the next? Is this what the term 'non-self' means?

I've always struggled to understand the meaning of this word. Is it that we don't have a 'fixed', permanent self or identity?

Yes and yes.

"Non-self" means no (permanent) self can be found because all conditioned things, including any "self" thoughts & identity, are constantly in the process of change.

"Non-self" also means, because conditioned things are constantly in the process of change, we can never claim them to be "ours" because the process of change will inevitably take those things away from us; dispossess us.

We can ask the questions: "Do I have a permanent identity?" "Is my identity today the same as my identity when I was five years old?"

But permanent peace can be found, namely, Nirvana (the end of greed, hatred and delusion).

Kind regards

Element

[byncnombmub]

Thanks, you're cheery!!

I am enthusiastic about having found the teachings of Buddha... sometimes, I know, over enthusiastic...

[CatLuvkaLover]

Thanks Element...

[AriaDesser]

Hi,

Does this basically just mean that everything in existence, including ourselves, are constantly in the process of change and therefore nothing remains fixed from one moment to the next? Is this what the term 'non-self' means?

Hi Aasha,
Good question. Essentially you are asking about two different things, hence the confusion perhaps.

If we investigate phenomena in order to establish whether they exist in a particular way, then this will result in an opinion, as any conclusions we reach are intellectually generated - even if we think that we are 100% correct in our conclusions. I don't take issue with this, as we need to make assumptions of all kinds to make sense of our lives and function.

Anatta, or not-self is (in truth) not a statement of 'ultimate reality' in an intellectual way. It is a direct realisation and there is a vast difference between the two, even if it seems that they are pointing at exactly the same thing. Thinking "all is not-self" won't have any real effect on the defilements. 'Seeing' it however helps eradicate them, as we no longer take ownership of them or nurture them as 'ours'.

Within the Mahayana system we can run into the same problem. When people claim that everything is "empty of inherent existence", it is mainly seen as an ontological statement of how things "in reality" exist. Then we can conclude that everything is empty and feel good about it. Same problem though, it won't lessen greed, anger or ignorance.

If you look with more care at what some teachers are trying to convey, you will also see that it describes a process, not an ontology. Self-grasping mind habitually imputes self or other onto raw sense data. It's an innate process, as even animals do this. It's clear that this process is a function of our mind and nothing else.

This is the real meaning of this "emptiness". Not a statement of "being", rather a discovery that the attributes we impute are all from our own side, not from the object itself. Thus, self and other are empty of possessing the attributes we impute onto them. They are not empty in an ontological sense, as to claim such is paradoxically to impute another attribute! Understanding this lessens the habitual function of the self-grasping mind.

I hope this helps clear some confusion. Perhaps it's just made it worse

Namaste
Kris

[bZEUWO4F]

Following Kris post...

I can't hold a hard intellectual demonstration of this because it goes much more about personal experience, also, personal realization and I do not have still the skills needed to transmit this experiences.

Before coming to BWB I really was stagnant with the popular books that are at hand in bookstores and where the "empty of inherent existence" is a kind of Christian "creed" that can lead to mental amusement and endless elaborations about things, which has never been the purpose, at least, of the teachings of the historical Buddha.

Later on, when I started Zazen and, after that, being encouraged to give a sincere look at the teachings of the historical Buddha, aided with the comments of the Thai Forest Teachers where Not Self is the cornerstone of contemplation, something started to become a little bit clear.

Lets say that doing philosophies, having views and meshing with ontologies is not my best strength. Maybe I have a kind of brain deficiency in that cognitive area. Not Self has been a very revealing experience because, IMO, of its directedness to explore this in our person. Contrary to what one may assume this experience gives the real taste of what the Buddha is really asking about cessation of Dukkha: understanding that there is no real ownership. That at the end we can not own anything because of its impermanent nature and thus its final unsatisfactoriness.

I think that "empty of inherent existence" is a more sided, gentle, kind and too chatted way to the experience not self and not self is the direct way once and for all.

Just a few ideas that come to mind...

[portoskins]

Like a lot of ideas in Buddhism, this is something I can quite easily grasp intellectually, however I don't understand them at a more deeper, one could say, intuitive level, when I do I suppose I will have made a breakthrough.

[SpecialOFFER]

Hi Kris and Kaarine,

Sorry for not commenting on your postings earlier….have had a few technical problems!! Hopefully all sorted out now though.

Yes, I understand about this concept of ‘non-self’ being an experiential one, rather than just purely understanding the words and their meaning, because as you say, knowledge in itself won’t help us overcome the mental defilements of ignorance, greed and hatred - it’s a change of heart and real insight that is required - and not so easy to achieve!!

I want to be able to understand, at a deep level, the basic central meaning of the Buddha’s main teachings - The Three Characteristics of Conditioned Existence and The Four Noble Truths - to enable me to put these things into practice in my daily life without reading an endless list of books, if possible, because I want to concentrate on improving my meditation technique and also have the time to really enjoy being mindful and living in the present moment. I think that is what you were saying about the Thai Forest Tradition Kaarine, in that they focus more on the practice and on the Buddha’s real message.

Lets say that doing philosophies, having views and meshing with ontologies is not my best strength. Maybe I have a kind of brain deficiency in that cognitive area. Not Self has been a very revealing experience because, IMO, of its directedness to explore this in our person.

And yes, what you experience is very difficult, if not impossible, to put into words, no matter how hard you try - I agree.

I think to begin with, maybe I should just concentrate on reading through these course notes I was given from the Buddhist Centre I used to go along to. I started reading them a few years ago, but didn’t really persist with it. They are just a basic outline of the main teachings. They were handed out to people who attended their evening classes in Introductory Buddhism, as an accompaniment to the actual class content given by the teachers there, so they are pretty sketchy. They are quite good though, but I’m hoping you can help me fill in the blanks and expand on them. They cover the essentials of Buddhism and meditation, and then go on to the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path; the wheel of life; the spiral path and the mandala of enlightenment; and finally the way of the Bodhisattva.

The ‘Handbook for Mankind’ is an excellent book for a beginner like myself - nice and simple!!

I enjoy asking questions of everyone here because its interesting and good fun, and it motivates me to find out more and also to do the practice. If I didn’t have this I would just give up, because I think you need the encouragement and support of like-minded people who share your goals. I know the questions I’m asking are very straightforward and simple at the moment, but its more to do with the interaction and the encouragement this gives me, rather than not being able to understand anything I’m reading. Some of the topics however that are discussed on these boards, are like EG says, degree level French, and which go right over my head regardless of how many times I read and re-read them!! - but one day hopefully I’ll know what you are all talking about and be able to join in!

[gluckmeea]

I enjoy asking questions of everyone here because its interesting and good fun, and it motivates me to find out more and also to do the practice.

Hi Aasha,
I'm glad it's helping. There are two ways to find out more; read books etc, and meditate. Meditation is the real way to find out more because Buddha's wisdom arose from within his meditation. It's a radically different way to 'find out more' as it means going inside to look - a landscape most people are unfamiliar with.

[hereiamguy]

it means going inside to look - a landscape most people are unfamiliar with.

[iroxmxinau]

Hi Aasha,

Welcome back again!

I think that is what you were saying about the Thai Forest Tradition Kaarine, in that they focus more on the practice and on the Buddha’s real message.

Those guys are really amazing. IMO, they reflect a very honest practice very close to what the Buddha ask for Bikkhus and Bikkhunis. Their teachings make easy the understanding of the ones of the historical Buddha. They do not mess with views, do not seem worried about them but in the direct resolve of what the Buddha taught. But it is just an impression because I have never met one of them, unfortunately... and seems I will never.

And yes, what you experience is very difficult, if not impossible, to put into words, no matter how hard you try - I agree. Sure... the only words that come to my mind are to contemplate anicca, dukkha and anatta. The careful contemplation of those.

I enjoy asking questions of everyone here because its interesting and good fun, and it motivates me to find out more and also to do the practice. And I enjoy your enthusiasm Aasha.

[AlissBart]

Different people have different needs, and at different times in their lives. Meditation is definitely important, but so is knowledge as an initial guideline, something to reflect on. But it is even better to have a good guide in real life, someone experienced and accomplished. These internet forums can be helpful but nothing beats an experienced and accomplished teacher.

Coming back to the title of your thread, all it really means (in terms of it being relevant to your practice) is that it isn't a fixed, kind of eternal thing which exists independently. It arises dependently upon our kleshas (2nd Arya/Noble truth), and can be overcome for that reason too if we overcome the causes (3rd Arya/Noble truth).

[Gubocang]

But it is even better to have a good guide in real life, someone experienced and accomplished.

Unfortuntately I don't have access to a Buddhist Centre or a good teacher at the moment, but I'm getting lots of good tips here with regard to what to read to start me off.

It arises dependently upon our kleshas (2nd Arya/Noble truth) Sorry, what does kleshas mean?

[JohnImamadviser]

Sorry, what does kleshas mean?

Hi Aasha, in Tibetan Buddhism 'kleshas' means emotional obscurations.

[bonyclayd]

Unfortuntately I don't have access to a Buddhist Centre or a good teacher at the moment, but I'm getting lots of good tips here with regard to what to read to start me off.

Don't worry Aasha. Try to keep in touch with the Thai Forest Tradition writings. IMO, they do not demand obedience to a Guru or an attachment toward a Tradition or to be stressed about being into a Sangha, as others do in their books. And that is good if, as many people on earth, do not have a "good" tradition to practice with. Also here, you can get some good guidance from some skilled forum members.

[avaicavum]

Hi Aasha, in Tibetan Buddhism 'kleshas' means emotional obscurations.

Thanks Aloka-D.