Preferences if No Self?

[mochafrap]

Hi all,

Under the idea that there is no self*, what is the explanation for preferences (including those of relationships) and everday individuality? Would it come down to different apparent levels of 'self' while still holding that there is no ultimate self?

* I say "idea of" because I am not fully convinced on this point, but I am exploring within it. Do not derail my question though, please!

[i am I AM]

If you can think about it, you cannot be it at the moment.

Inquiring on this may be helpful: Is Infinity in Oneness?

In that case, Does Oneness = Infinity?

[Mu_]

4 hours ago, mochafrap said:

Hi all,

Under the idea that there is no self*, what is the explanation for preferences (including those of relationships) and everday individuality? Would it come down to different apparent levels of 'self' while still holding that there is no ultimate self?

* I say "idea of" because I am not fully convinced on this point, but I am exploring within it. Do not derail my question though, please!

I know you don't want to derail the question, the thing about questions like this is you have an idea what a self is (which you already believe since its viserally real to you) and what a no-self is.  Perhaps one idea you share or heard is you have something called a personality and a free will as a self and it learns by making choices what to put its attention on  (this probably lines up with your direct experience) Then on the other side of the coin is no-self, and since a self by your definition/experience is something that has preferences and individuality, you seem to believe that this no-self functions within the context of preferences and individuality/will, which it may be a combination of or a not all. 

If you shared more of your ideas of what you see as self and no self, I can maybe help you more.

[Shin]

Do you have a self in a lucid dream ?

If not, then how can the characters you see living in that dream have preferences ?

 

[mochafrap]

@i am I AM I'm not sure I understand these questions quite yet, but I will certainly think them over. Could you explain a little further if you'd like? 

@Mu_ I do have a concept of both self and no-self intellectually. My sense of self is more obvious, of course, given the Western background, but I am slowly feeling the inklings of what it means to have no self. I am still open to both possibilities being true and don't see myself settling soon, as I am pretty epistemologically skeptical. I recognize that the skepticism has no bearing in the realm of no self. I also understand that in the ultimate nondual experience, all is one and individuals don't exist because all is one consciousness. However, when we are not in that zone of beingness and are not actively feeling that one consciousness, we can define things like "I prefer slapstick humor over dry humor. I prefer my girlfriend over some other person and so am dating her." I'm essentially wondering what role these preferences play and whether they are valid and whether they should just be shirked, to be honest. Like, what do we do with them? And do these distinctions define a level of self that is not the ultimate truth that we simply use to "live a human life"? I'm aware that the distinctions are infinite; could we say that there are infinite selves rather than no self at all? Could we group based on most common or most obvious types of distinctions? I'm sorry for so many questions, but maybe you have some insight on a couple now that I've talked so much! I also think I may have had a decent amout of realizations about the self while writing this, haha.

@Shin I'm actually about to start a book that has an entire chapter dedicated to connecting the idea of consciousness with that of lucid dreaming, so funny timing! I guess there is a sense of self in a lucid dream... it's just weird, because we always wake up from and remember lucid dreams. I guess one would say that the actualization version of waking up and remembering a lucid dream is having an englightenment experience and coming "back" to "dream" experience?

Thank you all for replying!

[i am I AM]

Plus dreams are showing you a fundamental truth of reality (i.m.e) so you can contemplate/question how, why that is, etc. I cannot elaborate as this is for you to find yourself.

[Nahm]

@mochafrap Look at natural selection, it’s consciousness. 

[Mu_]

@mochafrap

 

By reading what you wrote and into what you wrote is it safe to say that you are a intellectual/philosopher of sorts and this information is to help you gain more knowledge and perhaps get a little closer to no-self or  get you to a place where you see the truth, wether its one or the other?

My experience with these matters has fluctuated a lot of over time, and each phase has had its realizations and understandings.  Some have stuck and some of been dropped, but what I understand now has given new life and understanding to all the previous experiences.  You see, all is "infinity/Unbrokenness" expressed and experienced as is it all.  The understandings and changes you feel as though you have and will have are that in action, including the individuality that it feels to be you and you are one with that.

Individuality and no-self as you've described is each its own expression/self experience as you've understood up to this point, neither is the whole picture and neither is not part of the whole picture.  What would it be like to let go of  "Is it one or the other, and the idea's you attach to each of these".

 

Edited October 23, 2018 by Mu_

[Consilience]

Even from a perspective of self, what is a preference? 

It’s a variation of desire right? So what is a desire? Desire is a clinging to a thought or idea about the future. So what is clinging? More thoughts? So thoughts generating clinging-thoughts generating positive feelings which were what the preference consisted of.

Preferences seem to be generated out of the concept that a certain future x may be achieved by certain actions y. But the underlying nature of a preference is that we confuse the outcome “x” as being positive or negatice, but if you look at any outcome of the future, it’s neither good or bad, so the underlying structure of a preference is based on... more thoughts which themselves don’t exist in the outside world.

Maybe none of what Im saying makes sense or resonates. Either way I think contemplating the nature of preference is the next step, not whether or not there is no self. Preferences clearly exist in some form, so unraveling their nature can be done from the perspective of a self or no self.

[Hellspeed]

Who told you there is no Self? 

[non_nothing]

On 10/22/2018 at 7:15 PM, mochafrap said:

Hi all,

Under the idea that there is no self*, what is the explanation for preferences (including those of relationships) and everday individuality? Would it come down to different apparent levels of 'self' while still holding that there is no ultimate self?

* I say "idea of" because I am not fully convinced on this point, but I am exploring within it. Do not derail my question though, please!

You'll get it when you get it.

You'll get the answer when you  embrace no-self

[ajasatya]

@mochafrap why do chemical reactions happen?

[mochafrap]

10 hours ago, Mu_ said:

By reading what you wrote and into what you wrote is it safe to say that you are a intellectual/philosopher of sorts and this information is to help you gain more knowledge and perhaps get a little closer to no-self or  get you to a place where you see the truth, wether its one or the other?

Yes, exactly. And then to figure out possible implications of truth and decide what to do with truth.

10 hours ago, Mu_ said:

My experience with these matters has fluctuated a lot of over time, and each phase has had its realizations and understandings.  Some have stuck and some of been dropped, but what I understand now has given new life and understanding to all the previous experiences.  You see, all is "infinity/Unbrokenness" expressed and experienced as is it all.  The understandings and changes you feel as though you have and will have are that in action, including the individuality that it feels to be you and you are one with that.

Individuality and no-self as you've described is each its own expression/self experience as you've understood up to this point, neither is the whole picture and neither is not part of the whole picture.  What would it be like to let go of  "Is it one or the other, and the idea's you attach to each of these".

I will think about this more. Or maybe I will let go. 

I guess a related comment is that I do see all as one experience. I am just not sure that all is entirely one consciousness / that we are all the exact same consciousness / all one conscious being. Still pondering this idea.

Edited October 24, 2018 by mochafrap

[mochafrap]

5 hours ago, Consilience said:

Even from a perspective of self, what is a preference? 

It’s a variation of desire right? So what is a desire? Desire is a clinging to a thought or idea about the future. So what is clinging? More thoughts? So thoughts generating clinging-thoughts generating positive feelings which were what the preference consisted of.

Is desire a clinging? And is clinging more thoughts? That's part of my question. For example, can I desire to go hiking without clinging to the thought of hiking, or does desire necessarily equate to clinging? I could see it going both ways at the moment. My semantics detail-orientedness can be annoying but is also sometimes important. Regardless, he context here doesn't seem to need that clarification and I agree with the last sentence.
 

5 hours ago, Consilience said:

Preferences seem to be generated out of the concept that a certain future x may be achieved by certain actions y. But the underlying nature of a preference is that we confuse the outcome “x” as being positive or negatice, but if you look at any outcome of the future, it’s neither good or bad, so the underlying structure of a preference is based on... more thoughts which themselves don’t exist in the outside world.

The outcome is neither good nor bad if all preferences have been abandoned and we are speaking objectively (and also assuming there is no objective "lowpoint" that is inescapably painful, such as extreme torture or something). I agree as above that preference is a ball of thoughts. This definitely addresses where preferences come from in the perspective of self. My question, though, is why do they exist at all? What is the nondual explanation for why I like cherries while Bob prefers grapes? And can we use these preferences to define selves for what most people see as everyday life / is that bad or invalid? And then the other questions I directed at Mu_ in the 4th reply of the thread.
 

5 hours ago, Consilience said:

Maybe none of what Im saying makes sense or resonates. Either way I think contemplating the nature of preference is the next step, not whether or not there is no self. Preferences clearly exist in some form, so unraveling their nature can be done from the perspective of a self or no self.

Good input! Thank you.

[mochafrap]

@Nahm how so? 

@Hellspeed a friend with more experience in this area than me. For clarification, my friend meant no individual selves and was promoting one overall conscious Self instead.

@ajasatya do you mean how we best explain it or why they truly actually happen? If the second, I don't know and currently think it is impossible to know. We just have to have practical predictions. This is annoyingly extreme skepticism on my end but it's my answer haha

[Hellspeed]

57 minutes ago, mochafrap said:

@Nahm how so? 

@Hellspeed a friend with more experience in this area than me. For clarification, my friend meant no individual selves and was promoting one overall conscious Self instead.

@ajasatya do you mean how we best explain it or why they truly actually happen? If the second, I don't know and currently think it is impossible to know. We just have to have practical predictions. This is annoyingly extreme skepticism on my end but it's my answer haha

Then is not important  only pure experience is  

[Mu_]

2 hours ago, mochafrap said:

Yes, exactly. And then to figure out possible implications of truth and decide what to do with truth.

I will think about this more. Or maybe I will let go. 

I guess a related comment is that I do see all as one experience. I am just not sure that all is entirely one consciousness / that we are all the exact same consciousness / all one conscious being. Still pondering this idea.

Don't worry about being a skeptic, its fine normal and not against any-kind of truth.  When I asked, What would it be like to let go of  "Is it one or the other, and the idea's you attach to each of these".  This is a opportunity for you to step into something new by dropping your need to figure one or the other out as truth or not.  You may actually find more answers in letting go in this manner then thinking, not all answers come from thinking.  And if your not ready for that, then ask yourself the following.

 What would it be like to not have answer or a need to ask the question.  It may make you very uncomfortable, and it may not, but if it does, question into the need to know and what it would mean if you couldn't know no matter how hard you tried.  Are you happy either way?  If so, then philosphies away for the fun of it.  But if your not, then what is it about the answer to these questions that you deeply hope to gain, and will the answers actually give that to you, or are your reasons just idea's.

[Emerald]

Preferences are just part of the way the human aspect works. All things within duality work a particular way... including human beings. It is a feature of human beings to have particular preferences. Animals have preferences as well. Chairs do not have preferences. This is also an aspect of how duality works. 

Preferences come as an outgrowth of emotions. Emotions are an outgrowth of the workings of the body and the mind. Body and mind are also aspects of duality. 

So, understand that becoming enlightened doesn't mean that your human aspect will cease to have emotions and preferences. The human aspect will keep functioning as it always had. Duality will keep doing as it always has. Nothing will change. People will still feel and like certain things and not like certain other things. Frogs will still ribbit. Cars will still go vroom.

The illusion of duality will still continue to be the illusion of duality. The only difference will be that you'll realize your deepest nature... which is the creator of all of reality and the created at once. You will still be human and have human emotions, in the human aspect. But you'll realize that you extend far beyond just that aspect. 

So, don't be at war with preferences. This is conditionally loving and invalidating of an aspect of infinity... and it will set you apart from the deepest aspect of yourself that created duality perfectly... and created human beings with preferences.

[mochafrap]

 

@Emerald Your response is actually along the lines of my own forming suspicions on this topic. However, this line:

On 10/24/2018 at 0:15 AM, Emerald said:

understand that becoming enlightened doesn't mean that your human aspect will cease to have emotions and preferences.

It seems to me that enlightenment in its most consistent and stringent form would shed all preferences and emotions - except for maybe the preference to have no preferences and those that are biological. Everything else would just fall away Do you have any input on whether this view of mine makes sense? Would stringent enlightenment be equivalent to being as neutral about everything as possible?

And even then, it seems like the shedding of all desires as much as possible is literally death. But even in that action, there is a desire or preference. So.... it's confusing and kinda makes me doubt stuff.

[mochafrap]

@Mu_ very good questions to ask myself. Thank you!