Buddhist meditations for extinguishing the self

[steve]

6 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I love this understanding of the Shema.  Interestingly, you're not the only one to see it this way...

 

Here's a quote from 2123 The Deeper Meaning of the Shema Yisroel Daily Chant (Print) — Rabbi David Cooper:

 

All of Judaism, and in many ways, all of Western tradition can be summed up in one sentence: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God the Lord is One. The emphasis of this statement is: Oneness. Kabbalah teaches that this sentence summarizes the entire Torah and all of Western mysticism. This is the essential culmination of non-duality. It is not referring to the number one, for that would suggest that there are other numbers, or that there are no numbers (the idea of zero). This oneness is inclusive—transcending numbers—embracing all ideas, it holds within it nothingness as well as infinity. It is without limit. Kabbalah refers to this oneness as Ein Sof, which means “without end.” I usually refer to this as Boundlessness.

 

 Very cool, thanks for sharing that. I’ve never studied Kabbalah.

[wandelaar]

31 minutes ago, steve said:

One can realize what the self is not by observing one’s own experience carefully. All of the different things that we tend to identify with as self can be seen to be only passing experiences and partial descriptions. If this is done consistently over a period of time a realization can arise regarding the nature of self. Telling someone what that realization is supposed to be tends not to be at all helpful, often quite the opposite. Allowing someone to do the work for themselves is generally the most effective method of discovery.

 

I personally don't believe in the self as an autonomous kernel of individuality because indeed everything flows and is interdependent. I have dumped the whole idea of a self on rational grounds without needing any cultivation or extraordinary experiences to do so. However the idea of there not being a self is deeply disturbing to many people and it could lead to unwanted social consequences when further developed as a form of nihilism. I think that this is the reason why the Buddha stopped short of drawing the logical conclusion of his own way of reasoning that would have resulted in declaring the self to be an ill-defined illusory idea. However you can (as in my example) continue to believe in a transitory self, or in a succession of self's (such as a juvenile self, an adolescent self etc.). Such self's wouldn't be anything transcendental, but more like one's momentary personality.

 

What you declare as fundamental to the self is that passing experiences and partial descriptions don't point to the real self. But why not? If you don't believe in a transcendental self and only take your transitory self to be the real thing, than the Buddhist refutation becomes irrelevant.

Edited March 1, 2023 by wandelaar

[steve]

 

53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

I personally don't believe in the self as an autonomous kernel of individuality because indeed everything flows and is interdependent. I have dumped the whole idea of a self on rational grounds without needing any cultivation or extraordinary experiences to do so.

I don't bother much with belief and intellectual investigation into self and other spiritual matters.

That was my path for a long time and it's been exhausted. 

 

53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

However the idea of there not being a self is deeply disturbing to many people and it could lead to unwanted social consequences when further developed as a form of nihilism.

Agreed and this is one reason that a solely intellectual approach can be problematic. 

When the rational mind negates the idea of self through reasoning, what is left?

Rationally speaking, there is nothing left hence the risk of nihilistic trauma. 

When we approach the issue experientially something very interesting happens.

We search and search and can't find anything reliable we can call "self."

This is known as emptiness. And yet, even in the absence of that sense of self we are still quite alert, aware, and vividly present.

Something is there, a knowingness, an immediate and vibrant presence, unlimited potential.

This is an antidote for nihilism and why experiential practice can be advantageous, particularly for anyone prone to it.

 

53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

I think that this is the reason why the Buddha stopped short of drawing the logical conclusion of his own way of reasoning that would have resulted in declaring the self to be an ill-defined illusory idea.

I think there are also other reasons. 

One being what has come to be called the Two Truths.

There is the absolute truth which sees through the permanence and solidity of self.

And there is the relative truth which acknowledges and honors our lived experience in duality.

Both are equally legitimate, equally real. 

 

53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

However you can (as in my example) continue to believe in a transitory self, or in a succession of self's (such as a juvenile self, an adolescent self etc.). Such self's wouldn't be anything transcendental, but more like one's momentary personality.

Yes, I agree. I also feel that belief is not necessary. 

We know our sense of self without any need for belief or disbelief.

I disagree with those that say there is no self.

Every one of us has a direct and very personal experience of self, except for some with rare pathological conditions. 

The experience of self is very real and very much a part of our lives.

To deny it is simply an intellectual game and I see that game being played quite often.

On the other hand, what we take to be a self is something that is very elusive to define or display.

 

53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

What you declare as fundamental to the self is that passing experiences and partial descriptions don't point to the real self. But why not? If you don't believe in a transcendental self and only take your transitory self to be the real thing, than the Buddhist refutation becomes irrelevant.

Perhaps I'm not being clear.

I don't mean to imply that transient experiences and partial descriptions are not real.

They are very much a part of our life experience and I consider them to be as real as anything else.

What I am saying is simply that they are not the whole story, they are inaccurate, misleading, and, most important, very limiting.

They are not who or what we are, just a passing experience or conceptual or experiential fragment.

We are so much more than that.

This is one of the great benefits to realizing the illusory nature of our sense of self, it opens us up to possibilities and potential that we otherwise overlook due to self-imposed limitations related to our sense of self. 

 

 

[wandelaar]

@steve

 

We largely agree. I also subscribe to the two truths doctrine. However I don't agree that nothing is left after the self is seen as illusory by way of some hard-nosed rational thinking. We keep functioning as human beings even after the illusion of the self is removed and the world around us doesn't evaporate. And that's because the world of which we are only a part has a structure and way of operating of its own called Tao in Taoism. Tao operates everywhere and also inside us. So things stay pretty much as they were before, unless of course if you can't deal with the insight of not having a self. And I agree that here being part of a legit lineage can be appropriate for some people who would go berserk when thinking the matter trough all on their own.

[Tom Beckett]

Hello, I have been out of dao bums for quite a while and have made quite the philosophical journey. I spent time with the universalist Christian church and saw a new perspective , I don’t believe the self should be extinguished or that it does not exist. I believe that it does indeed exist and that it is special, but it should not be the main focus of our lives. We should focus on the other souls of this world and show your love to them. Granted you won’t be perfect and maybe a bit mischievous but show your love and care for others, especially in the toughest times. I don’t believe the self is an illusion like some Buddhists say but I think I wanted to believe that because if I was not “me” then I would be a stronger person, maybe I did not like myself. 

[manitou]

1 hour ago, Tom Beckett said:

Hello, I have been out of dao bums for quite a while and have made quite the philosophical journey. I spent time with the universalist Christian church and saw a new perspective , I don’t believe the self should be extinguished or that it does not exist. I believe that it does indeed exist and that it is special, but it should not be the main focus of our lives. We should focus on the other souls of this world and show your love to them. Granted you won’t be perfect and maybe a bit mischievous but show your love and care for others, especially in the toughest times. I don’t believe the self is an illusion like some Buddhists say but I think I wanted to believe that because if I was not “me” then I would be a stronger person, maybe I did not like myself. 

 

 

When masters speak of extinguishing the self, I think they're talking about extinguishing those things inside ourselves that prevent us from clarity.  If we've been conditioned all our lives to act in a certain way, or react when something in particular hits an existing trigger inside, the trick is to get rid of the existing trigger.  By 'extinguish the self', it's getting rid of excessive ego that prevents us from seeing clearly.

 

Your words about focusing on the other souls of this world are beautiful.  It almost becomes second nature when it is kept in mind that we and the other person are the same entities, but with different conditionings.  Then, to focus on another is really just to focus on self after all.  As to ridding ourselves of unwanted conditioning, a person could start from where they are at this moment.  If and when a reaction bubbles up within, causing anger or irritation - then it is most likely that the very trait that is driving you nuts in the other person, is actually the same trait we have in ourselves.  I think that's a good way to start to dissolve the unwanted inside us.  The trick is to see where the reaction comes from - and most likely there is often a little memory there from childhood that is the offender.  Usually it's an innocuous little memory that repeatedly comes up - maybe just a glimpse of you as a child having some experience.  If these little memories remain after all these years, there's a reason we're remembering it.  During shamanic healing, this is an effective method of reversing the trend - to reverse the little memory.

 

Nice to have you back, Tom.

[Cobie]

3 hours ago, Tom Beckett said:

Hello, I have been out of dao bums for quite a while and have made quite the philosophical journey. I spent time with the universalist Christian church and saw a new perspective , I don’t believe the self should be extinguished or that it does not exist. I believe that it does indeed exist and that it is special, but it should not be the main focus of our lives. We should focus on the other souls of this world and show your love to them. Granted you won’t be perfect and maybe a bit mischievous but show your love and care for others, especially in the toughest times. I don’t believe the self is an illusion like some Buddhists say but I think I wanted to believe that because if I was not “me” then I would be a stronger person, maybe I did not like myself. 

Great post. I agree entirely. 

 

 

[old3bob]

.

Edited April 1, 2023 by old3bob

[old3bob]

.

Edited April 1, 2023 by old3bob