Self or NoT-Self?

>
> Dear All,
>
> In the first chapter about Buddha it says:
>
> During this period, the Blessed One gave teaching on nonself, or
> non- ego.

Dear Chuck..the nonself or non-ego in Buddhism is based on the idea of
not-permanence of the ,,false self,,..in order to differentiate from
the ,,real,, self or spirit within.In other words my false, nonself,
transitory and not eternal self has the name of danny and assumes that
this is the real me.
Attaining Buddha nature is infact this ,,union,, or dissolution of the
false,nonself named danny into the real self,or spirit, therefore
escaping the cycles of births/rebirths on this particular physical plane.

The idea of an eternal self, an ego or soul, connected
> with an eternal divine principle in the universe and
> transmigrating from rebirth to rebirth, was a central tenet of
> Hinduism.

What hinduism regard as ,,eternal soul,, which transmigrates is
the very nonself in Buddhism.For being entangled in the chains of
Karma is it not ,,permanent,, as nature,but transient.The eternal
divine principle is the very ,,universal spirit,,and is the only one
permanent,and unchangeable.

The Buddah taught that there is no such self, but only
> the illusion of a self. If a real self did exist, he explained,
> it would only be a cause of suffering, and if it were eternal it
> would be a cause of suffering that could never be removed.

If the soul would be permanent then the cause of suffering could never
be removed.This is not the case,as the soul is transitory on this
realm, and reincarnates if not,,united with the spirit within,,
therefore attaining Buddha nature.


That
> eternal self would enter again and again into the web of
> experience, into the cycle of rebirth. Then there would be no
> Third Noble Truth of the cessation of suffering and thus no
> enlightenment.

The soul is not the eternal self.We have plenty evidence supporting
this buddhist theory from other religions,like Christianity or
Islam,where there are plenty warnings that in the worst scenario the
souls will simply ,,die,,or be distroyed on the end of times,unless
one connects with the eternal source(spirit) within.

As it is, he taught, there is only an illusion of a
> self, but even that is enough to function as the principal
> obstacle to liberation, to the cessation of suffering. But the
> obstacle of an illusionary self, taught the Tathagata-the
> Perfected One-who was fresh from victory, falls away when it is
> seen as it is. Rather than being a solid, eternal entity, it is
> merely a temporary composite of form, feeling, perception,
> conceptual formations, and consciousness, which are called the
> five skandhas, or aggregates. Rather than a definite self to cling
> to, and which in turn clings to other things, there is just an
> ever-shifting mosaic composed of those five aggregates. Once this
> is recognized, one becomes dispassionate toward what one formerly
> clung to. Desire fades away, and the heart is liberated. Nothing
> remains that is subject to the round of suffering and rebirth.

Again we are talking about the reincarnation of the ,,false self,, or
non-self.But reincarnation theory in Buddhism is a bit different than
that in Hinduism.In Buddhism they acknowledge the reincarnation of the
latent impressions of the non-self(soul,and not the real self
as,,spirit)which is exactly the idea that only the subconscious
reincarnates...In other words,if I ,danny will reincarnate,it surely
won't be danny again.Therefore this danny form is nonself, transitory.
What it will reincarnate will be my subconscious, whatever I'll be a
woman or a man next time,and surely I won't recollect my former life
of danny(as danny was a nonself) The real self is the spirit
within,and immortality(avoiding the wiping out of the conscious
memories)is this very union between my soul(nonself) with my
spirit/source(real-self).
Thus,liberation is obtained for the soul,for the spirit does not need
liberation,being eternal. But when the 2 become ONE then the Buddha
nature/salvation pure consciousness takes place.Freedom,my friend..as
William Walace cried out in the movie
,,Braveheart,,?..Freeeeeeddddddddddooooooooommmmm!!!!
love,danny

ps.
When Buddha talked about nonself he meant to direct attention to the
real self(spirit).By anihilation of the illusion of the
non-real-self(as soul) he meant to express,,integration,, with the
real self.From his prospective,as a Buddha,we can understand now why
he regards the soul as ,,nonself,, and an illusion.For only after
,,integration,, it becomes permanent.From Buddha's point of
view,everything wich is not permanent,unchangeable and being pure
conscious of itself is not-real,if we translate not-real as ,,transient,,.and this is DANNY TAKING.