views without a thinker
views without a thinker
there is no self, so there is nothing to call me or mine, not sight no feeling no thought, none of those things belong to us there is no thinker. but what about when we stub our toe and there is pain is there self then?
Take care of mindfulness and mindfulness will take care of you.
Re: views without a thinker
Self consciousness arises dependently. Conciousness "mine" arises dependently. Feeling and thought arise dependently.befriend wrote:there is no self, so there is nothing to call me or mine, not sight no feeling no thought, none of those things belong to us there is no thinker.
If self consciousness and/or conciousness "me"/"mine" arise dependently pain may do so as well. If the former is not the case then what could feel pain?befriend wrote:but what about when we stub our toe and there is pain is there self then?
Re: views without a thinker
This seems to be a current theme....befriend wrote:there is no self, so there is nothing to call me or mine, not sight no feeling no thought, none of those things belong to us there is no thinker. but what about when we stub our toe and there is pain is there self then?
The Buddha does not teach that there is no self. That would actually be an extreme view in his understanding.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tself.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: views without a thinker
Did you reach this conclusion through personal experience or through literary research?cbonanno wrote:The Buddha does not teach that there is no self. That would actually be an extreme view in his understanding.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: views without a thinker
Hi Befriend
Pain exists but not permenanent. You can avoid it.
Please weare a steel cap shoe next time.
In the Visuddhi Magga it is therefore said:
Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found.
The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there,
Nirvana is, but not the man that enters it.
The path is, but no traveller on it is seen.
Please see the attahed link for more details.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el202.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pain exists but not permenanent. You can avoid it.
Please weare a steel cap shoe next time.
In the Visuddhi Magga it is therefore said:
Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found.
The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there,
Nirvana is, but not the man that enters it.
The path is, but no traveller on it is seen.
Please see the attahed link for more details.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el202.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: views without a thinker
there is no self, so there is nothing to call me or mine, not sight no feeling no thought, none of those things belong to us there is no thinker. but what about when we stub our toe and there is pain is there self then?
Did you deliberately stub your toe or was it an accident? If it was an accident why should the the pain be taken personally. Pain arose because the toe contacted a hard object, that is all. You don't own the pain.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Re: views without a thinker
Indeed, I have not found any sutta where the Buddha says "there is no self". He does not say "there is self" either. In the suttas the Buddha tells us to regard any phenomenon as ''This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self."cbonanno wrote:The Buddha does not teach that there is no self. That would actually be an extreme view in his understanding.
That's super interesting.
Pain: this is not mine, this is not I, this is not my selfbefriend wrote:but what about when we stub our toe and there is pain is there self then?
Re: views without a thinker
Hi SamKR
if pain exist, is in it wrong to say that "pain is not mine" or "pain is mine" instead of seen pain as a impermanance process? Please also consider when I am in pain, only I sufer not you!
if pain exist, is in it wrong to say that "pain is not mine" or "pain is mine" instead of seen pain as a impermanance process? Please also consider when I am in pain, only I sufer not you!
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: views without a thinker
The Buddha taught that a human is made up of the Five Aggregates, but this does not mean there is a "self". The "self" is a term given as a form of expression and in a way to solidify the ego which is an illusion as well. Just because there is no "self" that does not mean there is no existence. You are still comprised of matter and mental formations but the term "self" is merely an illusion because there is no essence found in man, simliar to if you break down a chair you will not find a chair essence. A complete chair with a seat,back, and legs is called "chair" and is considered a singular object rather than a compilation of legs, backing, and a seat. Similarly because we view ourselves in a singular manner we think the "self" exists when in actuality you won't find a "self" in feelings, mental formations, or anything for that matter. That is why in Buddhism we do not believe in a permanent soul or essence of man.
"A silver bird
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
Re: views without a thinker
How we grasp the doctrine relating to the khandas makes all the difference, ime. So many Buddhists seem to get fixated on the idea ' I have no self', but THAT statement is dismissed as wrong view, because (as I understand it) it is still a particular view of self.
If we put aside the notion of 'do I have a self' or 'do I have no self' (existent vs non existence) and instead, focus on cause and effect, that is better. 'Who feels' is the wrong question. We should rather ask, 'with what as a supporting condition, can feeling arise?' And the answer is, 'contact'.
If we put aside the notion of 'do I have a self' or 'do I have no self' (existent vs non existence) and instead, focus on cause and effect, that is better. 'Who feels' is the wrong question. We should rather ask, 'with what as a supporting condition, can feeling arise?' And the answer is, 'contact'.
Last edited by manas on Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Re: views without a thinker
Of course. Because what could it be that does not have? If it's felt like "I" and determined as such then it is the (felt) self that is affirmed.manas wrote:... ' I have no self', but THAT statement it's dismissed as wrong view, because (as I understand it) it is still a particular view of self.
Re: views without a thinker
Well we should try and see what the Buddha was saying through the creation of the non-self doctrine anatta, for if we did not and simply called it incorrect because it being a view, it's existence would not come to be. I've heard some teachers say no-view is right-view but I think a view can be used skillfully without carrying it around with you. When a bolt is loose, you use a wrench to tighten it. You are using that wrench in a skillful manner. Using that wrench in an unskillful way would be using it to pick something out of your teeth or to carry it around with you at every moment saying "this is my wrench". Similarly, we can use the view of no-self in a skillful way without carrying it around with us.manas wrote:How we grasp the doctrine relating to the khandas makes all the difference, ime. So many Buddhists seem to get fixated on the idea ' I have no self', but THAT statement is dismissed as wrong view, because (as I understand it) it is still a particular view of self.
"A silver bird
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
Re: views without a thinker
The trouble is that how it is presented and defined - even calling it 'the non self doctrine anatta' - seems to affect how people grasp it. I can't put any links up with this dratted 'smart phone' but if you look, Thanissaro Bhikkhu has written about this issue...well we should try and see what the Buddha was saying through the creation of the non-self doctrine anatta,...
Metta
Last edited by manas on Sat Jan 05, 2013 6:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Re: views without a thinker
"The trouble is that how it is presented and defined - even calling it 'the non self doctrine', an expression I've not found in any of the suttas - seems to affect how people grasp it. I can't put any links up with this dratted 'smart phone' but if you look, Thanissaro Bhikkhu has written about this issue..."
In what way would you present and define it? why should it matter what it is called as long as it does not alter the concept of the teaching? Quite frankly, I believe being concerned over the exactness of the name is more of a problem than the issue at hand, it seems there is more conceptualizing than practice taking part. For if the doctrine is put fully into practice it will be easier to understand in both concept and experience.
In what way would you present and define it? why should it matter what it is called as long as it does not alter the concept of the teaching? Quite frankly, I believe being concerned over the exactness of the name is more of a problem than the issue at hand, it seems there is more conceptualizing than practice taking part. For if the doctrine is put fully into practice it will be easier to understand in both concept and experience.
"A silver bird
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."
Re: views without a thinker
Hi nrose
if you google 'no self or not self', and also, 'the not self strategy' (both by T.B.) and read them, that would explain it better. I'm limited as I'm posting from a phone here.
Edit: I hope my previous post did not come across as criticizing, it was not intended in that way.
if you google 'no self or not self', and also, 'the not self strategy' (both by T.B.) and read them, that would explain it better. I'm limited as I'm posting from a phone here.
Edit: I hope my previous post did not come across as criticizing, it was not intended in that way.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.