What is the 'Self'?

[Mira72]

So, I asked.

What is the 'Self', dear yi?

She says: 15.4

Line 4
'Nothing that does not bear fruit,
Displaying integrity.'

It is possible it is an aside to my ongoing 'tantrum'...but I thought may be have some fun?

The 'Self' (I must add, it comes from reading a little too much on the deKorne site)...is that 'thing' out of which all arises...it feels the yi is choosing the negative description vein of which the advaitins talk of 'It'. And it is 'That' which displays 'integrity', (why not?) in the midst of all that which is 'small'...The Self is that which is modest, but not petty, and it certainly does not 'exceed' its bounds, which is have it maintains its, er, 'Itness'?

Who will go next?

 

[Mira72]

So, I asked.

What is the 'Self', dear yi?

She says: 15.4

Line 4
'Nothing that does not bear fruit,
Displaying integrity.'

And in an offglance, it again shows a further depth...

The Self is that Nothing/Non being that remains unaltered by cause and effect (does not bear fruit)...out of which the being in integrity 'displays' its essential, apparent, illusory phenomenal existence.

Truly profound...it alludes to all the tropes, ('play of maya', 'fruit of karma', 'Nothingness') yet remains True.

Humbling.

All hail yi! And I was only being 'casual' without my overly earnest 'beingness'...And yet, such meticulous Mercy.

 

[moss elk]

I must add, it comes from reading a little too much on the deKorne site

I keep telling people to NOT read the editors commentary on that site.
Unless you enjoy entering the mind of one person's reality/belief collage that has nothing to do with Yi and very often doesn't comprehend the meaning of the text.
There is such a thing as too much psychedelics, after all.

 

[Mira72]

I keep telling people to NOT read the editors commentary on that site.
Unless you enjoy entering the mind of one person's reality/belief collage that has nothing to do with Yi and very often doesn't comprehend the meaning of the text.
There is such a thing as too much psychedelics, after all.

I think I know what you mean by this...Initially, when I was just getting into Yi I used that site a *lot*...i liked that multiple translations where present...but there is such a thing as 'too much'...

I see it as a more of an academic or scholarly resource...not helpful in the least bit, when you are overly involved in 'using' the yi for a problem.

it is a very good resource for a measured, learning process. But not necessarily, helpful in a pinch so to speak.

 

[Candid_X]

How fun. A philosophical question. It can depend on whether you mean atman or brahman, or self or Self. Since Yi is based on dualism or binary, I think 15.4 as implying legitimate individual or unique self, even though the self of which you asked was with a capital S. Changing to 62 would suggest staying low while crossing the high road.

 

[radiofreewill]

The True Self is non-dualistic, two complementary sides of the same Reality coin, the same as the Dao; while the false separate self is dualistic, two sides opposed in delusion, and known as ego.

"What is the 'Self'?"
15.4 to 62 ~ Form (Mountain) is the substance (Earth) of Emptiness; and Emptiness is the activity (Thunder) of Form (Mountain) ~ all things are moved from within by the Way.

Here’s some good background info on the differences between the Western/Judeo/Christian worldview and the Eastern worldview:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4ASBCguPYwDNU14NzJfX0pOTlE

In the 5th Wing (The Great Treatise, Dazhuan I, section V) of the i-Ching it says:

Line 1 ~ "Now Yin, now Yang, is called Dao"
~ and ~
Line 9 ~ "All that yin and yang do not define is called spirit."

In Chinese alchemical terms:

Line 1 refers to True Yin (Earth) and True Yang (Heaven) as the True Self, or Dao.
~ while ~
Line 9 refers to false yin (Water) and false yang (Fire) as ego, or 'not spirit.'

True Yin is Absence/Stillness/Formless (receiving ~ the “mysterious female” of the Dao De Jing)
~ and ~
True Yang is Presence/Movement/Form (creating ~ the “effortless action” of the male ~ “wu-wei”)

Chapter 40 of the Dao De Jing says:

“Return is the movement of Way,
and yielding the method of Way.

All beneath heaven, the ten thousand things: it’s all born of Presence,
and Presence is born of Absence.”

The small self, ego, arises as a veil of cognitively generated storybound separateness ~ thru grasping and dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ which is an error of “beguilement into vanity” that trades the True for the imagined, Paradise for desire, and Eternal Life for death.

false yin is materiality ~ clinging ~ dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ storytelling
~ and ~
false yang is self-interest ~ craving ~ grasping on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ pervasively unsatisfying

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4ASBCguPYwDVmRKcUQ0ODNTdjQ

So, a spiritual practice seeks to recover the True Self from behind the veil of the small self, ego, by ceasing grasping and dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts, and choosing “Presence rooted in Absence” ~ aka Emptiness ~ instead.

I hope this helps!

 

[Mira72]

The True Self is non-dualistic, two complementary sides of the same Reality coin, the same as the Dao; while the false separate self is dualistic, two sides opposed in delusion, and known as ego.

"What is the 'Self'?"
15.4 to 62 ~ Form (Mountain) is the substance (Earth) of Emptiness; and Emptiness is the activity (Thunder) of Form (Mountain) ~ all things are moved from within by the Way.

Here’s some good background info on the differences between the Western/Judeo/Christian worldview and the Eastern worldview:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4ASBCguPYwDNU14NzJfX0pOTlE

In the 5th Wing (The Great Treatise, Dazhuan I, section V) of the i-Ching it says:

Line 1 ~ "Now Yin, now Yang, is called Dao"
~ and ~
Line 9 ~ "All that yin and yang do not define is called spirit."

In Chinese alchemical terms:

Line 1 refers to True Yin (Earth) and True Yang (Heaven) as the True Self, or Dao.
~ while ~
Line 9 refers to false yin (Water) and false yang (Fire) as ego, or 'not spirit.'

True Yin is Absence/Stillness/Formless (receiving ~ the “mysterious female” of the Dao De Jing)
~ and ~
True Yang is Presence/Movement/Form (creating ~ the “effortless action” of the male ~ “wu-wei”)

Chapter 40 of the Dao De Jing says:

“Return is the movement of Way,
and yielding the method of Way.

All beneath heaven, the ten thousand things: it’s all born of Presence,
and Presence is born of Absence.”

The small self, ego, arises as a veil of cognitively generated storybound separateness ~ thru grasping and dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ which is an error of “beguilement into vanity” that trades the True for the imagined, Paradise for desire, and Eternal Life for death.

false yin is materiality ~ clinging ~ dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ storytelling
~ and ~
false yang is self-interest ~ craving ~ grasping on objects in the stream of thoughts ~ pervasively unsatisfying

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4ASBCguPYwDVmRKcUQ0ODNTdjQ

So, a spiritual practice seeks to recover the True Self from behind the veil of the small self, ego, by ceasing grasping and dwelling on objects in the stream of thoughts, and choosing “Presence rooted in Absence” ~ aka Emptiness ~ instead.

I hope this helps!

Absolutely! Thanks so very much.

Personally the concept of true and false yin/yangs were so very revealing...

And what you say of the Self being two sides of the same coin...which is how I have related with a certain someone, for all of life seemed to have telescoped into this one particular relationship, and being baffled by the 'dualistic' thread that kept popping up in the flow of life...like air bubbles in blood this has been very dangerous.

Knowing is enough. Knowledge is too much.

But context is everything.

Everything you have written radio freewill is so very affirming to that *spirit*...I have been waylaid by too many false prophets along the way...there is a reason why the pursuit of the 'ultimate goal' was relegated to the elder years...caught in the middle years, the 'shine' is still too alluring to too many others who assail you and seek to topple you.

And thanks candid for participating...the atman and brahman are essentially the Same...I would not think of this seeming dichotomy in the same way as Self/self...i think in the western cannon, the self is often the agglomeration of conceptualities that are propped up by a sense of separateness. Whereas the Atman is merely the embodied Brahman with *no* difference whatsoever in essence.

 

[Mira72]

"What is the 'Self'?"
15.4 to 62 ~ Form (Mountain) is the substance (Earth) of Emptiness; and Emptiness is the activity (Thunder) of Form (Mountain) ~ all things are moved from within by the Way.

...

When asking such a question, one expects either a 'big' answer (like tai or inner truth) or a slapdash answer for one was too big in the asking...

but i find it remarkable that the answer given is such a particular one, yet the entire fullness of profundity is accessible, just there.

 

[Mira72]

"What is the 'Self'?"
15.4 to 62 ~ Form (Mountain) is the substance (Earth) of Emptiness; and Emptiness is the activity (Thunder) of Form (Mountain) ~ all things are moved from within by the Way.

...

When asking such a question, one expects either a 'big' answer (like tai or inner truth) or a slapdash answer for one was too big in the asking...

but i find it remarkable that the answer given is such a particular one, yet the entire fullness of profundity is accessible, just there.

If one were to just delve deep enough and let the extra weight of conceptualisations drop off at just the right moment...

 

[radiofreewill]

Thank you, Mira72, I'm glad that we're resonating here!

Those are very nice meditations...you're all over it.

I think you would like the "Hsin-Hsin Ming" ~ Verses on the Perfect Mind ~ by the Third Patriarch of Chan:

http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Hsin-Hsin-Ming.pdf

I hope you enjoy.

Many Blessings!

 

[Candid_X]

These are ideas, with which an individual or group may or may not identify (their self) with. The concept of Atman, being the soul, and Brahman, being the whole, arose after the Vedic traditions, in the Upanishads. Neither is to be confused with the ego. But even the ego has different meanings depending on the context. Just as Freud's Unconscious has a different meaning from Jung's Unconscious. I like the idea of the Atman arising from the Brahman, or identity arising from the unidentifiable. But that too is only an idea.

I think the Yi's answer refers to ones individual identity, or the soul. Bradford's 15 reads (shortened): 'Authenticity - The Noble one diminishes the excessive and adds the deficient - Appraising things with fair allocation.' The Noble refers to the individual. What need would the whole have to discern authenticity, or discern anything? In short, be real. Grand ideas need to fit into our individual lives (or self), or else of what use would the IC be?

 

[Mira72]

Thank you radio freewill.

That was a beautiful rendering of what I am (IS) beneath this suffering superficiality.

To be so 'caught' when one has inherently *been* is a catastrophe...for now, how to be rid again of what remains as but a memory?

I beseeched the yi from the bottom of this bottomless well...one thing, just one thing...give me to....what...out of this entrapment?

I get 20.

Sigh. SEE...see...sea...si.

 

[radiofreewill]

I heartily concur with the yi ~ imho, the best one-word summary of the liberating dharma of the present moment is "Observe".

All Best!