|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
....
....
The key question
For liberation know yourself as consisting of consciousness,
the witness of these.
[The Song of Ashtavakra (Ashtavakra Samhita) Chapter 1.3]
So where does this all leave us with regard to the ultimate search for the real self? Are we any closer to any real facts or substance, regarding this mystery. Obviously not, but the previous contemplation posits two distinct possibilities.
1. That the self is created out of necessity, and is purely a biological machination; a requirement for the evolution and creation of the mind, (within the brain). A key part in personal development.
2. That the self is created and apparent through the grace of God, the creator, or some supernatural occurrence, or divine agent.
Broadly speaking, and in its simplicity, these two notions can be divided into two distinct philosophical systems; 1. Materialism, and 2. Dualism.
Materialism, as a philosophy, is the belief that only the manifest, the physical, is real, and is in fact, the only reality. That super-nature, or the supernatural, or even God, cannot be proven as fact, and must therefore be discarded in dealing with the explanations of the relationships between the mind and body, and notions of perception. That thoughts are a natural consequence of cause and effect, and can be explained purely as biological and neural processes, which respond in both a rational and irrational manner.
Dualism, on the other hand, is the philosophy that proposes the definitive divide between mind and body. A divide that cannot be reasonably explained, as yet, by any rational scientific experiments. Counter to the claims of materialism, dualism posits that there is a divide between the material or physical world of matter, and the metaphysical worlds of thoughts and ideas within the mind.
The materialist places his faith in science, and proven advancements within biology, psychology, and the physical sciences. Whereas, the dualist, does not exclude the possibilities for the unknown, and seeks to understand the speciality or metaphysical connection between nature, the natural world, and the world of ideas.
Both camps of philosophy have valid claims and arguments yet neither can prove, beyond reasonable doubts, the exact nature of the self. Certainly, the materialist could prove, that identity is linked to the Ego, and thus to the psyche. And provide evidence that both these are, in fact, the foundation of the mind, and thus the foundation of self. Yet, there is no definitive evidence, that these are one and the same?
Is the Ego the self, or is the psyche the self?
Or... Are neither of these the real self?
The materialist may provide evidence to show that the mind is no more than the biological processes and functions of the brain and body, and that every aspect of thought and reaction, is governed by some external initial cause. They may show us the links between the physical phenomena of thirst and hunger, and the thought patterns associated within the brain to rectify these feelings with drinking and eating. They may even provide unquestionable evidence and experiments that show exact processes within the brain that deal with the motivation of the body and senses, of speech, sight, and even memory. And they can thus isolate, and even disable these processes in a living individual, or animal.
The weight of this evidence, of the physical nature of the brain and mind, is irrefutable. Yet one thing is missing from the whole picture. You may be able to identify and isolate the exact area within the brain that deals with speech, and thus stop a man from speaking, but have you stopped the man from wanting to speak? Have you prevented the man from his freewill to act?
In other words, you may have the knowledge and powers to disable physical actions of the body, by manipulating associated control areas within the brain, but does this affect the real mind at all? You may be able to take away a man's thoughts of thirst, or hunger, but can you prevent ideas?
The answer to this must be no. Ideas are still a mystery, and although thoughts and processes may be interpreted, identified, and even isolated within brain, it appears they cannot really be prevented, no matter how much the conjuror shows us his expertise. Although there certainly appears to be a fine line between which thoughts can be manipulated and which cannot.
Take for example, the memory. We know for certain, that memory is susceptible to intrusion and manipulation, and even damage. Amnesia both short term and long term, and the areas identified within the brain has shown us the vulnerability of the memory. Yet this still remains a mystery. One may have lost memory, only for it to return, days, months, or even years later?
And what of the materialist who may isolate, and even disable some memories? Can they really destroy any memories at all? One thing is for sure, no matter how much manipulation and intervention may occur, the seat of thought, the psyche still remains elusive within the brain, within the mind. This may be by no accident. This central identity must remain protected at all costs, and thus may not be isolated to within one area of the mind, or the brain at all?
Surely, to identify and isolate the immediate, short term, memory; the awareness of things immediately past and present; the immediate comparison between now and then: And thus to control or prevent this; would be to prevent awareness itself? Would prevent the comparison between subject and object, and thus, prove to disable the identity, the agent of comparison itself?
The dualist would maybe concur with the above, but would then exclaim it would be impossible to isolate or disable such awareness, as the metaphysical nature of this awareness, the self, does not reside in the brain at all. That this awareness is exactly the seed of life itself, that appears to be totally isolated from the physical processes of the brain and body. In fact, it is not so clear as to whether these are distinct terms at all? What came first, the awareness or the self? The awareness of self, or, the self of awareness? These terms seem to be immutable.
In this way, it may be concluded that the term 'mind', may have different interpretations within these different philosophical systems. The materialist may draw connections and conclusions that the mind is the physical processes within a biological brain, whereas, the dualist would posit that the mind is totally separated and distinct from any physical processes within the body. Once more, it is language and terminology that only serves to confuse and cloud issues where the exact distinction and determination of processes and matter, and of material forms, are concerned.
And so it appears, for the moment at least, we have arrived full circle, and are no longer any closer in defining the real self at all. Except that is, for perhaps one clue that has become apparent?
This connection between the terms of awareness and self. The self possesses attributes that unquestionably include awareness. In fact, one may reason that the self is awareness. Perhaps we should shift our investigations and enquiries into this direction even farther?
Back to contents..
