reality of no self // liberation?

[clyde]

Hi,

The reality of no self seems pretty true. At least none of what I've seen of self seems to amount to much more than a thought reference to something imagined. There isn't really an entity or anything that could be clyde, for example.

I see what the Hindu angle is too, when Self with a capital S is used. That Self is everything but self -- it's everything, in other words. And the whole wave/ocean analogy seems to be pointing to the fact that there may be body, personality, memories, etc...and all that can be put into a set called self but it's really not independent from Everything, and if attention (identification) is focused on that self, it's really missing out on the whole enchilada. Personality and body can't be denied but it's not separate from all the other stuff that is happening and it is inaccurate to label it as something individual.

So, looking, paying attention to what is happening right, it's clear there ain't much self going on. It's an afterthought. But it refers to nothing.

Okay, but where is the liberation? I'm waiting for some liberation. Freedom.

Do you folks have a definition of liberation anywhere? I searched but couldn't find anything.

clyde

[Ilona]

Hi Clyde,

Nice to have you here. You sound lIke you know what you are talking about.
Where is liberation?
When reality of no self becomes obvious, not pretty true.
And what do you expect that freedom to be? Very interesting.

[clyde]

hah! I knew that 'pretty' would get me into trouble. I thought about taking it out but then decided to leave it in to keep a casual style. Interesting.

Pretty true or obvious, that's the question. Yea, when looking / attending right now, nada. It is obvious.

When not attending, not looking, reactions can be unconscious and reek of being beguiled by self illusions. For example, hackles rising up while hearing what appears to be a hostile tone in partner's voice. Those hackles turning to defensiveness of some sort... That sort of reaction seems to be 'defending a self.' What's there to defend, I ask myself? And it just echoes in nothingness.

So I guess the 'pretty' as a qualifier to true comes because I don't see what I would expect to be liberation and freedom from unconscious reactions....am i making sense?

[Ilona]

So you see that life goes on automatic, happening by itself, but want to change something.
Reactions become less and less with time as beliefs re cleared and feelings released.

What is unaceptable in reactions being unconscious? I see it as stuff coming up ready to be inspected and reased.

So how did you come to realise the absence of separate beings?

[clyde]

So you see that life goes on automatic, happening by itself, but want to change something.
Reactions become less and less with time as beliefs re cleared and feelings released.

promise? It's been about a year now and I haven't noticed much change in terms of less reactivity. less questions, yes. and maybe more stillness -- that's nice. but that stuff reacting from defensiveness or asserting ego or whatever, i haven't noticed a lot of change.

What is unaceptable in reactions being unconscious?

hmm, well i wouldn't phrase it as unacceptable. it's acceptable. is that it? is that liberation?

I see it as stuff coming up ready to be inspected and reased.

yea, me too. thank god for projection!

So how did you come to realise the absence of separate beings?

hammered it out in dialogue with jed and some others. but at no time have i been comfortable with the terms liberated or free or enlightened. maybe i'm just delusional about what they mean.

[No_One]

Hi clyde, could you answer the following questions just to be sure we're speaking about the same thing?

1) Is there a you, at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form?
2) Explain in detail what the illusion of self is and how it works.
3) How does it feel to be liberated? What's the difference between before and after liberation? What made you see this, what was the final push for you?

Also, what do you expect? What do you want to achieve?

[clyde]

Hi clyde, could you answer the following questions just to be sure we're speaking about the same thing?

1) Is there a you, at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form?

outside of linguistics, no. i reply to my name when called. i'm not about to give up the cash in my savings account to anyone that asks. there are certain conventions that i live with. when i stub my toe, i say 'shit my toe!'

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of self is and how it works.

wow. that one must be worth 20 points at least.

how about a few details and some broad generalities about how it works...

the illusion of self is basically a myth that we are taught as soon as we're capable of comprehending such a thing. maybe around age 2, i don't know. there's a constant reinforcement of this myth everywhere. complete immersion. and eventually we are so fluent with the myth that we can creatively reinforce it for ourselves using our own thoughts...and we can take part in indoctrinating others in the same way. i'm not really sure what the evolutionary function is of this myth -- my guess is that there is one. it's sort of like role-playing. And those roles may help us develop intellectual skills and social skills. Just conjecturing. So anyway, we get so involved with this myth that we lose touch with our natural state which is seeing things as they are, unnarrated and unobstructed by the drama of self and such. The self is really just a made-up myth, and I-thoughts refer to that myth, to keep the mythical plate spinning. Typing is happening, the sounds of the keys, the sound of the fan...a constant flow of sensations and typing. There isn't really anyone guiding any of this. The self is nothing. And that nothing is referred to in a thought like "I am typing."(10 points?)

3) How does it feel to be liberated? What's the difference between before and after liberation?

Exactly. Inquiring minds would like to know.

Before this recognition of no-self there were lots of questions about what self was, who i was. After, not so much, unless asked like you just did. Also, in a previous post, there've been less questions in general. Less doubt. Doubt is just a question -- is this true? -- that comes and goes like everything else. And there has been a greater appreciation of stillness, a sort of ever present awareness. But mostly not a whole lot has changed.

What made you see this, what was the final push for you?

i had been fearing that it would negatively affect relationships but then i recognized that as just fear and the myth would throw up exactly such barriers to keep going. there was a bit of courage that needed to happen and i just decided to fuck it all and let the cards fall where they may.

[qoute]Also, what do you expect? What do you want to achieve?[/quote]

hmm...well there seem to be lots of folks out there claiming to be enlightened or liberated or free and they seem to speak very confidently and eloquently about what a big profound thing it all is. wax on poetically, etc. i don't see that. the profound shift -- i don't see that. i was hoping to stop reacting less unconsciously in relationships. it's acceptable, sure, but i guess i was expecting more. things seem pretty much the same really, though i acknowledge a bit more stillness (for lack of a better word) and a bit less seeking/searching -- though here I am.

it's nice that y'all have set up this place for talking about this. It's a nice atmosphere.

[No_One]

Cool ... can you see how the illusion of self is created in practice? Like how does it go from an action to I did this? Or from thoughts to I am thinking? Really explain this like to a 5 yo. Just tell me what are the facts, what can be seen.

Is there any doubt there is no I or is it just you would expect more? Do you exist?

[clyde]

Cool ... can you see how the illusion of self is created in practice?

yes

Like how does it go from an action to I did this? Or from thoughts to I am thinking? Really explain this like to a 5 yo. Just tell me what are the facts, what can be seen.

for example right now typing is happening. there's a bit of sentence construction going on too. a bit of editing. it's all action just happening. there is no I involved. The only way I gets involved in any way is when there is a reflective thought after the action. Then that reflection contains within it the tag of I. I am typing. I am thinking. I am editing. But actually all that stuff happens without an I. That label or tag comes in after the fact. The reflecting itself just happens too. It's automatic, engrained, a habit. No one is reflecting, reflecting is happening. No one is identifying, identifying is happening.

explaining to a 5 year old sounds a lot trickier. I've had a lot of experience talking to 5 year olds and this is way too abstract. BORING! is likely to be the response. They're right.

Here's a dialogue that happened recently with my 5yo daughter:

me -- Who are you?

kid: <puzzled look> -- YOU'RE BEING SILLY!!

me: are you your name?

kid: <look of disbelief>

me: are you your body?

kid: BORING!

me: yea, let's read a book.

kid <rolls eyes>

Is there any doubt there is no I or is it just you would expect more? Do you exist?

Doubt is a friend of mine, I welcome it. The loyal friend of doubt comes usually as "Is this true?" She keeps me honest. But with cases like this, considering whether the absence of a self is true or not, the doubt does not naturally arise. The question is forced. Why doubt it?

Here's the crux of my question to you: I'm new here. I understand that you want to make sure I understand this stuff deeply, viscerally, not just intellectually. I'm not sure how I''m going to convince you of that. I don't question the reality of no self -- no doubts there. The second part of my subject header contains my question to you.

Is realizing the reality of no self equal to liberation?

Is that the definition of liberation that you are working with? Is there another definition? Please point me there.

Thanks,

clyde

[ddb]

Is realizing the reality of no self equal to liberation?

(speaking as an amateur - wait for a better answer)

liberation is to be free from entanglement in the dynamics of suffering. if you see what self actually is (a mirage) and how it has been believed throughout your life, you must have an insight into how belief of self has caused or exacerbated suffering unnecessarily. to see this dynamic in action is to be able to step away from it and drop it and the suffering it causes. therefore it is liberation from a major cause of suffering, possibly even the only cause of suffering.
liberation is a relative term - it is to be free from whatever it is that enslaves you. it fits the usage here because most people are unnecessarily enslaved to a belief that doesn't bear up to examination.

[Nemo]

Hi Clyde, some really nice descriptions there. It's great to have you here, welcome.

To answer your question, yes, the definition of liberation we are working with here is that of no-self (ie. the Buddha's "anatta"). Usually belief in self equates to belief in some kind of experiencer, controller, etc.
The spectrum of human emotions lives on, only no-one owns them. Illusion of an owner or controller breeds resistance to what is, and this is where suffering happens. Emotions do not equal suffering. Owning them, holding on to them (or ignoring them), creating feedback loops does.
The idea that something here isn't right, that it needs to be changed, and that it can be changed by self - this is resistance, this is swimming against the tide, the struggle. But everything is included, nothing can be out of place, it is not possible.

So what is it you expect liberation to change? What part of experience are you resisting? Is there something you are still clinging to as yours, or something that you think needs correcting?

[clyde]

Is realizing the reality of no self equal to liberation?

(speaking as an amateur - wait for a better answer)

liberation is to be free from entanglement in the dynamics of suffering. if you see what self actually is (a mirage) and how it has been believed throughout your life, you must have an insight into how belief of self has caused or exacerbated suffering unnecessarily. to see this dynamic in action is to be able to step away from it and drop it and the suffering it causes. therefore it is liberation from a major cause of suffering, possibly even the only cause of suffering.
liberation is a relative term - it is to be free from whatever it is that enslaves you. it fits the usage here because most people are unnecessarily enslaved to a belief that doesn't bear up to examination.

thanks ddb! i really appreciate it.

[clyde]

Hi Clyde, some really nice descriptions there. It's great to have you here, welcome.

the warm welcomes here are just wonderful. the love comes through -- THANK YOU for that.

To answer your question, yes, the definition of liberation we are working with here is that of no-self (ie. the Buddha's "anatta"). Usually belief in self equates to belief in some kind of experiencer, controller, etc.
The spectrum of human emotions lives on, only no-one owns them. Illusion of an owner or controller breeds resistance to what is, and this is where suffering happens. Emotions do not equal suffering. Owning them, holding on to them (or ignoring them), creating feedback loops does.

okay, gotcha.

The idea that something here isn't right, that it needs to be changed, and that it can be changed by self - this is resistance, this is swimming against the tide, the struggle. But everything is included, nothing can be out of place, it is not possible.

yes, that makes sense. Nothing can be other than what it is.

In practice, do you find that your day-to-day life involves times where you may perceive something to be amiss or not wanted in some way and behavior follows from that? For example, I brought this up earlier, but I find close relationships to be extremely fertile for this sort of thing. Even though it is true that nothing can be out of place, sometimes, for whatever reason, I perceive my partner to be judging me in some way, or actually trying to hurt me emotionally. Now I know that she is behaving automatically (and love and understanding is just a talk away). Especially this can be recognized after the fact. But during the fact, during the interaction, sometimes I will respond defensively as well. Or maybe I'll be impatient with my kids.... Just trying to spell out some real scenarios here.

Now I imagine that someone more liberated, more enlightened (LOL! -- I'm 'pointing' at the right words here not using them) might be able to cut through the illusion during that interaction. Instead of defensiveness, instead of impatience, something totally unpredictable, genuine and appropriate could happen. Are the liberated here doing this sort of thing -- reacting wisely and compassionately and creatively as a matter of course?

My hunch is that the answer to that is no. However, if it is similar to what has been happening here, there is a bit more space and awareness in those situations.

So what is it you expect liberation to change? What part of experience are you resisting? Is there something you are still clinging to as yours, or something that you think needs correcting?

Excellent questions.

So what is it you expect liberation to change?

I expect that liberation will cut real deep. So deep that behaviors will change. I do perceive some behavior to have changed, but it’s not as deep as it could go IMHO. I'd expect some sort of 'unity consciousness' or samdhi or kensho or whatever -- where are the fireworks!

What part of experience are you resisting?

probably sameness. it feels the same (for the most part).

Is there something you are still clinging to as yours, or something that you think needs correcting?

not that I'm aware of. But there is the unconscious. Ilona mentioned that it could take some time for that stuff to be exposed -- or at least that's how I understood what she said.

[Nemo]

Hey Clyde.

Thanks for the real scenario examples. We can wax lyrical about all this stuff until the cows come home, but really, none of it is any good unless it can be applied to real life.

Subscription to the "I" belief over a lifetime can create and reinforce some negative patterns in ego surrounding that belief, so yes, even though seeing "I" as an illusion is something that can never be unseen, there is still often a lot of karma to burn. By karma, I simply mean these built up self-serving patterns. It takes time.

Seeing self as illusion provides a good basis to do this. Emotions and reactions and thought patterns that are provoked can potentially be examined when brought to the surface. They need to be provoked so they can be examined. They need to be examined so they can be let go of. There is no need to beat yourself up over reacting negatively to a situation. Just think of it as an opportunity. All that is really required in this process is a deep honesty. Belief in self, means defending a belief in self, means dishonesty in order to do so. Just gentle observation, honesty, no blaming. It's all you need. Examine the patterns. See how thoughts spawn other thoughts.

In my own experience, I used to be capable of getting very emotional and/or angry in trying to defend a very strong sense of self which once was here. A thought or emotion would get bounced off my sense of self like a mirror, creating a feedback loop in which the thoughts creating the anger or sadness could grow exponentially. Lots of unnecessary suffering.

Deepening the liberation is continuous it seems, but now thoughts and emotions, even reactions, still surface. Only they don't have that belief of self to reflect off anymore, so they dissolve away into the void far quicker than the used to. There is no need for things to get out of hand. Nothing is held on to for very long. It's old patterns playing themselves out and dying away. There can even still be sense-of-self residue, even if self if no longer believed in.

But am I an unwaveringly wise, patient, compassionate saint or sage? No. Just human.

Clyde - One of our friends here pointed out something amusing to me that I thought I would share with you. My name is actually Bonnie.

[Ingen]

I am reading this thread with great interest, because I am roughly at the same place, but haven't been there so long.

You write about the self:

i'm not really sure what the evolutionary function is of this myth -- my guess is that there is one.

My take on this is: the self *is* the habit that is discontent with the current state of affairs. (Or proud. But never quiet). Thus it was/is so successful as an evolutionary tool for progress.

The discontentment with the current state of "enlightenment" - lack of peace, too many automatic reactions, etc. is in itself just an appearance of self. It raises its head where it can- why should it stop just because some insights have been won. All just memes competing.

What to do about it? I don't know. Just watch it happening, I guess.