In a comment relating to my last blog Gary wrote:
Allen As parts of a whole we as individual parts have self-awareness….at what point does that self-awareness create the illusion of separation? When does individuality separate mind from body and self from the universe?
Gary · March 25, 2020 at 3:34 pm
A cosmological answer to this question might be: “When Ichi Rei manifests as Ni Ki,” or “When Tao manifests as Yin/Yang.
From the typical human point of view, “self” – awareness implies a duality, self in juxtaposition to another. Let’s explore this a little further: If we conceive of the “self” as one’s physical being one can ask the question: “Which physical being? The newly conceived being? The newly born being? The five-year-old being? The 20-year-old being? The 70-year-old being? The 95-year-old being? Our corpse? Obviously, these beings are not the same. They are not comprised of the same atoms, cells, organs, etc. Normally we recognize these beings as “our self.” Yet, among these beings, there are ones that no longer exist, and ones that have not yet come to be. Which one is the physical being that is the self? Our bodies are constantly being created and dying. How can one reasonably assert a static “self” in a dynamically constant process of birth and death?
In response, some have asserted that one’s “self” is one’s mind. If we conceive of one’s “self” as one’s mind, one can again ask the question: “Which mind?” The newly conceived neuron? The newly born mind? The five-year-old mind? The 20-year-old mind? The 70-year-old mind? The 95year-old mind? The corpse’s mind? Obviously, these minds are not the same. They are not comprised of the same neurons, thoughts, knowledge, and/or memories, etc. Which one of these minds is the mind that is the self? Our minds and mental processes are constantly developing, changing, and disappearing. How can one reasonably assert a static “self” in a dynamically constant process of development, change, and disappearance?
But wait . . . there’s more! All that constitutes one’s mind and body at any point is constantly being made of something. That something would be matter and energy. So, even if one identifies one’s self as mind and body, that very mind and body must be constituted of a dynamic interplay between matter and energy. It comes from matter and energy, returns to matter and energy, and is matter and energy. What is all of the matter and energy and the space it occupies? It is referred to as the Universe.
One can refer to one’s body and mind as if it were a discrete unchanging entity OR one can refer to one’s body and mind, recognizing that it is a dynamically constantly changing entity that derives from, interpenetrates with, and returns to all that is, ever was, or ever will be . . . the Universe. The former conception of “self” is the common and pervasive view of “reality.” The latter conception of “self” is rather rare. Because this conception of “self” conflicts with the common and pervasive view of “reality,” it is usually viewed with doubt, suspicion, and/or fear.
In other words, Gary, the formation of the idea of separateness is the beginning of ignorance. One must ignore that which is self-evident and continuously assert that which is not. Delusion is the continuous maintenance of ignorance as a means to assert as evident that which is not self-evident. Delusion, in turn, gives rise to clinging and aversion, (also called greed and hatred). A result of asserting a “self” that is separate from “other” seems to be both a yearning for that which one sees as desirable outside one’s self and an aversion to that which one sees as undesirable outside one’s self. While the self wants to keep what it wants and also wants what it doesn’t have. It also desires to be rid of which it doesn’t desire and also has an aversion for that which it doesn’t desire.
Just as delusion produces greed (yearning) and hatred (aversion), greed and hatred produce fear. Fear is usually manifested as fear of losing that which one desires and believe they possess, fear of never gaining that which one desires to possess, fear of gaining that which one has aversion, and fear of never losing that for which one has aversion.
This absence of fear is what was recognized by the Samurai class as being tactically advantageous (with some, to a lot, of superstition thrown in). Experiencing no fear, while not losing prudent judgment, is an advantage in war and the activities of war. One might think that due to this advantage one might better one’s chances of survival. While this could be true, it was not the primary attraction for the samurai. Here, if we recall that samurai means “to serve.” We begin to see the primary attraction for them. Any tactical advantage personally gained from a lack of fear is an advantage that can be offered in the service one’s master.
Once again the notions of peace, love, and harmony understood in one culture, does not directly translate to that of other cultures. There can be similarities, but there can also be marked differences in assumptions. Love is the motivation to do that which one’s master wills, like a child unquestioningly following the will of the parent, and the master desiring what is best for their children like a caring parent. Harmony is everyone and everything serving their proper purpose in their proper place and time without question or complaint. Love and harmony working in unison are called Peace.
Who is “the master” and who is “the servant?” Who decides the proper purpose, place, and time for everyone and everything? How those questions are answered go a long way to understanding how one envisions the Peace of Love and Harmony working together.
I was further asked by another individual:
“One thing I would like to ask though: If we can only control our own sphere of influence (body to skin), yet there is no separation between me and the universe – how do these two arguments go together. If I am unified with the universe, isn’t another body than part of the me-universe, too? Where does my influence end then?”
Great question!
As humans, and from a limited point of view, our physical ability to influence ends at our skin. Of course, this is a very gross generalization and definitely not strictly true. For example, we generate heat that extends beyond our skin. We have an electrical field that extends beyond our skin. The air we breathe interchanges with us and influenced by us can extend beyond our skin. I could go on, but you get the idea. Furthermore, how we appear and how we smell, and sound can influence our surroundings, especially in the case where there are sentient beings in our surroundings. These, whether or not we are conscious of them, are forms of communication. Or, two becoming one.
As an analogy, a fish isn’t usually defined as a pond, but a fish can be born from, live, and die within the pond. While alive, the fish’s “be-ing” (all of its life processes, etc.) has an influence upon the pond and the pond, in turn, has an influence upon the fish. One obvious example is that when the fish moves, we don’t see it as part of the water that surrounds it, but it definitely influences the water around it (think of waves). The fish may be partially aware of the chain of causation it has begun with its movement, but it certainly isn’t aware of the entire chain of cause and effect.
Animate or inanimate, sentient or non-sentient, all things are interconnected similarly in our world, and this interconnection reaches far beyond our conscious awareness.
The true realization of this is, I am told, is freeing. One loses one’s fear and the self-imposed fetters that one’s fear produces. One can act without being driven by greed or hatred. Those that have embodied this realization are usually seen as “selfless” by us. Probably we can recognize such an individual by noting the difference in their motivations (what we might call altruistic but in a strange way is also as selfish as it is selfless) and the means which they are willing to use (usually considering means that other’s would shun out of fear.)
Of course, a philosophy to a pragmatist is as a “plan” to Mike Tyson’s face punch. When push comes to shove one better have more than just a philosophy or plan in one’s corner!
True Aiki is free for all to read, but it is not free. As little as $1 can help to cover expenses and possibly add features to True Aiki.
Thank You!
Please consider becoming a patron of Allen Dean Beebe's True Aiki. Your ongoing support will best assure the continuance and growth of True Aiki.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR GENEROUS SUPPORT!
0 Comments