More nails in the Coffin of the non-existent Self

[Pero]

That is cause and effect. We can work our karma out later. (If we hold to such a concept.)

 

Uhm hehe, but that is basically what karma is about....

[Marblehead]

Uhm hehe, but that is basically what karma is about....

 

Yes, I am slightly aware of that. It is my opinion though that the concept of karma has been grossly misrepresented by many and it is because of this opinion that I speak only to the concept of 'cause and effect' and not to the various miusunderstandings of what karma is.

 

Of course, I am a Taoist and not a Buddhist so we need bear this in mind. I consider all Buddhists reserve the right to totally ignore me.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

All will fail if there is only a mechanical like "karma" taking place in a mechanical like multi-verse;

but the "Mystery" is deeper than such mechanics alone, although such mechanics are aspects of it.

Edited July 26, 2010 by 3bob

[effilang]

Lucky m'boy, I don't think the focus of your attention should be me. Rather, you should start looking at your belief system and analyze why you believe that there is "No Self" and why it appeals to you. The nihilism that is rapant amongst your ilk is a very spectacular example of how The Teachings of Buddha have been distorted and retrofitted to justify a potential psychological pathology.

 

 

You WIN! Flawless VICTORY!

[3bob]

How then do you explain it 3Bob? I'd like to listen.

 

Hello Serene Blue,

 

I can not really explain the power of Unconditional Love,

but there are signs of it everywhere around and through us

both in dancing and in stillness...

 

[dwai]

And This...

 

 

 

 

 

Let go of the belief of a True Self or a No-Self.

 

Must say I rather like that. But I have no idea why. It just is.

 

 

 

Edit:

 

Dwai...I'd like to know why you like the idea of a True Self. Just curious.

 

 

 

I like the idea of a True Self because it is congruent with my existing Self and the sense of Unity that pervades in meditative states. The "True Self" is nothing but pure Consciousness...unfettered by forms or names, that is what each of us should strive to remember. I like the idea of a True Self is because it is Absolute Reality, beyond names and forms.

 

Let me ask you why you cling to the Non-Self?

[dwai]

[dwai]

You WIN! Flawless VICTORY!

 

save your sarcasm for yourself...it goes to show what happens when your belief-system is rattled.

[dwai]

Nails in the coffin? LOL, certainly not from this article.

 

You don't even have to look to past life to understand. Since the writer took the analogy of a murderer so will I. Lets say that as a young man I killed someone because maybe I just thought it's cool. Fortunatelly I didn't get busted. But after a few years, I changed, realized that that way of thinking is no good and deeply regreted what I've done. Unfortunatelly after these few years the police solved the case and found it was me and caught me. Now, I am no longer the same person I was years ago when I commited the murder but I am still sentenced to death. Is that fair? Perhaps not, but fairness doesn't necessarily enter into the equation, after all, I'm still the same person who comitted the crime.

 

I always find it laughable when people talking about karma talk about fairness. Karma doesn't care about you. It's not some kind of living thing. It's like if you accidentally fell into a meat grinder and I'd say "oh man, that meat grinder sure is unfair, it killed that good guy.".

 

But I guess I shouldn't expect deists to be able to understand these things.

 

Karma doesn't work that way. It is beyond the rules of punishment and deterrence that we have in our mundane world. Karma works at a different (higher) level. Now let's say that you did murder someone when you were younger...it could very well be that person and your karmic history that had to be worked through. It could be that it was a life-lesson that you learnt through your victim, in the form of introspection and the nature of your act. It could also be that this act will carry forward into your next life and afflict you in some way.

 

The fact that you turned yourself in doesn't absolve your previous act of murder. And the fact that you were sentenced to death despite your turning yourself in, simply perpetrated more Karma...something that your judge, your executioner and all involved besides yourself have to deal with in your next life.

 

You missed the point of what the author was trying to make...his point was if the two incarnations are not the same "Self", then Karma doesn't make sense.

[rex]

Doesn't the distinction between absolute truth and relative truth address this apparent problem?

[effilang]

save your sarcasm for yourself...it goes to show what happens when your belief-system is rattled.

 

lol - wha?

 

Too many labels, too many titles.

 

It was not sarcasm, i was appreciating your comment. It seems you are the one that is rattled.

You can safely relieve your guard.

 

I'm out of here, this thread must be in the paranoid section.

 

Laters all

[dwai]

When Buddhism speaks of a lack of self, they mean there is no inherent, independent self. This applies to things as well as people. This doesn't mean things and people don't exist at all.

 

For example, if you take a person's hand--- there is no independent, unchanging something called a hand. On the one hand, there is a collection of fingers and a palm, and each of these can be further subdivided ad infinitum.

 

Another is that what appears to be a hand depends on other things: the presence of a sentient being at a certain distance. From the moon, you won't see the hand at all. From the perspective of an atom, a hand is a vast universe. There is not one thing you can say is a "hand".

 

Even so, an empty hand still packs a punch, even if it lacks a self.

 

I think the Buddhist concept of Anatta is very apt for the physical individual, because the True Self is not evident...there is the limiting adjunct, obscuring it. The True Self is beyond individuality or multiplicity...it is simply, pure consciousness that exists for ever.

Edited July 26, 2010 by dwai

[Lucky7Strikes]

Lucky m'boy, I don't think the focus of your attention should be me. Rather, you should start looking at your belief system and analyze why you believe that there is "No Self" and why it appeals to you. The nihilism that is rapant amongst your ilk is a very spectacular example of how The Teachings of Buddha have been distorted and retrofitted to justify a potential psychological pathology.

Why don't you just stop. It's very evident this type of discussion for you is no longer beneficial. Just fuels useless fire.

 

You like coffee, I like tea. Now go on about your practice. I honestly don't know why you continue to post this topic just over and over again.

 

What happens in these threads is you drop out. And it's clear you only selectively read other people's posts and don't really consider them. You spit out your views, write some wise ass comments, assert that you're right, make your views untouchable, and somewhere in there you write something like "oh just practice," or "oh you just don't understand."

 

It's clear you won't change your views since you've made your self very clear on this forum many times what your stance is. And the more your assert yourself in this way, the more "your position" becomes solidified. It just continuously makes you cling to differences and identities.

 

Actually this discussion does help others who read through them. But by this point, we've done it too many times for there o be any such benefit. So this thread is clearly about you and your continuing obsession with this topic and an unwillingness to truly delve into it.

 

But Dwai,

 

I love you

Edited July 26, 2010 by Lucky7Strikes

[dwai]

I did, in a 30 page rampage.

 

But I did that once...

 

while you've done it for at least 7 times...

 

Why don't you just stop. It's very evident this type of discussion for you is no longer beneficial. Just fuels useless fire.

 

Let me assure you there is no paranoia here...while I can take your statements as pleas for respite. I agree...a lot of what is being discussed is simply pointless...on the other hand, my personal experiences support what I am positing, or rather repeating since many Taoists, Advaitins and Buddhists have also pointed to it. The important thing to realize is that all the difference lies in the labels and syntax, while it is accepted(?) that IT is non-syntactical (Tao cannot be named..if it is named, it's not the real Tao)

[Pero]

You missed the point of what the author was trying to make...his point was if the two incarnations are not the same "Self", then Karma doesn't make sense.

 

No, you missed my point because that was exactly what I was reffering to. I made a simple analogy to try to illustrate this, not tried to explain the complexities of karma.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Pero

[xabir2005]

That is because the Self of today was the Self of Yesterday...the underlying being was the same...albeit with different memories and experiences.

So it was Self that performed the evil act? Or did the act just happened? Did the Self will the act into existence? Did the Self will what you see and hear into existence or did it just happened? Can you choose to not have unwholesome or painful thoughts or did it just happen? Why did you will it into existence in the first place if there was a controller/thinker of thought? Finally: can you even know what your next moment of thought will be, or did it just spontaneously appear?

 

All these just proves that there is no doer or controller involved... so the question of there being a self that is the doer and recipient of karma, and that the doer and recipient is the 'same self' in order to be 'fair' is baseless not only in Buddhism but also in Advaita.

 

Even in Advaita, there is no doer or recipients of deeds/effects. There is just selfless actions and consequences rolling on without a doer/recipient.

 

Ashtavakra said:

 

Righteousness and unrighteousness, pleasure and pain are purely of the mind and are no concern of yours. You are neither the doer nor the reaper of the consequences, so you are always free. 1.6

 

...

 

 

Since you have been bitten by the black snake, the opinion about yourself that "I am the doer," drink the antidote of faith in the fact that "I am not the doer," and be happy. 1.8

I know you are alluding to the mind-stream (Alaya Vijnana) which according to certain Buddhist schools is a set of completely distinct and discrete packets of thoughts (arising and falling you say?). Let me ask you if there was no underlying "Thread" to tie these together, there would be no you thinking up a storm...

Rizenfenix (excerpt from above): ...since Buddhism denies the existence of any self that could be seen as a separate entity capable of transmigrating from one existence to another by passing from one body to another, one might well wonder what it could be that links those successive states of existence together.

 

One could possibly understand it better by considering it as a continuum, a stream of consciousness that continues to flow without there being any fixed or autonomous entity running through it… Rather it could be likened to a river without a boat, or to a lamp flame that lights a second lamp, which in-turn lights a third lamp, and so on and so forth; the flame at the end of the process is neither the same flame as at the outset, nor a completely different one…..

Steven is an enlightened Non-being? This is the height of nihilism and the Buddha would be crawling in his grave at this nonsense! I agree that there is no chance and everything is enfolded order or unfolded order, but the happenings and experience of happenings bit implies an underlying "experiencer". I take you back to the Zen koan:

 

"if a tree fell in the forest and there was no one to witness it, did it fall?"

No, Steven Norquist is an eternalist. Edited July 26, 2010 by xabir2005

[JustARandomPanda]

Let me ask you why you cling to the Non-Self?

 

I don't. I like the idea of letting go of both. Don't cling to either a True Self or No-Self. Just Let Go.

[xabir2005]

Why don't you just stop. It's very evident this type of discussion for you is no longer beneficial. Just fuels useless fire.

 

You like coffee, I like tea. Now go on about your practice. I honestly don't know why you continue to post this topic just over and over again.

 

What happens in these threads is you drop out. And it's clear you only selectively read other people's posts and don't really consider them. You spit out your views, write some wise ass comments, assert that you're right, make your views untouchable, and somewhere in there you write something like "oh just practice," or "oh you just don't understand."

 

It's clear you won't change your views since you've made your self very clear on this forum many times what your stance is. And the more your assert yourself in this way, the more "your position" becomes solidified. It just continuously makes you cling to differences and identities.

 

Actually this discussion does help others who read through them. But by this point, we've done it too many times for there o be any such benefit. So this thread is clearly about you and your continuing obsession with this topic and an unwillingness to truly delve into it.

 

But Dwai,

 

I love you

Good point...

[JustARandomPanda]

I like that Dwai posted it. It's fuel for thought. Dwai said his belief is based upon his personal experiences and Vedanta texts. In this he is similar to Vajrahidaya who says he believes in No-Self because it's based on his personal experiences and Buddhist texts.

[beoman]

There is no random chance, or evolution based on chance. The universe is perfect, nothing is wrong or could be. There seems to be chance or unpredictability from a human perspective but that is only because our time frame reference can not see the universe emerge through its whole life span in a matter of minutes. If we could see that, then we would clearly see how every event was not only perfect and necessary but even predictable...[/i]

From what I understand, though, Buddhists believe that karma is also influenced by the present moment. Meaning that we can

still affect our karma by the actions we take. So how does that fit in to the idea that every event is perfect and predictable

ahead of time, given that some form of "free will" seems to be taking place?

[dwai]

No, you missed my point because that was exactly what I was reffering to. I made a simple analogy to try to illustrate this, not tried to explain the complexities of karma.

 

I got exactly what you were trying to state. That the "You" had changed and the criminal "you" were no longer the repentent "You". This flies in the face of logic and is simply escapism, imho.

[xabir2005]

From what I understand, though, Buddhists believe that karma is also influenced by the present moment. Meaning that we can

still affect our karma by the actions we take. So how does that fit in to the idea that every event is perfect and predictable

ahead of time, given that some form of "free will" seems to be taking place?

Hmm... I would not go as far as to say 'predictable'. But perfect, yes.

 

Nothing is predetermined. But nothing is controlled. Intentions and imprints manifest, influence actions, which results in consequences. At no moment is there a doer or a recipient of karma/consequences.

[dwai]

I don't. I like the idea of letting go of both. Don't cling to either a True Self or No-Self. Just Let Go.

 

Why do you have to let go? Who let's go?

[dwai]

Why don't you just stop. It's very evident this type of discussion for you is no longer beneficial. Just fuels useless fire.

 

You like coffee, I like tea. Now go on about your practice. I honestly don't know why you continue to post this topic just over and over again.

 

What happens in these threads is you drop out. And it's clear you only selectively read other people's posts and don't really consider them. You spit out your views, write some wise ass comments, assert that you're right, make your views untouchable, and somewhere in there you write something like "oh just practice," or "oh you just don't understand."

 

It's clear you won't change your views since you've made your self very clear on this forum many times what your stance is. And the more your assert yourself in this way, the more "your position" becomes solidified. It just continuously makes you cling to differences and identities.

 

Actually this discussion does help others who read through them. But by this point, we've done it too many times for there o be any such benefit. So this thread is clearly about you and your continuing obsession with this topic and an unwillingness to truly delve into it.

 

But Dwai,

 

I love you

 

 

me and wise ass? nah man...you got me mistaken for someone else. If it is so moot a discussion, why bother responding?

 

BTW, I love you and everyone else (mostly)

 

 

[Marblehead]

BTW, I love you and everyone else (mostly)

 

Now you've got me clinging to a guilt complex. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!