Dear Carolyn

Eagerly looking forward for the rest of the series.

Can you please consider posting the video(s) with a transcript and/or subtitles?

That would benefit me and other deaf people.

Thank You.

Article by Ajaan Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff)

No-self or Not-self?

One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta (in Sanskrit: anatman), often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of karma and rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the results of karma and takes rebirth? Second, it doesn't fit well with our own Judeo-Christian background, which assumes the existence of an eternal soul or self as its basic presupposition: If there's no self, what's the purpose of a spiritual life? Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali Canon--the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings--you won't find them addressed at all. In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible. Thus the question should be put aside. To understand what his silence on this question says about the meaning of anatta, we first have to look at his teachings on how questions should be asked and answered, and how to interpret his answers.

The Buddha divided all questions into four classes: those that deserve a categorical (straight yes or no) answer; those that deserve an analytical answer, defining and qualifying the terms of the question; those that deserve a counter-question, putting the ball back in the questioner's court; and those that deserve to be put aside. The last class of question consists of those that don't lead to the end of suffering and stress. The first duty of a teacher, when asked a question, is to figure out which class the question belongs to, and then to respond in the appropriate way. You don't, for example, say yes or no to a question that should be put aside. If you are the person asking the question and you get an answer, you should then determine how far the answer should be interpreted. The Buddha said that there are two types of people who misrepresent him: those who draw inferences from statements that shouldn't have inferences drawn from them, and those who don't draw inferences from those that should.

These are the basic ground rules for interpreting the Buddha's teachings, but if we look at the way most writers treat the anatta doctrine, we find these ground rules ignored. Some writers try to qualify the no-self interpretation by saying that the Buddha denied the existence of an eternal self or a separate self, but this is to give an analytical answer to a question that the Buddha showed should be put aside. Others try to draw inferences from the few statements in the discourse that seem to imply that there is no self, but it seems safe to assume that if one forces those statements to give an answer to a question that should be put aside, one is drawing inferences where they shouldn't be drawn.

So, instead of answering "no" to the question of whether or not there is a self--interconnected or separate, eternal or not-- the Buddha felt that the question was misguided to begin with. Why? No matter how you define the line between "self" and "other," the notion of self involves an element of self-identification and clinging, and thus suffering and stress. This holds as much for an interconnected self, which recognizes no "other," as it does for a separate self; if one identifies with all of nature, one is pained by every felled tree. It also holds for an entirely "other" universe, in which the sense of alienation and futility would become so debilitating as to make the quest for happiness--one's own or that of others--impossible. For these reasons, the Buddha advised paying no attention to such questions as "Do I exist?" or "Don't I exist?" for however you answer them, they lead to suffering and stress.

To avoid the suffering implicit in questions of "self" and "other," he offered an alternative way of dividing up experience: the four Noble Truths of stress, its cause, its cessation, and the path to its cessation. Rather than viewing these truths as pertaining to self or other, he said, one should recognize them simply for what they are, in and of themselves, as they are directly experienced, and then perform the duty appropriate to each. Stress should be comprehended, its cause abandoned, its cessation realized, and the path to its cessation developed. These duties form the context in which the anatta doctrine is best understood. If you develop the path of virtue, concentration, and discernment to a state of calm well-being and use that calm state to look at experience in terms of the Noble Truths, the questions that occur to the mind are not "Is there a self? What is my self?" but rather "Does holding onto this particular phenomenon caused stress and suffering? Is it really me, myself, or mine? If it's stressful but not really me or mine, why hold on?" These last questions merit straightforward answers, as they then help you to comprehend stress and to chip away at the attachment and clinging--the residual sense of self-identification--that cause it, until ultimately all traces of self-identification are gone and all that's left is limitless freedom.

In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or about whether or not it's a self?

http://herenow.org/IMSB/pages/not-self.html

I am unaware of Deepak Chopra's view on this very important topic(Ref. #2) in his book. Anyone who has read the book may please share it here.

For more detail on Buddha's subtle notions than that was presented in post #2, please read this article:

The Not-self Strategy
by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself.html

"Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply."

Thanks lou rizzo!

Bonnie

Dear Lou (Rizzo),

I will look into it. Thank you for patience.

Best,
Carolyn

Let us hope the story reaches the world at light speed.

Thank you for mentioning that Lou, as I cannot watch the videos either, nor can I hear the sound. But I bet it was good.

Love, Char

Thank you, Carolyn!

Did anyone else notice a change in Deepak's demeanor?

This doesn't seem to be the same guy who wears tight red shoes.

Maybe it's because there are no antagonists facing him.

He seems very calm and self-assured...I would even dare say 'serene'.

Will he still address the skeptics and naysayers?

Do they ask the type of questions that beg to be 'put aside'
or shunned, or should they be answered honestly,
with an "I don't know" once in awhile?

.

No labels necessary, names we use only for convenience.

As soon as you think you are somebody doing something,
you've missed the boat already.

We don't need to be a certain type of character
day after day, year after year...where's the fun in that?

Right thinking tells me
that the ruts we get stuck in
are made by our own two feet.

Treading lightly away now, in peace. Keith~

Well ... you won't believe what I just found on Deepak and I was not looking for him. I am bored at work, which is usual for me, so I was web surfing. Today, I have been so blah!!! I even went out and had beer and a hot-pocket for lunch! When I came back, I felt a little better as I could pretend that I was not bored. I want to run away again!!! Anyway, did you know that Deepak is #82 in the Forbes mag "The Celebrity 100?" I was surprised as I think of Deepak, as more of a spiritual master, but he is all over the place now and uses the best technology to where I can no longer follow him, i.e, get to all the places, nor have the capacity. Well, Deepak is still a great spiritual person. Jesus was popular too, as well as others, so I guess they really great ones get famous! It's just so strange for me to take in. Oh well....I still love you Deeapk!

Love, Char

Anyway, here's the bookmark for Forbes, as I forgot to post it ...

http://movies.msn.com/movies/celebsbuzz?GT1=7701

Well, I'm off to web lala land!

Love, Char

Well, now that I am over the shock and thinking more clearly. It's not Deepak's fault that he is listed as a celebrity. Deepak is doing what he loves and is good at, which is spiritual and self-help to others. Like Deepak has said before in so many words, when you serve people, you gain gifts, so this is one of his gifts, i.e., this kind of recognition. It's not like he is an actor or something and some of the other celebrities where in sports, as well as other areas. It's just the word 'celebrity' that really bothered me being connected to Deepak. So this is good .... Deepak is still the same nice and friendly person. (Sorry actors/ess - not that you are not.) Oh well, I don't know why this is still bothering me...it's like so bazaar.

Love, Char

I think D.H. Lawrence sought and found his Buddha Nature.

.

"Entire separation, that is what must happen to
one:
not even the nominal shelter left, not even the mere
fact of inclusion in the host. One must be entirely cast forth."

This alienation he advised his friend Bertrand Russell
to seek, if Russell hoped to become something more
than an academic philosopher...

...everything great and good springs, as Lawrence believed, from man's inner life and not from changes
in his social and scientific arrangements.
This faith in the externals of life has had the effect
of making man think less than highly of himself. Such pride was not lacking in the religious epochs
of our emotional history. Compare Lawrence's friend
Russell's characterization of man as a passing and
miserable creature in an indifferent creative universe
with Lawrence's own daring not only to place the self
at the center of the universe but to imagine it literally
as the hot creative stuff from which even the remotest
cold stars derive. "It is the life of the universe
which has resulted from the death of individuals,"
Lawrence proclaims, proudly anthropomorphic in his
opposition to the scientific downgrading of man.

.

Readings from an introduction to "Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious"
(D.H. Lawrence), by Philip Rieff

Tomorrow, I will bring in my headsets so that I can listen to all these videos :-)

Feeling much better as it is almost time to go home!

Buddha is butterfly that I cannot catch. I guess, I should stop chasing Buddha!

But hey, I have Deeapk's book with me, so I need to take a real lunch away from my desk and read it! You know the color on the book, below the sleeve is the exact same color of my kitchen stove! When I first move to this little apartment where I live, I hated the color of that stove! After a few months, I became fond of it and it works really good, even though it is really old. My landlord refused to trade up and said it was a collectic. Anyway, I had this bamboo plant in this pretty small vase that matched the stove, which made my kitchen a little better. Anyway, I have been looking a rental house in Santa Cruz near the beach all afternoon and there are some reasonably priced properties. I want it far away from people! So I can sleep when I want to and not hear my neighbor snoring all night! One year of that is driving me mad. I want to play my music loud! I want to sing on a mic! I want to play my keyboard loud! I want to have a yard! I want to be able to garden again! I want sunbath again!

I know, not very Buddha ... but this fly needs freedom!!!!!!!!!! And one day I might catch Buddha!

Love, Char

Deepak: Buddha's answer remains radical, but its truth offers a way out that may be our best hope for the future.

There might be a need to learn a `New' way of living with arrival of new perception, new view, new understanding, ...Arrival of Realization.

As we can see and as we have seen in history, ...many activities of humans in society and elsewhere have been dominated and driven by ego and its fear and greed ...

It is demonstrated by act, thinking and behavior the people of power today as well by the people who don't hold such power. Organizations, corporations companies and even countries are mostly run this way and gets driven by these dynamics.

A Buddha, even if his sense of strong separateness as well as incessant greed and fear is gone, ...as a `social' human is likely to find itself in one of these organizations/corporations and is likely to be subject to same conditions, demands and expectations.

For a example, we can imagine a soldier fighting in Iraq war or a soldier serving Saddam, Hitler or Stalin becoming a Buddha ...?

Or a professional working for an organization which is driven by intense fear and incessant greed and practices domination by any means ...

As long as the common driving motives for fear and greed and prevalent in organization's culture as well as the individual's psyche, ...both can be said to be compatible. Can be even said to be ..."Made for each other".

However, if these factors lose their significance in the life and psychology of an individual where the psyche of the organization remains same, the relationship would suddenly change ...

It will require a new `learning', a new answer to `why' for that individual as well as new way of `how' ....

Second factor, which continually drives many individuals is the search of the ever illusive peace and happiness ...

and, the belief that some change in external conditions will make it possible for them to gain the happiness and peace that has been always illusive.

...but, with the realization of ever-present, unconditional peace even that reason and motive loses its place.

The "why" of most major activities needs to be answered fresh ...

Further, after tasting this peace, happiness and joy most other things greatly pale in comparison.

...and understanding comes that nothing might be worth more and more important than this eternal peace and happiness,

And, such pursuit of no thing could be worth compromising it.

...and, that prompts the search of a new "how" to perform whatever that person has to perform but to still to do it without losing this peace, happiness and inherent joy that is now seen ...Unconditional and All-Important ...

an OSHO tried to answer this "how" by:

Always MEDITATING ...

a Buddha tried to answer it by:

Conscious living ...

a Ramana tried to answer it by:

Staying in and as Self ...

...and, strengthening the Mind by continuous practice so that it can keep resting in Self ...

a Tolle tried to answer it by:

When you lose touch of stillness, you lose touch with yourself. When you lose touch with yourself, you lose yourself in the world.

Whether such a learning is necessary or not, ...might be easy to answer.

First question, to ask would be:

...Who in his/her RIGHT mind will willfully do something to lose peace and happiness that he/she is desperately looking for?

Yet, many people even many considered `intelligent' ones are said to have lost it.

All this when, this peace and happiness is said to be eternal and unconditional !!!

How did that Happen ?

.....
...
.

Further, according to many observations newborns and children are said to be quite joyous and happy.

Some have even used them as an example of enlightened beings as well as calling enlightened beings and sages ....CHILD-LIKE. A Deepak Chopra describing Dalai Lama.

Yet, as the same joyous child grows and starts interacting with parents, teachers and rest of the society, ...it starts losing this joy and happiness slowly but Surely.

Looks like as it learns to please parents, teachers, society, as it starts leaving, ...it seems to start losing peace and happiness.

It seems to somehow have caught an infectious disease of perpetual unease that in many cases seems to last a lifetime.

Why is that ....???

Once the inherent Buddha-hood is recognized Again,

As well as seeing ...how this joy, happiness, ease, effortlessness, flow was seemingly lost as child grew and learnt to ...behave, interact and live in the society.

...and, seeing how it is still seemed to be lost in many other lives.

.
...
.....

It is ONLY quite natural for such a creature to look for a new way to LIVE as `human' now,

...one that doesn't cost this peace and happiness that the prevalent and common way seem to ...

( ...as evidenced in his/her life when he/she grew from ...perhaps, a generally happy child to a tortured individual with almost constant unease. )

( ...as evidenced by the unease, unrest of many other lives around him/her. )

Thank you, Carolyn! Looking forward to see the rest of the series.

Thank you, lou rizzo, for the article on Buddha's teaching.

Well I wanted to respond as one of the many post above from Robusberi caused me to think, even though s/he pretty much ended up answering all the questions s/he raised. Isn't that always the way it works and that is good.

So what I have found, if one truly has some peace within, however little or great, and attempts to maintain it in harsh conditions, such as abuse on basic human rights for example and stays strong with the peace inside of themselves, certainly that can change the environment around them. But it takes a great deal of effort, time, and patience. I found this to be true after a few years of attempting to maintain some peace within me. But I have now lost interest somewhat, as well as the heart, and desire to keep it up. Plus, I was not really equipped to continue this escapade at this moment - I don't thinks so? Anyway, I occasionally practice peace, especially in prayer, as I attempt it in thoughts. And when I do, my environment starts to change. And if the items of grief and/or war will change and if not, they will be removed from my environment, especially when I cannot escape or run away, i.e., such as what has happened to me a work with these two dictator leaders in my company. I always attribute it to my prayers to my Lord. And this morning I heard that I need to be more faithful, as God is faithful, i.e., I need to not give up, which I have recently as well on many more other occasions. And I need know that God will give me what I ask for, even though I was told last night to be careful what I ask for, as I still asked for it (I want to live away from people! At least for a little while.)

Well, I've said enough. And one could even replace the word God or Lord above with the Self or whatever feels right or seems appropriate, if one desire. I much pretty prefer the use of the word God and Lord.

Love, Char

Mindfulness is certainly a skill and a learned process....opening up to if is only a plus in my mind..joanie

Hi Deepak:

An eloquent description of the Holistic Relativity engrained in Buddha's approach and insights. Thanks.

Love
Avtar

Well, I forgot my headsets today, so I can listen to Deepak's video clip above. But my mood is good...it must be the new moon. :-)

Love, Char