1

There is no self that is permanent. All this results from 5 aggregates, then who is experiencing the non self?

1

There are several questions on this site which are more-or-less about this topic.

One which I found helpful was, How is it wrong to believe that a self exists, or that it doesn't?

I also liked this little summary of Right View, which includes, "A thicket of wrong views".

1

Why, of course Buddha is experiencing the non-self. Arahant is experiencing the non-self. Bodhisattva from the first Bhumi and above is experiencing the non-self.

0

You have this question a bit upside down and backwards. The point is that we mistakenly associate the 'self' with the five aggregates. What we think is the 'self,' isn't. It's like walking around wearing a name-tag that says 'me,' and pointing at it whenever anyone asks who we are. If someone rips off our name-tag and runs away, do we suddenly stop being 'me'? But we are so used to pointing at the name-tag, that we lose track of the distinction between it and us.

The idea of 'no self' is a way of ripping off the name-tags. It's not a question of who is there experiencing 'non self'; it's a question of who is there experiencing all the false labels of 'self'.

  • Is the name tag "the aggregates", is this analogy? Are you saying there is a self but that it's other than the aggregates? :-) And what's the basis of this answer, what doctrine (or personal experience) is it based on? – ChrisW Dec 9 '19 at 16:03
  • The various aggregates that we identify with become 'name tags'. You have awareness, therefore you have experience that is reasonably interpreted as a self. The Buddhist problematic arises when you begin to connect with various aggregates as 'permanent' features of an 'identified' self. You can't really argue with 'I am,' because 'I am' is the fundamental condition for arguing with anything. The problem enters when 'I am' becomes 'I am this' or 'I am that.' – Ted Wrigley Dec 9 '19 at 17:21
  • Thank you (and I didn't mean to challenge you, I just didn't understand the answer). – ChrisW Dec 9 '19 at 22:14
  • Oh, no worries. I didn't think you were being challenging; nothing here to challenge except our own curiosity. 😀 – Ted Wrigley Dec 9 '19 at 22:31
0

The mind experiences not-self.

Questions about "who" are irrelevant, per the Phagguna Sutta .

0

I can't give answer this question. But I will attempt this question. We aren't going "non self " First question " who am i " I am "name" so I can live without "name" so I am not "name". Who told you aren't name?. Answer =mind saying

You can understand....

I am "identity " identity means docter, engineer, monk, Hindu,Muslim. So without identity you can live so you aren't identity.. Who told you aren't identity? Answer =mind saying.

I am physical body. In physical body many parts so we are discussed. I am hair so without hair we can live so I amnot hair.

I am leg and hand But without leg we can live so I amnot leg.

I am eye, ear , but without eye and ear we can live so I amnot eye and ear..

I am mind but without mind can live so I amnot mind for example comma .

I am "breath" but without breath we can't live.. This is my last lever. I amnot going next level.

-1

That’s exactly right. When you find out “who” that is, you will have resolved the matter of birth and death.

Just keep asking “who? who? who?” Don’t put the question down for a second. Keep it so close that no air can escape.

-1

How did you come to the conclusion that the self is impermament? I'm asking because your question seems to contradict your first conclusion. In other words, there's a risk that your question leads you away from understanding annicca/anatta (impermanence/non-self).

It is - to use a parable from the suttas - like asking about the specifics of the poisoned arrow, and it distracts us from the remedy of the damage:

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.

Regarding undeclared questions, and their alternatives:

"And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life. They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are undeclared by me.

"And what is declared by me? 'This is stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. And why are they declared by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are declared by me.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.063.than.html

(I realize the questions in the sutta are phrased differently than yours, but they share the same characteristics as unwholesome diversions).

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.