-
The solid sense of identity comprised of an entity that persists birth after birth is eroded. Consider a layer of rich black dirt on the grounds surface. It seems to be one big thing called top soil. Then the individual particles separated and wash away over time and it can no longer be regarded a a collective thing called the top soil.
This does not clarify if or why this sense of identity is again formulated or again appears after it is eroded. Why, if it is washed away over time, does it reformulate?
The sense of identity is comparable to topsoil. It functions as a solid thing with purpose, but meditation reveals over time that the form used, the feelings felt, the opinions and thoughts held dearly are constantly changing, coming and going, typically without ones permission. What was once regarded to be a solid identity, a ME, is now seen as a constantly changing, coming and going of mental factors.
Now seen?
By what/whom?
Normally, for something to be seen or perceived, there must be an observer and then a condition or object seen?
If the seer is merely a passing phase of whatever, then how is it that this passing ephemeral whatever makes declarations about consciousness over a certain time, as for example Buddha’s life of declarations about his Way, or some other Buddhists teacher who is declared to be enlightened?
To put it bluntly, does the sense of identity erode once and for all or not? If it does not then state that it erodes and then is reformulated. In your example, that dirt is no longer a collective thing, our experience is that it somehow again becomes a collective thing anyway, and that such erosion followed by formulation reoccurs repeatedly. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that there is some other influence which causes the erosion and reformulation and that other factor is superior/permanent even though it is unknown.
What was once regarded to be a solid identity, a ME, is now seen as a constantly changing, coming and going of mental factors.
Seen by whom?
By the passing phase of mental energy which is itself the same solid identity?
In effect, this means that a figment of temporary imagination/perception does see, does perceive.
What a declaration?
-
This does not clarify if or why this sense of identity is again formulated or again appears after it is eroded. Why, if it is washed away over time, does it reformulate?
The sense of identity keeps reformulating until one becomes an arahant and attains nibanna. There is another analogy in Buddhist suttas that describes the sense of identity like the skin of a pig. Through the practice, the sense of identity is "skinned" off and it can never attach or stick back. I am not qualified to elaborate on this.
Even the sense of identity which we currently use and identify with is constantly arising and disbanding. To believe this, you have to experience it with keen mindfulness.
Seen by whom? The cognizing feature of mind essence, sees.
If the seer is merely a passing phase of whatever, then how is it that this passing ephemeral whatever makes declarations about consciousness over a certain time, as for example Buddha’s life of declarations about his Way, or some other Buddhists teacher who is declared to be enlightened?
Even a yogi who attained nibanna is required to live out the rest of the current birth, reaping good and bad consequences based on his/her prior actions in samsara. This is called nibanna with residue.
To put it bluntly, does the sense of identity erode once and for all or not?
I guess it is more accurate to use the skinning of the pig analogy. In this case, the stickiness, the binding of the pigskin to the pig body is totally loosened and it stays on the pig body until the death of the creature form. I'm sorry to use such a crude example.
What was once regarded to be a solid identity, a ME, is now seen as a constantly changing, coming and going of mental factors.
Seen by whom?
Seen by the innate congnizing nature of mind essence.
_____________________________________
I've answered the best I know how and I'm sure there are some inconsistencies with actual Buddhist doctrine. I shared the experience for the sake of sharing what actually happened. I try not to overthink stuff that happens in meditation. Talking about it and trying to make sense of it eventually causes me to lose touch with the actual experience and the guidance it was meant to yield.
Discussions about the permanence of the sense of identity usually become combative on this forum. There is no need for that. We need to get direct experience and follow where it leads. Disputing with words fuels speculation which circles round and round.
-
Comment to Follow-up to Neutrality in Meditation
