One of the notions that has taken prominence over the last few years is that somewhere, lurking inside each one of us, is some kind of authentic self. You might have shoulders as wide as a barn door, be able to crush walnuts with your bare hands (not to mention being able to open jars), sport the most magnificent beard, and possess a rather impressive trouser salami, but really, inside, the
Great article. Good questions, I never thought of trans that way. But when I voice my opinion on this whole shit-show, quite frequently I’m called a bigot, racist, heartless/unsympathetic. Sigh……
Great as usual. Definitely worth adding that the Buddhist philosophy does not recognise that people have individual selves separate from everything else.
Anatta, (Pali: “non-self” or “substanceless”) Sanskrit anatman, in Buddhism, the doctrine that there is in humans no permanent, underlying substance that can be called the soul. Instead, the individual is compounded of five factors (Pali khandha; Sanskrit skandha) that are constantly changing.
"Does anyone actually have the answers to these kinds of questions?"
Yes. We are made in the image of God. The way we become our true selves is through self-abnegation. Deny yourself, take up your cross... Through humility, prayer, fasting, humility, ascesis, love, the sacraments, and humility... and also humility, we move toward union with God, who fashioned us and knows our true nature better than we ourselves do. We become truly who God created us to be.
It may not be what you believe, but certainly the question has been addressed.
Since wherever you go, there you are; going to try and find yourself is impossble.
However, one can /accept/ who one is. Having done that, honestly and upright without pretense or rationalisations, one can then decide what to do - alter, endure, ignore, enhance.
Within physical limitations, obviously.
Buddhism is a religion for people with no doubt about where their next meal is coming from. Plus, as the Dalai Lama has pointed out, people born outside budhist cultures can't ever become actual buddhists, since we don't get it.
Seeing how the concept of karma has come to be understood as two sets of points you score for good/bad actions, I'm inclined to agree with him.
Pop-Eye had the right of it: "I yam what I yam and that's all I yam".
Brilliant. Thank you you very much. Actually quite empathetic. Personally I tend to empathise much more with (some) suicide bombers than you but that’s a whole other argument. And great questions, to which I’m not sure good Buddhists would even want to provide oven ready answers
What do people even mean when they talk about who they are “on the inside” or their “inner self”? Are we talking about the physical organ we call the brain, or are we talking about the mind (as I recall in Buddhism very much not the same thing as the brain, and more entwined with the metaphysical heart), or about the soul? If we are taking of the metaphysical, what belief system posits that there is some kind of system in which humans are embodied souls, souls are gendered in ways that match the cultures into which they find themselves embodied, but occasionally there are mix-ups at the plant and mismatches occur?
If it’s physical and not metaphysical— if hormones are what make you male or female, or body parts, or the pronouns others use and social recognition— why go in the direction of trying to help people conform to the sex that they aren’t? Essentially, if transing people worked, couldn’t we do it in the other direction instead, which seems the lesser of two conversions?
Great article. Good questions, I never thought of trans that way. But when I voice my opinion on this whole shit-show, quite frequently I’m called a bigot, racist, heartless/unsympathetic. Sigh……
Great as usual. Definitely worth adding that the Buddhist philosophy does not recognise that people have individual selves separate from everything else.
Anatta, (Pali: “non-self” or “substanceless”) Sanskrit anatman, in Buddhism, the doctrine that there is in humans no permanent, underlying substance that can be called the soul. Instead, the individual is compounded of five factors (Pali khandha; Sanskrit skandha) that are constantly changing.
There is no authentic self to be found.
"Does anyone actually have the answers to these kinds of questions?"
Yes. We are made in the image of God. The way we become our true selves is through self-abnegation. Deny yourself, take up your cross... Through humility, prayer, fasting, humility, ascesis, love, the sacraments, and humility... and also humility, we move toward union with God, who fashioned us and knows our true nature better than we ourselves do. We become truly who God created us to be.
It may not be what you believe, but certainly the question has been addressed.
Since wherever you go, there you are; going to try and find yourself is impossble.
However, one can /accept/ who one is. Having done that, honestly and upright without pretense or rationalisations, one can then decide what to do - alter, endure, ignore, enhance.
Within physical limitations, obviously.
Buddhism is a religion for people with no doubt about where their next meal is coming from. Plus, as the Dalai Lama has pointed out, people born outside budhist cultures can't ever become actual buddhists, since we don't get it.
Seeing how the concept of karma has come to be understood as two sets of points you score for good/bad actions, I'm inclined to agree with him.
Pop-Eye had the right of it: "I yam what I yam and that's all I yam".
Brilliant. Thank you you very much. Actually quite empathetic. Personally I tend to empathise much more with (some) suicide bombers than you but that’s a whole other argument. And great questions, to which I’m not sure good Buddhists would even want to provide oven ready answers
What do people even mean when they talk about who they are “on the inside” or their “inner self”? Are we talking about the physical organ we call the brain, or are we talking about the mind (as I recall in Buddhism very much not the same thing as the brain, and more entwined with the metaphysical heart), or about the soul? If we are taking of the metaphysical, what belief system posits that there is some kind of system in which humans are embodied souls, souls are gendered in ways that match the cultures into which they find themselves embodied, but occasionally there are mix-ups at the plant and mismatches occur?
If it’s physical and not metaphysical— if hormones are what make you male or female, or body parts, or the pronouns others use and social recognition— why go in the direction of trying to help people conform to the sex that they aren’t? Essentially, if transing people worked, couldn’t we do it in the other direction instead, which seems the lesser of two conversions?