We have a conventional self, but not a soul-self

For good reasons I don't believe in a human "self." Or a non-human self either. But this doesn't mean that I deny people exist. 

This notion of no-self can be confusing.

To some, no-self implies oneness. Yet it is obvious that I am me and you are you. We have different bodies and different brains. There are connections between us, but we are distinct entities.

I've found it difficult to explain both to others and myself how the non-existence of a self is compatible with the existence of individual human beings.

Re-reading part of "Living As a River" today, I found that the author, Bodhipaksa (born Graeme Stephen), did a good job delineating the difference between a conventional self, and the sort of soulful entity that generally is viewed as our "self," especially by religious believers.

When we're talking about a conventional self, then, we mean one where the individual recognizes him or herself as an individual and acts in accordance with that recognition. In other words there is some degree of reflexive recognition and reflexive action.

...Our assumptions about our selves, however, transcend mere self-recognition. The understanding of the self against which the Buddha argued vigorously, and which many contemporary scientists and philosophers also dispute, is the notion of a self which is unchanging and separate.

We assume those qualities belong to the self, not so much as part of a thought-out philosophical standpoint arrived at after careful deliberation, but as an instinctual response. This response is at least partly based on the fear of acknowledging our existential situation as fragile and transitory creatures, but also based on a number of perceptual distortions that we'll examine shortly.

...If we identify certain attributes of the self as "essential," then it stands to reason that the core self must be something unchanging. After all, if something is essential, it must be permanent. Although this kind of thinking predominated at the time of the Buddha, he disagreed that there was an unchanging core to the self. Instead he saw the self as composed of a number of ever-changing processes.

...So in effect we own nothing, and therefore nothing that constitutes us can be seen as constituting a self.  So this is the kind of self I do not believe in. I do believe I have a conventional self, which right now is busy typing words on a keyboard. I see my body and recognize it as me rather than you. I experience a flow of experience that is unique to me.

But what of anything beyond that? I do not believe that I -- or you, for that matter -- have a self that is permanent and separate. And when I talk about belief and non-belief I am not talking about "blind faith." I mean to say that my experience is that I do not have a self of this sort.

This also is the experience of neuroscientists who fail to find anything permanent about human consciousness/personality, whether we call this "soul" or any other word, that is separate and distinct from the goings-on of the brain. 

Thus the self is, basically, the mind and body in action. The self is an ever-changing process, not a static thing. I wrote a blog post about Bodhipaksa's book called "Live as a river -- fluid, dynamic, interconnected." Here's some Bodhipaska quotes from that post.

...The self is, in a simile I'll return to frequently, like an eddy in a stream. It has the appearance of being a separate thing and of having permanence, but in what sense can an eddy be permanent? There's no borderline we can say for sure marks where the eddy stops and the river begins.

...We are not separate from the world around us; we instead exist as the sum total of our relationships with a vast web of interconnected processes.

...Consciousness is not an entity that sits within us, awaiting contact with the outside world; rather it's a series of activities that arise in dependence upon contact with the world.

...I will not be suggesting to you that you do not have a self. I will simply try to demonstrate that the self is not what you take it to be, and that it's our idea of having a definable self we must let go of.

...I'll suggest that we cease clinging to the idea of having a self so we can embrace a life that is spontaneous and flowing, like an athlete "in the zone," with a mind clear, focused, and non-grasping.

This morning, during my re-reading of Living as a River, I came across a passage that reminded me of a video I shared recently on my other blog. Bodhipaksa said:

Instead we find ourselves living attentively, spontaneously, and joyfully. Creativity wells up in us without conscious intervention. We know what to do and what to say without even knowing how we know. And we weave around life's obstacles joyfully, with, in the words of Montaigne, minds that are "universal, open, and ready for all things."

Oh, yeah.

That's how I felt land paddling on my longboard at the Venice Beach (California) boardwalk last Saturday. I had to weave around a lot of obstacles -- people, bikes, medical marijuana salesmen, all kinds of things.

As noted above, mostly I didn't have time to consciously think about what direction I was heading or how fast I should go. I just flowed with my experience of the boardwalk.

Fun time. Life goes better with no-self. I only ran gently into one person, my wife, though I had some close calls -- as the video shows.

 

 

Comments

[Jim Surherland]

Hi Brian. If you still have a small crack left in your mind that you have decided to close shut, you might take a look at this, for a completely different expression on just what a "Soul-self" might consist of. Take a close look, with out past bias of such ideas. You might encounter a renewal of your very own Soul-self that you have dedided does not exist. Good hunting! Cheers, Jim. http://brotherofyeshua.blogspot.com

[Jim Sutherland]

http://beingoflight.brotherofyeshua.com. Brian, the Being of Light is the URL I tried to refer you to. Thanks. Jim

[tucson]

Jim Sutherland,

The text in your links is very long, detailed, involute, tiring and laborious to get through (for me). I am still not sure I have a soul even though others tell me I do. I have looked everywhere and can't find it. All I can detect is this atomic crackling that is within and without.

Can you sum up the gist of your teachings in a paragraph or two? Or not. No big deal.

[Jim Sutherland]

They are not my teachings, so not my privilage to sum up. The Writer of the teachings is very accessable, how ever, and would no doubt, be open to answer any specific question about any spiritual doubt you might be having problems with. I just stumbled on your Soul-Self doubts post, and knowing that you have spent 30 'years RSSB surfing, and coming up short, as a fellow Charan Singh Initiate myself, I felt a desire to at least point you to another discription of just what a Soul-Self might be, and perhaps you still might be able to rediscover yours , that has not yet completely departed.
The Author of all those Web sites is Allen Chronshaw, and he lives in North Carolina. he is about 70 years young, presently, in that incarnation. His writings are not for entry level seekers, and can not be scanned or summed up in a couple of paragraphs, n easier than Radasoami Teachings are able.

[777]

One non satsangi wanted to take naam daan so when he was presented for naam daan for 1st time he was rejected.
He tried for 25 times n rejected 25 times.

When he went for 26th time he was bestowed with naam daan then he asked babaji why was he rejected for 25 times?

Guru arjan dev was made to sit on hot plate(oven) by mughals? ... babaji replied when i was made to sit on hot plate u were the one who did put 25 tablespoons of hot sand n that man started crying n fell on babaji'feet
Lords always mercy on us he never see our faults he only see our love n affection
March 29 at 9:04pm · Like

Need to know basis

777

[Juan]

Guru Arjun Dev- 5th Guru, and Babji Don Gurinder Singh Dhillon also 5th Guru, both Sikhs with the same beard. Reincarnation of a Guru again as a Guru, even after 4 centuries almighty Babaji could clearly recognize the person who put 25 spoons of hot sand, but as usual these true masters are so kind and soft hearted, and overlooking the sins of that person Babji initiated him.

Masters know past, present and future. Normally they don’t point at our sins, but sometimes out of love when the disciples insist, they just tell them about their past sins of past lives.

Does anybody knows the name and other details of that satsangi ? Thanks.

[Rogerr]

Jim Sutherland,

I agree with Tucson,

"The text in your links is very long, detailed, involute, tiring and laborious to get through (for me)."

---Jim, how do you describe, in your own words, what a "Soul-self" might consist of.
Hopefully, you will avoid any babble and gimmicky wordage.

[june schlebusch]

Hi Roger and Tucson I'm finding Jim Sutherlands other link..eternaloasisofsouls.. more interesting. He goes into a lot of details about his inner experieces..For me, very refreshing to find someone that actually claims something.

[Roger]

Hi june,

Going into lots of detail of his inner expericences is, for me, more boring subjective conjecture. Actually "claiming something" is more of the same.

Sometimes, it is very refreshing when someone says, "I don't know."

[Jim Sutherland]

Hi Roger and Tuscon: I don't know! At least, I don't know every thing about birth, life,death, ...then, possible reincarnation. But I DO know,.....that for those interested in studying the mysteries of that puzzle, a summary of a couple of short paragraphs will not grant any real answers to such a serious subject. All I know, is in all of my reaserch, and experiences, I am still interested enough to share what I think with a very limited audience of possible similar non-souls. If any one can sum up in a paragraph or two proving that it all end here, after our last breath departs our bodies or the last time, then, I guess Wikapedia will need to delete all but a couple of paragraphs of their conclusions offered by others, exactly like us, who speculate, but can prove nothing.

[Roger]

" But I DO know,.....that for those interested in studying the mysteries of that puzzle, a summary of a couple of short paragraphs will not grant any real answers to such a serious subject."

---Nothing wrong with studying the mystery of a puzzle. However, I don't see such as being anything that is serious.

"All I know, is in all of my reaserch, and experiences, I am still interested enough to share what I think with a very limited audience of possible similar non-souls."

---What you think you know could be expressed in 5 paragraphs or fewer. Not a massive lengthy document that babbles.

[Robert Searle]

It is in the end all a matter of personal experience whether we have some kind of a "Higher Self", or not. The following is a cut and paste copy of an experience I had. It is connected with Sant Harjit Singh who also put the following on his own Facebook site which suggests from his POV that it was genuine phenomena.

III. A Spontaneous "Initiatory" Transmission....

Ref Esoteric Other Worlds, 2013

The blogger of this site has had a connection with the Teachings of Faqir Chand, and with one of his authorized successors, Sant Harjit Singh. The following is a brief account of one of the possible outcomes of being associaated with an advanced mystical Path.

Sometime ago, I had real-time contact called "John" on the internet who seemed to be "fascinated" in a positve manner with myself. Anyway, he was trying to find someone, or some organisation which could rid him of certain re-occuring negative psychic experiences. I suggested that if he followed Sant Harjit Singh his problem might disappear. Indeed, just talking with the latter on the phone could lead to an awareness of protective spiritual energies. I suggested to John that these "energies" could have a healing effect, and possibly help "cure" him of his negative psychic experiences.

Around this point of the internet "conversation" I became pleasantly aware of changing into a higher state of conciousness. Simultaneously, I was aware of an "energy" along my head, and shoulders. It was as if it was creating this higher state of conciousness so that it could transmit some form of indescribable "energy". This was a highly subtle, and spontaneous experience. It was totally unexpected. The energy transmitted itself from the upper right side of my physical body. Just before this experience happened I tried to resist it but this resistence totally "dissolved" itself in my mind in the most unimaginably loving, and subtle way. It totally overcame my resistence into a state af total unconditional acceptance. Thus,I felt that there was nothing wrong at all with this spontaneous "initiatory" transmission...

I explained to John what had happened via our internet contact, and he seemed impressed. But it is not clear whether he experienced anything at the other end...possibly not, but the experience was real to me. However, I told him in no uncertain terms that if he thought I was somekind of bona fide spiritual guru he was sorely mistaken. I had no official authority to initiate anyone, and instead, he should contact Sant Harjit Singh, a real Master to perhaps get a genuine initiation (which is a spontaneous energy phenomenon).

It is interesting to point somethng out. In the Teachings of Faqir Chand it is revealed that the Guru is regarded as the physical manifestation of God. However, Chand claimed that he was not all-knowing. Thus, he was unaware of the experiences of his disciples in connection with him. He believed it was their belief, and faith in him that created inner, and outer "miracles." Thus, the "Faqir Chand" experienced by the disciples in meditation notably was infact a manifestation of their Higher Self. This also implies that even imperfect "gurus" could have the same effect on disciples, and yet, turn them possibly to their own worldly advantage. Indeed, they could even give something akin to a spontaneous initiatory transmission.......irrespective of whether they were aware of it, or not..

Important (PS)

I met a man (a TM instructor) who claimed that he saw a tv programme on Swami Muktananda a long time ago. At the time, he experienced Shaktipat (ie a spontaneous "initiatory" transmission) from the televisual image of this controversial guru. He had a few days of bliss, and then claimed that Muktananda "possessed" him for awhile. He felt as if he were this guru. However, this "possession" later ended.

In my case, when I was with Dr Sharma, another guru, I had the "initiatory" experience, but ultimately pulled away from his subtle energy transmission as It seemed to become more of a projection of his lower ego trying to "control" me. I did not experience this with Sant Harjit Singh. This is an area largely unknown, and it would be very interesting to see if other people have had similiar experiences in this area.

[Jim Sutherland]

More clarity about the Soul-Self, and if reincarnation happens.

http://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.com/