non self

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

non self

Postby befriend » Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:02 pm

I don't see how not having control over ones bodily functions, thoughts, views, etc.... is non self. could someone explain this to me, please? thank you, befriend
befriend
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am


Re: non self

Postby befriend » Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:37 am

what does form mean, in Buddhism?
befriend
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

Re: non self

Postby santa100 » Sat Oct 12, 2013 1:05 am

santa100
 
Posts: 1522
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: non self

Postby Virgo » Sat Oct 12, 2013 1:23 am

He befriend ruupa is form.

See: ]
Exposition of Paramattha Dhammas II (Rúpa)


Rúpa paramattha dhamma is the reality which does not know anything 1. It arises and falls away because of conditions, just as in the case of citta and cetasika.
Rúpa paramattha dhamma includes 28 different kinds of rúpa. The meaning of rúpa, material phenomenon or matter, is different from matter in conventional sense, such as table, chair, or book. Among the 28 kinds of rúpa, there is one kind of rúpa, visible object or colour, citta can experience through the eyes. That which appears through the eyes is the only kind of rúpa which can be seen by citta. As regards the other 27 rúpas, these cannot be seen by citta, but they can be experienced through the appropriate doorways by the cittas concerned. Sound, for example, can be experienced by citta through the ears.


- http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para2.htm

:namaste:Kevin
Virgo
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: non self

Postby befriend » Sat Oct 12, 2013 1:55 am

someone said to me, views are nonself, because we cant control them, if we could control them they would be self. we would say please go away view, and it would obey, or stay in my mind view, and it would stay. but this is not the case so views are non self, don't cling to it as being yours. do I have to understand how a self would be able to control views?
befriend
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

Re: non self

Postby chownah » Sat Oct 12, 2013 3:10 am

befriend wrote:someone said to me, views are nonself, because we cant control them, if we could control them they would be self. we would say please go away view, and it would obey, or stay in my mind view, and it would stay. but this is not the case so views are non self, don't cling to it as being yours. do I have to understand how a self would be able to control views?

I think the answer to this is, no. There is no reason to try to understand something which does not happen. The Buddha taught about how views just arise based on mental conditions. That teaching is called dependent arising or dependent origination or dependent co-arising......take your pick, they all mean the same thing......many times people just type DO as a shortcut. It is rather complicated....it is the buddha's teaching to show how things don't happen because of a self but that they happen because conditions are right for them to happen with no self involved at all.
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2655
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: non self

Postby befriend » Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:07 am

thank you very much
befriend
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

Re: non self

Postby reflection » Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:33 pm

I get the idea that you try to understand 'nonself' by trying to understand self. But self is not one thing or one view even. It is a collection of different views that people can have and so you can't really understand it as a fixed thing. For example, the idea of being in control of something is per definition a view of self. Even if you don't know what exactly is in control or how it works, if you have an idea of being in control, that is self view. But since the Buddha said, no control like that exists, that kind of self view is wrong.
User avatar
reflection
 
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: non self

Postby kirk5a » Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:28 pm

befriend wrote:not having control over ones bodily functions, thoughts, views, etc

The notion that one's own volitional activities are totally uncontrollable is inherently self-contradictory, and an extreme philosophical view. Fortunately, that's not what the Buddha taught. I think Ven. Thanissaro presents a balanced perspective on the relationship of control, no-control and anatta.

Our experience of the present moment is composed of three sorts of things: the results of past actions, present actions, and the results of present actions. We have no control over the results of past actions, but we do have some freedom — some element of control — in our choice of our present actions. The question of exactly how much control and how much freedom is something that we can discover only by trying to act as skillfully as we can with each moment. This is why the topic of skillful action is one of the Buddha's most basic teachings.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tself.html
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
kirk5a
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm


Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests