"Not-self" is an ungrammatical English translation favoured by some Buddhist gurus. If you wish to take refuge under them, that is fine by me.
For instance, "not-self" is a clumsy hyphenate that needs an article before its noun. "Not the self," is what "not-self" means to imply, if only it were grammatical.
Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
Like I say, you miss the forest, by focusing on trees
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
"Then is there no self?"
A second time, the Blessed One was silent.
Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat and left.
Ananda Sutta
A second time, the Blessed One was silent.
Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat and left.
Ananda Sutta
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
You “exist” only relative to other phenomena. Thus, your “existence” is conditional. There’s no intrinsic or ‘self-caused’ existence.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:04 pmExcept obviously you exist
Hence no self is logically flawed
We can say that the Mississippi River exists in North America and the Amazon River exists in South America. In relation to each other, yes, they are two entirely different streams of water.
But each one, itself, has no constant, unchanging quality. No “self”. You can’t stand in the same river twice. Or even once. The river is entirely composed of constantly changing parts .
This is what the Buddha was explaining about a “self” in persons. Your body and mind are constantly shifting collections of aggregates. Yeah, you can say over here is Rahula and over there is Ananda. Conditionally, they can be said to “exist”. But within either one, no “self” can be found.
So, “obviously you exist” is as much of an illusion as “obviously a tiger chasing you in a dream exists”. Yes, the appearance arises conditionally. But ultimately it does not.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
I just addressed this
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
Unlike me, the Buddha knew better than to waste his time arguing.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:20 pm "Then is there no self?"
A second time, the Blessed One was silent.
Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat and left.
Ananda Sutta
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
If you’re arguing then you are wasting time
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
So, where is this “you” that truly exists?
It’s not in the body or in thoughts.
Where is this ‘obvious’ self?
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
I don’t say there is no self
Because it would imply annihilation
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
IMO, you mistake the forest for a singular entity, not realizing that, in truth, it is merely a conglomeration of trees.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
I’m advocating neither extreme
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
That’s not what I asked. You said, “obviously you exist”. So, where is this “you” that obviously exists? Buddha said it can’t be found. “Obviously” you know something he didn’t.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:30 pmI don’t say there is no self
Because it would imply annihilation
So, where is it?
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
Deny, deny, deny.
"I do not take it thus, nor do I take it in that way, nor do I take it in some other way. I do not say that it is not, nor do I say that it is neither this nor that."
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12977
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Advaita seeks Atman, Buddhism seeks anatman, right?
"Yes, friends. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."
"Don't say that, friend Yamaka. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One. It's not good to misrepresent the Blessed One, for the Blessed One would not say, 'A monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'"
Yamaka Sutta