Buddhists a question about shame and guilt

[Brickjectivity]

Suppose you have a profound sense of shame for whatever reason, and it latches onto you and won't leave. I am talking about something that can have many reasons ( such as massive failure ), but the reasons can also be irrational. It can be simply something you are born with, a feeling of self hate. Maybe your neurons are in the wrong place in your temporal lobe but for whatever reason its there and too strong. Is there a path for getting past abundant shame or guilt, so you can become what you want to be? Do you know anyone who has done it?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Suppose you have a profound sense of shame for whatever reason, and it latches onto you and won't leave. I am talking about something that can have many reasons ( such as massive failure ), but the reasons can also be irrational. It can be simply something you are born with, a feeling of self hate. Maybe your neurons are in the wrong place in your temporal lobe but for whatever reason its there and too strong. Is there a path for getting past abundant shame or guilt, so you can become what you want to be? Do you know anyone who has done it?

In my experiance the problem is the attachments to the feeling of shame, in my understanding it must be something you can not let go of from the past, something that you feel was wrong, and maybe do not know how to fix, so when you get in to similar situations you feel ashamed or worried about it.
But the only way to fix it in my experiance is to let go of the past, learn from the mistake and try not repeat it.

So it is more a case of attahmets to the past.

 

[Brickjectivity]

In my experiance the problem is the attachments to the feeling of shame, in my understanding it must be something you can not let go of from the past, something that you feel was wrong, and maybe do not know how to fix, so when you get in to similar situations you feel ashamed or worried about it.
But the only way to fix it in my experiance is to let go of the past, learn from the mistake and try not repeat it.

So it is more a case of attahmets to the past.

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Thank you for your thoughts.

Very welcome

 

[crossfire]

Contemplate anatta, the not-self characteristic.

 

[crossfire]

Contemplate anatta, the not-self characteristic.

Here's a sutta that can help with anatta. Let me know if you would like more.
Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic

 

[crossfire]

Suppose you have a profound sense of shame for whatever reason, and it latches onto you and won't leave. I am talking about something that can have many reasons ( such as massive failure ), but the reasons can also be irrational. It can be simply something you are born with, a feeling of self hate. Maybe your neurons are in the wrong place in your temporal lobe but for whatever reason its there and too strong. Is there a path for getting past abundant shame or guilt, so you can become what you want to be? Do you know anyone who has done it?

Thank you for asking this question. It has been an interesting contemplation for me. It highlights the difference between 2 shramanic religions: Buddhism and Jainism. Buddhism is non-substance based (anatta,) whereas Jainism is substance based (Dravya.) Your question sounds like it would be coming from the substance-based philosophy of Jainism, where karma is seen like a sticky substance that clings to the jiva, which could certainly result in such feelings as expressed in the OP.

Again, thanks for this question.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Here's a sutta that can help with anatta. Let me know if you would like more.
Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic

The 'I' likes it.

Questions about definitions and the cultural context in the sutta. They may be ignored or answered at leisure:

• The self refers to an unidentifiable target? Is it like saying 'the heart' or maybe 'that which is presumed to be the person' ?
• Is it assumed throughout Buddhism that the self exists and simply is not equal to these other measures or (oppositely) is it argued against as something perceived but which does not exist?
• Third option is Buddhism agnostic about the self?

Questions about these five bhukkhus:

• A little off-topic but is there a spelling system that helps to ease the spellings of words like these? Its quite difficult for this I, and the word has literally been retyped three times for each time it appears in this post. Hopefully that is funny to some people. Any idea why the translators transliterate this term instead of translating it?
• These 5 bhukkhus are instantaneously liberated forever? Is this the implication? Is this the expectation for all noble souls? Are they liberated only during the utterance and then must utter it again later? Its a translation and there are lots of situations where people have to continually doing things like wash hands, remind themselves of things and so forth; so the question arises. Is this a one time event?
• Is it rare to find five noble souls like these bhukkhus all in one place?

 

[crossfire]

I'll start with the Bhikkhus:

This group of 5 Bhikkhus (You can also use the term "monks," but this word doesn't quite fit this group of five, since they were not a "proper sangha," but are individual practitioners) are other contemplatives that Buddha practiced austerities with before his awakening. These are the ones Buddha went to and delivered his first discourse upon his awakening. You really can't say they are monks, per se, but more like individual practitioners who practiced austerities and shared notes.

A little off-topic but is there a spelling system that helps to ease the spellings of words like these? Its quite difficult for this I, and the word has literally been retyped three times for each time it appears in this post. Hopefully that is funny to some people. Any idea why the translators transliterate this term instead of translating it?

You can generally use the word "monks" for the word "Bhikkhus," although "Renunciative Contemplatives" might be more appropriate for this group of five

These 5 bhukkhus are instantaneously liberated forever? Is this the implication? Is this the expectation for all noble souls? Are they liberated only during the utterance and then must utter it again later? Its a translation and there are lots of situations where people have to continually doing things like wash hands, remind themselves of things and so forth; so the question arises. Is this a one time event?

No, they are expected to examine these things for themselves and do the work themselves, as no one can purify another.

Is it rare to find five noble souls like these bhukkhus all in one place?

Well this was Deer Park, the game reserve where these reclusive practicioners hung out. Buddha practiced with them, so he would know where to find them.

 

[crossfire]

The 'I' likes it.

Questions about definitions and the cultural context in the sutta. They may be ignored or answered at leisure:
The self refers to an unidentifiable target? Is it like saying 'the heart' or maybe 'that which is presumed to be the person' ?

Tathagatha means "The one Thus Gone." It's where you go through and identify everying you can as Not-Self. What you are left with is hard to describe and difficult to fathom.
Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta: To Vacchagotta on Fire

Is it assumed throughout Buddhism that the self exists and simply is not equal to these other measures or (oppositely) is it argued against as something perceived but which does not exist?
Third option is Buddhism agnostic about the self?

Buddhism is agnostic about Atman.

Sabbasava Sutta: All the Fermentations
"[1] And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by seeing? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — does not discern what ideas are fit for attention or what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas fit for attention and attends [instead] to ideas unfit for attention.

"And what are the ideas unfit for attention that he attends to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen fermentation of sensuality arises in him, and the arisen fermentation of sensuality increases; the unarisen fermentation of becoming arises in him, and arisen fermentation of becoming increases; the unarisen fermentation of ignorance arises in him, and the arisen fermentation of ignorance increases. These are the ideas unfit for attention that he attends to.

"And what are the ideas fit for attention that he does not attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them, the unarisen fermentation of sensuality does not arise in him, and the arisen fermentation of sensuality is abandoned; the unarisen fermentation of becoming does not arise in him, and arisen fermentation of becoming is abandoned; the unarisen fermentation of ignorance does not arise in him, and the arisen fermentation of ignorance is abandoned. These are the ideas fit for attention that he does not attend to. Through his attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his not attending to ideas fit for attention, both unarisen fermentations arise in him, and arisen fermentations increase.

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — discerns what ideas are fit for attention and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention and attends [instead] to ideas fit for attention.​

 

[Srivijaya]

Suppose you have a profound sense of shame for whatever reason, and it latches onto you and won't leave. I am talking about something that can have many reasons ( such as massive failure ), but the reasons can also be irrational. It can be simply something you are born with, a feeling of self hate. Maybe your neurons are in the wrong place in your temporal lobe but for whatever reason its there and too strong. Is there a path for getting past abundant shame or guilt, so you can become what you want to be? Do you know anyone who has done it?

What you are describing is one aspect of Dukkha, which gets misleadingly translated as suffering. It's part of the doctrine of the Three Seals and is a core teaching of Buddha. Yes, there is a way past it. You will need to locate its source and relinquish it. The way to do this is anapanasati - awareness of breathing.

Right now you have no alternative but to take ownership of the shame, just as others take ownership of anger, lust, and thoughts and feelings of all kinds. It's "your" shame. People think their s**t, say their s**t, do their s**t!

When you cross the threshold of first jhana, you will see that none of it is yours = not self = Anatta.

Please don't get trapped in Buddhist metaphysics - it's the path of distraction, diversion and lies, which Buddha rejected in sutta after sutta. "Self exists, does not exist - both exists and does not exist - neither exists, nor does not exist", were positions all rejected by Buddha. ALL OF THEM.

The work starts with a pathway inwards, away from thoughts. Follow the breath. Find the source of Dukkha. It will not want you to find it. It prefers to stay hidden and run you.