On the ultimate confusion and self-identification

"What is the world and myself? What the hell is going on with all this?"

Like birth, old age, sickness and death, ultimate doubts are all troubles in life; it is just that ultimate doubts can free people from the attention to birth, old age, sickness and death, and can also lead people to liberation from these problems.

Of course, the pain of birth, old age, sickness and death can also lead people to go out, and the ultimate doubt is completely unnecessary.

Note that the "liberation" mentioned here is not a magical state that spiritual seekers talk about overnight, but just a general sense of no longer troubled. I no longer feel the need to mention the "liberation" that is said to be the ultimate state.

To recognize is to recognize what it is.

For example, if I do an action, then I take the action as something I did, or someone else did it, or someone else (such as desire, habit, social culture) motivated me to do it, or I thought it was something I did. What the world does, it's none of my business - it's all identification. For example, the phenomenon is regarded as the real world, or the phenomenon is regarded as me or mine, or I am in it, or I am in it, or I am outside it, or the whole phenomenon is only an illusion or Dreams... these are also recognized.

In the same way, to think that there is a self in the world, or that there is no self in the world, this is identification. The point is not to think that the world is empty or that there is no me, that is just a negative identification, the point is to get rid of "thinking". "Empty" and "no-self" cannot be mentioned indiscriminately. Although this is the truth, if you don't understand your old feelings and habits, and perfunctory yourself with "color is emptiness", you will only deceive yourself and deceive others. All stipulations, even the stipulations of nothing, from common sense to reason, judgments of good and evil, are identifications. When there is no such identification, tranquility can be experienced.

And self-identification, that is, to think that there is a "I" first, and what is considered to be me, and about me (what I have, what I have, what I am connected to, where I am...) ——It is the system that most closely creates identity, and it is the identity closest to it, because it begins to identify itself with the delusional mechanism of “identity”, which is always wrong. For this reason, self-identity is the closest thing to us and the one that bothers us the most, and it's good to start with it to get rid of identity. If you can't identify yourself, then it doesn't matter whether you are "enlightened" or not, at least half of the troubles of life are gone.

What the Buddha repeated over and over in the Pali Tripitaka was to disassociate the questioner. The Buddha in the corresponding section does not directly mention non-self, and rarely talks about emptiness, nor does he present them as concepts, but just say don't think of this as me, don't think of that as me, don't think of actions as me Don't think that the world did what you do, but don't mention how to identify with it, don't mention that since these are not me, then what is me or whether there is me, don't mention who the behavior comes from, don't mention that all this should be regarded as what. "What the heck is that?" The Buddha laughed without saying a word—this is so secretive, mellow, and consummate, and how easy it is to be missed. Take another step forward, say one more sentence, and you will already agree.

Kant said: Freedom is not to do whatever one wants, but to master oneself.

Therefore, freedom cannot actually be created and given by social conditions, but can only be given to oneself by individuals.

When you think you have a will and look at nature, you will see fate, because fate is another order that is different from your own will; when you don’t think you have a will, you will not attribute the occurrence different from your own will to objectification. for "destiny". There is neither will nor destiny - but they are not nothingness, but objectifications of what is happening from different perspectives.

In the original religious spirit, the important topic of "endurance" is not a symbol of submission and obedience, but a symbol of overcoming - to endure is to overcome. It is not cowardice, but leads to strength. When a desire or a trend comes, endure the torment and not submit to it, and then gain spiritual strength after it fades - the next time the desire or trend comes, it will be weaker, and I overcome it, to myself control will be stronger. This is the road to freedom. Kant said: "Freedom is not to do what one wants, but to master oneself." This is the original purpose of "endurance" in religious and spiritual training. But then it was smeared with moral camouflage, dressed in layers of docile, cunning, and cowards and opportunists relied on "suffering" to maintain a painful and temporary silence, but in "suffering" they obeyed With all the fear and greed that befell him, "endurance" changes from freedom to slavery.

To become a monk is both an impulse and a decision. Impulsivity is courage, but it is also evasion and cowardice. General courage is always accompanied by cowardice, but this is not without merit. The major events in life can only be stepped out on impulse, and deliberation leads to nothing. Looking ahead is the wisdom to maintain life, but the impulse is detached.

A healthy balance is by no means a compromise, but rather both ends of the spectrum.