Buddhism and no-self
Buddhism and no-self
How the personal experience is explained when there is no self?
Re: Buddhism and no-self
The 'personal experience', is the sense of there being an 'individual self', called ego.
Ego lives purely for distraction away from it's basic fundamental not-knowing empty presence.
The sense of 'self or no-self' exist in the exact same instant of happenstance which is a juxtaposition of truth and reality, versus deception and lies, known as and through the mental maze of wordplay and appearances. . all appearing as conscious brain activity, of which there is absolutely nothing known to exist out side of that arena.
There is not even an inside or an outside to the brains functioning activity, as both inside, and outside world is a concept of braining happening simultaneously as one unitary function.
You are literally living your brain both as knowing it to be on the inside of your head and as and through the outside external world in the same exact instant. There is no division there except as imagined conceptual distinction where there is none in reality.
In reality, knowledge of 'self or no-self' is but a dream dreamt by no one.. the dream world of self is the effect of a functioning conscious brain attaching itself to distractions in it's need for recognition and autonomy, all born from reflexive responses to pure sensation and impulses...which are never seen, only known conceptually by the believing brain.
Reality has no requirement or need to fill what is essentially the pure emptiness of presence.
In reality, no brain ever created itself. Life, or the sense of being, is a total mystery even to itself, and this non-creation makes no distinction between what is real and what is not real, as both concepts are one and the same reality within knowledge which can only point back to the emptiness of which it has appeared, life and death, self and no-self are the same phenomena, albeit differing in appearance, that's all.
.
-
- Posts: 12847
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am
Re: Buddhism and no-self
"I think therefore I AM" Descartes.
Buddhism do not deny the 'I-THINK' which is the empirical self one is conscious of, feel, sense, and see in the mirror. In this sense one can have personal experiences of the empirical self that will eventually disappear upon physical death.
However, Buddhism deny there is an "I-AM" the self of persisting permanent substance within which for theists, can survive physical death as the soul that can go to heaven.
This is the ultimate part that you insist can relate to empirical emergent consciousness. It is delusional to insist such a permanent self exists.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
Yet, according to Wiki...Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:24 pm...Buddhism deny there is an "I-AM" the self of persisting permanent substance within which for theists, can survive physical death as the soul that can go to heaven....
...It is delusional to insist such a permanent self exists.
So how you can square that with the "no permanent self" nonsense, is just plain silly.Wiki wrote: In the 40-plus years of his life after enlightenment, the Buddha Shakayamuni is said to have recounted almost 554 past life stories, (called Jataka tales) of his prior existences.
The bottom line is that the self-aware entity that went by the name of Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha) approximately 2600 years ago is either still alive - right now - in some higher (transcendent) context of reality,...
...or...
...he has blinked-out of existence forever.
If the latter, then Buddhism is nothing more than a nihilistic philosophy that implies that life holds no ultimate and eternal purpose for us as individuals.
The amazing irony of the story is that as long as one fails to reach Buddhahood (enlightenment), one will continue to exist for a very long time and experience a vast number of lives on this planet.
Whereas, on the other hand, once Buddhahood (enlightenment/nirvana/moksha) is achieved, then, apparently, you're a goner, and will never experience the wonder and beauty of life ever again.
_______
Re: Buddhism and no-self
Every human body experiences things and every human body experiences different things. So, it could be said, every human body is an individual one, or, in other words, a personal one.
What each and every human body experiences is therefore a personal experience.
These personal experiences become thoughts.
When there is a thought like for example, "I am a doctor", then this is just an illusion or a delusion. There is NO 'self', which is actually this. There is NO 'I' which is ALWAYS "a doctor". There is, however, a human body who sometimes acts or behaves in a way, like "a doctor" does.
The saying, "I am a doctor" is, literally, just the thoughts within a human body thinking 'it' is a self.
Thee actual Truth however is there are just some human bodies, which have thoughts within, with some of those bodies thinking, and some even believing, that they are actually 'personal selves'.
Of course EVERY human body is an individual one and so in a sense is a 'personal one', but physical bodies are not 'selfs', nor 'persons'. If bodies were, then bodies with less limbs than other bodies would be "less of a person", which obviously they are not, or larger bodies would be 'bigger selfs', which they obviously are not, or more healthy bodies would be 'better selfs', which obviously they are not.
Where the misconception of 'self' arises from is from the human body's ability, through its five senses, to experience the environment [the world] around it. From a body's parents, and other adults, each body experiences, and thus learns/thinks, it is a 'self'. Again, of course, a body is an individual body or a personal one but it is not a person nor personal self.
Through bodies 'personal experiences' thoughts are gained, and it is 'thought' alone where there is a perception or actually a misconception of 'self'.
Although there is no actual (little) self other than thought or 'thinking' itself. There is a Real or True (big) Self. This Self arises from and through 'knowing' and not 'thinking', itself.
Knowing is VERY DIFFERENT than what thinking is.
-
- Posts: 12847
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am
Re: Buddhism and no-self
Note, one of the core principles of Buddhism-proper is 'anatta';seeds wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 5:38 pmYet, according to Wiki...Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:24 pm...Buddhism deny there is an "I-AM" the self of persisting permanent substance within which for theists, can survive physical death as the soul that can go to heaven....
...It is delusional to insist such a permanent self exists.So how you can square that with the "no permanent self" nonsense, is just plain silly.Wiki wrote: In the 40-plus years of his life after enlightenment, the Buddha Shakayamuni is said to have recounted almost 554 past life stories, (called Jataka tales) of his prior existences.
The bottom line is that the self-aware entity that went by the name of Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha) approximately 2600 years ago is either still alive - right now - in some higher (transcendent) context of reality,...
...or...
...he has blinked-out of existence forever.
If the latter, then Buddhism is nothing more than a nihilistic philosophy that implies that life holds no ultimate and eternal purpose for us as individuals.
The amazing irony of the story is that as long as one fails to reach Buddhahood (enlightenment), one will continue to exist for a very long time and experience a vast number of lives on this planet.
Whereas, on the other hand, once Buddhahood (enlightenment/nirvana/moksha) is achieved, then, apparently, you're a goner, and will never experience the wonder and beauty of life ever again.
_______
- In Buddhism, the term anattā (Pali) or anātman (Sanskrit) refers to the doctrine of "non-self" – that no unchanging, permanent self or essence can be found in any phenomenon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatt%C4%81
Note the following comment;
- Each story functions as a teaching about selflessness, compassion, determination, wisdom, or some other virtue that the Buddha-to-be perfected on the path to enlightenment.
The point is one must understand the wide range of Buddhist texts within Buddhism-proper thoroughly and that the core principles will always prevail, e.g. anatta is fundamental despite the talk of other selves.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
Re: Buddhism and no-self
How do they prove that there is no self? Experience without no self is possible but a reality that is coherent without a self is impossible.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:24 pm"I think therefore I AM" Descartes.
Buddhism do not deny the 'I-THINK' which is the empirical self one is conscious of, feel, sense, and see in the mirror. In this sense one can have personal experiences of the empirical self that will eventually disappear upon physical death.
However, Buddhism deny there is an "I-AM" the self of persisting permanent substance within which for theists, can survive physical death as the soul that can go to heaven.
This is the ultimate part that you insist can relate to empirical emergent consciousness. It is delusional to insist such a permanent self exists.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
So the brain causes experience? How?Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:31 amEvery human body experiences things and every human body experiences different things. So, it could be said, every human body is an individual one, or, in other words, a personal one.
What each and every human body experiences is therefore a personal experience.
These personal experiences become thoughts.
When there is a thought like for example, "I am a doctor", then this is just an illusion or a delusion. There is NO 'self', which is actually this. There is NO 'I' which is ALWAYS "a doctor". There is, however, a human body who sometimes acts or behaves in a way, like "a doctor" does.
The saying, "I am a doctor" is, literally, just the thoughts within a human body thinking 'it' is a self.
Thee actual Truth however is there are just some human bodies, which have thoughts within, with some of those bodies thinking, and some even believing, that they are actually 'personal selves'.
Of course EVERY human body is an individual one and so in a sense is a 'personal one', but physical bodies are not 'selfs', nor 'persons'. If bodies were, then bodies with less limbs than other bodies would be "less of a person", which obviously they are not, or larger bodies would be 'bigger selfs', which they obviously are not, or more healthy bodies would be 'better selfs', which obviously they are not.
Where the misconception of 'self' arises from is from the human body's ability, through its five senses, to experience the environment [the world] around it. From a body's parents, and other adults, each body experiences, and thus learns/thinks, it is a 'self'. Again, of course, a body is an individual body or a personal one but it is not a person nor personal self.
Through bodies 'personal experiences' thoughts are gained, and it is 'thought' alone where there is a perception or actually a misconception of 'self'.
Although there is no actual (little) self other than thought or 'thinking' itself. There is a Real or True (big) Self. This Self arises from and through 'knowing' and not 'thinking', itself.
Knowing is VERY DIFFERENT than what thinking is.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
What?bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:52 amSo the brain causes experience? How?Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:31 amEvery human body experiences things and every human body experiences different things. So, it could be said, every human body is an individual one, or, in other words, a personal one.
What each and every human body experiences is therefore a personal experience.
These personal experiences become thoughts.
When there is a thought like for example, "I am a doctor", then this is just an illusion or a delusion. There is NO 'self', which is actually this. There is NO 'I' which is ALWAYS "a doctor". There is, however, a human body who sometimes acts or behaves in a way, like "a doctor" does.
The saying, "I am a doctor" is, literally, just the thoughts within a human body thinking 'it' is a self.
Thee actual Truth however is there are just some human bodies, which have thoughts within, with some of those bodies thinking, and some even believing, that they are actually 'personal selves'.
Of course EVERY human body is an individual one and so in a sense is a 'personal one', but physical bodies are not 'selfs', nor 'persons'. If bodies were, then bodies with less limbs than other bodies would be "less of a person", which obviously they are not, or larger bodies would be 'bigger selfs', which they obviously are not, or more healthy bodies would be 'better selfs', which obviously they are not.
Where the misconception of 'self' arises from is from the human body's ability, through its five senses, to experience the environment [the world] around it. From a body's parents, and other adults, each body experiences, and thus learns/thinks, it is a 'self'. Again, of course, a body is an individual body or a personal one but it is not a person nor personal self.
Through bodies 'personal experiences' thoughts are gained, and it is 'thought' alone where there is a perception or actually a misconception of 'self'.
Although there is no actual (little) self other than thought or 'thinking' itself. There is a Real or True (big) Self. This Self arises from and through 'knowing' and not 'thinking', itself.
Knowing is VERY DIFFERENT than what thinking is.
The brain does NOT 'cause' experiences.
The body experiences the environment around it with the five senses of sight, smell, taste, touch, and hearing.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
There is no such thing as Buddhism or and no self.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:45 amThere is no such a thing as empty presence.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
The body only sends the signals to the brain. Therefore, the body itself does not experience anything.Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:16 amWhat?bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:52 amSo the brain causes experience? How?Age wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:31 am
Every human body experiences things and every human body experiences different things. So, it could be said, every human body is an individual one, or, in other words, a personal one.
What each and every human body experiences is therefore a personal experience.
These personal experiences become thoughts.
When there is a thought like for example, "I am a doctor", then this is just an illusion or a delusion. There is NO 'self', which is actually this. There is NO 'I' which is ALWAYS "a doctor". There is, however, a human body who sometimes acts or behaves in a way, like "a doctor" does.
The saying, "I am a doctor" is, literally, just the thoughts within a human body thinking 'it' is a self.
Thee actual Truth however is there are just some human bodies, which have thoughts within, with some of those bodies thinking, and some even believing, that they are actually 'personal selves'.
Of course EVERY human body is an individual one and so in a sense is a 'personal one', but physical bodies are not 'selfs', nor 'persons'. If bodies were, then bodies with less limbs than other bodies would be "less of a person", which obviously they are not, or larger bodies would be 'bigger selfs', which they obviously are not, or more healthy bodies would be 'better selfs', which obviously they are not.
Where the misconception of 'self' arises from is from the human body's ability, through its five senses, to experience the environment [the world] around it. From a body's parents, and other adults, each body experiences, and thus learns/thinks, it is a 'self'. Again, of course, a body is an individual body or a personal one but it is not a person nor personal self.
Through bodies 'personal experiences' thoughts are gained, and it is 'thought' alone where there is a perception or actually a misconception of 'self'.
Although there is no actual (little) self other than thought or 'thinking' itself. There is a Real or True (big) Self. This Self arises from and through 'knowing' and not 'thinking', itself.
Knowing is VERY DIFFERENT than what thinking is.
The brain does NOT 'cause' experiences.
The body experiences the environment around it with the five senses of sight, smell, taste, touch, and hearing.
Re: Buddhism and no-self
Re: Buddhism and no-self
There are many beliefs.
What about the belief there is a self?
Where does the belief in personal experience come from?
Is it a byproduct of the brain?…is it a programme running in the brain as being a byproduct of the environment?
What is the personal experience exactly?
Re: Buddhism and no-self
The problem is resolved if there is a self that experiences.
I have no idea when and where the belief comes from.
I think the brain create Qualia which then Qualia can be experienced by the mind.
The state of being aware.