Super Universe
Defender of God
Self is a singular identity that forms when a consciousness becomes isolated from the All That Is consciousness.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Is the Self?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
OK folks - here is the Buddhist definition of the impermanent "self". Lifted with permission from writings by Rev. Ryuei Michael McCormick, a friend and fellow Nichiren Buddhist, from San Francisco, CA, USA.
*******************************************************************************
The five aggregates (Skt. skandhas) are form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness. These are the five groups or aspects of
sentient life.
In a way, they are the description of how life is a constant ongoing interdependent process. Physical phenomena impinge upon one another, soundwaves hit the eardum, lightwaves hit the eye, molecules activate our tastebuds and nose, we touch things or they touch us and so on. These contacts (and also mental phenomena interacting) cause us to have feelings that are pleasant or unpleasant or neither though yet noticeable. These feelings are then perceived by us in terms of our store of knowledge about what things are - this smell is a flower, this tastes peppery, this is PJ Harvey I'm listening to, etc... Based on our perceptions of mental and physical phenomena we generate more thoughts, ideas, conceptions, plans of action, various reactions - all this is lumped under the aggregate of volitions. And the end result is that we are conscious of a new moment of experience wherein we encounter and engage the external world and/or our own internal world of thoughts, feelings, and ideas. This sets us up for how we will enter into the next moment of encounter and engagement and the process just keeps rolling on until we die - and even beyond as the volitions help bring about a rebirth consicousness elsewhere after the moment of dying consciousness of the current life.
The Buddha pointed out that our delusion that there is a fixed independent self is based on grasping onto one or more of these five aggregates. But if we examine them, we see that each one of them is impermanent, not truly under our power to govern or control, and therefore none of them singly is the basis of a fixed, independent self. And altogether they are obviously an unstable and conditioned process and not a singular fixed entity. And apart from them there is nothing we could identify as part of our life or experience. So neither in them singly, nor in them together, nor apart from the aggregates can a "self" be found. In realizing this, one awakens to the fact that there is no singular fixed independent self to cling to. But there is a contingent dynamic process that we can provisionally call a "self" and take responsibility for (because it is "us" in a provisional sense) and direct in terms of the causes that are made.
In deeply examining the five aggregates or aspects of our life - we come to appreciate that it makes no sense to get carried away by
attachment and aversion for what are in fact impermanent elements that are constantly in flux. But on the other hand it also makes no sense to ignore this dynamic process, because it can have its dysfunctional aspects unravelled and the whole steered into a more wholesome way of functioning once it no longer futiley tries to make itself some ultimate subject (or even object). In other words, we gain a more realistic perspective on what our life really is and is not, and thereby we take life seriously but not too seriously. We learn to value and care for our aggregates and those of others, but without the unecessary baggage of ignorantly seeking ultimate self-satisfaction in any of it, or fearing that there will be some loss of "self" because that kind of "self" doesn't exist to worry about in the first place. Life becomes something more precious, dynamic, open-ended and interdependent once we stop grasping at the ungraspable five aggregates and for a fixed self that is not there. In this way an authentic dynamic non-dual "self" shines through, a "self" that takes on whatever form it needs to and realizes it is not truly seperate (see chapters 24 and 25 of the Lotus Sutra and the transformative power of the bodhisattvas in those chapters).
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
*******************************************************************************
The five aggregates (Skt. skandhas) are form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness. These are the five groups or aspects of
sentient life.
In a way, they are the description of how life is a constant ongoing interdependent process. Physical phenomena impinge upon one another, soundwaves hit the eardum, lightwaves hit the eye, molecules activate our tastebuds and nose, we touch things or they touch us and so on. These contacts (and also mental phenomena interacting) cause us to have feelings that are pleasant or unpleasant or neither though yet noticeable. These feelings are then perceived by us in terms of our store of knowledge about what things are - this smell is a flower, this tastes peppery, this is PJ Harvey I'm listening to, etc... Based on our perceptions of mental and physical phenomena we generate more thoughts, ideas, conceptions, plans of action, various reactions - all this is lumped under the aggregate of volitions. And the end result is that we are conscious of a new moment of experience wherein we encounter and engage the external world and/or our own internal world of thoughts, feelings, and ideas. This sets us up for how we will enter into the next moment of encounter and engagement and the process just keeps rolling on until we die - and even beyond as the volitions help bring about a rebirth consicousness elsewhere after the moment of dying consciousness of the current life.
The Buddha pointed out that our delusion that there is a fixed independent self is based on grasping onto one or more of these five aggregates. But if we examine them, we see that each one of them is impermanent, not truly under our power to govern or control, and therefore none of them singly is the basis of a fixed, independent self. And altogether they are obviously an unstable and conditioned process and not a singular fixed entity. And apart from them there is nothing we could identify as part of our life or experience. So neither in them singly, nor in them together, nor apart from the aggregates can a "self" be found. In realizing this, one awakens to the fact that there is no singular fixed independent self to cling to. But there is a contingent dynamic process that we can provisionally call a "self" and take responsibility for (because it is "us" in a provisional sense) and direct in terms of the causes that are made.
In deeply examining the five aggregates or aspects of our life - we come to appreciate that it makes no sense to get carried away by
attachment and aversion for what are in fact impermanent elements that are constantly in flux. But on the other hand it also makes no sense to ignore this dynamic process, because it can have its dysfunctional aspects unravelled and the whole steered into a more wholesome way of functioning once it no longer futiley tries to make itself some ultimate subject (or even object). In other words, we gain a more realistic perspective on what our life really is and is not, and thereby we take life seriously but not too seriously. We learn to value and care for our aggregates and those of others, but without the unecessary baggage of ignorantly seeking ultimate self-satisfaction in any of it, or fearing that there will be some loss of "self" because that kind of "self" doesn't exist to worry about in the first place. Life becomes something more precious, dynamic, open-ended and interdependent once we stop grasping at the ungraspable five aggregates and for a fixed self that is not there. In this way an authentic dynamic non-dual "self" shines through, a "self" that takes on whatever form it needs to and realizes it is not truly seperate (see chapters 24 and 25 of the Lotus Sutra and the transformative power of the bodhisattvas in those chapters).
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Rolling_Stone
Well-Known Member
What is the self? Like a shadow, it is neither real nor an illusion.
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
Greetings Doppleganger and Willamena. Just a question to you two for clarification. In an old thread on the greatest truth of religions - http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/38867-worlds-greatest-religious-truth.html - you two agreed that to "Know Thyself" was a great truth. And I agree. My question is 'if the self you describe in this current thread on self is the one consistent with that truth?
Regards,
a...1
Regards,
a...1
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
Speaking for myself . . . Yup. The greatest truth is to know that whatever I see, what I see is me (as symbolized by my avatar). Put another way, it's the age-old wisdom of every culture that "all is vanity."
As Wittgenstein wrote: "It seems to me that, in every culture, I come across a chapter headed 'Wisdom.' And then I know exactly what is going to follow: 'Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.'" Or put another way, all is grasped only relatively, and the greatest wisdom is perceiving the operation of perspective that stands between the forms by which I experience and organize reality and "truth".
I'm also very fond of this take on it, by Nicholas of Cusa, perhaps the original father of relativity and modern astronomy:
The self that is "me" is the only self we can know, the concretized being. "Know thyself" is a phrase I picked up from astrology, and there all these "things" about ourselves that we can know, be and do are symbolized in the signs of the Zodiac. Each "thing" in the world --including the bits of "me" and my "life" that I relate to --is seen in a symbolic form in relation to the individual "being" in a ring surrounding a centre.
"Know thyself" to me has the implication of knowing this self (in relation to all "things" that comprise the world) in its proper context. The astrological chart has a centre that, as I was taught to make them, is left empty, only intersected by aspects, and since learning of unity and the transient or impermanent self I can now also identify that emptiness in relation to "being." It's caused me to re-evaluate what I "know" of "know thyself."
moegypt
Active Member
this is perfect questions to atheists..
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
Question: do you consider Buddhists atheist, or not?
doppelgänger;966103 said:Speaking for myself . . . Yup. The greatest truth is to know that whatever I see, what I see is me (as symbolized by my avatar). Put another way, it's the age-old wisdom of every culture that "all is vanity."
Thanks for responding to my question. At this point, I am not sure that I understand either one of you but will continue to ponder what you have posted. My question came up because "Know Thyself" seems much akin to 'look within to know God.' My own view would offer 'Know Thyself' to be important and would mean it in the sense of knowing oneself deeply to discover the 'true' self (perhaps akin to Engyo's non-dual self) and realize oneness with God. Does that fit with anything you posted?
Regards
Greetings Engyo. Thank you for surfacing and sharing those thoughts on the self for us. It seems that you have mentioned two self's - an impermanent one and a non-dual one. Just for clarification, how do you see them related to one another and would you care to say more about the non-dual one?
Regards,
a..1
For me, "me" is being (or beingness if you prefer) that is no different whether we examine ourselves in the context of the out-there world or of our "deep" or "true" inside. "I am" equally in duality and non-dual oneness. Hope that helps.
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
Auto -
I don't think that the quote was talking about two different selves; the non-dual self is still impermanent. The impermanence is something that cannot be changed. The non-dual self is just one particular way of viewing the impermanent self - a way which might have more beneficial results than some of the other ways which seem to come more naturally to humans.
I hope that this makes sense........
Greetings. Still pondering.
If you are still with me, would you care to say any more about "in duality and non-dual oneness"?Best for you,
a..1
Like what?Greetings. Still pondering.
Best for you,
a..1
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
They go together like a horse and carriage? If so, which one is the horse?