No Self in several ways

There is no self in several ways….

First, in the sense that there may be a me + I here – a human self with identities and roles, and gestalts of a doer and observer – but is that what I am? Through investigation, I may find that all of it happens within content of experience, as any other content of experience. It comes and goes. It is not what I am, independent of whether there is identification with it or not. So there is a self here, as a me + I, in a conventional sense, but it is not what I really am.

(This is what is most true for me, but it is a stretch to talk about this as “no self” which is why I usually don’t.)

Also, if I explore the boundary between this me + I and the wider world, I find that it is imaginary. It comes from a mental field overlay. And that goes for what is on each side of that boundary as well. Those gestalts – of a me, a separate I, others, a wider world, boundaries – are all created through a mental field overlay.

Then, there is no self since it – the me + I and the wider world – all happens as the play of awakeness itself. It is all the play of Ground, of God.

And finally, there is no self here since it is all a mystery. I don’t know what any of it is. It is a mystery, as anything else.


Initial outline…

  • no self
    • the sense of separate I, imagined
      • identification with gestalts of me + I, or release of this identification
    • all of it – gestalts, identification – play of Ground, God
  • also, don’t know what it is, a mystery as anything else

First, in the sense that the boundary between what I take as me+I and the wider world is imagined. It exists only as a mental field overlay.

Then, that any

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.