Intelectual Knowledge x Embodied Knowledge

[UnbornTao]

On 31/07/2024 at 7:09 AM, Salvijus said:

Animals have self-preservation instinct. That's identity. 

I don't know about that. Preservation instinct, yes. 

Quote

You must have a sense of self in order to relate to the sense of other. Without the sense of self you're in nonduality. And you can't function. You're just absorbed into everything motionless samadhi. Coma. Whatever you wanna call it. You couldn't even maintain the body for long in that state. You'd go mahasamadhi. 

Hmm.

Didn't we act when we were babies? What was there for us? We could act and there was not a conglomerate of past history and identity. 

@Keryo Koffa "What is one's nature?"

Get it yourself and then tell us about it. My contemplation goes loosely like this: get an honest sense of who you take yourself to be and question what that experience is about.

Edited August 1 by UnbornTao

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

I don't know about that. Preservation instinct, yes. 

The only way to have a desire to protect yourself is if you have a sense of self first. 

Animals also have fear. Fear, survival instinct, ego identity are one and the same. 

One who has no sense of self, does not interpret anything as a threat. Therefor feels no need to resist anything. Their conciousness and sense of self merges with the whole universe. And all sense of duality is gone. 

Your understanding of what identity is seems to lacking depth in my view. 

 

Edited August 1 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

2 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Enlightened people can do stupid and dysfunctional stuff, etc.

Truth is never stupid or disfunctional. Only ego can be stupid and disfunctional. 

To call someone who is expressing qualities of ego, beyond ego (enlightened) . Is a contradiction in terms. 

Edited August 1 by Salvijus

[UnbornTao]

16 hours ago, Salvijus said:

The only way to have a desire to protect yourself is if you have a sense of self first. 

Animals also have fear. Fear, survival instinct, ego identity are one and the same. 

One who has no sense of self, does not interpret anything as a threat. Therefor feels no need to resist anything. Their conciousness and sense of self merges with the whole universe. And all sense of duality is gone. 

Your understanding of what identity is seems to lacking depth in my view. 

I wouldn't project emotions on animals except perhaps certain apes, like us!  

Instinct may be a rudimentary act that can exist without self--it already does. Your body, for example, doesn't need a sense of self for it to function. However, since we identify with or as our bodies, we say we do stuff.

Again, what did we have as babies? What was our experience like? Not much fear, perhaps none. I doubt we had an identity developed at that point and yet we did stuff, pretty basic, but it was done. Neither were we aware of "threat" or "benefit." Why don't we have any memory of that period?

Identity, ego, and self are not the same. What are they? And what is instinct?

16 hours ago, Salvijus said:

Truth is never stupid or disfunctional. Only ego can be stupid and disfunctional. 

To call someone who is expressing qualities of ego, beyond ego (enlightened) . Is a contradiction in terms. 

Nisargadatta was a heavy smoker, Alan Watts and Chogyam were alcoholics, Osho had problematic personality traits, enlightened Japanese warriors have killed people in the past, etc.

We're talking about two different domains here, the absolute and the relative domain--relationship. Access to one doesn't necessarily endow you with knowledge of the other even though it might facilitate it.

Edited August 2 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

Another take: self and not-self are building blocks of our current experience, yet, in the end, they might not be existentially true. Even though they appear solid and as occurring, there was no subject or self behind actions in the first place.

This is still overly simplistic, suitable for a forum post. I guess this would take us into the essence and origin of both self and instinct which are tricky subjects. Grasping these dynamics for real is a different beast.

Edited August 2 by UnbornTao

[CARDOZZO]

 

[Salvijus]

@UnbornTao 

If you have intention, you have identity. 

Intention is inseparable from the one who intends.

The one who intends is your identity. 

[NoSelfSelf]

@Salvijus Can you expand on this idea or it's just simple as that?

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

@Salvijus Can you expand on this idea or it's just simple as that?

I will try, I'm trying to write another reply now

[Salvijus]

What is intention is not a simple question tho. 

[NoSelfSelf]

@Salvijus im more interested in understanding identity, you mentioning intention is the thing i never heared in this context the way you said it.

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

@Salvijus im more interested in understanding identity, you mentioning intention is the thing i never heared in this context the way you said it.

It's important to understand intention to understand identity. Because who produces intention? You do. What is this "you"? It's your identity. 

[Salvijus]

There's not a single intention in you that did not come out of you. YOU must be there first, for intention to exist. That YOU is your fundamental core identity. 

[NoSelfSelf]

3 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

There's not a single intention in you that did not come out of you. YOU must be there first, for intention to exist. That YOU is your fundamental core identity. 

True because core identity is without thought it just moves. 

[Salvijus]

14 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

True because core identity is without thought it just moves. 

It is the intention that moves. 

Intention/will can come from fear (ego) and it can come from the source (love) 

If you identify yourself with ego, you will express everything that has to do with survival (anger, judgement, control, manipulation, fear etc etc.)

If you identify with Truth, only the impulse of love will manifest through your body. And the way of truth is only harmony and peace. 

Therefor your actions show what you identify with. Truth or illusion. 

Edited August 2 by Salvijus

[NoSelfSelf]

@Salvijus My take is that all intentions are self serving ,you doing anything is benefiting you but the thing is one thinks it benefits himself but more times than not hurts itself.I digressed ,but how would you tell how intention showcase your true identity like in one moment my intention is to be totally lazy in another to be productive its complex.?

Edited August 2 by NoSelfSelf

[Salvijus]

@NoSelfSelf

3 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

 My take is that all intentions are self serving

All intention is self serving. Yes.

If your identity/idea of self is only you and you alone. You will be called selfish. 

If your sense of self expands and becomes everything. All your intentions will be to serve The Whole. And that is love. 

Edited August 2 by Salvijus

[NoSelfSelf]

@Salvijus Only if you lay down your own survival.Do you know the answer to my previous queastion tho?

Im more interested in ego i was working on spirituality for past 10 years im done for now.

Edited August 2 by NoSelfSelf

[Salvijus]

6 minutes ago, NoSelfSelf said:

but how would you tell how intention showcase your true identity

All intention is self serving.

If it serves the false self (ego) then your identity is false also. 

If your intentions serve The Whole (your true identity) than you are in alignment with truth. You are expression of your true self. 

Edited August 2 by Salvijus

[NoSelfSelf]

@Salvijus I know its false but still has serious implication on survival so that's my interest knowing my "false" self more and more i know my true self.