Which is Your True Self?

[crossfire]

You want to continue with your baggage of the past, which includes your 'learning' along with who you think you are, neither of which will have anything to do with your new life after death. When you die, it's over. The part you played on this earthly plane is no more. Why would you continue the drama in Heaven?

You are temporarily 'unique' in the particular form the mud is shaped into, but the mud itself is formless and universal. The mud is who you really are; the unique mud-form just a temporal fantasy you enjoy for the moment. Clinging to your temporal form will only result in your going to Heaven as a fossil. You will not fit in with the new life you are supposed to be living. Get out of the boat and onto the shore. It's here, now, and not after you die. Then it will be too late.

Nothing you do to 'prepare' yourself will apply to a new life. A new life is just that: something you have never experienced before, and to experience it correctly, you must not have anything in the way to interfere with the experience, like your baggage of Identification and 'learning'.

*tosses a few apple seeds of the newest tasty variety into the mud, as well as some fig seeds*

 

[godnotgod]

The Divine-Child archetype is a positive one mentioned in the book and is very interesting. I would say if you are looking for a true Self, it would be when we are accessing the Divine-Child archetype. It is certainly the one where we feel the most connected and content with being.

Excellent post. Thank you!

Krishnamurti talks about being in the state of 'innocency' (not innocence). In this state, one sees things as they are, without judging what one sees. It is not a moral viewpoint, and is a view free from societal indoctrination and technique. It is this view of 'innocency', which Yeshua referred to when he said: "Unless you turn and become as little children, you will not enter into Paradise", and I think what Yeshua meant here is to 'turn' away from the moral, hypocritical finger-wagging of society inwards to 'the Kingdom of God'. which he said lies within. 'Little children' are not yet corrupted by societal indoctrination, and so do not judge in terms of right and wrong; they just see things as they are.

 

[godnotgod]

*tosses a few apple seeds of the newest tasty variety into the mud, as well as some fig seeds*

Nice, but if you are born, you will die.
All this world is filled with coming and going*.
Now show me the path where there is no coming and there is no going.

*coming and going: birth and death

 

[crossfire]

Nice, but if you are born, you will die.
All this world is filled with coming and going*.
Now show me the path where there is no coming and there is no going.

*coming and going: birth and death

The coming and going is what makes a path a path.

 

[godnotgod]

The coming and going is what makes a path a path.

Coming and going round and round is what makes suffering and delusion, ie 'the wheel'.

What is the path where there is no coming and going, and who is it that comes and goes?

Do you know?

 

[Thief]

You want to continue with your baggage of the past, which includes your 'learning' along with who you think you are, neither of which will have anything to do with your new life after death. When you die, it's over. The part you played on this earthly plane is no more. Why would you continue the drama in Heaven?

You are temporarily 'unique' in the particular form the mud is shaped into, but the mud itself is formless and universal. The mud is who you really are; the unique mud-form just a temporal fantasy you enjoy for the moment. Clinging to your temporal form will only result in your going to Heaven as a fossil. You will not fit in with the new life you are supposed to be living. Get out of the boat and onto the shore. It's here, now, and not after you die. Then it will be too late.

Nothing you do to 'prepare' yourself will apply to a new life. A new life is just that: something you have never experienced before, and to experience it correctly, you must not have anything in the way to interfere with the experience, like your baggage of Identification and 'learning'.

you do realize......this post^......is Christian propaganda

only the nouns are different

 

[loverofhumanity]

My view is that the true self is .....

“The Self of God standing within Him with laws.”

The Seven Valleys, The Four Valleys
Bahá’u’lláh

To have ‘God within’ means to observe one’s life according to what God has prescribed. This is the ultimate self.

There are different grades or levels of self either approaching or distant from the goal of ‘God within with laws’.

We are all at different levels to this ultimate goal. And it is forever shifting. So online a person may choose to release more of their godliness or ungodliness but there is only one us and that is changing from hour to hour minute to minute, second to second.

One time I might really try hard and be patient and speak nicely but at another I might allow my passions to get angry and speak rudely. It depends on how I control my self., by my passions or by the God within.

 

[crossfire]

Coming and going round and round is what makes suffering and delusion, ie 'the wheel'.

What is the path where there is no coming and going, and who is it that comes and goes?

Do you know?

No self: anatta. (The throne is empty)

 

[godnotgod]

you do realize......this post^......is Christian propaganda

only the nouns are different

Excuse me. I am only responding to you in a manner which you presented to begin with, namely:

"...then we stand before God and heaven"

Why? You think you go on after death with the same identity you just died to? It's over. You've already lived that character, and it's now dead. Kapputt. Zilch. Nada.

 

[godnotgod]

No self: anatta. (The throne is empty)

So if there is no self, then there is nothing that is born or dies; nothing to come and go. Is that the case?

 

[godnotgod]

M
There are different grades or levels of self either approaching or distant from the goal of ‘God within with laws’.

We are all at different levels to this ultimate goal. And it is forever shifting. So online a person may choose to release more of their godliness or ungodliness but there is only one us and that is changing from hour to hour minute to minute, second to second.

One time I might really try hard and be patient and speak nicely but at another I might allow my passions to get angry and speak rudely. It depends on how I control my self., by my passions or by the God within.

Do you think Moses was ungodly when he smashed the Ten Commandments out of anger? Or was Jesus ungodly when he, out of anger, threw the money-changers from the temple?

 

[crossfire]

So if there is no self, then there is nothing that is born or dies; nothing to come and go. Is that the case?

"Self" is not a singular, unchanging, "thing." If you disassemble a vehicle into its component parts, where is the vehicle? If you replace the component parts one by one, is it the same vehicle? Does the earlier version hold the claim of being the "true" vehicle? Does the present vehicle hold the claim? Does the "ideal" of the vehicle hold the claim? This in no way discounts the concept of vehicle as being invalid, delusion, unreal, or "nothing."

 

[godnotgod]

"Self" is not a singular, unchanging, "thing." If you disassemble a vehicle into its component parts, where is the vehicle? If you replace the component parts one by one, is it the same vehicle? Does the earlier version hold the claim of being the "true" vehicle? Does the present vehicle hold the claim? Does the "ideal" of the vehicle hold the claim? This in no way discounts the concept of vehicle as being invalid, delusion, unreal, or "nothing."

The analogy of vehicle to self does not hold, as 'vehicle' is a physical object that can be physically dismantled/assembled from/into component 'parts' which can be perceived via the senses, while 'self' is a mentally-created principle that is an illusion from the get-go, so who is it that is born, and who is it that dies?

Show me the path where there is no coming and there is no going.

 

[crossfire]

The analogy of vehicle to self does not hold, as 'vehicle' is a physical object that can be physically dismantled/assembled from/into component 'parts' which can be perceived via the senses, while 'self' is a mentally-created principle that is an illusion from the get-go, so who is it that is born, and who is it that dies?

Show me the path where there is no coming and there is no going.

"Self" is empty of inherent nature of its own. Even "emptiness" is empty of any inherent nature of its own.

 

[godnotgod]

"Self" is empty of inherent nature of its own. Even "emptiness" is empty of any inherent nature of its own.

And yet, we all experience a conscious presence. If self is illusory, then, this selfless, conscious presence must be our true nature. Unborn, Unconditioned, Uncaused. This is the path where there is no birth and death.

 

[crossfire]

And yet, we all experience a conscious presence. If self is illusory, then, this selfless, conscious presence must be our true nature. Unborn, Unconditioned, Uncaused.

Where did I say self is illusory? Nowhere! No traceable essence of its own does not mean illusory! Emergent processes or dependently arising phenomena are not necessarily illusory!
Consciousness is inconsistent and inconstant.
The unborn, unconditioned aspect of consciousness is the passive yin aspect, by which we can discern the active yang aspects of consciousness as they arise and fade.
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (3)
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (1)
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (4)
Nibbāna Sutta: Parinibbana (2)

 

[Thief]

Excuse me. I am only responding to you in a manner which you presented to begin with, namely:

"...then we stand before God and heaven"

Why? You think you go on after death with the same identity you just died to? It's over. You've already lived that character, and it's now dead. Kapputt. Zilch. Nada.

try the book of Job

 

[dfnj]

Excellent post. Thank you!

Krishnamurti talks about being in the state of 'innocency' (not innocence). In this state, one sees things as they are, without judging what one sees. It is not a moral viewpoint, and is a view free from societal indoctrination and technique. It is this view of 'innocency', which Yeshua referred to when he said: "Unless you turn and become as little children, you will not enter into Paradise", and I think what Yeshua meant here is to 'turn' away from the moral, hypocritical finger-wagging of society inwards to 'the Kingdom of God'. which he said lies within. 'Little children' are not yet corrupted by societal indoctrination, and so do not judge in terms of right and wrong; they just see things as they are.

The study of archetypes is not about inventing anything new. The idea of a Divine-Child archetype is derived from what you have referenced. Archetypes are usually identified through the study of mythology, literature, and film. I've heard said by Joseph Campbell, "It's the only thing worth writing about." Touching the archetypes is why Star Wars is a classic and Ice Pirates is pretty much forgotten. Touching the archetypes is the juice that makes movies great.

 

[godnotgod]

Where did I say self is illusory? Nowhere! No traceable essence of its own does not mean illusory! Emergent processes or dependently arising phenomena are not necessarily illusory!

In post #114, you stated that:

"Self" is empty of inherent nature of its own.

IOW, what we call 'self' is empty of inherent self-nature; ie; 'self' being a fabrication of the mind due to ignorance of the Law of Dependent Origination, which has twelve causal links the first causal link being ignorance. IOW, due to ignorance (ie conditioning), we see a world of separate 'things', where no such 'things' actually exist. Such 'things' co-arise interdependently, and are part of all other such 'things'. The confusion lies in the fact that we mistake 'form' for 'things', and that includes mental forms, such as 'self', which we think to be real. The Dalai Lama actually equates 'no-self' with 'emptiness':

"It is only through generating such an insight and penetrating into the nature of reality that we will be able to dispel this fundamental misperception. By this insight, or wisdom, I am referring to what is known in Buddhist terminology as the understanding of emptiness or no-self. There are diverse interpretations of what is meant by the terms emptiness, no-self, selflessness, and identitylessness in the Buddhist teachings. However, here I am using these terms to refer to the emptiness of intrinsic existence. Grasping at the opposite—that things and events possess some kind of intrinsic or independent existence—is the fundamental ignorance. The profound insight that arises with the realization of the absence of any such intrinsic existence is known as the true path."

The Dalai Lama on dependent origination | Wisdom Publications

The Heart Sutra sums up the emptiness of all 'forms', perceived as 'things', by stating:

'form is emptiness;
emptiness is form'

IOW, all forms co-arise due to Dependent Origination, and are thus empty of inherent self-nature.

We see a 'whirlpool' which takes on the form of a whorl, but in reality, is simply whirling water, which we mistake for the 'thing' called 'whirlpool', where no such 'whirlpool' actually exists.

(Response to the rest of your post to follow)

 

[Thief]

form is emptiness;
emptiness is form'

not a quote of Bruce Lee.....but it could have been

now THAT guy was a PERSON!