Only the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Only consciousness exists, not self.
Only the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Does the self I used to have now not exist?cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:52 pm Only the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Only consciousness exists, not self.
Used to have how?
3.35- sense of being a subject and locus of consciousness is inside the head is an illusion.
4.44-you can just be identical to this sphere of experience that is all of the color and light and feeling and energy of consciousness.
4.52- But here is no sense of center there. So this is classically described as self-transcendence or ego transcendence in spiritual, mystical,
new age religious literature.
5.18- self-transcendence really is at the core of the phenomenology..it is clearly a experience people can have..
6.17- self-transcendence does link up with what we know about the mind through neuroscience to form a plausible
connection between science and classic mysticism, classic spirituality....your expereince of the world actually becomes more faithful to the facts
If the body (or mind, or consciousness) exists then self also exists. Both are abstractions based on conditions like direct experiences and their interpretations.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:52 pmOnly the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Only consciousness exists, not self.
IMO this is a vital distinction which is often glossed over. Self and sense of self, these are quite different things.
Of course it exists, it exists as a virtual image. We can see it with the eye. The only things that don’t exist are such things as unicorns, flying pigs, etc.SamKR wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:33 amIf the body (or mind, or consciousness) exists then self also exists. Both are abstractions based on conditions like direct experiences and their interpretations.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:52 pmOnly the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Only consciousness exists, not self.
It depends upon what you mean by "to exist". To me, to exist means to arise and remain. Self (or sense of self) arises. Body (or sense of having a body) arises. But once the conditions (abstractions, interpretations, biases, ignorance) cease or reduce then self or body (that is, sense of self and sense of having your own body) ceases or becomes less substantial - and the knowledge that there has never been a self or a independent body arises.
Self is an illusion. Illusion is real. But there is no actual, 'real', independent thing corresponding to that real illusion.
A question that could be interesting to those who know basic physics: Does a virtual image (due to concave lens) exist?
TRobinson465 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 07, 2018 5:26 am I just thought i would share the video because it provides an interesting viewpoint similar to whats found in Buddhism (about the five aggregates not being self essentially), but emerged independently.
So if a person attends a few mass-market meditation retreats, they are a certified qualified "lineage holder"?
The Buddha has remarked:cappuccino wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:52 pmOnly the body exists, not self. Only the mind exists, not self.
Only consciousness exists, not self.
The Buddha does not deny a self here. He denies a self in that which is ill and that which is inconstant.Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
Searching all directions
with your awareness,
you find no one dearer
than yourself.
In the same way, others
are thickly dear to themselves.
So you shouldn't hurt others
if you love yourself.
Saying "yourself" is for the sake of communication.
What is he trying to communicate? That we hold our skhandas dearest over others?cappuccino wrote: ↑Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:22 pmSaying "yourself" is for the sake of communication.
Body isn't self, mind isn't self, consciousness isn't self, etc.
These two are taken as quite different things (sense of self and really existing self) until the realization of no-self