No-Self/Anatma in Buddhism

No-Self/Anatma in Buddhism

 I have concluded after carefully studying some of the authentic Buddhist texts that instead of a self, there is consideration only for a being or a living being. The fact that there is no self in their system does not mean that there is nothing there. This is the first thing we have to consider in this regard of their no-self presentation. There is something there according to their text and it is the living being.

 Their view is that this being does not remain as it is, as the same, because in one life this appears and in the next life that appears which is not identical. They use the example of a fire which used up its wood fuel and then suddenly due to coming in contact with a dry branch flares up again.

 It cannot be said that it is the same fire from before but all the same it is not completely different either. The original piece of dry wood was consumed and then another piece of dry wood was ignited by the dying cinders, so on one hand it is the same fire because of an apparent continuum and yet it is totally different the materials used changed.

 It may be considered that their view is valid because of the impossibility of manifest things remaining perpetually the same.

 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 As it stands right now the self, the conventional self is a composite, a psycho-physical organism. It can be targeted. We know that for sure. This is why one person may feel pain while another does not. It can evade being targeted but only on occasion. Then it might be said to be untargeted or not distinguished from the physical or psychic all-surrounding reality.

 Buddhism seems to refuse to acknowledge any core (s) around which the energy flux interacts. What can be said?

 It seems that in Buddhism the search for a core is considered to be ludicrous. The effort there is to become liberated without even considering any core. The question of what is to be liberated is not addressed because then one will be boxed into an individual identity crisis.

 This is in direct contrast to the Krishna system of self-realization which begins in Bhagavad Gita with a pronounced and very distinguished core-self or atma. Is it that there are two types of living beings (composite selves) which seek liberation: One which will focus on distinguishing a self and one which will have no concern about that?