Self vs No Self
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лип 2024
- Angel City Zen Ctr. Zoom Schedule & podcast - www.aczc.org
To donate by PayPal - hardcorezen.info/donate
My Patreon page - www.patreon.com/user?u=4874189
LETTERS TO A DEAD FRIEND ABOUT ZEN audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Letters-to...
PODCAST - hardcorezen.podbean.com/
PODCAST ON SPOTIFY - open.spotify.com/show/0LnQAan...
PODCAST ON APPLE - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
To order LETTERS TO A DEAD FRIEND ABOUT ZEN - hardcorezen.info/store
Angel City Zen Center - www.aczc.org/
My blog - hardcorezen.info
My books - hardcorezen.info/store
It Came From Beyond Zen audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Religion-S...
Sex Sin & Zen audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Self-Devel...
Don't Be a Jerk audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Religion-Sp...
Hardcore Zen audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Religion-Sp...
Sit Down & Shut Up audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Religion-Sp...
There is No God & He is Always With You audiobook - www.audible.com/pd/Religion-Sp...
You can email me directly at bw@hardcorezen.info - Комедії
The last thing you said was great! The True Self is not the "personal self" (fundamentally) ... but superficially, it is the personal self.
Good luck with writing!!!
That you are is certain, what you are, not so much. “Nisargadatta “
Hey Brad, glad I tuned into this one, thanks for the shout out. This video reminded me of an anecdote I once read about a guy who got a skin graft on his nose using tissue from his ear. And the graft worked but the tissue kept trying to grow back into whorls like an ear, so he had to keep getting it shaved down periodically. I think about this story when I think about self/no self.
Also I'm really looking forward to reading your thoughts on the subject!
Whoa. Weird story. I'm not sure I see the relation to self/no-self. I'm gonna have to ponder that.
@@bradwarner119 Yeah I haven't fully articulated the connection myself just yet. But there's something in there about being distinct yet also part of everything else.
Sara Campbell, aaahhhhhh! I came here to hear Brad’s calming elucidation of the treasures of Dogen and Zen, but what I leave with is a nightmare-inducing image of the Scary Ear-Nose Monster. And just think what h*ell-ish things could arise were skin from Body Part X to be used for a graft on Body Part Y, for various combinations of X and Y. Shudder.
😁
There’s certainly a few ways to look at no self.
Here’s a few I’ve considered:
1. Self is like a magic trick. It’s there, but is made of other parts that give the illusion it’s real.
2. The self is so vast that you cannot find it’s perimeter. Thus it has no ‘form’. Since all forms have a perimeter, the self in question, having no perimeter that can be found, thus has a negative aspect.
A tangible way to express and experience what I mean is take a look at your hand.
Notice two things. What’s inside the hand and what outside. This duality between self and other, background vs object creates a ‘self’
Now, slowly zoom in on your hand. Eventually, when it gets really close to your face, the edge of your hand disappears and all you see is what’s inside. However, because all you can see is what’s inside and nothing outside, you can’t conclude your looking at a hand anymore except blurry wrinkles. It’s as if the hand (self) disappears when it got ‘bigger and bigger’
3. Finally my favorite aspect of no self is more so called ‘no perceivable self’.
How to do this is rather easy as well. Just take your hand again and try to get your hand to grab itself. You’ll quickly notice you can’t. Now, try to get your foot to kick itself. Right.
You can’t do that either. Now try to get any object or process to act on itself, by itself. You’ll eventually realize that this can’t happen.
Now we get to the self, or knower. Just as the hand, or the one that grabs, cannot grab itself, we now ask can the knower know himself?
If you say yes, which feels intuitively correct, you might want to investigate that. Why is it the case that you the knower can know thy self, yet every other action in the universe cannot act on its source? It’s being.
Rather mysterious.
Now if you say no, then the job is done. There is no self to know.
Thus no self
There is no "self" to know ... but then who is holding up whose hand to whose face?
You are.
Who are you?
You don't know, but you are.
There is no abiding self. The self is a condition of several things arising together, subject to change as all things are. This is what science nowadays calls "emergent property". That's my view of it anyway :)
@@t.c.bramblett617 so that would be the first position I offered. The ‘magic trick’ idea. When many different ‘real’ aspects are put together, they form an illusory object.
But!
There’s an issue with this emergent property idea. Which is...
How deep do we go till we get to the real element?
For example. A tv show appearing on the tv screen doesn’t really exist. It’s an emergent property of ‘real’ objects such as tv, remote, screen computer chips etc.
but how do we know that the computer chips, screens etc aren’t as well emergent properties?
Which element of reality isn’t a byproduct of other more real elements?
“All things composed of the four elements (earth, air, water and fire) are empty and contain the seeds of suffering. Human beings are composed of five skandhas, aggregates (form, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, consciousness) and are without a separate self. They are always in the process of change - constantly be born and constantly dying. They are empty of self, without sovereignty. The mind is the source of all confusion, and the body is the forest of all impure actions”
“By meditating on no-self we can break through the barrier between self and other”.
From The Sutra On The Eight Realizations Of The Great Beings, translated from the Chinese with a commentary by Thich Nhat Hanh.
Sounds right to me!
The mind is the great ocean of light and the body is the totality of wisdom
very interesting, thanks for addressing this issue!
great topic. look forward to more. thanks.
Thanks Brad. :)
Im a beginner to buddhist thought. The idea of having "no self" is mysterious to me. I would think that having a body gives me a very concrete experience of having a self. This body, mind, emotions, life experiences are mine. i have experienced them up til the age i am now. Im sure there is more to this, im just not very clear about it. With respect to all, namaste & aloha....
Maybe I need to start with that part.
There’s certainly a few ways to look at no self.
Here’s a few I’ve considered:
1. Self is like a magic trick. It’s there, but is made of other parts that give the illusion it’s real.
2. The self is so vast that you cannot find it’s perimeter. Thus it has no ‘form’. Since all forms have a perimeter, the self in question, having no perimeter that can be found, thus has a negative aspect.
A tangible way to express and experience what I mean is take a look at your hand.
Notice two things. What’s inside the hand and what outside. This duality between self and other, background vs object creates a ‘self’
Now, slowly zoom in on your hand. Eventually, when it gets really close to your face, the edge of your hand disappears and all you see is what’s inside. However, because all you can see is what’s inside and nothing outside, you can’t conclude your looking at a hand anymore except blurry wrinkles. It’s as if the hand (self) disappears when it got ‘bigger and bigger’
3. Finally my favorite aspect of no self is more so called ‘no perceivable self’.
How to do this is rather easy as well. Just take your hand again and try to get your hand to grab itself. You’ll quickly notice you can’t. Now, try to get your foot to kick itself. Right.
You can’t do that either. Now try to get any object or process to act on itself, by itself. You’ll eventually realize that this can’t happen.
Now we get to the self, or knower. Just as the hand, or the one that grabs, cannot grab itself, we now ask can the knower know himself?
If you say yes, which feels intuitively correct, you might want to investigate that. Why is it the case that you the knower can know thy self, yet every other action in the universe cannot act on its source? It’s being.
Rather mysterious.
Now if you say no, then the job is done. There is no self to know.
Thus no self
try and find the "you" that owns it all.
I think the sense of self is very natural. :) I would be pretty surprised if even feral children (growing up wild) didn't have a sense of self. I think one thing to think about is that a self often tells itself stories which contradict reality, and lead to unhappiness. (Perhaps I tell myself that I "deserve" something, or that some action that I know is wrong is justified for some reason or other -- maybe it's only a little wrong.) The thing I like about Zen it's it's focus on reality. Zazen (a specific kind of meditation) is a tool to help you focus on reality. (That's just my perspective.) Some people after doing years and years of zazen (lots of practice focusing on reality I think) have an experience where they say they realize (in an undeniable way) that they are the whole universe (as opposed to the small self they thought they were before).
Another thing to think about is that a self is a pretty hard thing to define, it changes moment by moment. Also, that idea that it's attached to a physical body... well, the physical body is also changing moment by moment, and what happens to the self when the body turns to dust? Did it vanish? Or... did it ever exist in the first place?
I'm still basically with you (in feeling like my self exists) despite having been exposed to lots of things suggesting that it doesn't. I think they make a lot of sense, and I definitely see problematic aspects to the self, but... I'm still here regardless. :) Hope that helps a little, or maybe points you in a helpful direction at least. (I don't know if it's a valid reference point, but I've been doing zazen every day for about 2 years, and have read maybe 15 or 20 books on Zen and Buddhism.)
The experience and the experiencer are the same
good luck
I don't know that it's really "imperceptible" that this collective "strengthening" happens when even one individual sits in zazen... In my own experience, it is perceptible to me. When I seem to myself to sit in zazen and be with the collective unity, I seem also to accumulate synchronicitous expressions of (and answers to) my own prayers, desires, and intentions. Does anyone else have this experience, of seeming to be able to "perceive" of our interconnectedness in this way?
This is where we have to be very careful. There are all kinds of concepts that arise when doing zazen. One of the main jobs of a teacher is to dispel them. It is said that truth lies beyond this, or that. I feel that it is more accurate to say that the truth lies before. Before what one may ask? Before ANYTHING that the mind can take hold off.
What's the new book about? Any chance you talk about it or is it a surprise
It will concentrate on Buddhist ethics. But not in a stuffy way.
I remember Stephen Batchelor talking about the self sneaking back into Buddhism but I don't remember the reference. Also, I recall this being discussed in Paul Williams' book Mahayana Buddhism The Doctrinal Foundations. Anyway, these might be useful references for your writing.
Thanks. I'll look into those.
Read Jed McKenna for more in depth teachings on no self vs false self.
You stopped shaking your head!
foget zazen, how the f do you have that head of hair at 50 plus?
30 years of sitting
You should read HuangBo, one of the original "classic" Zen Masters, I think your viewers would love to hear your opinion!
"Mind is the Buddha, while the cessation of conceptual thought is the Way. Once you stop arousing concepts and thinking in terms of existence and non-existence, long and short, other and self, active and passive, and suchlike, you will find that your Mind is intrinsically the Buddha, that the Buddha is intrinsically Mind, and that Mind resembles a void. Therefore is it written that ‘the true Dharmakāya resembles a void'. Seek for naught besides this, else your search must end in sorrow. Though you perform the six pāramitās for as many aeons as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, adding also all the other sorts of activities for gaining Enlightenment, you will still fall short of the goal. Why? Because these are karma-forming activities and, when the good karma they produce has been exhausted, you will be born again in the ephemeral world. Therefore is it also written: ‘The Samboghkāya is not a real Buddha, nor a real teacher of the Dharma. Only come to know the nature of your own Mind, in which there is no self and no other, and you will in fact be a Buddha!"
GreenSage : if I were to give you a strong slap in your face, who will feel the physical pain you or me?. What about if you had an accident and break your both legs?. Who will be the one enduring that pain you or me who didn’t have the accident since you stated that there is no self and other?. True the self is empty but also true that for as long we are under the manifestation of a physical human form we have to deal with it. So there is a self and other but there is also no-self and other. There is a continuos interaction between self and non self while living in awareness. A different matter is when we live in forgetfulness and under the delusion of having a self separated from all the rest.
@@lorenacharlotte8383 A respectable POV but Zen Masters express a point of view in which there is no "self" and no "no-self". Think about it this way: Imagine an advanced AI robot which has a "human" mind ... but the mind is completely digital. If we make copies of that digital mind and put them into 10,000 cyborgs, they will all power on with the "same mind" but then will each live out different iterations of that mind.
More to the point: "Self" and "No-Self" are just concepts dreamed up with regard to our *being*. They are unified in the Mind which has conceived them.
Dualism is, in actuality, non-dual ... but it's still a real phenomenon, obviously. The apparent "continuous interaction of self and no-self" is actually just a continuous existence of the True Self.
Brad said it in a really good way: "The self of the universe and the self of the "Self" are one and the same, but its *not* the "personal" self."
One consequence of this is that your perceived "defilements" are actually not "defilements." Defilement and purity come from the same place ... Mind!
XD
HuangBo:
"I assure you that all things have been free from bondage since the very beginning. So why attempt to explain then? Why attempt to purify what has never been defiled? Therefore it is written: ‘The Absolute is thusness-how can it be discussed? You people still conceive of Mind as existing or not existing, as pure or defiled, as something to be studied in the way that one studies a piece of categorical knowledge, or as a concept-any of these definitions is sufficient to throw you back into the endless round of birth and death. The person who perceives things always wants to identify them, to get a hold on them. Those who use their minds like eyes in this way are sure to suppose that progress is a matter of stages. If you are that kind of person, you are as far from the truth as earth is far from heaven. Why this talk of ‘seeing into your own nature'?"
GreenSage : You wrote: “Self and No Self” are concepts. These are only concepts when reading about them or trying to explain by the use of words oneself insight based in personal experience in the attempt of communicating with other humans. There are no concepts of any kind while sitting down, interacting, experiencing living in the present moment. There are no concepts involved while contemplating, touching, flowing with nature.
GreenSage : I have often seen through the years some practitioners get caught by the concept of no-self. Debating at times with lots of conviction the no self notions and discarding the self in such a way that before the delusion was in the living in the self of forgetfulness and after was in the mental notion of the no self as if they didn’t have a physical body.
GreenSage This sounds exactly like Advaita Vedanta with the atman=brahman, minus the 'god' part. If you are familiar with their philosophy, what is the main difference between this take of zen and Advaita?
4:16 "Literally" true is a bold claim. How are we "helping the world in this tremendous way"? The only way someone sat on their ass staring at a wall is "helping", is by keeping out of the way of everyone else. But that's true of a cabbage too.
I guess, by sitting Zazen you become more capable to recognize your true needs by finding their source, the true self. This could be a tremendous way to help the world or not?
@@verfassungspatriot Your true needs are to survive and reproduce, everything else is superfluous.
I mean WTH is a self anyways? Haven't we all conceived of ourselfs as a self without ever haven't asked ourself this? I mean it's just a mind-made concept, but in all the sitting I have done, I never could locate a self anywhere. Neither in the body nor in the brain, not in this molecule not in that atom, actually nowhere but in the thought "I am". 😘
HuangBo provides a really interesting contrast to DoGen.
"5. Q: Does the Buddha really liberate sentient beings?
A: There are in reality no sentient beings to be delivered by the Tathāgata. If even self has no objective existence, how much less has other-than-self! Thus, neither Buddha nor sentient beings exist objectively."
I'm not so sure that's actually a contrast to Dogen's view.
@@HardcoreZen The contrast I see is, on the one hand, DoGen saying, (paraphrasing) "Drop away body and mind from defiled thoughts and realize [no-self] in order to save sentient beings from suffering", and HuangBo, on the other hand, saying (paraphrasing) "Both self and no-self are illusory so there is no No-Self to obtain; no sentient beings to liberate."
SIMPLE: THE SELF IS NOT MYSELF , more verbiage will complicate it .
well that's not it, that implies that there is another self, such as atman which is brahmanic or hinduist concept, anatman is literally opposite of that and anatman is a buddhist doctrine
I hope you will have the most inspiration! Give Sadhguru a listen, just saying! Best regards!
You are a bit obsessed by taxes 🤣🤣🤣