Sera Khandro, a prominent 19th/20th century practitioner discussing the self:
A literal definition of the term “individual” is as follows: The two obscurations, along with habitual patterns, fill an individual’s stream of being; and the contaminated aggregation of attachment forms the foundation for the individual. What is called “the self” is the consciousness predisposed to assume the existence of a self: during the periods of waking life, dream, transitional states [bardos] between lifetimes, or in a future life, a self merely appears when none exists. That consciousness is what is called “an individual self.” Immediately thereafter, subsequent knowing and discursive thought give clarity to the consciousness predisposed to cling to an “I” where there is none, and a sense of self where none exists, and make them stable and solid.
################
#################
An analogy.
I have...
flour
butter
sugar
blueberries
eggs
Give me a sec and make you something...
I give you.....a muffin.
Wait, let me take that back and rearrange it a bit.
Now I give you....a pancake.
You ask "Where's the muffin?"
I say, "There is no muffin."#
###############
SELF-Generally it is the feeling of an internal and subjective reference point, and specifically the identity attributed to that feeling
#######################
################
##############
A Of the 196 sutras in PYS, 56 are devoted to the Vibhuti-Pada. This accounts for more than a quarter, suggesting the importance Patanjali afforded this topic. However it has not received commensurate scholarly attention. “Vibhuti...has historically been the least studied portion of the Yoga-Sutras in-spite of the fact that it comprises over one-fourth of the entire work.”12 While other areas have received hair-splitting consideration, one can only speculate that a lack of sufficient study has added to the mystery surrounding this chapter and the ‘powers’ it defines.13 White points out that post Patanjalian history has focused on philosophical works and the cessative aspect of yoga at the expense of what he calls the this worldly ‘numinous’ aspect – i.e. “...the attainments (sampattis) of Buddhists and the Patanjalian tradition, as well as super-natural enjoyment (riddhi, siddhi) or “omnipresencings” (vibhutis) of Buddhist, Jain and Hindu traditions...”14. What he calls ‘dry contemplative inquiry’ privileging over ‘wet’ yogic experience. For this his finger points squarely at scholars such as Swami Vivekananda, a thinker “who has cast the longest shadow on modern appreciations of yoga and yogis...”15
#############
B
All that you claim as you is empty. Meaning it dependently arises. Essentially, there is no aggregate of self without relating at least two parts together. Without this relation, self means nothing. And since we can’t whittle down to a core piece that is “you” it is said that it is “non-self.”
That isn’t to say there isn’t inherent enlightened nature that resides in all of us to essentially be realized. But that realization, nirvana, is outside of definition and can’t really be put into words beyond saying it is unconditioned or independent; not dependently originating
##############
B there's no stable-enough construct that one can reliably designate as a self. memory, feelings and consciousness comes and goes : they're fleeting.
then the rest -- follows the law of existence: that which is impermanent, when clung - brings about dukkha and thus not worth clinging
#######################
I find this an good explanation:
You(your brain) is not the one u try to describe with this relations but more, like an endless sky and all your likings and thoughts and feelings are clouds popping up in the sky, so these person u think is u is more of a big from u constructed cloud in the sky who are u.
This is an really hard to get concept, but I think it's one of the powerfull ones, because it can empower u do become the one u really are.
If u are more interested I really can recommend the books from Rinpoche Yongey Mingyur, the joy of living and in love with the world, He's great due to him not only teaching Buddhas teaching, but he combined it with the western sciences like neuroscience and others, this makes it really unterstandable for western people like i am
########################
All my likes and dislikes? My personality traits? My beliefs?
"My memories? My knowledge? My feelings? My love? My hate? My rage? My books? My citizenship..."
And you can go on all day long with all that you feel is you, yours, that happens to you, etc.
But I propose to you to stop and take a look at what happens when we remove the "I, my, mine"? What is left?
What remains is: All my likes and dislikes My personality traits My beliefs
"My memories My knowledge My feelings My love My hate My rage My books..."My citizenship
See how all of it remains without "you"?
Yet, without all of these "things", is there a "you"? A you you, a you as such?
Can you find it?
No, there's only loads of stuff that "exist" regardless of wether the "I" exists or not.
That is what it means that "there is no inherent "self" in "you".
P.S. I think you must sit on it, stop thinking, fokus on breath, and it will "click". It is counterintuitive, opposite of all we are used to, so thinking doesn't help. Thinking uses old paths which are entangled with the self-feeling. So, think about it, then sit and breathe and don't think about it.
#####################
Another side of "no-self" is that, exactly as there is no true (inherently existing) self in you, there is no inherent self in any of the people or things around you - but that's a story for another time.
##################
This is because of dependent origination. You are how you are because of the conditions that you arose in. It has nothing to do with true or untrue more a case of mistaken identity. The things that we identify with are conditions they are not "us". It is not about praise or blame nor punishment nor reward. Things were are certain way then something happened and now things are a different way over and over again. You could not have been any other way than you are right now. But this is not exacrly fate either nor a lack of voluntary action because the universe is chaotic and continuous nothing is truly separate. I think of it kind of like steering a boat in a river. The water is also moving so it is impossible to perfectly control exactly where the boat is going, but we can influence the general direction. The flow of the river would be like karma, it was already there and we didn't truly choose it to be that way, but to some extent we can adjust and compensate for it.
######################
There is no self, but there is an impersonal process. This process gradually changes a child to young then adult etc
########################
Actually the Buddhist teaching is not that "there is no inherent self", but that "there is no inherent self to be found in any phenomena". The word phenomena is often alternatively translated as "compound things" or "aggregates". So, original Buddhism does not flat-out deny a self; it denies that the self can be found in any phenomenon, be it physical, mental, emotional, or otherwise.
So, to address the various phenomena that you list in your question, such as likes, dislikes, personality traits, beliefs, etc.: yes, Buddhism teaches that ultimately you cannot find your true self in any of those. But that is not to say that you must try to deny these things by mentally denouncing them. Correct Buddhist practice involves "shedding" these things gradually through careful, self-aware living. Mental denial will not help. Therefore, although it appears to be "very Buddhist" to insist that there is no self, such denial is actually not part of proper Buddhist practice, and actually counter-productive.
######################
The Buddha discovered that all conditioned things in the world, meaning all things that are brought into existence, are impermanent. There isn't a single thing within our universe/existence you could name that isn't dependently arisen, transient and impermanent. Because nothing has a permanent identity, everything is said to be 'empty'.
Now this universal truth extends to our physical bodies, minds and experiences as well. Our 'self'. The Buddha taught the self is really 5 different phenomena that come together to formulate our experience, that's why they're called 'the 5 aggregates'. They are form (the elements, including the body), feeling, perception, fabrications (ie. thoughts) and consciousness.
The Buddha compared to this self like leaves on the ground. If someone were to burn the leaves on the ground you wouldn't think "It's me being burned". In the same way we're taught to observe these aggregates: "these are not mine, these are not what I am".
The only thing that isn't like this is Nibbana, the unconditioned. It doesn't arise, isn't dependent on anything else, doesn't change, doesn't cease.
####################
Most would also probably practice Pureland and aim to be reborn in Sukhavati with better conditions to practice.#
##################
'#############
refer to the actual 'official' doctrinal positions of Buddhists of eastern Asian traditions okay? (Not the 'cultural' people who might hold non-Buddhist views)
There is no "do not care about attaining Nirvana" nor "wish to be reincarnated as Devis"
The ultimate idea is to become a Buddha and benefit countless sentient beings.
Never the idea to reject nirvana. The nuance is in the desire to delay complete Buddhahood, to be a Boddhisatva, to help all beings, and together reach complete Buddhahood.
Some hold the view to be reborn in Pure Land where they have better conditions to be enlightened. (To be a Boddhisatva)
##################
As for ‘delaying’, I think this topic gets sort of subtle. It’s said that there are the three motivations - the king like motivation in which one wants to become a Buddha and then help others, the boatman motivation in which one aspires to go along with others, and then the shepherd motivation in which one wants to bring all others to enlightenment prior to one’s own Buddhahood, similar to how a shepherd comes into pasture only after the sheep are all in.
Perhaps paradoxically, the latter shepherd type is the one said to lead to Buddhahood the fastest.
So on the one hand, part of the path I think is coming to overcome self-concern about the idea of one’s Buddhahood, but on the other hand if one actually does that, one is closer to Buddhahood.
Also, it’s worth noting that there are sometimes different types of nirvana discussed, with allegedly the sravaka path leading (at least temporarily) to a sort of inert nirvana, but then there is the great non-abiding nirvana of a Buddha that does not veer towards samsara or quiescence. Basically
###################
there is some correlation between the older schools being more renunciate and the newer embracing more modern applications.
Bodhisattva path is pretty much solely a Mahayana tradition.
To compare, therevada is the oldest school and there isn't any mention of Bodhisattva iirc.
The mahayana explosion was very much a resurrection of budshist teaching with the angle of being more palatable and inclusive. It's hard to keep the horse going when the carrot its chasing is 100 lifetimes from now. There's less urgency.
This adaptation I believe was specifically in an "evangelical" spirit. Or to at least make the practice easier or more enjoyable for the average person.
###################
The Mahayana has a clear path set out with various practices and stages of the path whereas the Theravada has a very vague view drawn from non-sutta sources with the paramitas being the only part of the path described.
Every tradition sees a full Buddha as more noble than a pratekabuddha.
A Bodhisattva is anyone aiming to achieve Buddhahood - this is the definition in every school
###################
Every Recitation Is at the Moment of Death; Each Is Embraced by Amitabha Buddha; Each Assures Rebirth
Every Recitation Is at the Moment of Death; Each Is Embraced by Amitabha Buddha; Each Assures Rebirth
By Master Jingzong
How do we comprehend the “moment of death”? Our life is only one breath away from death, for exhaling at the present moment doesn’t guarantee we will inhale again. The “moment of death” can happen after any breath. Thus, every recitation links to the last breath of life; each recitation is at the moment of death.
In general, we expect the “moment of death” to be a certain time far in the future. But who is to decide when that point in time will be? Frankly, any present moment can be the “moment of death”: Suppose you were on the way to a business meeting, and you got into a car accident, and that became your “moment of death.” You might have plans for 10 or 20 years into the future, but things might not go as planned. Therefore, any moment can be the “moment of death.” Every one of our recitations is at the moment of death.
The light of Amitabha Buddha permeates in every direction. Why does it embrace only Amitabha-reciters and never forsake them? That’s because the Buddha sees vividly that every one of our recitations could be at the last moment of life. What if Amitabha had said, I would come fetch you when you are in need or encountering vicissitudes? It would be too late.
The Buddha-light embraces and never forsakes reciters because beings are facing death at all times. As Master Shandao says, “sentient beings are prone to jump into the fire pit of the Three Wretched Realms;” we may fall in at any moment. No matter what, Amitabha Buddha will never let go of reciters, so how can we fall? The Buddha tells us, “Every one of your recitations is at the moment of death; each of my thoughts is to deliver you; each recitation ensures your rebirth in my land.”
Here is a quote from Master Shandao: “Every recitation with a committed mind achieves rebirth in the Land of Bliss.” “A committed mind is a sincere mind, a profound mind, and a mind of merit-dedication towards rebirth. One, whoever gives rise to these three kinds of mind, his rebirth is assured. After that, every recitation ensures rebirth now, not in the distant future. Otherwise, it would be an incorrect view of impermanence, a weak perspective of life.
Shakyamuni Buddha once asked his disciples: “Will each of you tell me your understanding of life and impermanence?”
Some disciples answered: “Life is within seven days.”
The Buddha replied: “No. you do not understand,” meaning the disciple was not yet enlightened, and did not understand the reality of life.
Some disciples said: “Life is impermanent; it is within a day and night since I do not know if I will live tomorrow.” Their answer seemed to show a better understanding of life.
However, the Buddha replied: “Son, you do not know the Way either.”
Another disciple answered: “Life is a short while.” It was getting close, but still not quite there yet.
And the Buddha again replied: “No, you do not understand. Because “a short while” still is a measure of given time, perhaps a quarter of an hour.
Finally, a disciple answered: “Life is impermanent; it is between inhalation and exhalation.”
The Buddha nodded in assent: “Yes, you understood,” meaning this disciple understood the impermanent nature of life. We breathe every day, and every breath is at the moment of death.
(Translated and edited by the Pure Land School Translation Team)
#####################
Suppose one morning you're walking to work and a man yells abuse and insults at you from across the street. As soon as you hear this abuse your mind changes from its usual state. You don't feel so good, you feel angry and hurt. That man walks around abusing you night and day. Whenever you hear the abuse, you get angry, and even when you return home you're still angry because you feel vindictive, you want to get even.
A few days later another man comes to your house and calls out, ''Hey! That man who abused you the other day, he's mad, he's crazy! Has been for years! He abuses everybody like that. Nobody takes any notice of anything he says.'' As soon as you hear this you are suddenly relieved. That anger and hurt that you've pent up within you all these days melts away completely. Why? Because you know the truth of the matter now. Before, you didn't know, you thought that man was normal, so you were angry at him. Understanding like that caused you to suffer. As soon as you find out the truth, everything changes: ''Oh, he's mad! That explains everything!''
When you understand this you feel fine, because you know for yourself. Having known, then you can let go. If you don't know the truth you cling right there. When you thought that man who abused you was normal you could have killed him. But when you find out the truth, that he's mad, you feel much better. This is knowledge of the truth.
###################
A -
Pivotal to this
process is ‘samyama’, a technical
term that defines the integration of three stages of concentration. It comes
from ‘sam’ meaning ‘with’ and ‘yama’ which means restraint or control.
Together they mean “a sharp focusing of psychic energy.”17 Sutras
III.1-4 explain the different levels of concentration, each being higher than
the previous. These are concentration (dharana), contemplation (dhyana) and mental absorption (samadhi) – a state where there is only consciousness of
the object of contemplation and not of the self (mind) as it were.18
Concentration here is not just intensely focussed, but of such a nature that
the mind of the yogi penetrates the core of the object, rather than staying at
the superficial level of the name (nama)
and form (rupa).19
From sutra III.16 on, we learn what the siddhis are. By applying samyama to sound and to its underlying
meaning, a yogi can understand the
speech/sounds of any living being
(III.17). By samyama, latent impressions in the subconscious mind are perceived,
and a knowledge of previous births arises.(III.18) Mind reading (III.19-20),
invisibility (III.21), knowledge of the time of death (III.22), knowledge of
the small, the hidden or the distant, (III.26), knowledge of solar system and
arrangement of the stars (III.27-29) are a few of the accomplishments.
###################
|
################
our human body can go about
3 weeks without food, 3 days without water,
but only 3 minutes without oxygen.
######################
Breathing.
Kāli means “time” — she is the personification of that in which all change occurs.
There can be no separation between these two factors of REALITY.
##################
No comments:
Post a Comment