No-self, soul and not-self

[otherbrother]

Empathy without action is pity — and pity feeds no one.

Loved that. “Truth” must be lived. Action and heart/experience integrated with a concept lie empathy. With “love” I tend to nurture (or at least ATTEMPT to nurture) my loved ones’ potential and wellbeing. But I also experience subtle energy between me and them, or at least a feeling that I interpret as being actual energy going out and coming in. So the concept of “love” must have both to be really true. You made a Very good point. Kirkigard (sp?) made a similar point about a true “Christian” (which to me is basically just one way of saying a spiritual person, spiritually is the main thing). To him a Christian lives the example that JC gave. Coherence between the concept, one’s actions, AND one’s genuine subjective experiences. Giving with a glad heart is even better than giving.
Back to your ocean metaphor—wholeness and integration is more real than definitive parts alone. Context is King. Requires gestalt like thinking and perceiving. I sense the whole journey my wife and I have made in our 51 year marriage. It is a lake within the ocean.

 

[otherbrother]

Liberation is seeing that those formations arise and pass like waves on the ocean — temporarily visible, always water, never an independent self.

I know you advocate non-grasping somewhere in this thread, and that quote is in line with non-grasping. I hope you don’t mind me sharing a song I wrote about a moment in which I was able to not cling/grasp. I come back to that song and moment to remind myself to flow:

 

[otherbrother]

I know you advocate non-grasping somewhere in this thread, and that quote is in line with non-grasping. I hope you don’t mind me sharing a song I wrote about a moment in which I was able to not cling/grasp. I come back to that song and moment to remind myself to flow:

 

[Thomas]

I sense the whole journey my wife and I have made in our 51 year marriage. It is a lake within the ocean.

Oya! That's worthy of congratulations! You're about two years ahead of us ...

 

[otherbrother]

Oya! That's worthy of congratulations! You're about two years ahead of us ...

Great accomplishment for you too

 

[otherbrother]

much suffering comes from grasping.

That was your comment that led to me sharing a link to a song I wrote about a moment of flow. The link is somewhere else on this thread. I couldn’t locate your non-grasping remark at the time I thought to share the song

 

[otherbrother]

Still water, its 'resting' state, is conditional, determined by the force of gravity upon it. The moon draws water, the moon makes waves. A drop of water spreads and finds its level. A drop of water in space resembles a bubble, there's no force acting on it. All of it is conditional state. The molecular bond is a conditional state – break the bond and you have hydrogen and oxygen.

What you call conditional seems also like “doing” as an experiential mode in each human. The ocean as oneness seems like the experiential mode called being (as in be here now, fully being, beingness). The experiential mode “relating” (which love is part of) may well be a bridge between the universal beingness and the conditional doing that apparently separate object beings must do to live in the context of a conditional realm, physical existence,

 

[Thomas]

What you call conditional seems also like “doing” as an experiential mode in each human.

I'm suggesting everything outside God is 'conditional', in that only God is unconditional, as in without condition, determination, limitation, and so forth. What the Pre-Socratic Milesians called apeiron ἄπειρον, 'boundless', 'infinite', 'indeterminate' and everything that is, arises from and out of the apeiron through arche, it's 'origin', 'principle', 'beginning' which is itself infinite and boundless (apeiron).

In this John arche as synonymous with Logos (John 1:1).

The ocean as oneness seems like ...

I regard the drop-in-the-ocean analogy as addressing an experiential element of spiritual realisation, but not addressing the totality of it, in that the relation of a 'drop' to the 'ocean' is quantitative, whereas the relation of 'human' to 'being' is qualitative.

Any experience of the all, of the totality, of one-ness, is nevertheless from a given point?

 

[Thomas]

The experiential mode “relating” (which love is part of) may well be a bridge between the universal beingness and the conditional doing that apparently separate object beings must do to live in the context of a conditional realm, physical existence,

Maximus the Confessor developed the concept of methorios μεθόριος, 'boundary', 'frontier', found in Philo of Alexandria and Gregory of Nyssa to describe humanity's unique role as the mediator between the physical and spiritual. According to this, humans were created to unify earth and heaven, and synthesise in themselves all cosmic polarities such as the spirit and matter, intelligible and sensible, heaven and earth, and so on.

 

[otherbrother]

Any experience of the all, of the totality, of one-ness, is nevertheless from a given point?

Yes. But God’s Being rubs off on busy little drop in the form of unexpected divinity like the God aspect of Jesus, a human. The ocean it is greater, more real than the drop, so the drop’s limited perspective is transcended sooner or later (usually later, after integrating spiritually with ego/flesh). Christ was an example of a drop receiving its oceanic nature.

 

[rupert333]

This is what “I” believe the Buddha was saying.———
Think of a vast, boundless ocean — an endless expanse of perfectly clear water. The whole ocean is nothing but interconnectedH₂O; its molecules never have a separate, lasting identity. Waves arise, travel, and dissolve back into the sea, but no wave is an independent, unchanging thing — each wave is just water manifesting briefly.

In Pāli/Sanskrit there isn’t a single word for “not‑self” in ordinary English; the terms used are anattā (Pāli) or anātman (Sanskrit), often rendered as “no‑self.” “Not‑self” emphasizes the practical method: examining experience and seeing what is not a fixed, owning self. “No‑self” points to the ontological insight: there is no abiding, independent self to be found.

Awakening reveals the conditioned mind for what it is: a shifting, composite process — a cluttered collection of habits, memories, and afflictive patterns accumulated over a lifetime. That conditioned process is not an individual, immutable self. The awakened insight is the recognition that the true nature of mind has no fixed identity; it is like another molecule of H₂O — simply water appearing in different forms. Nothing “becomes” the awakening in the way a separate thing could; there is only the clarity that what we called “I” was never a permanent entity. But “ nothing” can realize “nothing”. The ocean is not empty. it’s an endless vast beauty free from a fixed self and the suffering of a self.

So: the conditioned mind can cause confusion and suffering, but it is not a self. Liberation is seeing that those formations arise and pass like waves on the ocean — temporarily visible, always water, never an independent self. This is just what I believe for what it’s worth. Please may you and all living beings be well and happy. free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Peace

The whole Buddhism thing just sounds like a horror movie to me. Losing self? No self? No thanks. I'm into MORE self. Me, expanded. Until I am all things. Not nothing.

 

[Thomas]

Yes. But God’s Being rubs off on busy little drop in the form of unexpected divinity like the God aspect of Jesus, a human.

Well, I can't comment because I don't know what you mean. If you mean 'God' is some contingent and accident with regard to Jesus' nature, I find that idea incomprehensible.

The ocean it is greater, more real than the drop, so the drop’s limited perspective is transcended sooner or later (usually later, after integrating spiritually with ego/flesh). Christ was an example of a drop receiving its oceanic nature.

Where the drop/ocean analogy falls down for me, is the comparison to water. Human nature is not like water; the human mode of being is not like water's mode of being, so the analogy only goes so far, and most push the analogy beyond its logical limit.

Then again, I think in terms of Logos rather than ocean, in which case Jesus was there before all else!

 

[otherbrother]

Well, I can't comment because I don't know what you mean. If you mean 'God' is some contingent and accident with regard to Jesus' nature, I find that idea incomprehensible.

No. Meant the opposite. God’s nature is so great as to “rub off” on humans. Christ being a prime example of a spiritual person. Hinges on concept in/from Bible that God is spirit. Of course one could reasonably argue that God appears to us as spirit and God’s real nature might be more like Mind or such. That works too, since we need the doorway (spirit) to whatever God is.

 

[koinonos]

This is what “I” believe the Buddha was saying.———

So, you see, it is even technically impossible to get rid of it, so there is the idea of the Original Self, though it should not be confused with ours, because out of that another series of illusions stream forth.

 

[otherbrother]

The whole Buddhism thing just sounds like a horror movie to me. Losing self? No self? No thanks. I'm into MORE self. Me, expanded. Until I am all things. Not nothing.

Which “self?” The physical self? Or your spirit? Might have to loosen grip (sense of identity) with physical self or what I call the Concrete Self, in order to identify with a “Connected Self,” your spirit.
Your spiritual self is MORE.

 

[Thomas]

No. Meant the opposite. God’s nature is so great as to “rub off” on humans.

I could be misconstruing, but the 'rubbing off' element to me implies a discontinuity between the two, God and creature. And, by extension, God and creation.

I rather see – today – that the human is (and originally was) a 'corporeal' spirit. To use biblically-inspired language, prior to the Fall, ours was a 'body of light'. It was a 'body', but not a corporeal body as ours is now. Angelic beings are not corporeal, they are formless spirits, where the human is a formal spirit.

This formlessness allows the angel a more perfect vision.
This formalness allows the human greater scope of action.
In terms of the human role within the cosmos, the human was a 'more effective' creature than the angel – so in that provisional sense the human state is 'better' than the angelic, whilst measured from the degree of perfection the angelic is 'better' than the human.

The point being that God alone is perfect. All other beings are perfect by degree, and the measure of their perfection is their act in accordance with the Divine Will – three distinction that Maximus drew: Being, Well-being and Eternal well-being.

It is not the case that we should aspire to become angels. God has all the angels God needs. God needs humans as God intended humans to be, which we currently ain't.

+++

The body formed from 'the dust of the ground' (Genesis 2:7), the 'garment of skins' (Genesis 3:21), the flesh and blood (the Greek sarx), is a consequence of the Fall. It was never intended, and it goes back to the dust from whence it came. Adam, as the progenitor of the human race, 'fell' as a result of the misdirection of his will, and thus brought about the Fall.

The Incarnation was a divine entry into the fallen state to rescue it, to recover it from the inevitable end to which it is directed (death), and this was done by the divine uniting Itself with the Fallen Nature in the person of Jesus, and redirecting that end away from death to eternal life.

Christ being a prime example of a spiritual person.

I disagree, Christ is the incarnate presence of an authentic human being. 'Authentic' in the sense of αὐθεντικός (authentikos), meaning 'original, genuine, principal', or, indeed, 'Logos'.

He is, in that sense, the 'genuine article' whereas we are not.

St Paul made this point in 1 Corinthians 15:44-46 between the body human beings possess 'in this age' and that which they shall receive in 'the Age to come' – the former as a perishable composite of flesh and soul, a σῶμα ψυχικόν (soma psychikon), but the latter in in possession of itself as an imperishable unity, a σῶμα πνευματικόν (soma pneumatikon): an 'animal' or 'psychical body', on the one hand, and a 'spiritual' or 'pneumatic body', on the other.

Psyché, ψυχή (psychē), has a wide variety of meaning and connotation – as 'soul', but also 'mind' and 'spirit'. The term derives from the verb ψύχω (psycho), meaning 'to blow' or 'to breathe', so we can see the theological context.

It can also mean 'life' or 'principle of life', or the 'enlivening force', 'soul' in the sense of 'conscious mind' or 'self'. Its Latin equivalent is 'anima', meaning both the principle of the body’s life, and soul in the sense of personal identity or self.

My point is, in a sense, it's spirit all the way down, and body all the way up.

By now I've come to see 'rub off' not as in the sense that I first read it, but more to do with immanence, but I've gotr this far, so I'll leave the above in place.

+++

My rejection of the 'drop in the ocean' analogy is because that involves the negation or the extinction of the self, and yet the self is a creature brought into existence for the sake of the Creator, with an end that the Creator has in mind, which is an end of one-ness of union, not an end of one-ness of extinction, in which the creature ceases to be.

God knows Himself, nothing can add to that or take from it, nothing can increase or or decrease it.

Creation is an act, the end or telos (τέλος) of which is participative union – for no other reason than God is Good.

 

[Carlos]

Greetings again my new friend. Wow are you overthinking this metaphor. The wave is 100% water. The wave was 100% h20, waves are wind having an effect on the water making something appear to be something other than it is.

Always water an. Illusion of being something other than it is, illusion of it having an identity a “self” affect the wind has in water creating this wave is like all things subject to impermanence. Like all things causes and conditions. like all things nothing is not in and of itself, “self.

May I ask can you reach into the water to find me that wave? No, you can’t as it was always water. The illusion of that wave being anything but water was just that, an impermanent illusion.
There are no rainbows simply illusions. Rainbow is 100% non - rainbow elements. Water/h20, light which of course itself not and of itself. The light is photons,packets of energy, travel in waves. It is electromagnetic radiation, various types of waves like gamma rays, X-rays. Radiation, as an example is not in end of itself radiation. It’s alpha particles, beta particles, and neutrons. A spectrum of colors. All of this emanating from the sun. Would take me hours to talk about how the sun was created, what elements created. It’s birth to death always changing, impermanent, where did those elements come from? From other elements created by elements made up of other elements.What are those elements comprised of then the sun itself? How is it fueled? Nuclear fusion. Is nuclear fusion in and of itself nuclear fusion? No, just all illusions of a “ self”. You speak of surface, there’s no difference between the bottom of the ocean and the top of the ocean. It’s just water continuously moving no identity. My friend you are attempting, to weigh overthink this. The ocean the molecules of H2O. I’m not speaking of an actual ocean. From space, there is no north pole, no up, no down.

My post was metaphorical, not a science class.

The ocean is all water. All H2O and none of the molecules of H2O differ from the other molecules of H2O, no individuality. My entire point was “ we “ are a not-self. Are we an “H2O?” Yes but nothing different and or etc. from all the other H2O. It not matters if for 20 seasons sings and dances. It is water affected by causes and conditions not of its self. It’s all water.

I believe in a true nature of mind, non-conditioned. That mind that awakens to the reality of all things being in permanent condition, suffering. “ something “ awakens, something attains enlightenment. A not- self.

The conditioned mind is not “me” not Mark it is 100% built on phenomena, everything you see, hear,do,people you meet, read-long list all “ make up your mind” . You are not who you were at birth, not at 10 nor 25, nor 50 nor at moments before death. There is not you see that is and itself Mark( my name.) what if i’m in an accident and wake up with amnesia, believing myself to be a completely different person with completely different life.

So Mark is gone. The sad illness that strikes young people around their 20s schizophrenia, the day before schizophrenia sets in and then the day after schizophrenia set in completely different person. What used to be called multiple personality disorder. Many personalities, usually a dominant one. But many different personalities with many different life stories which one’s real? None. May you, your family and all living beings be well and happy. Free from suffering and the causes of suffering.

Metaphorically I consider myself a drop or water with personality. My personality is my soul. In front of a judge the trial will be about my behavior not so my physical composition.

As a drop of water with personality I can refuse going with the traffic. I can choose with what other drops of water I can communicate, share and live around.

Without the guidance of a teacher, I became interested in studying and experimenting the topic of illusion. The book of psychology is correct, lots of our perception falls in the tricks of illusion, still we live the physical reality. I found out several of theories of science as invalid because were originated on misinterpretation of perception caused by... illusion.

The behavior of people is widely guided by illusion, mostly propaganda.

We understand our surroundings thanks to our senses, and since birth our lives is a continued learning acquired thru our perception. We adapt to what we can perceive. I asked a blind person how she dreams. She told me in her dreams she can't see but she interchange with others smelling, listening, tasting and feeling she is touching something or a person, including kisses and more. I was realizing slowly but surely how important is to choose properly our environment in order to grow intellectually, morally and physically of course.

We are formed indeed by a great percent of water, but water in nature is not found pure. The seas water exist combined with salt and several other elements, and these other elements are the cause for ocean waters to behave different than pure water.

The metaphor given in your post is well accepted but can't describe in its analogy what the soul is about.

In my opinion, in our lives the reach of happiness is a dead end path when we take the wrong way. We cry as soon as we are born, such is our destiny in this life.

While many pursue happiness escalating their wealth, others find it enjoying their job regardless of the salary. Suffering is part of our existence because we just survive in this world, this is what we just do: survive. While people consciously think and feel they are not suffering at all while resting happily on the beach, internally the cells of their bodies are continually repairing themselves the damage caused by sun rays. We are in continued fighting for survival.

Amazingly, the ideals of many leaders in the past were in defense of humanity as individual first and as part of society second. Later it became country or society first, individual second. Still, the base foundation is the individual, the self, the soul. The waves of water metaphor works when the drops of water are the same and work in agreement, what I can see is that we as society can't work fully in agreement. Sometimes can't even mix like oil and water inside our atmosphere.

In the scriptures, the ones who are not part of the biblical god's people are metaphorically represented as "the waters". When I saw that my instinct persuaded me to jump into land and became a grain of sand. In that moment I found out I just suffered the trick of illusion, of course, but I have become used to it.