What does "self" mean in Buddhism

[Jishin]

Hi Joyo,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self

A western definition of the "little self" from wiki:

The self is the subject of one's own experience of phenomena: perception, emotions, thoughts. In phenomenology, it is conceived as what experiences, and there isn't any experiencing without an experiencer, the self. The self is therefore an "immediate given", an intrinsic dimension of the fact of experiencing phenomena. In some other trends of philosophy, the self is instead seen as requiring a reflexive perception of oneself, the individual person, meaning the self in such a view is an object of consciousness.

Regarding the "Big Buddhist Self":

I think that all words are representations of reality, not the real deal. This being so, anything that can be said about the "Big Buddhist Self" is not it. The Dao # 1 explains it well. If it can be said, thats not it. Why? Because they are words. The "Big Buddhist Self" and the "little self", if it can be conceptualized, is not it because it relies on words to be "understood." How do you explain with words the taste of an apple to someone that has never tasted an apple? You can try, but the best way would be by taking a bite out of it. But even then, their taste buds are different than yours, they may be allergic to apples, they may be blind or deaf and miss the "real" or "universal" experience of bitting into the apple. Even apples lack a western "little self" or a "Big Buddhist Self."

So, how can someone talk about the "Big Buddhist Self" without being wrong? They can't. Anyone that tells you they understand the "Big Buddhist Self" is wrong. Now, with this in mind, Zen teachers do the best they can with what they got - words and actions. It takes a lot of a skill to talk about something that can not be talked about. Zen teachers are dummies and they know it. Students are dummies but do not know it. Thats the difference.

With regards to your case, trying to explain the concept of the "Big Buddhist Self" to a non buddhist is a tall order. So, good luck.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

[Jundo]

If I may offer a couple of cautions ...

First, one should avoid being to overly analytical about some of this. As was stated, it is something like describing apples without tasting the apple.

As well, one can be too light about this. It is not simply to be a bit less selfish, less self-centered, less wrapped up in ourselves, more concerned about the feeling and needs of other people (although those are all marvelous attributes that we can cultivate along this Path). It is a much more radical transcending of the sense of small, mortal, limited self than that.

Traditionally, in Mahayana Buddhism (including Zen), our enterprise is to transcend the restricted (some say "false") model of self/other (me vs. everything not me) that is created within the human mind, and all the dividing, categorizing, judging, attaching, fearing etc. etc. that then goes with it. Here is a classic description from one of the basic old texts of our Mahayana corner of Buddhism, including Zen. It from a work called "Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana" written about the 6th Century AD it is believed. Note that here the author uses such terms as "One Mind" and "Suchness" to point to whatever is when all divisions, names and categories are dropped (however, he goes to great pains to say that even those terms are also just provisional). He speaks of the "ignorant" mind that has all the divisions and judgments, and the True Mind which is free of all that ... and enlightened mind, which is seeing that both are just the same all along from different perspectives. He uses descriptions like "eternal" and "pure", but what he actually says is that he means more something timeless (transcending even human measures like "eternal" and "finite") and beyond all human measures of "pure vs. impure".

I. One Mind and Its Two Aspects

The revelation of the true meaning of the principle of Mahayana can be achieved by unfolding the doctrine that the principle of One Mind has two aspects. One is the aspect of Mind in terms of the Absolute (tathata; Suchness), and the other is the aspect of Mind in terms of phenomena (samsara; birth and death). Each of these two aspects embraces all states of existence. Why? Because these two aspects are mutually inclusive.

A. Mind in Terms of the Absolute
The Mind in terms of the Absolute is the one World of Reality (dharmadhatu) and the essence of all phases of existence in their totality. That which is called "the essential nature of the Mind" is unborn and is imperishable. It is only through illusions that all things come to be differentiated. If one is freed from illusions, then to him there will be no appearances (lakshana) of objects regarded as absolutely independent existences; therefore all things from the beginning transcend all forms of verbalization, description, and conceptualization and are, in the final analysis, undifferentiated, free from alteration, and indestructible. They are only of the One Mind; hence the name Suchness.

All explanations by words are provisional and without validity, for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable of denoting Suchness. The term Suchness likewise has no attributes which can be verbally specified. The term Suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words. But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put an end to, for all things in their Absolute aspect are real; nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of Suchness. It should be understood that all things are incapable of being verbally explained or thought of; hence the name Suchness.

...

1. Truly Empty
Suchness is empty because from the beginning it has never been related to any defiled states of existence; it is free from all marks of individual distinction of things, and it has nothing to do with thoughts conceived by a deluded mind. It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with marks nor without marks; neither not with marks nor not without marks; nor is it both with and without marks simultaneously; it is neither with a single mark nor with different marks; neither not with a single mark nor not with different marks; nor is it both with a single and with different marks simultaneously. In short, since all unenlightened men discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness; hence, the definition "empty"; but once they are free from their deluded minds, they will find that there is nothing to be negated.

2. Truly Nonempty
Since it has been made clear that the essence of all things is empty, i.e., devoid of illusions, the true Mind is eternal, permanent, immutable, pure, and self-sufficient; therefore, it is called "nonempty". And also there is no trace of particular marks to be noted in it, as it is the sphere that transcends thoughts and is in harmony with enlightenment alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awakening_of_Faith_in_the_Mahayana

http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachin..._of_faith.html

Even Zen through the centuries, although we try to avoid being too wordy and philosophical about it, has pretty much been about experiencing what the author is describing.

By the way, when one transcends the self/other divide in Buddhism, the result is not what philosophers call "solipsism" (the view that the whole of reality is just Jundo Cohen ... or put your name here ...). Rather, it is something which transcends all "Jundo Cohen/Not Jundo Cohen" to something much more encompassing and wonderful. It would be terrible if the universe were just fat old me!

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Jakuden]

Aaah! Ok it's going to take quite a bit of re-reading to get close to "grokking" that one. Right from the first paragraph I am already realizing I have been confused about what is "the Mind in terms of the absolute" vs. "the Mind in terms of phenomena", I thought they were the same thing, as opposed to the more relative emptiness that holds them all... I guess part of the point, though, is that the words used are inadequate anyway to described "suchness," which contains everything?

It would be terrible if the universe were just fat old me!

Gassho, J

SatToday

Nah, it would eliminate a lot of terrible suffering in the world, but it might be pretty boring for you. I can join you in the fatness club after this holiday season! Had leftover Christmas cookies for breakfast

Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday

[Jishin]

First, one should avoid being to overly analytical about some of this. As was stated, it is something like describing apples without tasting the apple.

I like simplicity. I am not a good wordsmith. One of the cool things about Zen is that with a few words one can convey volumes and volumes of meaning when using koan dialogues/examples or when "stinking of Zen." It's much easier and expedient to communicate in this fashion in
Zen circles in my opinion. But now and then I take a stab at being wordy and analytical which is best left to the professionals.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

[Jakuden]

I like simplicity. I am not a good wordsmith. One of the cool things about Zen is that with a few words one can convey volumes and volumes of meaning when using koan dialogues/examples or when "stinking of Zen." It's much easier and expedient to communicate in this fashion in
Zen circles in my opinion. But now and then I take a stab at being wordy and analytical which is best left to the professionals.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

It depends who is in the Zen circles of which you speak, some of us have a long way to go before we can understand the volumes of meaning in those few words. Yes it can seem like repetition and wordiness sometimes, but in a one-room schoolhouse (like this forum) the kindergarteners share the same space with the advanced students. Prior to finding Treeleaf, and what appears to me to be Jundo's "middle way," I perhaps thought that there had to be some goal of "ultimate mindfulness," or some state of completely ego-less being, now I realize that must be dropped like any other preference, reaching, or searching... sometimes it is just communication through the words of our small selves because that is a tool we have, and that's it. Other times it may be a koan used as a tool to further understanding, but not necessarily a goal of all communication to be turned into koans... how inefficient that would be!

Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday

[Joyo]

Thank you, Jundo.

Gassho,
Joyo
sat today

[Joyo]

It depends who is in the Zen circles of which you speak, some of us have a long way to go before we can understand the volumes of meaning in those few words.
Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday

Hi Sierra, I understand how you feel in regards to understanding the volumes of meaning in Zen words. I felt that way a lot when I first started practicing, and obviously (since I started this post) I still do. I've found the way to handle that is just to let go of grasping for the meaning. Eventually the understanding comes, as you practice, and quit trying to figure everything out. There are still many things I do not fully understand when it comes to Zen words, so I just continue to quietly practice, letting go of the desire to understand it all. I hope that makes sense. =)

Gassho,
Joyo
sat today

[Jakuden]

Yes it makes total sense... usually if I bang my head against something long enough, I do just let it go and come back to it (a lot like sewing the Rakusu, isn't it!!?) Thank you for the encouragement, I will definitely continue to practice--and to practice dropping the need to understand it all

Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday

[Jishin]

Yes it can seem like repetition and wordiness sometimes

Yes. Jundo is a broken record most of the time. His favorite one pony trick is the middle way. A very important trick. .

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

[Rich]

Hi Sierra, I understand how you feel in regards to understanding the volumes of meaning in Zen words. I felt that way a lot when I first started practicing, and obviously (since I started this post) I still do. I've found the way to handle that is just to let go of grasping for the meaning. Eventually the understanding comes, as you practice, and quit trying to figure everything out. There are still many things I do not fully understand when it comes to Zen words, so I just continue to quietly practice, letting go of the desire to understand it all. I hope that makes sense. =)

Gassho,
Joyo
sat today

Thanks, really like this letting go of the desire to understand and quietly practice. It's so easy to make Zen into another intellectual exercise.

SAT today

[Jishin]

Thanks, really like this letting go of the desire to understand and quietly practice. It's so easy to make Zen into another intellectual exercise.

SAT today

I think what get us into trouble is the frontal lobe. If we all had frontal lobectomies we would be better practitioners.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

[Rich]

I think what get us into trouble is the frontal lobe. If we all had frontal lobectomies we would be better practitioners.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

But wouldn't that make us into one trick ponies 😊 -)

SAT today

[Jundo]

... I perhaps thought that there had to be some goal of "ultimate mindfulness," or some state of completely ego-less being, now I realize that must be dropped like any other preference, reaching, or searching...

Sometimes (although actually "sometimeless" because beyond human measure of the "now vs. then" clock and "yesterday/today/tomorrow" calendar) there is "completely ego-less being" ...

but I would say such is a nice place to visit but wouldn't want to (nor could we practically while in human form) live there ...

... and, by the way, not a "there" or even "here" place for "you" to visit, because that creates a mental gap between "you" and "it", "here" and "there" ...

... so better known as so "Big H Here" that this "thisless this" sweeps both away and right in both here there and everywhere.

One must even be careful calling such as "being" because that too creates a split between "to be or not to be", and so does any denial, thus to use the way of putting things from the piece I quoted above in Koany fashion ...

It should be understood that the essential nature of Suchness is neither with being nor without being; neither not with being nor not without being; nor is it both with and without being simultaneously; it is neither with a single being nor with different being; neither not with a single being nor not with different being; nor is it both with a single and with different being simultaneously. In short, since all unenlightened people discriminate with their deluded minds from moment to moment, they are alienated from Suchness

That is just a word game to caution us to get radically away from the mental categories like "being" vs "not being" to find what radically transcends such. a kind of Big B "Being".

Now that being said, get back to life, get back to our day to day word games of this and that ... go to work, take care of the baby, chop wood and fetch water.

However, maybe one will now know a bit that all this life, every day to day, all this and that, the work, the baby, all that grows and all held in the bucket is Suchness too.

Something like that.

Gassho, Jundo the Broken Record

SatToday

[Jakuden]

I think what get us into trouble is the frontal lobe. If we all had frontal lobectomies we would be better practitioners.

Gasho, Jishin, _/st\_

Yes, (spoken like a true expert in neuroanatomy lol) very intriguing, that story recently posted about the doctor who had the left-brain stroke and lived by pure experience without verbal analysis! Of course, there goes my desire to explain everything again. There are those that address being human as a disease, as if our self-awareness is somehow unnatural and problematic, or inferior/superior to animals in some way... someone commenting on our FB page yesterday was even insisting how humans are all terrible by nature.... but I think we just are what we are as part of the universe as it should be, and the challenge is just to become "fully aware" of what we are, both the verbal, analytic and non-verbal sides to us (absolute vs.. relative?)

Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday

[Jakuden]

Sometimes (although actually "sometimeless" because beyond human measure of the "now vs. then" clock and "yesterday/today/tomorrow" calendar) there is "completely ego-less being" ...

but I would say such is a nice place to visit but wouldn't want to (nor could we practically while in human form) live there ...

... and, by the way, not a "there" or even "here" place for "you" to visit, because that creates a mental gap between "you" and "it", "here" and "there" ...

... so better known as so "Big H Here" that this "thisless this" sweeps both away and right in both here there and everywhere.

One must even be careful calling such as "being" because that too creates a split between "to be or not to be", and so does any denial, thus to use the way of putting things from the piece I quoted above in Koany fashion ...



That is just a word game to caution us to get radically away from the mental categories like "being" vs "not being" to find what radically transcends such. a kind of Big B "Being".

Now that being said, get back to life, get back to our day to day word games of this and that ... go to work, take care of the baby, chop wood and fetch water.

However, maybe one will now know a bit that all this life, every day to day, all this and that, the work, the baby, all that grows and all held in the bucket is Suchness too.

Something like that.

Gassho, Jundo the Broken Record

SatToday

Thank you Jundo, the broken record helps stuff get through my thick skull sometimes! Going to sit, then do barn chores, fill the woodstove, and quit the yakking for tonight

Gassho,
Sierra
SatToday