No self and self not exist

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

No self and self not exist

Post by sentinel »

Dear forum ,

Anatta commonly translated as "no self" or "not self" . Does natthattā’ti (self does not exist) is the same as anatta ?


Thanks

When Vacchagotta asked me whether the self does not exist absolutely, if I had answered that ‘the self does not exist absolutely’ I would have been siding with the ascetics and brahmins who are annihilationists.
Ahañcānanda, vacchagottassa paribbājakassa ‘natthattā’ti puṭṭho samāno ‘natthattā’ti byākareyyaṃ, ye te, ānanda, samaṇabrāhmaṇā ucchedavādā tesametaṃ saddhiṃ abhavissa.
You always gain by giving
User avatar
rhinoceroshorn
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 7:27 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by rhinoceroshorn »

I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
Last edited by rhinoceroshorn on Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Without resistance in all four directions,
content with whatever you get,
enduring troubles with no dismay,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Sutta Nipāta 1.3 - Khaggavisana Sutta
Image
But if they hit you with a stick...?"
"...I will think, 'These people are very civilized, in that they don't hit me with a knife.'..."
"But if they hit you with a knife...?"
"...I will think, 'These people are very civilized, in that they don't take my life with a sharp knife.'..."
SN35.88
SteRo
Posts: 3551
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: अ धीः

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by SteRo »

sentinel wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:13 pm Does natthattā’ti (self does not exist) is the same as anatta ?
"self does not exist" is not the same as "x is not self".
SteRo wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 4:43 am So the core message is appropriate:
Form is not self, the self does not as possess form, form is not in the self, the self is not in form.
Feeling is not self, the self does not as possess feeling, feeling is not in the self, the self is not in feeling.
Perception is not self, the self does not as possess perception, perception is not in the self, the self is not in perception.
Fabrication is not self, the self does not as possess fabrication, fabrication is not in the self, the self is not in fabrication.
Consciousness is not self, the self does not as possess consciousness, consciousness is not in the self, the self is not in consciousness.

And:
The eye is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'
Form is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'
Consciousness is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'
Eye contact is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'
Feeling is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'
Craving is not me, is not my self, this is not what I am.'

And the same as to the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the intellect.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... l#selfview
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... tml#selfid
Exhaling अ and inhaling धीः amounts to བྷྲཱུཾ་བི་ཤྭ་བི་ཤུད་དྷེ
justindesilva
Posts: 1338
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by justindesilva »

rhinoceroshorn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:31 pm I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
Lord Budda expressed the same thing in different ways depending on the psychology of the person in his presence.
If we have a question then we have so many answers from buddas to select the most suitable for us. To understand self or not self we have anatta lakkana sutta, sammadiththi sutta and the best of all Paticca samuppada and many more like Mana sutta. Please read all and select the one that fits.
takso
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2020 6:12 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by takso »

There is self; just leave out the ownership of it..
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 3604
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by confusedlayman »

takso wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 6:16 am There is self; just leave out the ownership of it..
if there is self how its possible to leave owner ship?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
form
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by form »

rhinoceroshorn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:31 pm I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
:goodpost:
justindesilva
Posts: 1338
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by justindesilva »

form wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:54 pm
rhinoceroshorn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:31 pm I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
:goodpost:
Most translations from Pali to English was done by Dr.Rhys David, as a linguist yet a non buddhist. I have seen references that his translations always do not carry the exact meaning.
Rev. Punnaji Thero has corrected some of these translations meaningfully. In fact vedana is a term which should mean feeling , beyond dukka, sukha but also a touch on the mind of a Rupa ( external or internal) which creates a 'mano,' signal of a person which creates a reaction (Sankara,) that created a cognition ( vingnana,) , so said as Rupa, vedana, sangna, sankara, vingnana in re-cognising a concept or object.
Another word in abhidamma which needs attention is phassa as shown by rev. Punnaji.
User avatar
rhinoceroshorn
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 7:27 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by rhinoceroshorn »

justindesilva wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:23 pm
form wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:54 pm
rhinoceroshorn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:31 pm I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
:goodpost:
Most translations from Pali to English was done by Dr.Rhys David, as a linguist yet a non buddhist. I have seen references that his translations always do not carry the exact meaning.
Rev. Punnaji Thero has corrected some of these translations meaningfully. In fact vedana is a term which should mean feeling , beyond dukka, sukha but also a touch on the mind of a Rupa ( external or internal) which creates a 'mano,' signal of a person which creates a reaction (Sankara,) that created a cognition ( vingnana,) , so said as Rupa, vedana, sangna, sankara, vingnana in re-cognising a concept or object.
Another word in abhidamma which needs attention is phassa as shown by rev. Punnaji.
Thanks for this information.
A long time since I noticed how those translations only make everything confusing.
I'll start to retranslate them ALL to fit my purposes. :thumbsup:
Without resistance in all four directions,
content with whatever you get,
enduring troubles with no dismay,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Sutta Nipāta 1.3 - Khaggavisana Sutta
Image
But if they hit you with a stick...?"
"...I will think, 'These people are very civilized, in that they don't hit me with a knife.'..."
"But if they hit you with a knife...?"
"...I will think, 'These people are very civilized, in that they don't take my life with a sharp knife.'..."
SN35.88
form
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by form »

justindesilva wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:23 pm
form wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:54 pm
rhinoceroshorn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:31 pm I don't like those translations because, like dukkha, samadhi, and sati, respectively suffering, concentration, and mindfulness, don't express fully what they mean in Pāḷi and create many unnecessary implications.
For anattā, I prefer impersonality, as Venerable Nyanatiloka uses in his book. As for samadhi, I prefer just translating as 4 jhānas (as they are taught in the suttas, not the commentarial development). As for sati, I prefer remembrance/alertness. As for dukkha, leave it as dukkha.

If you use 'impersonality' you instantly understand what it means, instead of pondering the implications of NOT SELF. :coffee:
Forget about self, remember dependent origination and how everything is a process.
:goodpost:
Most translations from Pali to English was done by Dr.Rhys David, as a linguist yet a non buddhist. I have seen references that his translations always do not carry the exact meaning.
Rev. Punnaji Thero has corrected some of these translations meaningfully. In fact vedana is a term which should mean feeling , beyond dukka, sukha but also a touch on the mind of a Rupa ( external or internal) which creates a 'mano,' signal of a person which creates a reaction (Sankara,) that created a cognition ( vingnana,) , so said as Rupa, vedana, sangna, sankara, vingnana in re-cognising a concept or object.
Another word in abhidamma which needs attention is phassa as shown by rev. Punnaji.
What about bhikkhu bodhi and thanisarro English translation in general?
takso
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2020 6:12 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by takso »

confusedlayman wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:16 am
takso wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 6:16 am There is self; just leave out the ownership of it..
if there is self how its possible to leave owner ship?
Well, one can still go to the cinema to watch movies without owning the copyrights of the movies or the cinema. :juggling:
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by cappuccino »

takso wrote: :juggling:
but you're not juggling Buddhist ideas
User avatar
StrivingforMonkhood
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 4:27 pm

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by StrivingforMonkhood »

We exist as a self in conventional reality, but we do not exist as a self in ultimate reality. That's how it is has been explained to me. We find the balance of the two - or the Middle Way - when we are conducting our lives.

Peace and enlightenment :anjali:
May we all fulfill our deepest wish for happiness

We are already Buddha
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by cappuccino »

Self and no-self are self doctrines


The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic
Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self. Were consciousness self, then this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.' And since consciousness is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.'
takso
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2020 6:12 am

Re: No self and self not exist

Post by takso »

There is no self, it is the result of an ultimate point of view;
There is a self, it is the result of a conventional point of view;
There is non-self, it is the result of an ultimate-cum- conventional point of view;

In the absence of creation, there would be no destruction; there is nothing lingers for annihilation.
Post Reply