and seemingly it is originated from their notion of the God.

Against this notion, the SELF = ME became its counter notion as rigid as the God.

As the concept of Self is there, the Self is the one who see the subject ( of cause, you may say, who else

saw and talked about the subject in his book, in his philosophy.  And say, Is this a Zen Mondo ?  🙂 )

( Shut up  🙂 )  As long as the subject is somebody else, there is no problem, hence scientific, objective

rationality works well and yelled this impressive western technological civilization.

Because of the objectivity is Selfless in its definition. Anyhow, the nature and its phenomena,

physics are there before human existence. We are just the observer regardless whoever the Self.

—

But when the Self try to see the Self ( or True Self what so ever the context ) and the phenomena around it.

The perpetual question of  Who is the Self came into the play. Therefore, the matter related to

themselves, psychology, human science, social phenomena, etc, it always plagued by its view-point = Self.

In fact, from ancient Plato to modern Phenomenology etc, they misbelieved that they can objectively see

the human affair and able to construct the philosophy as well.  And they stuck in the cul-de-sac.

Because even an  Atheist, started exactly the same stance, The Dualism. —– God and Me / Me and

the Subject / Observer and be Observed,  the uncertainty of the Self is still persistent,

hence its stance of view point,  reliability itself is in doubt.

The fundamental trouble of this stance is, we can’t objectively observe the Self or the phenomena

attributed by ourself. —–  we always end-up in unseeable and unknowable.

On the end everybody just resigned to say  ” Don’t bother, there are thousands of truth ”   🙂

So that, some Philosopher try to grasp this unknowable with the notion of  Transcendental though, made

further  mistake try to convert it to explanatory words by thinking. ( You may say, What else ?  😀  )

This was the very situation, which Buddha encountered soon after he got his enlightenment,

Should I teach this to others or not.  Can this be transmittable by the words ?

( This is why, the Buddha’s teaching has been conveyed by the practice and metaphor )

—

While we are thinking, most of its process ( some says 90% of it ) are taking place in our

subconsciousness. —– And so-called Self is a mere temporally mock-up model by guess-work, since it

never stays the same, moment to moment and never rationally configurable like our thinking process.

Hence True Self which reside in our subconscious is ever invisible and remained undefinable.

This was the reason why Buddha said  ” Don’t bother there is no such thing like Self exists”  :-D.

The situation was made even harder, as the basis of our thinking are also contained in the immense

amount of the Data or information which we accumulated without aware of its existence.

—– so, am I talking hopeless ?  Am I giving cold water to the Philosopher’s pleasure to express themselves ?

The answer is again in the Buddha’s words ” Don’t take a word, think yourself “

And to against the fundamental flaw of Dualism, the Zen giving the answer ” Ichijo ”  Oneness.

In Ichijo we can overcome the alienation of the subject, alienation of the Self.

The barrier between observer and be observed disappear.

( Which I’m going to talk further in the next post )

___/\___

—