Buddhism: Anatta = No-Self... A Dynamic Process rather than a Static Entity !

[Guest guest]

Friend(s):

 

The ever Drifting Impersonal Round of Samsara:

 

There is no entity: no 'being' exists ...

There is only a process of becoming: moment after moment.

Only that which IS the SAME, can cease to BE & re-arise...

But such Static Existence cannot be observed anywhere...

Even the stone always changes a little and become otherwise.

In this ever transient Process of Change, where there is no

'being', the question of 'next-being' cease to be relevant...

The anagami-non-returner is just a Continuation of that process,

like the old man is a Continuation of the baby he once was...

 

Example: The baby grows & ages into a 80 years Old man:

Is this old man the same or another, than that baby ?

Neither actually ..., but the continuation of a process, that

both in the baby and the old man continues for every moment.

No 'identity' is the 'same' & 'identical' only the empty label &

pointer of 'Name' & 'Designation' remains the 'same'...

Neither 'the baby' nor the 'old man' have ever really

Existed as stable & unchanging entities "being the same"

even for two consecutive moments. So how can the 'old man'

possibly ever be the 'same personal identity of being = soul!'

when transmigrating at the moment of death ???

 

All is ever new, transient, passing, otherwise & different.

If they ask you: Who are You ?

(In the Hidden Assuming a stable & same identity!!!)

one should answer:

"Something else...!!!"

 

 

 

The Blessed Buddha cuts it out in neon:

 

‘Whenever touched by pleasure or pain, whether in town or in forest,

do never assign it to any ‘self’, neither to any ‘other’,

since contacts can only afflict the 5 clusters of clinging !

What can contacts touch & affect in one not clinging ?’

Udana – Inspiration: II – 4

 

About the mental state of assuming a 'self':

 

‘First it appeared to be, then it disappeared.

What was not apparent, became apparent.

Yet it never remained, nor will it become,

neither is it to be known now !’

 

Udana – Inspiration: VI - 3

 

All this "I"-dentification is founded on the key conceit; ‘I am’.

This ingrained self-deception of an existing ego is verily the

core of all mental defilement.

For this diffcult, yet crucially important principle of

Anatta = No-self = Impersonality = Egolessness:

 

check out:

 

 

Reflection on No-self as a basis for insight: SN XXII.59

Identifying the five khandhas as "self" is the cause of affliction: SN XXII.1

As one of seven perceptions: AN VII.46

As one of ten perceptions: AN X.60

Relation of No-self to dependent co-arising: DN 15

Contemplation of the six senses in terms of No-self: MN 148

Not understanding No-self is like being a dog tied to a post: SN XXII.99

 

Friendship is the Greatest !

 

Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka.

 

http://groups.msn.com/DirectDhamma Buddha-Direct http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma Dhamma-Questions sent to my email are quite Welcome.

Friendship is the GREATEST! The whole motivation of the Noble life! : - ]

[Guest guest]

Realization , " lostnTRANCElation "

<unbound@h...> wrote:

>

>

> Friend(s):

> The ever Drifting Impersonal Round of Samsara:

>

> There is no entity: no 'being' exists ...

> There is only a process of becoming: moment after moment.

> Only that which IS the SAME, can cease to BE & re-arise...

> But such Static Existence cannot be observed anywhere...

> Even the stone always changes a little and become otherwise.

> In this ever transient Process of Change, where there is no

> 'being', the question of 'next-being' cease to be relevant...

> The anagami-non-returner is just a Continuation of that process,

> like the old man is a Continuation of the baby he once was...

>

> Example: The baby grows & ages into a 80 years Old man:

> Is this old man the same or another, than that baby ?

> Neither actually ..., but the continuation of a process, that

> both in the baby and the old man continues for every moment.

> No 'identity' is the 'same' & 'identical' only the empty label &

> pointer of 'Name' & 'Designation' remains the 'same'...

> Neither 'the baby' nor the 'old man' have ever really

> Existed as stable & unchanging entities " being the same "

> even for two consecutive moments. So how can the 'old man'

> possibly ever be the 'same personal identity of being = soul!'

> when transmigrating at the moment of death ???

>

> All is ever new, transient, passing, otherwise & different.

> If they ask you: Who are You ?

> (In the Hidden Assuming a stable & same identity!!!)

> one should answer:

> " Something else...!!! "

 

Maybe someone can answer this for me... Why are concepts like this

always explained like this? The past is happening right now in the

past, the future is happening right now in the future, but it's all

now...and eternity. Draw a mental line in your head of a timeline,

then notice it's all one thing...a line. When is everything on this

line happening? Nothing is really happening or ever happened, but

how does that help when you're wanting to know why we seem to fixate

on a single point of this line, and how to be free of it? If it's

ment to be a rambling of someone, who was trying to fully explore the

idea to absurdity, then that's fine...or maybe as a koan, but other

than that, I don't think it's very useful. Maybe I'm just not

reading it right, any suggestions?

 

Jeremy.

[Guest guest]

Maybe someone can answer this for me... Why are concepts like this

always explained like this? The past is happening right now in the

past, the future is happening right now in the future, but it's all

now...and eternity. Draw a mental line in your head of a timeline,

then notice it's all one thing...a line. When is everything on this

line happening? Nothing is really happening or ever happened, but

how does that help when you're wanting to know why we seem to fixate

on a single point of this line, and how to be free of it? If it's

ment to be a rambling of someone, who was trying to fully explore the

idea to absurdity, then that's fine...or maybe as a koan, but other

than that, I don't think it's very useful. Maybe I'm just not

reading it right, any suggestions?

 

Jeremy

 

I am giving advice as one of the lowest beings on the rung.

How about just stop reading or exploring?

 

Metta,

Alton

[Guest guest]

Jeremy Bost wrote:

 

> Maybe someone can answer this for me... Why are concepts like this

> always explained like this? The past is happening right now in the

> past, the future is happening right now in the future, but it's all

> now...and eternity. Draw a mental line in your head of a timeline,

> then notice it's all one thing...a line. When is everything on this

> line happening?

 

Now!

 

> Nothing is really happening or ever happened, but

> how does that help when you're wanting to know why we seem to fixate

> on a single point of this line, and how to be free of it?

 

I believe that the problem is not that we fixate on a single point in

time, but that we fixate on both the past and the future, which are only

ideas in our heads at this point (therefore not real), and by doing so

we take ourselves out of the present which IS real. How's that for a

sentence?

 

> If it's

> ment to be a rambling of someone, who was trying to fully explore the

> idea to absurdity, then that's fine...or maybe as a koan, but other

> than that, I don't think it's very useful. Maybe I'm just not

> reading it right, any suggestions?

>

> Jeremy.

 

To me the gist of that piece (below) is that there is no stable self or

entity on this level of existence, and therefore the apparent self which

one experiences is simply not real. The real Self is unchanging and is

the ground of being from which this transitory world arises.

 

By the way, this is the first time I've posted anything on this forum,

so to those of you who have read this far, hello.

 

-Tom

 

 

Realization , " lostnTRANCElation "

<unbound@h...> wrote:

>

>

> Friend(s):

> The ever Drifting Impersonal Round of Samsara:

>

> There is no entity: no 'being' exists ...

> There is only a process of becoming: moment after moment.

> Only that which IS the SAME, can cease to BE & re-arise...

> But such Static Existence cannot be observed anywhere...

> Even the stone always changes a little and become otherwise.

> In this ever transient Process of Change, where there is no

> 'being', the question of 'next-being' cease to be relevant...

> The anagami-non-returner is just a Continuation of that process,

> like the old man is a Continuation of the baby he once was...

>

> Example: The baby grows & ages into a 80 years Old man:

> Is this old man the same or another, than that baby ?

> Neither actually ..., but the continuation of a process, that

> both in the baby and the old man continues for every moment.

> No 'identity' is the 'same' & 'identical' only the empty label &

> pointer of 'Name' & 'Designation' remains the 'same'...

> Neither 'the baby' nor the 'old man' have ever really

> Existed as stable & unchanging entities " being the same "

> even for two consecutive moments. So how can the 'old man'

> possibly ever be the 'same personal identity of being = soul!'

> when transmigrating at the moment of death ???

>

> All is ever new, transient, passing, otherwise & different.

> If they ask you: Who are You ?

> (In the Hidden Assuming a stable & same identity!!!)

> one should answer:

> " Something else...!!! "

 

 

--

 

 

Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release 1/28/2005

[Guest guest]

> > If it's

> > ment to be a rambling of someone, who was trying to fully explore

the

> > idea to absurdity, then that's fine...or maybe as a koan, but

other

> > than that, I don't think it's very useful. Maybe I'm just not

> > reading it right, any suggestions?

> >

> > Jeremy.

>

> To me the gist of that piece (below) is that there is no stable

self or

> entity on this level of existence, and therefore the apparent self

which

> one experiences is simply not real. The real Self is unchanging

and is

> the ground of being from which this transitory world arises.

>

> By the way, this is the first time I've posted anything on this

forum,

> so to those of you who have read this far, hello.

>

> -Tom

 

Hi Tom. I'm kinda new here too. I'll be sure to stick my foot in my

mouth sooner or later. :> What you say fits. A view from with-in,

instead of with-out to show the same thing. Don't know why I

overlooked that side of the coin before. LOL :> Thanks, that'll be

useful.

 

Jeremy.