What if you didn't have a name?
 

Try to imagine yourself without a name. Who would you be?

Remove egoistic associations from past experience, accumulated pieces of transient personality, your contrived sense of 'self'.

I have learnt that the self likes to strengthen itself through conflict. By argument, debate, identity; by pursuit of greater experience/knowledge/attractiveness, even sadness, all to strengthen your idea of who you are, or who you want to be.

This happens collectively too. We don't like peace, because we lose our collective identity. This is particularly relevant to recent events in Russia/Iraq - in fact all of human history - but I thought I would bring it up here to see what happens when we address the question individually.

What if you didn't have a name?

"Asshole" would suffice, everyone turns around to that...

Are we talking names like personal identifiers (your birth name, nicknames people give you, chat/forum handles...) or titles/affiliations (Democrat, Boss, American...)? How about names that are simply descriptive of something about the person (Sitting Bull, Eric the Red...)? Or any/all?

If you didn't you'd quickly gain one, many societies assign names at coming on age, when you have an identity to attach one too.

By your name I mean a symbol - encompassing everything you think you are.

Say my name is Elkie Smith. What does that mean?

'I am Elkie Smith. I work for an advertising agency and write for a hobby. My friends see me as funny, caring, precocious. My parents think I'm good at everything. I have moments of self-doubt punctuated by embarrassing arrogance. I shock people by interchanging intelligence with incredible dappiness. I have a strong sexual appetite and a passion for knowledge. My parents are divorced and I have experienced violence and sadness in my life. My first love now loves someone else. I am female, young, professional, immature, angry, happy and very, very curious.'

All these things are just fragments of a personality I have created for myself, through my past. Who would I be if all these symbols, experiences, associations were taken away from my interpretation of me? I am not a product of my past. If I removed everything subjective and irrelevant from that sentence I would be left with:

'I am alive.'

Funny, I missed that one out to begin with.

So now explore what 'being alive' means (the key is in this sentence).

Interesting concept...I've often wondered what a newborn "thought", or even if it could think. It's like us older folks thinking "Where will "I" go when 'I' die". A similar question might be "Where was 'I' before I was born?'. Boggles the mind. In any event, Popeye had the answer.

Part of the key is in removing thought itself.

If one removes thought,
what has the thoughtless one wrought?
The void of Haiku?

This is giving me a headache. What if you didn't have a name is rather different to what if you didn't have a past or what if you didn't think.

It's all the same. It's all identity. A name = a label you have given yourself (or that has been given to you) that is the fabrication behind who you are. I'm not saying imagine you don't have a past. I'm saying try to imagine what it would be like if your past did not contribute to who you are today - ie, all your built up knowledge, pain, relationships, travel, experiences. Of course they have happened to you. But they do not make you who you are. So what does?

I can speak to this one. I have "lost" my name in the sense that I have lost almost everything that I once used to define myself: I am a professional, a librarian and a college teacher. I love books and knowledge and I write bad poetry in my spare time. I am married to a writer and we own a three bedroom home in a nice part of a small college town in western Colorado. I make a comfortable middle class income and I save for my retirement and I have health and disability insurance. I am doing well in my career and hope to one day achieve the position of either being in charge of my own library or becoming the collection development officer for the sciences in a major university library. My father loves me and is proud of me, and I have made peace with my mother by moving 300 miles away from her.

That was then. Fast forward to one year ago today. I was homeless, living on the banks of the San Miguel River. My marriage had ended in divorce and my father had passed on. My senile Mother had been manipulated by her second husband into throwing me out on the street. The material things I had accumulated over a life time were all stolen or destroyed or hauled off to the local land fill. Every scrap of writing I had labored so hard on was destroyed. I had run through all my savings and resources long before. I could no longer hold down even the most menial job. The one thing that I had counted on to carry me through any situation - my intelligence - had been impacted by a long, slow but steady exposure to a deadly poison- carbon monoxide. I suffered from short term memory loss that impacted my ability to problem solve and carry out to completion even the simplest of tasks. I experienced odd blank outs of my current experiences. I could no longer trust my own perceptions or my ability to asess people or situations. The result was that I trusted no one else either.

I was a non person living in a tent with only my cat for company. I was 20 miles from the nearest town and didn't have gas money, and besides, my car was illegal to drive since I had no money for insurance or valid plates. There was no one to call me by my name, and that person with that name didn't exist anymore, anyhow.

I think that there on the San Miguel River I was stripped down to my most basic essence. What was left to me were my words because that part of my brain had remained pretty intact, and my spirit. I picked wild flowers and arranged them in empty soup cans and jars and put them all around my camp. I decorated the sides of my tent with sketches printed on cards that somone had given me. I bathed every day in the icey mountain waters of the San Miguel and washed my clothes in the river as well and I would put on clean clothes and make up every day because I had to look good for a very important person - myself.

I figured that the only way I could be beaten was if I stopped fighting, so when I had gas money I drove to Telluride and went to the public library and wrote letters to everyone I could think of - the state and national congress, social security, the various newspapers, and the Colorado Cross Disability Association. In my heart I carried the thought of 6,000 people living in Colorado who were going through the same sort of plight that I was - the needy disabled people of this state who must wait two years or more before getting help from the federal government. Colorado in its vast wisdom and genorosity gives its disabled $170.00 a month plus $140.00 in food stamps - nothing more, and there is NO other help out there. I wrote my letters on the behalf of those 6,000 as well as my own.

Who am I without my name? I am a fighter. I care deeply about what happens to other people, not just myself, and I look for beauty in whatever might be around me - in the wildflowers in a mountain meadow, in the face of a little girl on a city street, and in the sweet, tired eyes of the exhausted mother sitting next to me in a social services office.

Who am I without my name? I am a flawed human being, more than some and less than others, but I still have a deep intrinsic value as a person in my own right, just as we all do.

That was a very moving letter. However, I find it hard to believe that it takes two years to get some assistance, however meager. Have you tried the local County Governmental Agencies such as the Department of Human Services for the Colorado Area ( http://www.cdhs.state.co.us/) They are the agency that distributes the grant money and that fund the various county agencies. Hope the link helps.

If anyone has paid into the Social Security system for any length of time they are entitled to social security disability payments (which are better than what Mari quoted) and it typically takes 2-4 months to have a decision made. The payments, if approved, start from the day of disability so at the end of an admittedly tough 2-4 months you'd get a nice big check.

It's not that clear cut, check out the hoops:http://www.disabilitybenefits101.org...htm#Disability

I'd figure identity theft could potentially put someone in a situation similar to the one Mari was in. ID theft can financially ruin somebody then when they try to get help, it'd be extremely difficult and time-consuming to prove they really are who they are. And since the only 'reliable' methods of identification are those of government-issued licenses and certificates, if the government doesn't believe or denies you are who you say you are, no one else will believe either, banks, lending companies, social services, your employer... At that point, who are you anymore? You're just a body taking up space, breathing the air and eating the food of the Properly Documented Citizens.

Honey, what planet did your space craft just land from? I have BEEN there, have you? There are a few exceptions, but the vast majority of people who must apply for disability through social security wait for at least two years. Go call up your local social security office and find out for yourself if you don't believe me. People who speak of speedy disability awards are often confusing private disability insurance with federal. Also, those who do have private insurance, ironicly enough, often recieve assistance from their private carriers to help prod the Feds along.

My disability award is a big $625.00 a month. If I'd only had to wait two months for it, the back pay would have been $1250. Maybe you consider this whopping. I don't.

marichiko--don't call me honey. I have been there, I am THERE NOW. I resent your attitude of exclusion--you are not the only one out here, you know? FEDERAL SSDI takes 2-4 months in Ohio. The award is 1271 single, 2570 for a woman with two kids. I've worked in the ss system for 25 years. You? Why don't you move to Canada? They would no doubt take better care of you.

Really. Don't call me honey. I find you a whiner at best.

Doesn't SSDI depend to some extent on how much you've put into the system?

yes, HM, it does. I've worked and put into the system for 25 years. It's based on that. It's a FEDERAL program--It's Social Security and in ohio it takes 2-4 months to know if you are getting an award or not. It's a MEDICAL decision. Marichiko complains of spatial difficulties yet she drives--makes me wonder. Maybe the SSDI wonders about her disability, too.

REALLY? You have worked in the federal civil service for the social security system for 25 years? May I ask what is your position and GS rating, if that is not being too personal, Ms. Brianna ?

If you really are a government worker, than in all due respect, you are a perfect example of what is wrong with the system. Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is based upon an individual's life time contributions to the system with their most recent year's work quarters of income being given the highest weight. A single person is NOT automatically given a set amount of 1271 and the amount of the award is not based on the number of dependents a person may or may not have. $1271 is practically an unheard of amount from social security for disability. People who draw on social security for their old age pensions don't even recieve that much after contributing to the system for fourty years.

Finally, you have made a correct statement. It is indeed a medical decision. But, whoops! Catch-22! How does a person without medical insurance get the required medical documentation? Answer: With the greatest of difficulty. Social security will pay for a claiment to be examined by one of its own doctors. However, the wait for this examination generally runs a year to a year and a half. I am intrigued that the federal system has allocated extra resources to the state of Ohio while short changing the western states. Perhaps, as a federal government worker you can explain why this might be so?

Given the discrepancy between your statements and the reality of the SSDI system, you must exist in a state of perpetual wonderment, and I feel no special need to explain myself to you. I find you a source of mis-information and astonishing inaccuracies at best.

Mari--I was recently awarded 2570 a month in SSDI payments. I payed into the system for 25 years. I have a documented medical condition. How is it that a woman with 2 master's degree's and the amount of responsibility you had in your job did not score medical insurance? freaky. Maybe no one valued you. Or your opinion.

[quote=marichiko]REALLY? You have worked in the federal civil service for the social security system for 25 years? May I ask what is your position and GS rating, if that is not being too personal, Ms. Brianna ? [quote]

You're pretty cute, mari. Too bad you're an asshole.

Hey, don't worry about it. I'm not. The feeling is quite mutual, and I'm not going to waste any further time with responding to you in either this thread or the other one. I've already explained in tedious detail the reasons for my current situation. If you're that curious check out some of the older threads. I'm not going to bother to explain myself all over to every newbie who comes and goes. I find your statements as implausible as you find mine. At least we agree on that much.

To get back to the thread ,,,,,,
Uhh most of you folks have evedently never worked on to many construction or indusrrial sites , I am scale man or scale dude , or the scale doc , or yo dude !!!!!

You have all missed the point.

It saddens me that you are willing to bypass an opportunity to find the answer you have all been looking for. Your whole life you have been asking questions like 'What are we doing here?', 'What is the meaning of this?', 'There must be more to life than this.'

Observe the conflict above. Marichiko and Brianna. Two anonymous internet names. Two anonymous people. They have never met. Yet they are attempting to strengthen themselves through their conflict. Marichiko has an identity here. People may see her as thoughtful, honest, literate, lefty. This is her identity. Her 'self'. If she was in touch with her real self that consists of nothing but truth, there would not be such anger.

Brianna associates with Mari's identity. Parts of it are like her, she thinks. I too have suffered, I too have pain. I want my pain, my validity, my ability to see and think clearly, to equal and rival yours, Mari, because that will strengthen my sense of self.

Both of you - please - remove yourselves from this equation. You are not unique or individual or special. You - and everyone else reading this including myself - are quite ordinary. Quite ordinary.

Mari - your first post - you describe a time in your life where you were absent of name or acquisition. Yet you put on make-up. You made sure you looked good. If you were on a desert island with no other being, would you wear make-up then? Of course not. Appearance does not matter. Survival does. I can't help feeling that you often get close to the point, nearing the truth, but keep just missing it. It passes you by.

Come on, all of you. The 'red pill' is right here. These are just words. What can you see?

You are not a unique and beautiful snowflake.
- Fight Club

God I love that movie.

You know, I was waaaay out of line up there. I shouldn't have said the mean things that I said to Mari. I apologize to her and to all of you who had to slag thru the muck I spewed. I don't like to be nasty and I was.

But, I guess I don't understand Catwoman. If we are not unique, not special in our own right--what does it matter why I am here? Really, it doesn't matter to anyone.

No. It doesn't matter. Not in the sense that you mean. In the sense that 'he doesn't care that I exist' or 'I am nothing without my children' - bear in mind this is only your personalised sense of self speaking - it does not matter that your fragmented insecure self exists. I would rather it didn't exist. In fact, the best thing would be for it to die. Not in a physical sense. If your contrived 'persona' ceases to exists you are left only with truth. Why would you want to lie?

Fight Club demonstrates another important truth. That by fighting with someone else you are fighting with yourself. Because we are all the same.

You all remember the commandment 'Love thy neighbour as yourself'. Now, this has been misinterpreted to mean 'Love thy neighbour as you would yourself'. This is wrong. What Jesus actually said was a much more fundamental truth, that you are the same as your neighbour. Because your neighbour is yourself. We are all the same. Humanity does not move forward as individuals but as a whole. Do not be under the illusion that you are unique.

So now answer my question. What can you see?

I'm tempted to say that it's the name or label that makes us unique and without that we are the same. But fundamentally that's still not true. Even without a name, no one is really the same as everyone else.

For people, the face is the primary visual identifier. By that face, we could get a name and from that name we could get all kinds of other self-identifying information.Take two men and put sacks over their heads. All you have left are the persons, the human animals. Even then, they aren't the same. They're both human, yes, and can look the same on the surface. But one's a diabetic and one's not. One's has high blood pressure, the other doesn't. One can shoot milk from his eye, the other can't. These people are still very different and unique given everything about them. They only lack a means to easily identify them.

And the same goes, from the physical to metaphysical. In a lifetime, however long it may be, no one has the same experiences. Say these two head-sacked men are both 30. Allow they both grew up in the same town on the same street and went to the same school and played on the same Little League team. Even then life experiences can be very different. One man was hit in the mouth by a line drive and refused to play baseball ever again. The other got a baseball scholarship to X University. One man's house was destroyed by a tornado while the other boy's house across the street was untouched. One man had a hard-nosed history teacher at school while the other got the fun teacher.

In all of that, depending on where they live, both men could have lived perfect ordinary lives. If they lived in Nebraska or Oklahoma, being victim to a tornado doesn't make either unique. However, if one moved to Montana where tornadoes more often show up on TV or in movies, he would be unique among the locals. How unique and different you are depends on your surroundings. In places like Africa or Asia, having a monkey as a pet wouldn't turn heads, but in Alexandria, VA, it'd likely be fodder for the local interest portion of the evening news and they'd call it an 'exotic' animal.

That is just nature playing with form.

All that surrounds you, including your body, is just form. Changing, interacting (although that is not strictly the right word) and metamorphosing.

Learn to recognise these forms for what they are. And remember that they can only happen NOW, not in the past or in the future. The computer in front of you, the tree in the garden, your best friend or lover. They are all just forms.

Look at the shapes, and see them without opinion or judgement. Just look at them. What do you see?

It's really a shame you don't live in Texas, Catwoman. I could introduce you to my brother, and the two of you could just go off together and talk to each other for eternity.

Well Morpheus, I follow you, I think you need to read some Carl Jung.

Nice thought Clod - why not introduce him to the Cellar?

Jung is concerned with the mind, the different levels of psych-consciousness, not the true wider self. The self does not exist within the mind, the mind exists within the self. Jung's philosophies are linear - they acknowledge the power of accumulation - how the unconscious consists of components/fragments - but this is still dealing only with the surface.

He is right in his assessment of the collective unconscious, he just made the mistake of trying to find more, trying to explain it in terms of thought. This can never be understood with thought, it simply is.

All philosophers are such not by merit of thought but of realisation. You cannot 'think' your way into becoming a philosopher. You just are. It is a pointless thing to study.

All I am concerned with is now. All of my words are old. But if you can see the space between the words you may have already answered your own question.

Well I did follow you.

Forms of what exactly?

Nice thought Clod - why not introduce him to the Cellar?

Because he doesn't have internet access--he currently lives with my mother (after she already kicked him out once, then my father kicked him out, now he's back at her house,) hasn't had a job in almost a year, has never had one for longer than 9 months, and has never paid his own rent or car payment in his life. He owns four electric guitars and a full drum set, but never plays them. He takes at least a roll of film a day on his $500+ camera, but he refuses to try to sell them or get them put in any art shows. And he loooooooves to philosophize, and tell you why your life is meaningless.

Don't follow me, lead yourself.

You are trying to understand this with thought. Maybe I am being too cryptic, I am not trying to confuse you. I just want you to see for yourself.

I cannot describe the word 'forms' in physical terms - what do you want to hear? That they consist of rapidly metamorphosing matter - a result of electrokinetic forces and tricks of the light? Maybe, if that helps you to visualise it. Science will answer that question much better than I can.

The point is that form is transient. It is always changing, and often short-lived. A form can take the shape of a physical thing or being, and it can also be emotional. Your depression is a form, as is your happiness. Neither will last for that long. If you can see that these are all merely forms that come and go, you can begin to enjoy the present for what it is. It's just now, nothing more, nothing less.

Is this starting to come together?

Would you be more inclined to accept this criticism - what you see as a criticism - if he had worked all his life and achieved 'success'? Is he the pot calling the kettle?

His perceived success (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with him. Whatever material routes he has and will pass through in his life, whether there is wealth or poverty, a career or a carer - none of this has any relevance to who he is. That's the point. He just is.

Maybe he has misinterpreted philosophy and sees it as another means to define himself. So he hasn't - on the surface - achieved much in this world: that's ok, because (he thinks) 'I'm a philosopher'. This is no different to defining your sense of self in any other way.

This is not what I am trying to do here. In fact I am not trying to do anything. I am typing and words are coming out that are the truth. No, they're not truth, but they point to the truth.

Now I see what you're trying to say.

I want what she's smoking. Oh never mind, I have to go back to the real world. :rolleyes:

Well, it is a bit on the esoteric side, but I like it. Makes my brain hurt. Thanks, Catwoman, for keeping Cellarites everywhere awake at night! ;)

One of the first (and, as spiritual progress goes, worst) things advanced minds do is immediately try to seperate itself from the environment surrounding it. I refer you to Robert Bakker's novel, <i>Raptor Red</i>, where lacking any formal language with which to identify itself, the main character simply refers to herself as "Red", due to a red patch on her snout. Advanced minds are always categorical like this. The first thing they do is split the world into "Me" and "Not Me". Then, everything in the "Not Me" category is split into "Good for Me" and "Bad for Me". It's this kind of categorization, essential to our physical and egotistical survival, that prevents human beings from feeling the connectedness that does, indeed, exist. You *are not* a unique and beautiful snowflake, standing alone, your survival independent of those around you. You *are* unique in the sense that a liver is different from a kidney is different from a heart. We're all part of this big, bumbling organism, being left alone to experience the societal evuivalent of adolescence all alone. If we, as a species, can remove the barrier of ego that seperates us from each other, we'll be much better off.

Brianna, apology accepted. And I realize I was out there myself with all my claws and teeth, so I hope you will accept my apology, as well. I am curious about just one thing, and I don't mean this question to be argumentative, I am merely curious. As I finally understand it, you worked as an RN for 25 years. Surely you had private disability insurance as a part of your benefits package?

Now back to your question, Cat. You and everyone else have made some excellent points. Cat, you seem to be asking about what makes up the essence of the human soul. I think that on a certain level, that is something which only each individual can define for herself. The soul or spirit of a human being is an elusive thing at best, difficult to pin down with mere words.

Who am I, really? If you look into my eyes, you will see the answer reflected back at you there.

I am
you
are
We are
God
is
me.

Lest this be misunderstood, I hasten to add that I do not personally believe I have supernatural powers and am the ruler of the universe (this should be obvious, but I know this gang well enough to understand that some devil's advocate would love to jump in there and make this accusation).

When I speak of the spirit or that of God (call it whatever is most pleasing to you) which resides in us all, I am talking about this:

The awe we feel when looking up at the stars on a clear summer night or when we come across the beauty of a meadow of wildflowers or the vastness of the ocean or the great mountain ranges of the West.

The tug we feel at our heart when we look at our child or the person who is our partner in life, or even a little 4 year old girl whom we've never seen before and will never see again, but there's something about how she runs in the park as we watch, her face turned up toward the sun and her smile of pure innocent joy.

The compassion we feel when we see the suffering of a friend or a woman on the 6:00 news who has experienced some terrible tragedy. Our hearts ached when we saw 9/11 going on one morning on our TV sets, and it didn't matter if we lived on the East coast or the West or knew someone who worked at the World Trade Center or not, something in our hearts went out to the innocent people killled or injured in such a terrible way.

The moments which describe our essence are precisely the same moments when we let go of our small everyday selves and become part of the greater Self - when we love truely, have compassion for others, are awed by the beauty of this world we live in.

Each one of us, without exception, is a most precious soul; created in the image of God, quite simply because taken as a whole, we ARE God. AS Joseph Campbell said, eternity is in this very moment. We create our lives right now in the present because that is all the time we will ever have. With our each action we can help to create "this earthly paradise" or this living hell. It is up to the spirit in each one of us which one we choose.

The 'real world' you speak of is everything you recognise with your senses. I am not advocating moving away from this reality - trying to pretend the trees don't exist or you don't have to go back to work. In fact, the opposite is true. The more you are aware of reality, of now, whether that may be the hot cup of coffee you're holding or the rising anger at the way your boss just spoke to you - all these things are real, and the worst thing to do would be to try to 'rise above it', detach or disassociate yourself. This kind of 'spirituality' I have no time for. All I am saying is to recognise truth - the boss, the coffee cup, and understand it is just a form. It does not have any relevance to 'yourself'. Instead of relating events to your personalised sense of self, try to see them as part of a much greater living 'whole'.

Lets say you are attracted to someone and they are not interested. You will view their rejection as self-defining - either by entering a brief depression/insecurity to strengthen the idea of yourself as useless and unattractive, or taking it on the shoulders and not really minding to strengthen the idea of yourself as nonchalant and carefree. Either way you use the event to define yourself. Instead, see the event for what it is, see yourself perpetuating these patterns, and enjoy the new form that is emerging. I sometimes find this hard to explain, yet it is so simple.

You understand, I think.

No. I am saying the 'human soul' is truth. That will become clear once you live within it.

Yes, that is the point. All we have is now. In now you will find the answer to every question you have ever asked.

I agree that the human soul is truth, but it is a truth which many people have great difficulty attempting to define. Your point about defining ourselves by the reactions of others around us is one that is well made. If my lover rejects me, that does not mean I should define myself as unloveable. The boss's bad day does not define my spirit. On a more mundane level, however, if I find that people constantly make the same criticism of me, say, "You always let people take advantage of you," just as an example, I would say that this consistent feedback is something we should consider as we try to shape our behavior to lead more fulfilling lives than we did in the past. But I don't think that is your real point here.

I think it takes a real effort toward consistent awareness to fully live within one's own soul. It is all too easy to fall back into the pattern of reacting, rather than being. I have moments, even hours when I feel that I live from my soul, and then someone does something which hurts or upsets me, and I'm back to reacting again. Its a journey, not a destination.

Perhaps I've been working in the technical field too long.

Names are words used to identify people, places, or things. They are tools within a language to help us, as effectively and quickly as possible, communicate with one another. The words and structure of language were defined using the joint experiences of folks long gone now.

Acronyms are a good modern day example of our need to communicate quickly with as little effort as possible.

My name is used as a tool to immediately refer to my physical presence. It was defined by my parents, in cooperation with their own ego, as a way to refer to “the baby.” I continue to use this label because, by the time I grew aware I could change it, it had grown on me. Just as anyone of my other experiences, it has helped to shape me as a person. However, it cannot describe me any better than the cover of a book could describe it's contents.

If I were to describe my essence, I would use tools of language, to describe myself based upon as a series of facts, personal truths, and opinions. Others would use similar tools to describe me using their observations. (Most times, these two descriptions will hardly ever match which would cause its own problem in our need to communicate.)

(By the way, we hardly have the patience to refer to ourselves even if the name is too long. Mary Jane = MJ. Can you imagine the acronym to describe ourself?)

A bit off topic... are we even capable to fully comprehend our own essence? I've forgotten so much since conception... some of it must have been important.

I'm still trying to wrap my brain around “living in one's soul.” My brain has filtered this into, “strive to be aware of life's details.” Much like some books I've read, I'd just assume to refer to bits of life just by their name and get on with something new.

Who me? F.E.A.R. F--ked up, emotional, anxious, reactionary! :D

I.N.M.F.I.W.L.T.W.I.G.H.W.C.E.L.A.I.O.F.I.B.O.S.W.B.P.

(It's not my fault... It was like that when I got here. We can either laugh about it or fix it. Both options simultaneously would be preferable.)

Fortunately my attention span is so short I'd never get past the second letter.

I quite agree. It is not 'easy' to be real while living within the confinements of the 'real world'. It is a paradox that unsettles me from time to time, paving the way for useless trails of thought that always end up in the same place: thoughtlessness. It is difficult to overcome years of tutoring (I will refrain from using the word 'indoctrination' - its connotations will only confuse things here) and in every movement you make towards true self-awareness, your 'self' pushes harder for recognition. Your journey/destination analogy bothers me for some reason... I think because being 'real' is not something you can do half-heartedly, it is something that you are. Therefore it is not a journey, not a destination you need to 'get to', but a place where you just 'am'. Saying that I think you've 'got it' Mari, and what a beautiful moment it is.

Bang on topic. Except that the mistake is in attempting to 'comprehend' it. You cannot analyse it with thought, because every thought is a movement away from your 'essence'. You cannot examine or test it - you simply are it. Once you achieve this state of 'being', you will 'gain' a true understanding of your essence, and your preoccupation with thought and desparation for answers will disappear because everything that is - is right now.

I'm not good at being a passive participant in my microcosm. “To be” invariably leads to the phrase “to become” which requires some intervention on my part.

Oohhh... I don't like limitations and hope we can overcome this someday.

Catwoman,

• When do you believe our “essence” is created and can it be destroyed?
• Who is “in charge”... our “essence” or our physical being? In other words, can I influence my “essence” based upon events that I experience in the world around me?
• Can I change who I am or am I merely a puppet to the base programming of my “essence”?
• Does our “essence” even reside inside our body?
• Then again, why do you believe our “essence” even requires these earthly frames?

So many questions lead me to my next point.

My “essence” strives to learn as much about myself and the physical world as possible. Based upon your paradigm, will I ever be “real” if I remain unsettled with unanswered questions?

(Maybe I'm a poltergeist in the making. Death always comes too quickly and there's a few things I might need to wrap up. If ghosts exist I hope to have more power than the ability to knock over a few tea cups.)

Absolutely not. 'Be' is not the same as 'become'. It is an antonym. 'Become' suggests movement, progress. 'Be' simply is. Bear in mind we are only using words here - the best words our language provides us with to attempt to describe something essentially indescribable. May sound like a cop-out to your scholared and linear way of thinking but hopefully we can get over that and pave the way for understanding on a completely different level.

But thought is the very limitation you speak of. Thought operates on an entirely different level to 'reality' - imagine these two concepts as two planes of existence (although I wouldn't even give thought that credit). You cannot see or understand the properties of one plane from the obscured perspective of another. Like Plato's cave we piece thoughts together creating meaning that has nothing to do with reality. How can we comprehend a universe, sitting on one chair in one country on one planet in one solar system in one galaxy? The only way is to realise, no open your heart/soul to the idea - no, not idea, that still denotes thought - but possibility that we are all interlinked - us and the planets, water and wind, the earth and the universe. This is frustrating. There is no way I can explain this with words.

When do you believe our “essence” is created and can it be destroyed?

'Essence' is energy (for want of a better word). It was never created and can never be destroyed, not in terms you or I will understand. Imagine an ocean. We are all waves, rising and falling, some higher than others, all unique yet essentially the same ('essentially' meaning 'essence'), emerging from and returning to the same greater 'whole'. Birth, death - insignificant. Because we are the wave, we cannot comprehend the ocean all around us, part of us, us part of it. The human flaw is in attempting to individualise, separate. Literally, 'cannot see the wood for the trees'.

Who is “in charge”... our “essence” or our physical being? In other words, can I influence my “essence” based upon events that I experience in the world around me?

No because 'your' essence is not 'yours' at all. People like the idea of a 'soul', because not only does it offer the possibility of an 'afterlife' (so you do not have to deal with death), but it also individualises. 'I feel it in my soul'. Well, yes, in a way, but just recognise that your soul is not distinct from the greater 'soul' of the universe. That same energy/ocean/essence is what drives life, and you are life. Physicality is just a form. It is not less important, but you are caught up in the intricacies of your physical being, preoccupied with attractiveness and pain, when this is merely a creation or manifestation of essence. Which is not necessarily to say that essence cannot be influenced - I do not have the answer to that. All I would ask is why you would want to influence it? If you fear a lack of control over your own life, first recognise which 'life' you are dealing with - your contrived sense of self; or reality.

Can I change who I am or am I merely a puppet to the base programming of my “essence”?

Superficially you can change who 'you' are - you can become anyone you want to be. Any personality/occupation/other self-defining feature. If you mean the true sense of who you are - well, you just are. It may change it may not. Why would you want to change? It is the control thing again. We fear loss of control because with responsibility comes security - but it is a false security. How can we presume to have any control over life?

Does our “essence” even reside inside our body?

No, our body is just a form. When you die, your essence remains, but not in a ghostly, individual sense. Although perhaps a 'ghost' is a fragment of essence still trying to hold onto a 'self' - a ghost being just another 'form'.

Then again, why do you believe our “essence” even requires these earthly frames?

It is nature playing with form. It is fun, it is beautiful. I don't know. But I do know I will never work this one out sitting and trying to think about it. The more I just 'be' the more I can enjoy these forms without trying to understand them. Maybe the understanding will come, maybe it won't. But you find that when you live life with true connection to your greater self, the search for answers ceases and is replaced by a genuine pleasure and absorption with life.

YOU FUCKING BASTARD WHY DON'T YOU JUST FUCKING LISTEN??!!!!!!!
Ok, now I have your attention. You are real right now in this moment. Absorb and understand everything that is happening to you. Don't try to interpret it or try to forge a reaction, just stay with it. This is real, this is the answer you are looking for, and this is all there is.

(of course you are not a fucking bastard, it was just a trick, a shock tactic to try and snap you into reality. If I had a glass to break I'd break it.)

OK. Thanks for the long write-up and I'm sorry to put you through the dissertation. It helps clarify your position.

I believe that we exist for a reason that has yet to be understood. Whether its nature playing with itself or nature teaching our “essence” a lesson, we, as a species, naturally strive to seek solutions to broaden our knowledge. (Our attention span is so short and we're easily bored.) If an “essence” indeed exists, it would seem to me that it's challenging us to learn more about something using this framework. I think it would be contrary to our “essence” if we remained in “the moment” for too long. For goodness sake, we dream when we're asleep. Our need to learn and explore does not stop. I believe we take these lessons on following our Earthly death. Note that I do not have any fact to support this claim.

You're describing “essence” using words like “my” and “our” which would imply you believe and individual “essence” exists for each of us. Therefore, there must be some sort of being or mechanism that determines the percentage of “essence” allotted for each creature. True?

Ah, but we do have some control over life. If someone is found to be a serial murderer, should we respect the fact they're being true to their “essence”? Should we be allowed to be true to our nature if in fact it harms another? Why should we catch and convict people if they're merely nature's way of thinning the herd?

I may recognize that I'm insensitive to other people's needs. I may allow other people to take advantage of me. There may be many reasons why we would want to influence our “essence”. Each of these situations would be an opportunity to grow our "essence".

“With great power comes great responsibility” - Spider Man 1962

We have more power over ourselves than we give credit for.

I've filtered this into “acceptance for what I cannot or do not want to change. It just is.” I'll buy that... to a point. You're presuming that everyone who finds this “true connection” will be good stewards of other people's “essence” in the process.

Let me know if I misunderstood your comments.

I don't know if your Jedi mind trick worked quite the way you intended. Please see my posting link below.
http://www.cellar.org/showpost.php?p...2&postcount=16
“Sticks and stones” you know...

Now there's an assumption...

Just a couple of thoughts. "But thought is the very limitation you speak of..."
Hmmm... Cat, there's your irony. How could you possibly have arrived at your current conclusions other than through your thinking about this question? I would like to submit that it is not our thinking which is our limitation, but the MANNER in which our culture and own personal psychology has inclined, even impelled us to think.

A fox or a rabbit lives completely in the present. A fox simply IS. Does this mean the fox lives on some higher spiritual plane than man? Perhaps. You must ask the foxes, and so far they aren't giving away any secrets.

I am in complete agreement with you that our essence - our life force - is energy, and the laws of thermodynamics tell us that energy is neither created nor destroyed. Where does this leave us? Only with our hypotheses which may be turn out to proven true or not. Perhaps as Joe says, our collective essence is pressing us to learn more. Then again, our collective essence may be nothing more than the demands of a double helix of DNA which commands that its sequences of amino acids not only survive, but be handed down across the millenia. An argument can be made that the perfect, most advanced life form is the virus which bothers not at all with self awareness, but has stripped itself down to the most basic essentials - a single DNA strand wrapped in a protective protein coat.

I agree with Cat that we have no control over our lives, and I agree with Joe that we do. We have both far less and far more control over our lives than most of us will ever understand. "Man plans and God laughs," as one old Spanish saying goes. Things happen in our lives which we have no control over, just as we have no control over which parents we are born to and what society we are born into. However, it is by our THOUGHTS regarding our place in the world and the events which happen to us that we create meaning for our lives; the courage to go forward or the despair that causes us to become embittered and die. Life is what we make of it, despite the blows of ill chance or the luck of the draw.

I agree Cat, that in my truest sense I simply am. Yet it is by being in this present moment that I will become what I am in the moments which follow. If I live this very moment to the best of my ability, the moments which follow will take care of themselves. If I disregard this gift of the present and squander it with remorse over the past or undue worry of the future, I squander my days because I am not living IN them.

At heart I am nomadic, a gypsy. Never do I feel so fully alive as when I am traveling some back road far from home. Bruce Chatwin in his book, Songlines, puts forth the idea that man evolved to be nomadic - that in effect, to travel is the essence of the human spirit. Our language reflects this thought. I consult The American Heritage Dictionary: The word "journey" is derived from Middle English "journei", day, day's travel, and from the Latin "diurn ta", from Late Latin "diurnum", - day, from neuter of Latin "diurnus", - of a day, from "di" , - day. If you delve even more deeply into the meaning of the word, you come across this indo-european root: "dyeu" - to shine and in its many derivatives 'sky, heaven, god.' These derivatives also include 'divine' and 'journey'. And at the very beginning of the ancestry of the word "journey" you will find its ultimate parent, the sanskrit word "deva" or spirit. My journey is my spirit.

If I cease to "journey" and feel that I have arrived at some final destination called the "ultimate truth" then I have indeed shut down my essence. One day the actual truth will come knocking at my door with the light to dispel my illusions. I'll awake from my sleep and reply crankily, "Go away! I already know you!" and I'll go back in my room and pull my comfortable blanket of darkness over my ignorant eyes.

One of the greatest modern American poets, Mary Oliver, sums up my present understanding best in her poem "Roses, Late Summer." The poem ends with these lines:

If I had another life
I would want to spend it all on some
unstinting happiness.

I would be a fox, or a tree
full of swaying branches.
I wouldn't mind being a rose
in a field full of roses.

Fear has not yet occurred to them, nor ambition.
Reason they have not yet thought of.
Neither do they ask how long they must be roses, and then what.
Or any other foolish question.

Stoicism and Spiderman?

Essence is the ontological representation of that which is. Your*essence* only may change before or after body. Soul/Spirit is a *symptom* of this essence. Spirit/Soul is manipulatable and only an ontic representation of HOW the essence is being.

I had too much Heidegger and Aristotle for breakfast.

I like your description of soul as a symptom of essence. My essence has a very bad cold today and my spirit is merely but of a symptom of my dis-ease! :D

Interesting point, marichiko.

Perhaps the fox is giving away some secrets. Could our thought processes be merely an instinctual response to learn as much about our environment and leverage it to our benefit, for the success of our species? It may not be tied to an “essence” at all. Rather, it might be almost an autonomic process that strives to comprehend and conquer our world for the survival of future generations.

I am living in the moment and using my assets to stay alive... just like the fox and rabbit.

That would lead me to believe that if an essence existed it would, for the most part, be passively along for the ride. My instinct would be driving the bus most of the time.

I've never quite thought of our desire to learn in that respect. Thanks.

JF first of all I think I should apologise. I did not communicate myself clearly and this may have confused things all the more. I needed to shock you somehow, just for you to be aware of the present moment. When something surprises you, when someone does something you don't expect, it shocks you into awareness. Maybe you didn't need this and maybe I went about it the wrong way - either way I think I should reiterate I do not (from your previous posts) consider you a bastard and I do think you listen, more so than many others. Right, now onto your questions.

There may be an underlying reason or motive behind existence. All I know is that the struggle for answers that occurs in the mind is perpetual has thus far proved fruitless. Every step closer seems a step away; the greatest historical minds have tackled this problem and still we do not know? Either we have worked it out and reject it because it represents the end of our journey (as per marichiko) or we cannot understand it with thought.

Please don't get caught up in my words. This is difficult enough to explain. My words are not new, and often inprecise. Try to see the meaning through the words. Essence is individual and it is not. 'Allotted essence' is a contradiction in terms. We are all the same, all have the same 'quantity' and are all equally as 'real' as each other. We need to stop attempting to distinguish and separate.

Once I would have agreed with what you say here. That we are learning 'lessons' and these are pathways to progressively higher 'planes' that we achieve beyond the material world. However, I think this is simply an attempt to understand the metaphysical within the linear faculties of our contrived existence - ie meritocracy. This is how our society works and we assume this is the same beyond death. Not only does this enable us to comprehend it in our terms, but also provides the security of individuation we so desire.

I was waiting for this to come up. In all honesty - yes, if that is nature, why try to stop it? Whether it is actually nature or not is the real question that needs addressing, hence my condemnation of the death penalty, hence my passion for understanding the root of crime rather than handing out futile and bloodlust-driven punishment. IF that is real, IF that is life, there is nothing you can do about it. So why try?

This is all related to the contrived sense of self, personality, emotion, and nothing to do with essence.

That is a most circular and untrue statement. Because yes, you do have power within 'yourself', ultimate power, but the 'responsibility' is shared, along with that power, amongst every living thing. Indeed, every living thing is that power. What do you mean when you speak of responsibility? Cause and effect? Accountability? What use are these things? The same cause will not necessarily produce the same effect so how can you consider responsibility? We do not know! How can we be accountable? And at the same time we do know, all of us, so there is no blame, no division.

Lets remove concepts of 'good and bad' from this equation. They are all relative, and as already discussed, we are powerless against it anyway. And it's not 'other peoples essence' - there is only one! Stop trying to individualise it!

Both. The manner you speak of is the illusion of self-definition. Thought itself is a limitation in that the true self does not exist within the mind. Once you arrive in the 'now' you understand. You are not thinking. By some fortunate glitch we are able to return to this fabricated world and explain it with words (well, I'm trying!) I know what you mean mari, and I can't explain how I arrived at these conclusions, they have just happened over a period of time, whether this is attributable to thought I don't know. I did receive confirmation of my thoughts in this man, Eckhart Tolle. (http://www.eckharttolle.com/) He explains everything I mean much more lucidly than I.

Exactly.

Yes, and I have done that myself, twice! How stupid, how fearful I must be of the truth. I felt it. I knew if I accepted it in that moment (twice) I would know. And I rejected it. Perhaps because as soon as I know it will mean leaving this world and this journey. I am preparing myself for this truth, because once you have fully accepted it there is no going back. I just want to make sure I have exhausted all other avenues first. I feel this is my last 'life' on this planet, and it is always hard to say goodbye.

Yes! And that is the value of thought, not in trying to comprehend our essence. It is merely a fragment of a form that our essence has created, to enable us to exist in that form.

Allocating 'importance' or significance isn't that useful. Just to recognise it is there is enough. There is a temptation to reduce all this to one 'point' or 'answer' - all I can say now is just live it, live the answer, because you are it. You are truth and life and love. That's 'all', folks.

Well, if that is your belief... (looks doubtfully at screen and shrugs shoulders). Who am I to tell you otherwise? So much of what you write mirrors Buddhist philosophy. Have you studied it? The Buddha (who claimed to be neither God, nor a prophet; but merely a human being who was "awake") taught that life consists of much suffering. Suffering is caused by desires arising out of a false sense of self. We want this; we don't want that. We pull things toward us and push other things away. We view the world in a dualistic manner, believing that its all about "us" versus "them." We are living under the delusion that we are a "self" different from other "selfs." How does one define one's self ultimately except through one's thoughts? Thoughts are elusive things, forever changing, coming and going. They arise and then they vanish. How can one possibly define one's self by such elusive criteria? The goal of Buddist meditative practice is to learn to empty the mind of our thoughts, and simply follow the breath - "pneuma" to breathe, from the Greek word for spirit. When we still the chatter of our "monkey mind" we can at long last simply be in this present moment. Our illusions drop away and we see that we are simply a part of a greater whole or "suchness" or the "atman" which might loosely be defined as the universal collective spirit of all living beings.

A person who manages to quiet the chatter of thought and cast aside the illusion of dualism has attained enlightenment. The Budddist saying goes "Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water; after enlightenment chop wood and carry water." An enlightened soul does not vanish but continues on in this everyday world. That is the true nature of enlightenment: to be in this world and yet not caught up in its illusions. Once one attains enlightenment, one has two choices: to be done with this world and its sorrows when one finally dies and enter nirvana (heaven) or to take what is called the Bodisattva Vow: "I vow that I will never attain perfect enlightenment until every other living being also becomes enlightened, all suffering finally at end. I vow to return lifetime after lifetime until all beings are free." That's the gist of it, if not the exact wording.

When I first read about the Bodisattva vow, I was stunned. There is no equivalent of it that I am aware of in any other spiritual tradition. What magnificent generosity of spirit to set aside your own "salavation" and come back lifetime after lifetime until every single living being on this earth is freed from suffering! Yet, if you think about it, what else would an enlightened soul do because of this understanding that we are all a part of the greater whole and this "small self" we carry as such a burden has no true validity?

I have no opinion on any possible life after this one. I have no opinion regarding heaven, although I know there is no hell. The power of the Bodisattva Vow for me is what it implies about the manner in which we lead our lives in the here and now. If I am in this thing together with all living beings then how can I do anything else but to act with compassion and practice what the Buddists call "bodichitta" or "loving kindness"?

The Buddha lived for a very long time after he attained enlightenment. His last words to his followers when he was an old man on his deathbed were, "Make of yourselves a light onto THIS world." Exactly. Heaven's here on earth. Its up to each one of us to create this earthly paradise or this living hell with our thoughts, words, and actions.

I hope I haven't bored you with a bunch of stuff you already know, just thought I'd let you know of the parallels with what you've been writing in case you weren't aware of it.

And Joe, I agree. Our human bodies with their animal instincts are inhabited by our spirit which is something quite different.

Actual Response
 

No Name......hmm...


I think E.M. Cioran said it best,"One always perishes by the self one assumes:to bear a name is to claim an exact mode of collapse." :greenface

Catwoman: Are you asking what you think the essence of your Self would be if you were stripped of all external influences?

No, YOU have missed the point. What you see is what you get. If you don't like it, tough shit, because that's all there is. The "spirit", "soul", "essence" is the stuff of fairy tales. It's something people make up out of boredom or drugged psychosis.
Get off your ass and do something productive. Do something useful. Do something worthwhile and you won't have time for endless circular musing. :rolleyes:

Add- Read your own post.