Drilling down on the concept of self. Self as commonly experienced is a reactive response. It lacks cohesiveness in that each experience of self is a newly arising event and it is entirely possible if not common that two arising of self know nothing of each other.
-
-
Replying to @memeristor @NoaidiX
Given honesty and the proper tools the disconnected nature of what we take as ourselves can be demonstrated and proven to be the reality of our selfness. "I generation and extinction" is how nature leaves us and where we find the truth of our being.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor @NoaidiX
The process of becoming and going away and is implied in the Yogacara material concerning the Alaya-vijnana. My limited understandings suggest the Alaya-vijnana is responsible for the process of I generation and extinction.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor @NoaidiX
Each new arising instance of self is a result of the inertia and takes the general form of previously some recorded impression. For the most part we are passive in relation to this process and as a result do as we have always done.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor @NoaidiX
If the structure created by this process, recording impressions, is disorganized then the product will also be disorganized. One interesting aspect of this observation is shown in the statement " Life lives us we do not live life." Our environment acts to organize our personality
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor @NoaidiX
We generally are passive in relation to the way we live our lives. This form of self is derivative lacking an active element. If then "I" make an effort to actively attend to the processes of sense and impression it is possible that a more cohesive structure can be created.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor
Do "I" re-route what is otherwise "my" default mode of operation, conditioned by unattended processes? Or does the process undergo re-routing upon the dissolution of I/me/mine?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NoaidiX
It seems likely that both are true by actively attending to the process of "registering an impression" the nature of previously recorded impressions are dissolved at the same time an intentional structure is created.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @memeristor
Creating an intentional structure, yes. Actively attending, yes. Cetanā (intention, volitional activity, will) re-routes the process, but must there be an intend-er/actor/will-er? Not necessarily, at least in the Buddhist framework.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NoaidiX
If some action is to be taken, one that is not predicated on ones conditioning, it seems, that some intending presence must act. Very interesting question. Are those of us who find interests in these ideas genetically predisposed to such investigations?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
What is that intending presence? Calling it a self/doer would lend coherence to the situation, give our predispositions. The perceived need for coherence of that sort may be evolutionarily adaptive, but does that which is evolutionarily adaptive reflect truth, or convenience?
-
-
Replying to @NoaidiX
At heart, a believer in panpsychism who sees in humanity the potential to become self creating beings, believe that each ones of has the possibility to take a role in the evolution of the universe. To so to speak "Lift ourselves by our own bootstraps."
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.