There Is Only One Self

[PureExp]

We are all one. The following introspection (enquiry) shows us this clearly. You do not need strange states of mind to see it, its simple and self evident. Just a reminder, Consciousness = Self (Capital S), I use them interchangeably.

Just look !
How many Selves can you see?
Exactly one - that of your own. End of enquiry. Took two seconds. You must have guessed where it is going now. There will be ifs and buts of all sorts. So lets tackle some of them.
How many Selves or "consciousnesses" have you experienced in your entire life?
Just one.
How many Selves or consciousnesses have others experienced?
Again only one. You can ask them, and they too report only one of it.

But all those people and creatures are conscious, they do look conscious and they report a Self of their own. So there must be many of those Selves, many little consciousnesses trapped in trillions of bodies. This is the usual argument your mind will put forth.

Is it possible to experience "someone else's consciousness"?
No. So now you know "someone else's consciousness" is only a belief, a made up concept.

If everyone were blind (say) and everyone reported and felt air, would the air become many "airs", separate pockets of air attached to their bodies?
Obviously no. There is one air aka atmosphere. This metaphor gives a first glimpse to your mind, of what's going on . But metaphors are fantasies, we need evidence. Self is nothing like air. Drop the metaphor.

What evidence can I get that everyone who reports a Self, has a separate and unique Self?
Clearly there is no evidence. Now you wonder why did you even think like that when there is no evidence for it. That's not very scientific or spiritual at all. You are now at a place of uncertainty, your belief is bared.

There are separate bodies obviously, and there are separate minds, which you can infer from unique behaviour exhibited by all individuals. There is absolutely no hint that the witness which witnesses all these separations is also unique and separate in everyone. What happens is - people, even most intelligent and educated ones, simply assume that since bodies and minds are separate and many, consciousness is also separate, with each person having their own private consciousness. This error is a direct result of the assumption that consciousness is caused by a brain, which is separate for each of us. Many people confuse consciousness with mind and assume they are one and the same. Mind is an object that happens in consciousness and is witnessed as an object. They are not the same.

Your mind will now shoot you back with your own arrow.

What is the evidence that others are reporting about exactly the same Self that I'm reporting about?
You will find that it cannot be done. The mind is trying to objectify the Self so that it can grasp it. If it sees only one object called Self, it can be certain of it. But the subject cannot become object, as soon as it is objectified, it becomes a concept which is being witnessed by the Self, the subject. In other words, the Self is beyond the reach of mind. If Selves are multiple, they are objects, and now mind can say there are many of them. However, the catch is that the Self is not an object, it is the experiencer of all objects. Mind cannot be certain either way.

Now you are at a place where you as a person, a mind can finally say - "I don't know". Very well. That's an improvement actually. Beliefs are dissolved. Ignorance is bared.

Lets use common meaning of the word reality and call the Self as the only reality, because that's what I experience, I do not experience anything except the Self. Now, if we assume two Selves, there would be two independent realities.

Can there be two realities?
You'd tempted to answer yes. So ask again:

How can you know for sure that there can be two realities?
You can only know that when you stand outside of both realities, and experience them together. But now both realities are a part of a bigger reality where you are standing. The reality again reduces to one. So if the Self is reality, it is only one.

Conclusion

We find that it is very difficult to provide an evidence or logical inference to support the belief that there are many consciousnesses out there, and every individual has his own private consciousness. Yet the belief of everyone having a separate private consciousness is rampant. It is very strange that people can believe such things. This belief also leads to another belief that when the body/person dies, his consciousness leaves the body and goes somewhere else. There can be many more derivative beliefs such as consciousness leaves the body during an out of body experience. A direct experience shows that the body is in consciousness, consciousness is not in the body. The above beliefs do not hold at all.

This introspection also shows that the mind has a limited capability to grasp the oneness of the consciousness. What it does is creates divisions, and in the process divides consciousness too. When we see that there are no real divisions, there is no sharp boundary where I end and you start, the illusion of separation breaks down. This introspection also shows that the consciousness is one but it expresses itself as many. I, as a person, am just an expression of one consciousness, and so are you and everyone and everything. At the core we are all one. This realization has huge implications.

A longer version which addresses more questions.

[Echoes]

@PureExp How would you distinguish non-duality from solipsism? 

[Nahm]

@Echoes all three are the same. 

[PureExp]

@Echoes I can present only my own (limited) understanding of Solipsism. Its a vast subject.

The first and foremost thing I find is that Solipsism limits itself to an individual mind, it has no concept of universal Mind and of consciousness, and also does not propose any mechanisms for creation of external world. So I regard it as a sub-set of Non-dualism.

Another big difference is that Solipsist would say - my mind alone exists and is the only reality. Others and world are my parts and are purely mental constructs. Myself is ultimate.

Nondualist would say - consciousness alone exists and is the only reality. Myself, others and world(s) are an expression of consciousness. My self is only a reflection of Self (aka consciousness).

Roughly speaking, the difference is - "I alone exist as one" vs "We all exist as one". Well, the problem with such quick and dirty sentences is that people easily misunderstand them.

Thirdly, non-dualism accepts and integrates duality in itself. Dealing with duality and practical issues are its concern too. I am not very clear on how Solipsism deals with duality. My (perhaps mistaken) impression is that it excludes any kind of duality.

[Bodhi123]

@PureExp I appreciate your clarity. 

[PureExp]

@Bodhi123 Welcome and thanks.

[Echoes]

@PureExp Thank you for the explanation! What is the dimension then in which a variety of mind's can occur at the same time? Is consciousness like a giant field? There seems to be one universal mind, that split itself into a multiplicity of (seemingly?) limited minds. But there has to be some dimension in which there is a "space" for a multiplicity of individuated limitations.

Edited March 10, 2017 by Echoes

[PureExp]

@Echoes When I check it from my direct experience, I see no field, no time and no dimensions. So I must conclude that these are mere concepts, fantasies....

Its fun to juggle these concepts, you see, but they are not very useful at top level.

I do see a mind, my own. I don't see other minds, but I can be a bit lenient and accept a logical inference that there are other minds.  I know from direct experience that there is oneness, so I can combine these two observations logically and say that there is one universal Mind too of which I see glimpses in the form of my mind and other minds. (Note that universal Mind is different thing, not to be confused with consciousness).

 

[Echoes]

@PureExp That's what confuses me about the solipsism vs. non-duality thing. Both are ultimately about the truth that everything we can know for sure is our own experience. "I am"/awareness Is <- nothing more is knowable. I can never be ultimately sure that there are other minds, it's not in my experience. All that I have of other living creatures are behavior-patterns and spoken language which I interpret and project certain things onto because it's filtered through "my" mind. Yet non-dualists seem to reject solipsism, even ridicule it (*) - This led me to assume that there is some experience or realization to have that eradicates all doubts about this issue. If I only take my own experience without any concepts, other mind's are also just fantasys. I hear people make the analogy of ocean and waves. That consciousness is the ocean and our mind's are the waves in that ocean. This would add a space-like dimension to consciousness, but it is not appropriate if there is really only HERE and NOW without any dimension.

(*) 

 

[Principium Nexus]

1 hour ago, Echoes said:

@PureExp Thank you for the explanation! What is the dimension then in which a variety of mind's can occur at the same time? Is consciousness like a giant field? There seems to be one universal mind, that split itself into a multiplicity of (seemingly?) limited minds. But there has to be some dimension in which there is a "space" for a multiplicity of individuated limitations.

The dimension would probably spherical or a bubble since this is the lowest entropy structure that can exist in any dimension. The one or the universe in it's ultimate form, if it would have boundaries, would be spherical aswell.

[PureExp]

@Echoes Great thinking there. I will try to explain some points. We are on a borderline knowledge here, on the edge of known and unknown, so be careful.

Btw, I'm not so harsh on Solipsism, its not madness. Its somewhat extreme form of Idealism. (Materialism is extreme madness, now thats harsh  )

1 hour ago, Echoes said:

Both are ultimately about the truth that everything we can know for sure is our own experience. "I am"/awareness Is <- nothing more is knowable.

That's right. Experience is the only way to know. However, IMO, we can't "know" awareness, we can just "be" awareness, because awareness is the "knower", only the contents of awareness are "known". Anyway its a minor technical point. In common language its ok to say I know awareness instead of I am awareness. Also note that knowledge can be limited, there can be unknowable stuff always, but experiences are open ended, there is no set limit on what can be experienced. If it can be experienced, it becomes known. This is a very important point to note. You can have any experience whatsoever. You won't find any logical hurdles or laws against this statement.

1 hour ago, Echoes said:

I can never be ultimately sure that there are other minds, it's not in my experience.

Yes, not yet. But I'm not so sure that it will always be like that. Never say never.  What if someday I get that experience? Nothing so far tells me that it is an impossibility. In fact infinite nature of awareness guarantees that there can be all possible experiences.

1 hour ago, Echoes said:

This led me to assume that there is some experience or realization to have that eradicates all doubts about this issue.

Exactly. It is possible that if you continue your practice and layers of ignorance get thinner and thinner, some experience will occur and will make it all real. I hear of experiences of universal Mind all the time. All you need is just one experience that shows you just one more mind, and you are done. (e.g. an undeniable telepathic exchange with someone, the most commonly reported direct experience of another mind).

1 hour ago, Echoes said:

This would add a space-like dimension to consciousness, but it is not appropriate if there is really only HERE and NOW without any dimension.

Right, its not to be taken literally, its only a metaphor.

[Echoes]

@PureExp But if I experience the mind of another being, wouldn't it become my mind in that moment?  Same with telepathic exchange. I don't think we can really be sure that we got mind-exchange with another mind or just informations who arose out of nothing but only seemed to be another mind. But nevertheless I am with you here, I don't think that my mind is the only one, even if it's the only one I can experience.  

[PureExp]

@Echoes That's true. Individuality is exactly that - inaccessibility of other minds. If separation is bridged you won't know who's thought you are thinking. I wonder if it is already happening for many. But that's another can of worms.

[Andres]

This is really a great subject!

I think it’s easy to get all mix up if we don’t define first our concepts. For me:

Mind is the tool that deal with our perceptions, thoughts, beliefs, concepts…

Consciousness is the whole content of the mind, and

Awareness is the quality that allows the existence of consciousness.

In my experience, I have my own consciousness, my own private universe; and so far, I have no access to anybody else’s (apparently, some individuals have developed the capacity to get into other people consciousness).

For what you and others report, it seems that we all share the same awareness, the quality that allow us to have our own private universes.

What is wonderful, is to get into the state of pure awareness (when the mind is in stillness). That’s the door to the divine dimension of enlightenment.

Just expressing my thoughts… Is there anybody else out there?

[PureExp]

And what is aware of this total emptiness and lack of any essence?

 

[WaveInTheOcean]

Just as there are many trees, there are many flowers, many oceans, many stars, many pigs, many lions, many birds, many tables, many cups, many galaxies, many persons, many bodies, many minds, many hands, many cellphones, many computers, many websites, many feelings, many beliefs, many cultures, many viewpoints, many ideas, many thoughts, many experiences.

However, all those "many's" are all deliberately created by You, popping into and out of existence within You, and perceived by You.

You = Me = Consciousness = the only true self that is = Absolute Infinity = Nothingness.

The error people tend to make is that they assume that a brain-mind is 'capable of experiencing experience' (experience = many's).
A brain-mind is not capable of that. A brain is concept, which we define as a physical lump of billions of nerve cells (= more concepts, you can go on).
A mind is an even more abstract concept, which can best be defined as a set of complex information/data/filters stored within a brain.

Currently, You -- whoever is reading this meaningless text -- are perceiving existence through a mind "with the help" of a brain.
You are not a brain. You are not a person. You are not a body. You are not a mind. You are not a thing.

The brain and the associated mind is merely a "tool" for You to experience reality/existence in one unique way of the infinite possible ways.

[Echoes]

Quote

However, all those "many's" are all deliberately created by You, popping into and out of existence within You, and perceived by You.

You = Me = Consciousness = the only true self that is = Absolute Infinity = Nothingnes

I really want to understand this. But It's creating the image in my mind that consciousness is like a siamese twin (only with infinite experiences simultaneously) or something. "We" are having different experiences right now, so there seem to exist many experiences in this one self. But where  and in what dimension can a multiplicity of experiences occur? Because if only HERE and NOW is existent without any dimensions, then that would rule out a diversity in experiences, wouldn't it? Are we like the two heads on the back of a siamese lizard? The two heads have different experiences but are still one on a certain lvl.

@WaveInTheOcean

Edited March 11, 2017 by Echoes

[WaveInTheOcean]

41 minutes ago, Echoes said:

I really want to understand this. But It's creating the image in my mind that consciousness is like a siamese twin (only with infinite experiences simultaneously) or something. "We" are having different experiences right now, so there seem to exist many experiences in this one self. But where  and in what dimension can a multiplicity of experiences occur? Because if only HERE and NOW is existent without any dimensions, then that would rule out a diversity in experiences, wouldn't it? Are we like the two heads on the back of a siamese lizard? The two heads have different experiences but are still one on a certain lvl.

@WaveInTheOcean

As I said, there exist many minds; obviously,..Currently, if we speak in normal conceptual language, then I'm one person(one mind), and you're another person.

Having a mind is an experience. Sure, a special type of experience, as other experiences are percieved through the mind. The mind is like a filter.

Most rationalists won't agree having a mind is an experience, though

There are infinite experiences. That which "has" the experience is Nothingness/You/Me/Infinity/Consciousness/Etc; it's all one, we're all one.

Yes, Consciousness is having many experiences right now. Infinite experiences probably;) And yes they are all different. So yes there exist infinite experiences within this true ultimate One Self.

"But where  and in what dimension can a multiplicity of experiences occur? "

I don't get your question. But of course existence is insanely mystical, so there are many questions we cannot answer:D
 

You could also view it differently and say we're all streams of the same essence (consciousness). But why are you that stream, and me this stream? (Why I am having this experience right now, and why are you having "that" experience right now? :D)

[Echoes]

 

Quote

"But where  and in what dimension can a multiplicity of experiences occur? "

I don't get your question.

I mean we normally say that space does not exist. But still something seems to seemingly seperate our two experiences. What is it that seperates our experiences if there is no dimension of any sort? 

Look at this image for example. This is how I imagine infinity/consciousness looking at all those experiences. But at the same time it is "zoomed in" in all of those as indivituated perspectives. But if we in our "zoomed in" state are the same consciousness as that which is prior to the zoom-in, shouldn't we be able to zoom out and then look at a multiplicity of all those infinite experiences? But then it would be one experience of several experiences again, as @PureExp previously said. Man, this can be confusing sometimes  

@WaveInTheOcean

 

[WaveInTheOcean]

12 minutes ago, Echoes said:

 

I mean we normally say that space does not exist. But still something seems to seemingly seperate our two experiences.

Don't overthink it too much. It's very, very simple.

That which seperate "our" two experiences IS the two experiences (two different minds).

Simple, but at the same time mysteriously unfathomable.

And by the way. Space exists just as much as objects exist. If there were no space, there wouldn't be any objects. It goes together.

Edited March 11, 2017 by WaveInTheOcean