Thread: Is there really something as selflessness?

The only thing that is wrong is to not admit that were not feeling good with ourselves,
Despite the fact that we should.

Maybe too much guilt is the first of the problems.

Guilt guilt guilt.
Guilt for everything.

Originally Posted by tsiouz

The first value is the self.
If you don't find yourself you don't find other people.
selfless is apathy.
apathy is death.
and not the transformative one.
the decayed one.

Selflessness is not the denying of the self, but the understand of the self. The understanding that the idea of a separate self is illusory.

Originally Posted by StonedApe

Selflessness is not the denying of the self, but the understand of the self. The understanding that the idea of a separate self is illusory.

There is a self and there is a connection of the self to the enviroment.
Now show me an ancient teaching or religion which talks about the "Illusion of the separate self" to show you the mistake of it's "Translation.

To study the Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things of the universe. To be enlightened by all things of the universe is to cast off the body and mind of the self as well as those of others. Even the traces of enlightenment are wiped out, and life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever.

-Dogen

yeah sure.
You didn't thought that the only thing that you have to forget is the way the self is working now in order to unite the pieces of the self.
The only being that is not aware of itself and sustains is an eggplant.

I don't think you understand. Forgetting the self does not mean forgetting how the self works, it means remembering(understanding) how the self works.(I don't know that it's really remembering, but thats how a lot of people who believe in reincarnation put it.)

It's about understanding the self. What is the self. Who am I?

Forgetting the self is not shutting down your awareness, it's tuning into your awareness and forgetting about your concept of yourself. I'm tough, I'm big, I'm happy, I'm greedy, I'm no good. It's forgetting this sort of thing and just experiencing things as they are. Seeing thoughts for thoughts and looking beyond your own assumptions of things to see the truth of them.


What do you mean by the mistakes of translation?

But in order to remember you self you have to abandon the way that the mind is currently works.
And in order to remember you just need to be more aware of the self.
Only if you're aware of your self you can remember yourself even if you lived all of your life alone in a cave it all comes to the self.
Tendency to be greedy is a result of a weak ego not a strong one.

All of the big religions are tampered or falsly understooded.
There is no ancient religion that says you have to deny your ego.
Infact quite the opposite.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting to yourself that you want to save someone from a fire because it'll make you feel better.

Originally Posted by tsiouz

But in order to remember you self you have to abandon the way that the mind is currently works.
And in order to remember you just need to be more aware of the self.
Only if you're aware of your self you can remember yourself even if you lived all of your life alone in a cave it all comes to the self.
Tendency to be greedy is a result of a weak ego not a strong one.

All of the big religions are tampered or falsly understooded.
There is no ancient religion that says you have to deny your ego.
Infact quite the opposite.

If you don't want to watch the whole video, here's the point she's trying to make in a nutshell.


Just knowing the difference between your true self and ego (identity), and to realize the internal eye can only watch, and it's only through you allowing it to take control that affects your perception. When you realize that you can't fight it, but accept it, but not let it take control of you, maybe you'll be able to define selflessness in your own experience.

She's strange. I mean... her energy is odd. And I mean that in the least metaphysical way possible. Don't you think? Oddly attractive to me.

You can minimize the window, and just listen to what she says. Sure she may emphasize more on spirituality, but I think you can filter that out to get what's she's really trying to say.

And she does have a way of attracting me as well, not just by looks, but how she plans what she says and doesn't mix it up with other ideals that makes it pointless in the first place.

She's more into the idea that everyone is an extension of Source energy, but I rather not talk about that here :x

It feels like Solipsism, just a little bit, but the concepts she talks about makes sense to me, but then again, I'm a nutjob.

because revenge is an emotion introvert harmfull and doesen't respond to inner morality.
Identification is the process of the reactive part of the brain not the ego.
Selflesness belongs to the eggplant.
The selfish motivation that makes you try to help in a fire comes from a part harmonized within the ego
And as the ego stays healthy the rest of the human dynamic can expand outward.

Originally Posted by Linkzelda

You can minimize the window, and just listen to what she says. Sure she may emphasize more on spirituality, but I think you can filter that out to get what's she's really trying to say.

And she does have a way of attracting me as well, not just by looks, but how she plans what she says and doesn't mix it up with other ideals that makes it pointless in the first place.

She's more into the idea that everyone is an extension of Source energy, but I rather not talk about that here :x

It feels like Solipsism, just a little bit, but the concepts she talks about makes sense to me, but then again, I'm a nutjob.

lol, I've no idea what she's going on about, but I like her bizarre presence. Watched a few others too. Can't put my finger on it...

Originally Posted by tsiouz

because revenge is an emotion introvert harmfull and doesen't respond to inner morality.
Identification is the process of the reactive part of the brain not the ego.
Selflesness belongs to the eggplant.
The selfish motivation that makes you try to help in a fire comes from a part harmonized within the ego
And as the ego stays healthy the rest of the human dynamic can expand outward.

Ego, Superego, and Id are metaphysical mediums to essentially define the brain. To say that identification is a part of the brain, and refraining the ego from it doesn't make sense at all. If you're trying to boil it down to practical and reasonable terms, it might make sense, but again, our brain can only define and associate so much based on this life, or this reality that we're so accustomed to synching into. Through the ego, the brain contains the schemata that fuels the ego.

And if you declare this relationship of sustaining the healthiness of the ego, it's basically falling for the ego. Instead of connecting to your true self, you're trying to satisfy the ego. Yes, the ego can be harmonized when we realize that it's not an enemy, just a neutral aspect that we have to think for ourselves to define, but to solely put identification as a part of the brain and not the ego......

Then take for example Dissociative Identity Disorder (or Multiple Personalities Disorder)....if it's the brain's own means of a coping mechanism, shouldn't the ego that is essentially being split into pieces for the sake of sanity (from traumatic events) be a part of identification as well?

If you want to talk about self expansion, if you make it a devotion to make sure the ego is stays healthy, you cannot expand. If you realize that it's just there because it's a facade to be worn for temporary objective mentalities, then you can focus on subjectivity and truly expand. Expanding based on objective matters will lead objective outcomes, because what you believe and what your filter out, you are limiting yourself from other thoughts that have been manifested already or have the potential to be expressed.

What I mean is, if you want to explore the inner depths of your shadows for example, you have to take into consideration that your shadows are merely an aspect of yourself that you are not willing to explore. So if you want to find selflessness, if you try to satisfy the ego, your ego will most likely prevent you from see what it would deem as "evil, dark, sinister" when it's just something that has to exist in order to define what to put out into the light, what we put as right and reasonable towards our schemata.

Originally Posted by tsiouz

But in order to remember you self you have to abandon the way that the mind is currently works.
And in order to remember you just need to be more aware of the self.
Only if you're aware of your self you can remember yourself even if you lived all of your life alone in a cave it all comes to the self.
Tendency to be greedy is a result of a weak ego not a strong one.

All of the big religions are tampered or falsly understooded.
There is no ancient religion that says you have to deny your ego.
Infact quite the opposite.

Yes, but denying oneself is not selflessness. Denying oneself is to assume the identity of one who denies oneself. Still trying to attain.

In other words, selflessness is not selflessness, it's just a word we use to point at a state of mind.

Let me make it easier.
The part of the mind based on reactions is responsible for identification.
This was ok till speech came so the process of identification crossed it's own limits.
Ego is the state of concious.
And the state of concious defines awareness.
The shadow or the chartography of a person doesen't come in contact with the ego.
The whole effort of awareness is to bring to the surface the "shadow" so the ego the self call it as you want can come in contact with his own chartography.
Dissociative Identity Disorder occurs when the ego get's shattered into pieces.
It is not the concious side of a person which drawn him to ruin is the non concious one.
So as more clear and strong the ego is as more able is to bring into surface part of the "shadow".
So the problem is not the ego is what cannot be realized through it.

Originally Posted by tsiouz

Let me make it easier.
The part of the mind based on reactions is responsible for identification.
This was ok till speech came so the process of identification crossed it's own limits.

This feels like nature vs. nurture, but I won't say anything on that.

Ego is the state of concious.

Ego- The part of the mind that mediates between the conscious and the unconscious and is responsible for reality testing and a sense of personal identity

The shadow or the chartography of a person doesen't come in contact with the ego.
The whole effort of awareness is to bring to the surface the "shadow" so the ego the self call it as you want can come in contact with his own chartography.

Alright then, so by following what you've said, utilizing the ego as a means of defining a person's own chartography is basically similar to what Teal Scott said in the video I showed before. The ego wants to quantify your existence and its own. It tries to rationalize based on what it is confined to, this reality.

But to in order to see selflessness (in my opinion), you have to see outside of the ego if you want to see the chartography (I think you mean cartography) of a person.

Because if you let the ego, the identity that you've conformed to for the time being as a mortal (sorry if I'm going eternal in here) continue to instil rationalization that is limited to this reality alone, how can one fine the "map" or "blueprint" of who they really are? Wouldn't it be practical to step outside of that?

To know yourself is to see it from a different perspective yes? Because if you try to learn about yourself through the ego alone, and only through the ego, how can you really have an above average focus on self-awareness?

Which is why by finding your true self, finding who you are as a whole that does not need to conform to only the ego, but acknowledges its presence, you can see who you are, an aspect of yourself through the ego.

It's (ego) just a piece, not the whole set for defining the cartography of a person.

Dissociative Identity Disorder occurs when the ego get's shattered into pieces.
It is not the concious side of a person which drawn him to ruin is the non concious one.

So by saying that it's shattered, yes, in a way it is because those who have it (though it's still a speculative condition) can have blank moments in memory, but that's only in extreme cases to where the person isn't really themselves. By that, they take a completely new identity that is not in synch to their cartography.

But if you eliminate the worst case scenario, the disorder is not really shattered, it's just being split off to process things into smaller bits.

Think of it as having multiple small super computers instead of one big super computer.

So as more clear and strong the ego is as more able is to bring into surface part of the "shadow".

So by declaring this, this does prove that because you are allowing the ego to bring it to surface, it is through your invitation for the ego to do so that makes it apparent. But you do not need the ego only in order to bring out a side of yourself.

So the problem is not the ego is what cannot be realized through it.

What do you mean by this? If the ego is responsible for rationalization, for quantifying means through the events/people/etc you experience, don't you think that it will likely filter out certain perceptions to make sure other aspects of yourself (id, superego) can coexist?

There is not much to be "realized" through the ego, because it is the medium between conscious and unconscious.

So based on the obvious "reaction" on what the ego is defined as, it's going to keep rationalizing based on the events/experiences invariably changing. To not realize that it must fulfill this role of rationalization for stabilization and sustainability of the brain and the schemata of self (but not true self, because that is the aspect that is beyond the realm you are living in) is the problem.

For example, if you're going through depression, and invite negative thoughts to manifest, through the ego, it can create more negative thoughts based on what feels reasonable to you to feel through the time of depression.

So if you want to find selflessness, shouldn't you focus on self-love as well?

And by self-love, I do not mean narcissism. Narcissism is an extreme value of egotism (though people still associate self-love with it).

Self-love, is the act of being prideful of yourself, but not the trend that leads to narcissism. Knowing your strengths and preventing yourself from euphemistically denying your weaknesses.

By focusing on your dominant traits, and using that as a basis to gradually acknowledge your weaknesses, then acknowledging your awakened sense of reality of yourself in this realm, and realizing that you have all that you need (love for instance through yourself), you will at last have your peace.

You won't have to feel tempted to do a good deed because you feel that it is "universally" right to do, or have to constantly define your purpose in life, to define the purpose of having consciousness to seek more awareness of levels of consciousness, because it's already in your disposal, all you have to do is synch in with the frequency, the energy of the universe.

Is English not your first language? I've never heard ego described as a state or as the conscious mind or consciousness at all. An aspect of consciousness maybe. It's

In the US, ego generally refers to the part of the mind responsible for a sense of identity or belonging. The reptile brain basically. It's responsible for things like territorial behaviour and manages the way we see ourselves in relation to others and others in relation to us. This extends into physical objects as well. The ego is responsible for ideas of property. These are not things we consciously decide on(at least most of the time). The ego does what it does mostly automatically based on previous experiences. There's not much reflection going on and when there is I think it's a different part of the brain.

I think that this definition splits Freud's definition of the ego into the ego and the mind, giving the conscious aspects to the mind and the unconscious aspects to the ego. But that is a very crude way of putting it, I'm by no means an expert on psychology.

No im greek and the greek word εγωισμος refers to the concious
And the ego is the part that defines the self not identifies him.
Reptile part is the reactive part of the ego the other is based on analysis.
Ego is composed by concious actions based on analysis and reactive ones like anger,with anger been a reaction based on state of reduced conciousness,so maybe you should learn another language to understand where your own language came from.
The word ego which means εγω which means ME is identifying self without a label (labels are created from the reactive part of the brain)in the language which created yours and the word you took
without change it.So maybe in the US you don't use your own language properly.
The part of the ego that reacts is based on automatical movements not the analytical one.
The word εγω which means ego is a word used in daily basis in greece.It means ME and is identification without identification.
It is the state of me just as an existence.

The reason that ego mailfunctions is because these two parts (reactive and progressive) cannot cooperate by a false state of mind.
The problem occurs because the ego doesen't identify itself just put's a label on it.

I do not have to say again that the origin of the word ego means me and the word self which means εαυτος describes just THE MIRROR OF ME so the mirror of the ego (ME) a word used like you describing someone else not yourself.
So the word self which was again created by greek language(but it doesen't matter which one) descibes the part of the self which recognizes ME.
So i use (i is just example) my self to bring more awareness to my ego.
And as the ego (WHICH MEANS ME) amplifies it's awareness,it's relationship with it self and it's surroundings get's in a new basis.

For linkzelda.
The lowest part of the layers of the non concious is the collective.
Shadow of a person comes straight from the collective as the collective is a "swamp" with a diamond on it's core.
In every moment of a person's existence arise from the collective to the subconcious till the ego the movements of the collective.
The reason that you don't experience this is because is coming coded.That is because if archetypical movements come to a not aware ego not coded you just gonna burn alive.
Now an artist which follows a fine art (as aesthetic is a very high state of mind) is the person which his mind as been ready dissolves movements of the collective as the mind is ready for it.So art is inner knowledge.The reason that normally artists get crazy it is because the straight contact
of images coming from the collective kinda burn them as their mind is not fully ready yet.
So the irony is that what keeps humanity strained is the collective as it is.
And as around the diamond of it's core exists a ton of mud collective resists any evolution.
This is why people who escaped the swamp of the collective,people like gandhi or christ got murdered,
Because as they didn't got controlled by the collective itself they became an enemy of it.
It wasn't a fanatic who killed these men it was the collective.

So instead of putting your self (so the ego) in a lower position every time,as most people do that mistake
Maybe you should bring reality as it is buried inside yourself to the surface.

Remember.
I use my self to realize ME as i can put me into another basis.
And as the ego (WHICH MEANS ME), the mind which represents ego make more realizations,the sexual expands to the person next to you,the instinct part which creates your family organizations ect, as you tending to the similar expands And the sentiment expands to everything around you.
And selflessness is the state which the ego doesen't need a mirror anymore as the person found and remembered himself if we suppose that the mirror is not nessesairy which i believe always is except to forms of existence like christ which was unnessesairy, or is the case of the man which he doesen't even get to the process to see into his ego.
Try to understand that ego means me and self is the mirror of me.
And the process to move aside your ego happens in order to observe the ego through the self.
In order again to find the pieces of the ego.
And till the moment of evolution which ego doesen't need the self selflesness belongs to the eggplant.

So every form of true EMPATHY comes to the ego through the self in order to expand outwards.
And thus as a fireman gets into a fire he tries to save him self and people around him.



Think about it.

Alright, I think what you've said is somewhat based on Shadow work (Jungian), but I understand what you mean, but I never had the time to actually look up on it for a while, I just know that it's essentially what would be deemed as "dark" or like the example you said with prominent figures who defied the collective the swamp of collective that people usually do not want to experience or synch into with those shadows.

Now an artist which follows a fine art (as aesthetic is a very high state of mind) is the person which his mind as been ready dissolves movements of the collective as the mind is ready for it.So art is inner knowledge.The reason that normally artists get crazy it is because the straight contact
of images coming from the collective kinda burn them as their mind is not fully ready yet.

You know, this is really interesting, I would like to know where you got this information from, but when I'm usually drawing, I usually do get a bit crazy sometimes if I keep my eyes on it for too long. Maybe this is a wrong personal experience I'm using, but I guess by what you said, that my eyes start playing tricks on me and show me other images based on the collective thoughts from my unconscious?



And as for the ego, I apologize if it seemed like I implied it was this separate entity, I do believe that it is ME as well, just a part of ME. I took the role of it being separate because I wanted to describe how its behavior can be detrimental for a person who doesn't realize that it is merely just a watcher, an internal eye.

And the same reason why I used that comparison to make it seem the ego is somebody else is because I'm open to the possibility that it is my true self (eternal self), and for the sake of expansion and higher knowledge, the ego would essentially be an aspect of the true self, but it's just the perception of making the ego seem slightly different for me is what adds on to the efficacy of expansion for one's own enlightenment. (To see yourself in a different light or even a different shadow to understand perspective)

In the end, I'm open (but not a complete visionary) to the possibility that all elements that one is experiencing in life is somewhat a part of themselves...so it is essentially you, but with the perception of it being broken off for the sake of understanding what it feels to look a certain way, have a certain lifestyle, etc. (this is excluding the concept of karma, but I'll keep my disbelief on it to myself).

But about the swamp of collective, those same people who you presumed died because they were an enemy of it, you have to think about how their deaths alone caused a monumental shift in several factors such as ethics, morale, civil manner. Those same people who were "slaves" to this swamp collective finally found the spark they needed to realize that thinking for themselves and finding the answers by themselves for themselves is better than having magistrates do the thinking for you.

Those same deaths may be perceived as those figures trying to escape the "system," but to me, it's also a darkness (or a shadow) that those who were in the collective swamp did not decide to shed light on. Like the apocalyptic mentality of 2012, if so many people (even though most are skeptical of course) of the supposed "end of the world" focus, if this same swamp of collective acknowledges those thoughts, it may lead to one's own preconception of an apocalypse for themselves. (And I don't mean the obvious outcome of fire and meteors falling down from space to punish us )

ok.
That thing that happens when you paint happens to the people who serve a fine art by the hands mostly.
Happens to musicians more often as they constantly practice.This is why if you disturb a musician when he plays a piece he needs to calm down and start after some minutes.
Since you bother you understand what i mean.
That doesen't mean you constantly take information from the lower layers of conciousness is just that a glimpse passed in a moment you didn't notice maybe before you even started painting
So ego processes that information in a very slow rate.
And as art is inner knowledge some times you get the feeling that you are "tuned" to what you're doing.

The mistake of freud as he literally stole his ideas from ancient greek scripts,is that he focused on the reactive part of the brain the reptilian mostly.
Ego is the value.
Self is the tool created by the ego in order to bring more awareness to it.
Think of it as the mirror.
If you never watched a mirror you wouldn't know how you look.
Now the process of feel your face would take a lot a lot of time to give you an objective idea for your looks something that the mirror accelerates as a process.(this is just an example).
Higher self is the mirror created by the ego in order to bring light to the part of the ego responsible for evolution.
And that is all.
True is the ego.
There is complete ego not self.
Is me and you.
Self is just a tool which ego needs to identify itself without a label as it is weak to see objectively the self.
So the subject is created in order to define to the depths of the ego it's true id.
To identify it as an existence.
In the future of our evolution ego is going to stay it is the self that is going to go.(supposively if you reach that point of existence which i presume is far away for us).
So when a person faces through the self it's own shadow like christ in the desert or amitabha below the bodhi tree self is gone as the self doesen't need to mirror the ego anymore.
So what you have after that is an egoist without the dam of his shadow blocking him.

Now most of people confuse ego (me) with the self by believing that they just gonna dissolve to the whole.
Trust me there is nothing more stupid from indians who didn't understand their own religion and sinked to their own apathy.
There is no god that created you as an existence in order to destroy you..

The reason that people who faced their shadows collective attacked them is simple.
A swamp never moves.Some minor movements.Maybe a little stone in the lake through time.
So the person which is not a part of that swamp when is in it creates a violent reaction.
Think of it like you're going to swim in a small dirty lake which always stays still.
The moment you gonna get in you are going to see violent movements on the water.
And this is the reason.The cynisism and the will of these people created a violent reaction to that swamp and as it resist it had to choke them.
As for ideas as indigo children and 2012 as the collective just reacts,so the reptilian part doesen't get balanced from the progressive,
Only reactions of worry come as reactions are motivated more easy by fear and worry.
Twenty years ago people were afraid 2000 fourty years the 1991 ect.
And if an indigo children (if something like that exists) what should personas like leonardo da vinci should be?

Remember.
Ego is the value.
Self is the tool.

I think ego was used in the way you use it, or at least in a more similar way, back when Freuds models were still mainly used. I like Timothy Leary's eight circuit consciousness model more.

The word ego is thrown around a lot and has different meaning depending on the context(informal/scientific/spiritual/etc).

But I very much agree with you that suppressing the ego is definitely not the way to get any kind of clarity.

selflessness occurs in moments with no thinking. But in a hypothetical you could have a fear of happiness (such as myself) and if you stop eating you wouldnt be taking any food or water from the earth and if you felt your existance was frustrating to other people you could starve yourself to death and feel sad because even though you believe your doing the right thing you still feel sad because happiness doesnt feel real. Therefore you create the last moments of your life to be completely selfless. What im trying to say is selflessness is achieved by the persons individual perception and it will differ from person to person. ie: the person dying feels selfless and like hes dying to help other people live happy lives even though the mother may be tragically impacted by his death.