It seems we are intent on questioning the self, and I don’t think anyone would question that seems to be the project of this course and much of TT’s writings. But, I would like to ask a different sort of question: Why do we invest so much in the reality of the “I” or self if it only produces suffering, confusion, and dissatisfaction?<\/p>\n
It seems that the self–since it is so universal–is there for a reason. What I mean is, the self serves some function, some need in the human species, does it not? I don’t think TT answers or explains WHY we construct the self? He certainly shows us how to deconstruct it….<\/p>\n
The Self is pervasive and is real to our shared human experience. What purpose does the “I” serve? If the “I” or “self” is a construction, why is it constructed? What purpose or need is it serving? It must be a very important one, because it is pervasive. In other words, the “I” or “self” must serve some sort of function in human experience, otherwise it would not be there in the first place? What is that function? What sort of problem or need is it trying to address?<\/p>\n
Perhaps if we could come to terms with this, then we might have a greater appreciation for our human condition?Certainly, the resistance and entrenchment of the sense of an “I” or “separate\/permanent self” must be due to the fact that it serves a real purpose?<\/p>\n
It seems KoF, LoK, and TSK all jump into wanting to question the self, but we never are told why…<\/p>\n
Ron<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It seems we are intent on questioning the self, and I don’t think anyone would question that seems to be the project of this course and much of TT’s writings. But, I would like to ask a different sort of … Continue reading