No-self, soul and not-self

[Lovingkindness]

This is what “I” believe the Buddha was saying.———
Think of a vast, boundless ocean — an endless expanse of perfectly clear water. The whole ocean is nothing but interconnectedH₂O; its molecules never have a separate, lasting identity. Waves arise, travel, and dissolve back into the sea, but no wave is an independent, unchanging thing — each wave is just water manifesting briefly.

In Pāli/Sanskrit there isn’t a single word for “not‑self” in ordinary English; the terms used are anattā (Pāli) or anātman (Sanskrit), often rendered as “no‑self.” “Not‑self” emphasizes the practical method: examining experience and seeing what is not a fixed, owning self. “No‑self” points to the ontological insight: there is no abiding, independent self to be found.

Awakening reveals the conditioned mind for what it is: a shifting, composite process — a cluttered collection of habits, memories, and afflictive patterns accumulated over a lifetime. That conditioned process is not an individual, immutable self. The awakened insight is the recognition that the true nature of mind has no fixed identity; it is like another molecule of H₂O — simply water appearing in different forms. Nothing “becomes” the awakening in the way a separate thing could; there is only the clarity that what we called “I” was never a permanent entity. But “ nothing” can realize “nothing”. The ocean is not empty. it’s an endless vast beauty free from a fixed self and the suffering of a self.

So: the conditioned mind can cause confusion and suffering, but it is not a self. Liberation is seeing that those formations arise and pass like waves on the ocean — temporarily visible, always water, never an independent self. This is just what I believe for what it’s worth. Please may you and all living beings be well and happy. free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Peace

 

[Thomas]

Hello, and welcome aboard.

And peace be with you also.

 

[Lovingkindness]

Hello, and welcome aboard.

And peace be with you also.

Thank you so much. I’ve been looking for the right site. Far too many sites, marketing themselves as philosophy, chat room forms or interface forms, justifying Facebook like fighting like children. This site looks great.

 

[Lovingkindness]

Thank you so much. I’ve been looking for the right site. Far too many sites, marketing themselves as philosophy, chat room forms or interface forms, justifying Facebook like fighting like children. This site looks great.

Oops, sorry. Should read Interfaith, not interface

 

[TheLightWithin]

Oops, sorry. Should read Interfaith, not interface

Great! Welcome! I hope you enjoy it here!

 

[otherbrother]

Liberation is seeing that those formations arise and pass like waves on the ocean — temporarily visible, always water, never an independent self.

Years ago when attending a talk by a guest speaker from a Church of Christ seminary I noticed how complex the explanations of how God works via entities, intercessors, like Christ. It dawned on me that Grace makes much more sense if we think dynamically, “like energy.” I had aspirations to write a book called Christians Thinking Like Energy, but ended up writing Christian Running in which running was a metaphor of “thinking like energy.” An ocean is akin to an energy field. In fact, when I was praying deeply for healing of my comatose son after an auto accident, at one point I had a vision of my son, my wife, me, and Jesus all walking together toward an ocean. As we got closer to the water we felt the ocean breeze on our forehead performing a healing action for my son who later made a full recovery from brain shears. He was yong enough to have good brain “plasticity” (rerouting capacity) but to this day I feel the envisioned and felt ocean breezes played an important role. Prior to that vision I had also seen strands of light weaving my son’s neurons together. If nothing else, my visions gave an otherwise helpless loving father a way to feel like I was participating in the healing process. At the very least my vision prayers were a very meaningful myth. But I do believe in “subtle energy,” and think that I was channeling it. Recently I came up with jingle: “Flesh manipulates. Spirit orchestrates.” Back when I prayed for my youngest son’s healing, I used light and the oceanic energy field to orchestrate healing, probably coordinating with my son’s natural healing processes. “With,” not “on.”
All this to say the ocean is a powerful metaphor of a highly interactive substrate of overall reality. Lynn McTaggart’s book The Field investigates the science suggestive of such an interactive and interconnected field, or “ocean.” In their book The Undivided Universe, Quantum physics theorists David Bohm and Basil Hiley postulate an “implicate order” beneath/within the physical realm of classical objects (“explicate order”). To explain how “active information” can be transmitted between subatomic particles they also deduced that there must be a yet deeper realm, “superimlicate order.” This smacks of the Vedic (?) concept of “causal body.” I sometimes call it “Mind Itself” which is nonlocal and independent of specific thoughts or projections.
Brain part candidates for “Thinking like energy “ are right brain hemisphere and prefrontal cortex. The latter is latest to evolve and seems responsible for, or at least helpful for, brain integration and flexible cognition and integrative consciousness, “thinking like energy.”

 

[Lovingkindness]

Years ago when attending a talk by a guest speaker from a Church of Christ seminary I noticed how complex the explanations of how God works via entities, intercessors, like Christ. It dawned on me that Grace makes much more sense if we think dynamically, “like energy.” I had aspirations to write a book called Christians Thinking Like Energy, but ended up writing Christian Running in which running was a metaphor of “thinking like energy.” An ocean is akin to an energy field. In fact, when I was praying deeply for healing of my comatose son after an auto accident, at one point I had a vision of my son, my wife, me, and Jesus all walking together toward an ocean. As we got closer to the water we felt the ocean breeze on our forehead performing a healing action for my son who later made a full recovery from brain shears. He was yong enough to have good brain “plasticity” (rerouting capacity) but to this day I feel the envisioned and felt ocean breezes played an important role. Prior to that vision I had also seen strands of light weaving my son’s neurons together. If nothing else, my visions gave an otherwise helpless loving father a way to feel like I was participating in the healing process. At the very least my vision prayers were a very meaningful myth. But I do believe in “subtle energy,” and think that I was channeling it. Recently I came up with jingle: “Flesh manipulates. Spirit orchestrates.” Back when I prayed for my youngest son’s healing, I used light and the oceanic energy field to orchestrate healing, probably coordinating with my son’s natural healing processes. “With,” not “on.”
All this to say the ocean is a powerful metaphor of a highly interactive substrate of overall reality. Lynn McTaggart’s book The Field investigates the science suggestive of such an interactive and interconnected field, or “ocean.” In their book The Undivided Universe, Quantum physics theorists David Bohm and Basil Hiley postulate an “implicate order” beneath/within the physical realm of classical objects (“explicate order”). To explain how “active information” can be transmitted between subatomic particles they also deduced that there must be a yet deeper realm, “superimlicate order.” This smacks of the Vedic (?) concept of “causal body.” I sometimes call it “Mind Itself” which is nonlocal and independent of specific thoughts or projections.
Brain part candidates for “Thinking like energy “ are right brain hemisphere and prefrontal cortex. The latter is latest to evolve and seems responsible for, or at least helpful for, brain integration and flexible cognition and integrative consciousness, “thinking like energy.”

Hello — I hope you and your family are well, and very glad your son is doing better. That must have been incredibly hard and scary for you all. Your post was interesting; I think we connected on many levels, if not all — and that’s okay. Sometimes there are many ways to tell the same story.

I respect everyone’s right to their beliefs and what they hold dear, as long as those beliefs do not cause suffering to others. Too much suffering is caused by the need to be right and by labeling others as lost or bad.

There is so much hatred and prejudice today. It has existed throughout history, but it feels worse now. I believe this comes from the false idea of “us and them,” an illusion many people perpetuate for their own benefit. I also believe, following the Buddha, that much suffering comes from grasping. People ask me why I’m a Buddhist; I say greed is humanity’s worst flaw because grasping is a form of suffering. When the Buddha spoke of grasping, he was often referring to the individual level rather than a grand, abstract level.

The belief in “us and them” is an illusion in many ways. We are one species — race is a social construct rooted in environmental differences, not fundamental human differences. Biology explains why there are no indigenous white people born in Africa (due to intense sunlight) or indigenous Black people in Nordic countries; people born closer to the equator need darker skin. Otherwise, we are all the same — brothers and sisters, as if born of the same source.

We are the only species that hates itself, kills its own in masses, and sometimes does so to the delight of a few. We are also the only species that destroys its habitat and environment, driven by greed at any cost — a cost that always falls on the poor and innocent. Just what I believe may you, family and all beings be well and happy. Free from suffering and the causes of suffering.

 

[otherbrother]

much suffering comes from grasping.

I believe that. A loose grip seems best, allows more flow and flexibility. Especially applies to belief. My Christian exploration of the role of one’s individual spirit leads me to believe it is not owned like my arm or my shoe, but assigned to my Concrete Self (regular physical me) for the duration of my life. That same spirit may have been assigned to many other lives before me. So to say it is “my” spirit is meant in a loose grip sort of way.

 

[otherbrother]

The belief in “us and them” is an illusion in many ways.

The “Mach Band” effect discovered by perceptual psychology makes edges be perceived in objects. It is a little trick our mind plays to help distinguish one object from another. Helps us manipulate objects. Part of the illusion of greater separation of beings and things than there Really is. Seeing unity transcends the Mach Band illusion and other contributors such as left brain oppositional, dichotomous, thought. The right brain is better at sensing patterns, gestalts. Its inclusion in thought leads to a poetic logic that transcends the “Tree of Knowledge (of good and evil and other dichotomies). The Tree of Life is a consciousness of life’s dynamics. Dynamics are like rivers leading to the Ocean. Hence, my valuing of “Thinking Like Energy.”

 

[otherbrother]

The “Mach Band” effect discovered by perceptual psychology makes edges be perceived in objects. It is a little trick our mind plays to help distinguish one object from another. Helps us manipulate objects. Part of the illusion of greater separation of beings and things than there Really is. Seeing unity transcends the Mach Band illusion and other contributors such as left brain oppositional, dichotomous, thought. The right brain is better at sensing patterns, gestalts. Its inclusion in thought leads to a poetic logic that transcends the “Tree of Knowledge (of good and evil and other dichotomies). The Tree of Life is a consciousness of life’s dynamics. Dynamics are like rivers leading to the Ocean. Hence, my valuing of “Thinking Like Energy.”

In a book titled Deep Simplicity, the author notes how dynamic interactions are the new frontier of science. As I understand it, Newton had to develop Calculus to adapt his theory to a situation in which a third object was interacting. In my own field (psychology) advanced statistics such as multiple regression and analysis of variance helped get a handle (albeit a “loose grip”) on multiple factors. Even that concept, “multiple factors,” showed how science evolves into understanding dynamics, first fruits of the prophesied “Tree of Life.” What’s next? Me learning about the whole me? Spirit and all? As spirit, I occupy more than one space (“simple location,” Whitehead, I think). We are translocated in each other and in all objects. Fish in an ocean.

 

[otherbrother]

In a book titled Deep Simplicity, the author notes how dynamic interactions are the new frontier of science. As I understand it, Newton had to develop Calculus to adapt his theory to a situation in which a third object was interacting. In my own field (psychology) advanced statistics such as multiple regression and analysis of variance helped get a handle (albeit a “loose grip”) on multiple factors. Even that concept, “multiple factors,” showed how science evolves into understanding dynamics, first fruits of the prophesied “Tree of Life.” What’s next? Me learning about the whole me? Spirit and all? As spirit, I occupy more than one space (“simple location,” Whitehead, I think). We are translocated in each other and in all objects. Fish in an ocean.

Internet search (Open A.I.) following this “line” (pun) of thought:

can drawing without lines help us develop empathy?

+4



Yes, drawing without lines—often termed mark-making, shading, or sketching by tone—can significantly help develop empathy by shifting focus from rigid outlining to observing and capturing the essence, weight, and emotional, "felt" quality of a subject. This process fosters deep observation, intuition, and intimate connection with the subject.

Realism Today +3
How It Develops Empathy:

• Promotes Deep Observation: By focusing on marks, textures, and shadows instead of outlines, you are forced to look more closely and connect with the subject, leading to a deeper understanding rather than a simplistic, stereotypical representation.
• Encourages Physical Connection: Drawing without lines (like in figure or life drawing) allows the artist to feel the "weight, posture and forces in the body," creating physical empathy.
• Focuses on Emotion and Intimacy: This method allows artists to connect with key elements like light or expressions, creating a "space of intimacy" that is a "celebration" of the subject, fostering a more compassionate viewpoint.
• Reduces Judgment: Shifting away from "getting the line perfect" allows the creator to focus on the overall effect and emotion, which can reduce anxiety and encourage more authentic emotional expression.
• Encourages Creativity Over Perfection: Instead of relying on lines, you use varied marks and textures to represent subjects, which encourages a more creative, intuitive, and less formulaic approach to seeing the world.
  
  
  Realism Today +5

By engaging in this process, you learn to see the world—and the people in it—more deeply and sensitively, cultivating empathy through artistic practice.

Realism Today +2
Further Exploration:

• Explore the concept of "[Stop Drawing with Lines]" to see how marks, rather than lines, can create more realistic and engaging drawings on YouTube.
• Read about Life Drawing's connection to empathy on Facebook to see how artists feel connected to their subjects.
• Discover how artistic expression can help in understanding emotions in a Karla McLaren article.

 

[Lovingkindness]

All interesting — I read everything you’ve written and usually delve a little deeper into your posts. A couple of thoughts:

These days a single word gets tossed around as if it’s a hot trend: empathy. From my experience, the people who boast the most about “feeling everyone’s pain” often show the least real empathy. Empathy with action is compassion. Empathy without action is pity — and pity feeds no one.

I founded a charity 21 years ago. We work locally, respond to national disasters, and have done a great deal of work in Africa. For health reasons I recently retired from hands‑on operations and handed the organization off. Over the years I’ve given countless talks and participated in many panels. After events I’m often approached by kind people asking how they can donate or get involved. There is always a percentage of people who loudly proclaim how much empathy they have for the suffering of the world.

I ask them: how do you want to start? Do you want to help with local projects, national efforts, or international work? Almost always their “empathy” immediately becomes: “Oh, I just don’t have any extra money right now.” I tell them that empathy doesn’t require donating money. There are many ways to help — rebuilding homes, raking leaves for the elderly, working with the homeless. I invite them to come to a project; there’s always something to do. Or come to our Code Blue emergency winter shelter and help serve meals — it takes about an hour to an hour and a half including cleanup. Compassion doesn’t have to be grand; it can be raking leaves or serving dinner to someone who otherwise wouldn’t have one.

Then the excuses continue: “I’m kind of busy with family stuff, book club, yada yada. Maybe soon — I’ll go to your website.” But acts of compassion can be very simple. I spent long overnights at the emergency shelter, talking with people who couldn’t sleep or who have mental illness. Often, you mostly listen. When you talk with someone who has schizophrenia, it can feel like you’re talking with five people at once — it’s complicated and heartbreaking, and a little dark humor helps sometimes. One common thread with people experiencing homelessness is how much they want to be seen: a simple hello, a pause for conversation, makes them feel recognized as an individual. If you worry they’ll spend money on alcohol, buy them a sandwich or a hot meal instead. Bend down, say hello.

Many people judge the homeless quickly, assuming addiction or moral failure. They don’t know the stories behind how someone fell into homelessness — how life can turn from comfortable to precarious in the blink of an eye.

I remember one man I sat with for a long time. He had been homeless about ten years but had once been a nuclear engineer with a good life. One day, leaning to reach a bag of peanut M&Ms, he had his first heart attack, followed by a stroke a week later. Over the next couple of years his health declined; by the time he recovered partially, his insurance and savings were gone. He became homeless. I promised to help get him into housing, but he said, “I’ve been sleeping in the woods for so long, it’s all I know now.” He died alone in the woods that winter, just before spring.

Empathy matters — but it must lead to action.

 

[Thomas]

So: the conditioned mind can cause confusion and suffering, but it is not a self. Liberation is seeing that those formations arise and pass like waves on the ocean — temporarily visible, always water, never an independent self. This is just what I believe for what it’s worth. Please may you and all living beings be well and happy. free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Peace

The water is not the wave, by which I mean waves travel through the medium, and in most cases the water stays pretty much where it is – it does not seek to possess the wave, or identify with it.

Only at the surface, or perhaps more accurately, at the edge, do we get the coming-and-going activity, which can be serene and passive, or turbulent and noisy, depending upon other elements at play.

This all might be 'blindingly obvious', or extraneous to the point, but it crossed my mind, and sometimes I find it pays to notice such passings, as they might well be pointers nudging me toward something else.

 

[Lovingkindness]

The water is not the wave, by which I mean waves travel through the medium, and in most cases the water stays pretty much where it is – it does not seek to possess the wave, or identify with it.

Only at the surface, or perhaps more accurately, at the edge, do we get the coming-and-going activity, which can be serene and passive, or turbulent and noisy, depending upon other elements at play.

This all might be 'blindingly obvious', or extraneous to the point, but it crossed my mind, and sometimes I find it pays to notice such passings, a an effect on the water making something appear to be something other than it is. Always water an. Illusion of being something other than it is, illusion of it having an identity a “self” affect the wind has in water creating this wave is like all things subject to impermanence. Like all things causes and conditions. like all things nothing is in and of itself, “self. May I ask can you reach into the water to find me that wave? No, you can’t as it was always water. The illusion of that wave being anything but water was just that, an impermanent illusion. There are no rainbows simply illusions. Rainbow is 100% non - rainbow elements. Water/h20, light which of course itself not and of itself. The light is

The water is not the wave, by which I mean waves travel through the medium, and in most cases the water stays pretty much where it is – it does not seek to possess the wave, or identify with it.

Only at the surface, or perhaps more accurately, at the edge, do we get the coming-and-going activity, which can be serene and passive, or turbulent and noisy, depending upon other elements at play.

This all might be 'blindingly obvious', or extraneous to the point, but it crossed my mind, and sometimes I find it pays to notice such passings, as they might well be pointers nudging me toward something else.

Greetings again my new friend. Wow are you overthinking this metaphor. The wave is 100% water. The wave was 100% h20, waves are wind having an effect on the water making something appear to be something other than it is.

Always water an. Illusion of being something other than it is, illusion of it having an identity a “self” affect the wind has in water creating this wave is like all things subject to impermanence. Like all things causes and conditions. like all things nothing is not in and of itself, “self.

May I ask can you reach into the water to find me that wave? No, you can’t as it was always water. The illusion of that wave being anything but water was just that, an impermanent illusion.
There are no rainbows simply illusions. Rainbow is 100% non - rainbow elements. Water/h20, light which of course itself not and of itself. The light is photons,packets of energy, travel in waves. It is electromagnetic radiation, various types of waves like gamma rays, X-rays. Radiation, as an example is not in end of itself radiation. It’s alpha particles, beta particles, and neutrons. A spectrum of colors. All of this emanating from the sun. Would take me hours to talk about how the sun was created, what elements created. It’s birth to death always changing, impermanent, where did those elements come from? From other elements created by elements made up of other elements.What are those elements comprised of then the sun itself? How is it fueled? Nuclear fusion. Is nuclear fusion in and of itself nuclear fusion? No, just all illusions of a “ self”. You speak of surface, there’s no difference between the bottom of the ocean and the top of the ocean. It’s just water continuously moving no identity. My friend you are attempting, to weigh overthink this. The ocean the molecules of H2O. I’m not speaking of an actual ocean. From space, there is no north pole, no up, no down.

My post was metaphorical, not a science class.

The ocean is all water. All H2O and none of the molecules of H2O differ from the other molecules of H2O, no individuality. My entire point was “ we “ are a not-self. Are we an “H2O?” Yes but nothing different and or etc. from all the other H2O. It not matters if for 20 seasons sings and dances. It is water affected by causes and conditions not of its self. It’s all water.

I believe in a true nature of mind, non-conditioned. That mind that awakens to the reality of all things being in permanent condition, suffering. “ something “ awakens, something attains enlightenment. A not- self.

The conditioned mind is not “me” not Mark it is 100% built on phenomena, everything you see, hear,do,people you meet, read-long list all “ make up your mind” . You are not who you were at birth, not at 10 nor 25, nor 50 nor at moments before death. There is not you see that is and itself Mark( my name.) what if i’m in an accident and wake up with amnesia, believing myself to be a completely different person with completely different life.

So Mark is gone. The sad illness that strikes young people around their 20s schizophrenia, the day before schizophrenia sets in and then the day after schizophrenia set in completely different person. What used to be called multiple personality disorder. Many personalities, usually a dominant one. But many different personalities with many different life stories which one’s real? None. May you, your family and all living beings be well and happy. Free from suffering and the causes of suffering.

 

[Thomas]

Greetings again my new friend. Wow are you overthinking this metaphor. The wave is 100% water.

Well I'm loathe to suggest otherwise, for fear of causing offence, but I was not so much overthinking the metaphor as exploring it?

I still stand by the idea that there are two things here – 'water' and 'wave' – take the wave away, we still have water. The wave is manifesting the effect of an exterior force upon the water.

The wave is (in this analogy) of water, but it is itself not water. It is an immaterial presence acting upon the water.

– The wave arrives, the water moves, the wave passes on. The water returns to its state of rest.
– In a physical sense, the water does absorb energy from the wave – signified by its degree of agitation.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'untrained mind' becomes agitated by the process of the wave's passage.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'trained mind' neither resists nor seeks to possess the wave. It adds nothing to it, nor asks anything of it.
– Nothing has changed.
– No matter how agitated or disturbed by the wave, the water remains true to itself.

Always water an. Illusion of being something other than it is, illusion of it having an identity a “self” affect the wind has in water creating this wave is like all things subject to impermanence. Like all things causes and conditions. like all things nothing is not in and of itself, “self.

That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.

I was simply offering a response to your wave.

My post was metaphorical, not a science class.

It was the metaphor I was addressing, not the science, or rather, alluding to the spiritual science.

... Are we an “H2O?”

I happen to think we are more than 'just' water.

+++

I believe in a true nature of mind, non-conditioned. That mind that awakens to the reality of all things being in permanent condition, suffering. “ something “ awakens, something attains enlightenment. A not-self.

I believe in the same, but I see a distinction between un-conditional or non-conditional and conditional states.

(I happen to think that we bridge the two – but that would take me beyond the scope of the current metaphor.)

In peace ...

 

[Thomas]

The conditioned mind is not “me” not Mark it is 100% built on phenomena, everything you see, hear,do,people you meet, read-long list all “ make up your mind” . You are not who you were at birth, not at 10 nor 25, nor 50 nor at moments before death. There is not you see that is and itself Mark( my name.) what if i’m in an accident and wake up with amnesia, believing myself to be a completely different person with completely different life.

I see all that as very much that which identifies as 'Mark', or 'Thomas', or whoever. All of that is phenomenal, ephemeral and transient. That self-knowing of the self as transient is all part of the same order of knowing.

... schizophrenia ...

This, and other detrimental conditions, is simply contingency at play. Beneficial conditions belong to the same order.

This is the surface activity I alluded to in my first post. It's all the coming-and-going activity, which can be serene and passive, or turbulent and noisy.

The 'unconditioned mind', if we are assuming something akin to 'the One', or what have you – is a transcendental state, prior to the realms of being in which we move and are. That does not mean the unconditioned mind is inaccessible to us, but it is not us, although we are of it.

To me, self-identification with the unconditioned is a confusion of degree – it's like the meditator who says "Look! I'm not thinking!"

The 'unconditioned mind' is such because it contains within itself all conditions, undifferentiated.

We are then instances of differentiation.

Whether there is any point or purpose to that is a whole other discussion.

 

[Thomas]

I noticed how complex the explanations of how God works via entities, intercessors, like Christ.

To be fair, I'd say that might be because you're filtering that information through the complex psycho-spiritual constructs you compose.

This is a non-denominational board, so I will not harry you with too much detail, but as a Christian, I don't see any 'complexity' in how God works, rather I see a Divine Simplicity. I do see what our Buddhist friends call diṭṭhi-gahana ('thicket of views' or 'thicket of speculation') when people try to rationalise the essential mysteries – be it from a personalist perspective in, say, 'Christ', or from an impersonal perspective in, say, Buddhist 'Enlightenment'.

It dawned on me that Grace makes much more sense if we think dynamically, “like energy.”

My response here would be "What other way is there to think of it?", other than a dynamic activity?

All this to say the ocean is a powerful metaphor of a highly interactive substrate of overall reality.

Hardly curious, then, that the idea of water is a key feature of primordial states in creation mythologies across the world.

... This smacks of the Vedic (?) concept of “causal body.” I sometimes call it “Mind Itself” ...

Have you looked at panpsychism? It's a theory that 'mind' or 'consciousness' is fundamental to, and an ubiquitous feature of, reality.

My own take is ordering itself towards an Indo-Abrahamic, or Vedic-Christian idea – that the cosmos is not a lifeless machine but an ensouled, intelligent 'emanation' of the Divine, the cosmos is psyche ('life'), nous ('mind') and pneuma ('spirit') from the ground up – or should that be 'waters up' ... ?

My nondualist panentheism regards panpsychism as a viable explanation, and one that is gaining currency at this time.

 

[Lovingkindness]

Well I'm loathe to suggest otherwise, for fear of causing offence, but I was not so much overthinking the metaphor as exploring it?

I still stand by the idea that there are two things here – 'water' and 'wave' – take the wave away, we still have water. The wave is manifesting the effect of an exterior force upon the water.

The wave is (in this analogy) of water, but it is itself not water. It is an immaterial presence acting upon the water.

– The wave arrives, the water moves, the wave passes on. The water returns to its state of rest.
– In a physical sense, the water does absorb energy from the wave – signified by its degree of agitation.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'untrained mind' becomes agitated by the process of the wave's passage.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'trained mind' neither resists nor seeks to possess the wave. It adds nothing to it, nor asks anything of it.
– Nothing has changed.
– No matter how agitated or disturbed by the wave, the water remains true to itself.


That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.

I was simply offering a response to your wave.


It was the metaphor I was addressing, not the science, or rather, alluding to the spiritual science.


I happen to think we are more than 'just' water.

+++


I believe in the same, but I see a distinction between un-conditional or non-conditional and conditional states.

(I happen to think that we bridge the two – but that would take me beyond the scope of the current metaphor.)

In peace ...

Well I'm loathe to suggest otherwise, for fear of causing offence, but I was not so much overthinking the metaphor as exploring it?

I still stand by the idea that there are two things here – 'water' and 'wave' – take the wave away, we still have water. The wave is manifesting the effect of an exterior force upon the water.

The wave is (in this analogy) of water, but it is itself not water. It is an immaterial presence acting upon the water.

– The wave arrives, the water moves, the wave passes on. The water returns to its state of rest.
– In a physical sense, the water does absorb energy from the wave – signified by its degree of agitation.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'untrained mind' becomes agitated by the process of the wave's passage.
– In a metaphorical sense, the 'trained mind' neither resists nor seeks to possess the wave. It adds nothing to it, nor asks anything of it.
– Nothing has changed.
– No matter how agitated or disturbed by the wave, the water remains true to itself.


That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.

I was simply offering a response to your wave.


It was the metaphor I was addressing, not the science, or rather, alluding to the spiritual science.


I happen to think we are more than 'just' water.

+++


I believe in the same, but I see a distinction between un-conditional or non-conditional and conditional states.

(I happen to think that we bridge the two – but that would take me beyond the scope of the current metaphor.)

In peace ...

A pre-note, you’re gonna find misspellings. The paragraphing is not great. The punctuations aren’t great. But my hand shaped pretty bad so I have to use voice to text and voice to text. Sucks.

OK before we start I just found some things. I’ve jumped over that address now rather going down to the body of my response to. Where they would fit better, but I’ll address them here quickly.

1- “– The wave arrives, the water moves, the wave passes on. The water returns to its state of rest.” no you’re confused pretty badly here. The wave is the wind, and water. The wave does not arrive the conditions for it does. The wind over the surface of the water. And influencing a piece a section of the water that creates the wave. Otherwise wind is wind waters water mixed together, = wave.

2– In a physical sense, the water does absorb energy from the wave – signified by its degree of agitation.” Nope again wrong. There is no wave without water. There’s wind. When the wind moves over the surface of the water combines with the water that’s a wave. Can you show me a picture of Wave without water?

“– Nothing has changed.
– No matter how agitated or disturbed by the wave, the water remains true to itself.” You just don’t get what the metaphor is about. Right that’s what I said nothing has changed, it’s water plus condition/wind(moving air) wind affects small portion of the water mixed together, water and wind rise up. Into a wave. The wind represents the illusion, or the condition. The wave affects the water and then the water falls back in to the water, it was always water. Wind lifts it up mixes with the water creates a wave gravity brings water back down to water. You really don’t understand what the wave is. And what’s worse is you’re getting into all kinds of stuff that have nothing to do with what I’m saying, the metaphor you want to do a science class and you’re not doing it well.

“– In a metaphorical sense, the 'untrained mind' becomes agitated by the process of the wave's passage.” not even close to what I am trying to say to explain non-self and not self . AND what do you mean by untrained mind? You mean unconditioned? There’s no such thing unless it’s a person in a catatonic state. This metaphor, is talking about after attaining awakening, so the mind is not untrained. The mind sees through the condition to mine. It’s free from all conditions free from suffering.

“That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.” no if that is your point you. I AM SAYING THE WATER IS ALWAYS WATER. and yes, I’ve said it over and over the wave is impermanent, but the wave no matter how much you don’t wanna believe it, is water and wind. Causes some conditions. As the wind passes through the water gravity pulls the water back down to the ocean. My point is the wave, the water within the wave never had an identity. It was always water. “

You’re all over the place.

I’ll say one more time. I say it down in the body of the conversation. Where it’s not as competitive because I didn’t find this part until I went through again. And none of your points are right. Wow points you make later all right or close. It’s my post. It’s my metaphor. I’m trying to teach people that are not self means. There’s nothing that is just water. There’s nothing that is in enough itself self. The water is comprised of endless molecules of H2O. When attaining awakening, consider yourself or think of yourself as a molecule of H2O. No identity, just the same as all H2O, but one of them.

“Well I'm loathe to suggest otherwise, for fear of causing offence, but I was not so much overthinking the metaphor as exploring it?” why on earth do you think I would find offense in you responding, expressing your thoughts and opinions? please post for me anyplace in all my posts one sentence which would infer I ban or get personally “ offended” by you making a statement? If anything what would be offensive as you suggesting you know what I think, or you know me. You don’t. Please feel free to express any thought or a position on anything. That’s why I’m here looking for adult mature respectful conversation. If that’s not what I saw it I would not be here. Please feel free to call me names if you so desire, they will not hurt my feelings.

That was a fairly arrogant statement. I’m sure you’re not an arrogant person,but in this instance you believing you know how I will react to a comment I make on a platform that’s designed for interaction between two people or more in a conversation is fairly arrogant. So let’s move on and no need to fear saying something then saying it anyway we are friends here talking nothing more. I placed no rules. It comes with a point where we’re no longer being friendly or we attack each other on either side and the conversation ends. I’m looking to be friends having a conversation nothing more so don’t make assumptions about me.

In the usage of the Wave was 100% a metaphor of being no self, no permanent identity, impermanence and conditioning, i.e. the condition of mind, temporary causes, and conditions. Waves are primarily wind blowing past the surface of the water.

Yes water (not an individual fixed self) transferring energy that creates circular motion in the water. Water be influenced, temporary, condition. gravity as the main driving force causing any displacement, the change in position of an object of, water, yes, water.

May I ask and hope you answer What are surfers surfing on? They’re surfing on water being affected by temporary causes and conditions. The conditions/causes temporary the water permanent clear clean free from conditioning. This was not meant to be a science class.

This is way overflowing what was a simple metaphor and visual. Now it’s becoming confusing to people who I was trying to explain my thoughts on soul, no self, not self.

Oh yes. You tend as many do, ignore things that would not fit your narrative. I answer every point made. Of course that doesn’t make me perfect or better than anyone. Clearly you’re very intelligent. But please don’t cherry pick.

I asked could you reach down into the water and pull out a wave, Even touch one? You failed to answer that one. Because it didn’t exist . Rainbows don’t exist as I explain further down. It’s an illusion built on rainbow elements. I know you agree with me on that, I hope so.

I’ve run it my entire post through three different AI, all agree and basically say Word for Word that it’s the most beautiful visual ex explanation of not self. Now, all three AI are smarter than me and you, and everyone. but everybody smarter than me .

That’s all I wanted. I didn’t want to give anyone a science class. It was a metaphor for people who were struggling with or interested in the differences of the three words with a representative. I explained that the Buddha did not say not self, because there was no word for not self at that . So I did not get into. Because that would cause friction.

So let’s not beat to death this horse anymore. But it’s everyone’s right to do what you do and I’ll tell anybody want to post, what to say, what to do.

Once again we’re friends talking, I hope we’re friends anyway it seemed like it. PS how’s the weather over there? I live in Arizona, so it’s always sunny and hot here. Later on down I see you

You twisted my language around, misrepresented what I said, but we’ll get to that.

“I still stand by the idea that there are two things here – 'water' and 'wave' – take the wave away, we still have water. The wave is manifesting the effect of an exterior force upon the” you said the wave was not water now you say it is? As I said above causes and conditions as I said. Water rose up due to external conditions impermanent. What falls back to the ocean is water, H2O molecules of H2O. No different than all the H2 of that ocean no individual identity. The external conditions that caused the wave, are the conditions the metaphor of the conditions that shape our minds throughout our lifetimes. “You “ are not who you were at birth, 10, 25, 45, 75 or on death bed. Your conditioned mind was shaped by external experiences, relationships from mom and dad to friends. By songs, movies, things you once heard and believed to what changed your mind bee endless conditions. If you were take. At birth to another country you would be shaped by other cultures, other families all different conditions. The conditioned mind is fact. The non- conditioned mind the mind that sees through the illusions in the conditions is the mind that becomes enlightened, awakened. No different from any other mind no identity no conditioning. That of course is my belief not asking or pushing it on you to believe. It’s just what I and my Buddhist teachings teach.



My whole point of the visual of the ocean and an awakened mind is a molecule of H2O. Not separate from the ocean just part of it. My point was the difference from “ no-self” and “not-self”. There was no word in anattā (Pāli) or anātman (Sanskrit),for not-self only no-self.

A no- self could not become awakened, not see through the illusions, and the illusions of the conditioned mind, free from suffering. So not a nothing and not a something/ someone. The metaphor used was just another molecule of H2O not different not distinct from any other just part of the other. “ water.” is not in an of itself water, it’s molecules of H2O uncountable amounts of H2O molecules. That’s the only visual I was trying to demonstrate. And it was a really good one. I was not trying to give a science lesson. Had nothing to do with science. The visual was the wave being a conditioned.” Something” like something different from the water, the molecules of H2O. It was never different. It was always water affected by conditions, fleeting conditions.


Again, as far as the awaken mind, and enlightenment, etc. I am not forcing that belief on anyone, I’m explaining my belief. As you explained in many post that I still haven’t read all through yet, but I am working through. I’m not gonna break them apart. I may ask questions about different things to learn a different belief as I have done with several different beliefs. I respect your right to believe whatever you wish to believe, just as I do all beings as long as that belief doesn’t cause others suffering. I’m gonna read your stuff, I’m not gonna nitpick it apart. I’m gonna read it and think this, these are his thoughts his beliefs. Interesting. I last looked deeply into Jainism to fully understand it, and that’s what it was an exploration into another belief that I don’t believe but I wanted to know what Jainism was completely.

A problem with too many people today is they are losing the ability to be inquisitive. I never wanna lose that ability. That’s why I said I’m going to the astrophysics, universe, Cosmos section next. Because I have great great interest in that I know a great deal about it and I want to absorb everything else that I can about it. It’s a good example because not everything believed right now about the universe is 100% true, proven much of it is physics, much of it is conjecture using what is known. And much of his theory, but theory based on physics and what can be known.

Many believe in the Multiverse, I also believe in the Multiverse. Bubble universes, many believe in the string theory multi universes, some in the mirror universe, which I just can’t believe, I don’t want her to be another me. One of me is bad enough.

But it’s a good example, there’s many lines and theories of the cosmos. I happen to believe like some other astrophysicist, and a growing amount of astrophysicist that as a black hole starts to disintegrate over trillions of years all the years it was active and sucking in everything that got near it son’s planets even light. It created a similarity. Basically crushed everything in to an incredibly unimaginably dense singularity. Hawking radiation theory believes that as the black hole in the horizon disintegrate so does the singularity. I believe along the line as some in a growing percent of astrophysicist and cosmetologist, believe that the singularity survives and becomes a new, bubble universe.

But it’s just theory, it’s what I happen to believe looking at the evidence. There is no clear answer on many things about the universe. That I love to learn what everyone thinks then I spent a long time thinking about everything I take in, and come up with my theories, and many of my theories are lining up with people a whole lot smarter than me. But through thinking and imaging in my mind, I was able to put together theories that are believed to be true. And I am not for sure an astrophysicist. I am a thinker, but you are.

You write “That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.” no that’s what I was saying. The water that was taken up by the conditions, the wind, etc., was Stillwater water fell back into the ocean. I just looked back and there is a point where you said that a wave is not water it is it was of course it was. It was water appearing because of conditions to be something it wasn’t, as the conditions faded because they were impermanent as I’ve been saying, gravity for forced the water back into the ocean with all the other molecules of H2O. There is no true identity of that wave. Causes and conditions affecting water, H2O. What you saw is water.
Just like the conditioned mine if you looked at me at 15 and now look at me at almost 70 you would see two different things because of the conditioning throughout the lifetime. That’s my point. In the awakened mind sees past all that conditioning. But again that’s within my belief and I’m not forcing it on anyone.

“I was simply offering a response to your wave” but it wasn’t a science lesson, it was a metaphor for external conditions conditioning being illusions or making an illusion that there was an identity of that water, but there wasn’t it was just water. So the wave was just representing something I wasn’t talking about the scientific breakdown of how a wave is formed. Just the imagery.

But again, I’m not attacking you for saying, whatever you said, it’s a conversation for him. You said what you said, and I told you what I meant by what I wrote. What it meant, and represented because I’m the one who wrote it and I wrote it for a reason imagery. People ask me all the time what’s the difference from no self and not self I was trying to explain that.

I asked all the time “ oh when Buddha attain enlightenment, did he just poof and disappear??” of course not he’s still was in this realm, this realm of suffering. He became awaken, saw the truth, and removed himself from the cycle of rebirth and death. But he still had a central nervous system. He was still a human. So I know you understand this, but these people didn’t understand that when you maintain awakening you just don’t poof and disappear.

“It was the metaphor I was addressing, not the science, or rather, alluding to the spiritual science.” Well you can say that all you want, you are not addressing the metaphor. Of a permanence of the wave being water affected by a condition never having a separate identity from the rest of the water. I know you’re not going to agree I’m gonna say it again, but you were making a science class out of what it was just imagery. I was trying to explain to people who were interested what does non-self mean and not self.

“I happen to think we are more than 'just' water.” Cool, I respect that that your belief. I don’t wanna attack anyone’s beliefs. Because they are just that beliefs, there are no proofs. Well, not many, like a condition mind is provable. Is there a true nature of mine the mind that is awakened? I can’t prove that I can only believe what I believe as you believe what you believe.

The world would be in much better situation if people just gave the same loving kindness, respect, and compassion they seek for themselves and their families. Not that you were disrespecting or attacking me. I spent too long on Facebook not to know what attacking is, personal attacks, death, threats, and all the other foolishness. I’m not saying you disrespected me at all.

“(I happen to think that we bridge the two – but that would take me beyond the scope of the current metaphor.)” and of course you’re free to believe that whatever you would like. But when you come to my post, and start speaking about something I wasn’t speaking about. I was doing a simple metaphor to teach people who have asked me the difference between nine and not self.
Anyway time to walk the dog. May you and all being well unhappy, free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Peace. I’m done with this topic over and out. I hope to see you on other topics maybe come over to the cosmos for a visit.

 

[Vasu Devan]

I would rather say the conditioned 'brain' causes suffering in the aware mind. I'm still not sure myself if awareness is caused by the brain alone. We are aware during waking, dreaming and deep sleeping. The content changes but knowledge that awareness existed is possible always. When we wake from sleeping, there is a sense that the time spent was not all dreaming but there is a sense of greater activity towards the end of normal sleep as opposed to the start. Coma state may be an exception since I dont know if someone waking from it is aware that time was spent in a less aware state or that the time between going into coma and coming out feel instantaneous.

But yes, conditioning of the brain of the human begins possibly from birth. Infancy is possibly the freest of our life states as I dont think the infant experiences imagination right away. Even our sense of self takes a while to develop. Pain is felt as a present physical experience, not as fear of an assumed imaginary one. We teach our children that something 'must be or must not'. Made up boundaries that must not be crossed due to cultural and social rules. This limiting of what I can be and cannot be is prolly what creates the illusion of the separate self.

The brain by default is very reactive organ generating emotions based on a fear system along with desires and aversion leading to action or inaction. The basic flight/fight reaction is simply formed by fear of a assumed threat in awareness. If there is belief the self is not strong enough to destroy this threat, the brain reverts to removal by taking itself away from the present threat.

Imagination is prolly the sole ability of the human brain. We can image beauty or horror and this dual ability makes it both blessing and curse. So the brain can imagine potential imaginary threats and changes its behavior response to desires/aversions based on that.

The saving grace is that, with effort, the brain can be retrained not to resist fear. It can go a long way practicing this and teachings like Zen, Buddhism and Daoism are free enough with few boundaries defined that all can approach them to learn. Our suffering experience can never go away permanently but we can train the brain not to react so automatically to the fear response.

I know this as fact not theory simply because I practiced meditation and it helped my psychotic brain end mania during psychosis by training myself to face the fear of the state without jumping into the normal mania as response. Now any fear while I am conscious can simply be observed without fearing the fear. It is experienced as a slight high until fear state dissolves. The psychosis has changed dramatically but I still enter torpid psychosis in sleep sometimes because unconscious fear while dreaming can sometimes trigger it. So, not perfect but the end of mania is a HUGE advantage.

Retraining the brain is not a breeze but I believe the effort is worth the reward. I am currently trying to train my brain not to resist boredom state by automatically turning to my phone and pc. Living by baselines is not 'fun' but I can be at peace while I wait for the lows of boredom to end.

 

[Thomas]

A pre-note, you’re gonna find misspellings. The paragraphing is not great. The punctuations aren’t great. But my hand shaped pretty bad so I have to use voice to text and voice to text. Sucks.

Yes, that does suck, and kudos to you for persevering. I hope your situation improves.

But let's take a beat here ...

Reading your post, I found it dogmatic and confrontational, and was of the opinion that we're not going to get anywhere, so I was simply going to say I saw no point in continuing, and stop there.

Reading further, I got to:

why on earth do you think I would find offense in you responding ...

Not offence, necessarily, I suppose – but you do appear to take exception to the things I say.

I can only go by the 'strength' of your language.

If anything what would be offensive as you suggesting you know what I think, or you know me...

OK.

How offended would you be if I suggested: "you’re confused pretty badly here" or "You just don’t get what the metaphor is about" or "You really don’t understand what the wave is" How does that sound?

Or how about: "stuff that have nothing to do with what I’m saying, the metaphor you want to do a science class and you’re not doing it well... You’re all over the place... And none of your points are right."
You tell me.

But I'll take you at your word, and proceed in good faith.

Here, I've gone through for the fourth time, trimming by responses back to the bare minimum. This risks coming across as arrogant or dogmatic, but it's not, I'm purely trying to focus on the point as succinctly as I can. I'm not being 'short' with you, or 'sharp' ... simply getting away from extraneous detail.

+++

When the wind moves over the surface of the water combines with the water that’s a wave.

I would rather say:
When the wind moves over the surface of the water, some of the energy moving the wind transfers to the water – the wind does not combine with the wave – and that it's the transferred energy that creates the wave.

The wind is itself air, but moved by a force acting upon it. The driving force is neither air nor water, nor wind nor wave. The former are simply the physical elements the force acts upon, the latter are the physical evidence of that action.

Can you show me a picture of Wave without water?

Sure, there's there's loads of them. Oscilloscopes. Magnets and iron filings. The resonance of a guitar string. 'Chladni patterns' caused by sound waves through a medium, such as beads on a drumskin.

What you're seeing here in the patterns formed are a cross-section of the sound waves.

+++

The wind represents the illusion, or the condition. The wave affects the water and then the water falls back in to the water, it was always water.

Which has been my point all along. (In hindsight, I was unconsciously responding to the Buddhist reference of your name.)

In mindfulness meditation, when stray thoughts arise, the general rule is not to lose focus, not to follow them, not to attach to them, not to be agitated by them, not to judge them, nor judge yourself because of them ... just observe them dispassionately, let them go, and return to the practice.

I accept that I have not yet broached your "non-self and not self" – because I am not sure I understand it. I was trying to clear the ground between us to get there.

AND what do you mean by untrained mind? You mean unconditioned?

By 'untrained mind' (hence the parenthesis), I meant the Buddhist idea: "an untrained mind is the primary source of suffering, characterized by restlessness, automatic emotional reactions, and the delusion of a fixed "self."

By 'unconditioned mind' I would again refer to the Buddhist lexicon, as asankhata a mind-state free of all attachment.

My point is the wave, the water within the wave never had an identity. It was always water.

I would say that 'water' is the identity of water. Whether calm or disturbed is a conditional state, by the force acting upon it. Wave is a conditional state of water, as is ice, or steam.

The water is comprised of endless molecules of H2O. When attaining awakening, consider yourself or think of yourself as a molecule of H2O. No identity, just the same as all H2O, but one of them.

I tend to avoid that metaphor, I think its problematic.

+++

So let’s move on and no need to fear saying something then saying it anyway we are friends here talking nothing more.

OK

I asked could you reach down into the water and pull out a wave, Even touch one? You failed to answer that one. Because it didn’t exist

They do exist, but not as physical entities – If you can see, that's light waves entering the eye; if you can hear, that's sound waves. Touch a surface when a wave is reverberating through it, and you feel it ...

Rainbows don’t exist as I explain further down. It’s an illusion built on rainbow elements. I know you agree with me on that, I hope so.

Again, too general and somewhat inaccurate. They do not exist as oranges or apples do, but they are visual phenomena that result when certain definite conditions are met. They're not an illusion – passing light through a prism is the same principle, the different colours result from different wavelengths refracted through the glass.

PS how’s the weather over there? I live in Arizona, so it’s always sunny and hot here.

Warm sun, chill wind ... very British ... not sure what it's gonna do next!

you said the wave was not water now you say it is?

No, I said the wave was the effect of a force upon the water.

If you drop a pebble in a pool, you get concentric waves. That's the force moving outward through the water.

If you float a rubber duck in the pool, and drop a pebble – I wish I thought of this earlier – the concentric circles move outward, but the duck bobs up and down on the spot – it does not surf the wave.

My analogy here is the duck is the 'self' and remains in place. All the other stuff, bobbing and such is what we identify as self, but which is, in fact, extraneous, contingent, ephemeral and so on ...

The external conditions that caused the wave, are the conditions the metaphor of the conditions that shape our minds throughout our lifetimes.

Now we're getting to it.

“You “ are not who you were at birth, 10, 25, 45, 75 or on death bed.

Yes. I see it as dynamic being. An instance of being undergoing movement and change.

Your conditioned mind was shaped by external experiences ... The conditioned mind is fact.

OK, I have no argument with that.

The non-conditioned mind the mind that sees through the illusions in the conditions is the mind that becomes enlightened, awakened. No different from any other mind no identity no conditioning. That of course is my belief not asking or pushing it on you to believe. It’s just what I and my Buddhist teachings teach.

I don't disbelieve you ... I'm just not clear I understand you. So I would ask:
"The non-conditioned mind the mind that sees through the illusions ... " Enlightened? Asankhata, in contrast to sankhata ('conditioned phenomena')?
"in the conditions is the mind that becomes enlightened, awakened." OK, the enlightened mind sees through the conditioning.
"No different from any other mind no identity no conditioning." No different from any other enlightened mind?
I struggle to grasp what you mean here – we can have two enlightened people, but they are not identical in themselves, although I suppose you could say they are 'of one mind', but then we could say that of conditioned people ... you see my difficulty?

That of course is my belief not asking or pushing it on you to believe. It’s just what I and my Buddhist teachings teach.

That's fine. I have a parallel belief, based on my Christian orientation, but I have avoided using my terms.

My whole point of the visual of the ocean and an awakened mind is a molecule of H2O. Not separate from the ocean just part of it.

OK. Yes, that's a good image, as far as it goes.

My point was the difference from “ no-self” and “not-self”.

That is the bit I still do not get.

In my Christian mind, I see the 'self' as emerging from that which is prior to and transcends all selfhood – I see me as a conditional state, a 'human being', emerging from the unconditioned, in which all states exist as possibilities, all states exist undifferentiated. I am a particular instance at a particular place and time. Drop that 'I' into different places, and different times, and a different 'I' will emerge, I understand that, but there was the original 'I' to begin with ...

That original state of 'me' is prior to nature/nurture conditioning, that which is there in my origin, the state upon which all conditioning occurs, that which is conditioned by nature, nurture, etc., etc. is nonetheless 'me'?

This is probably where Christianity and Buddhism appears to part company, but I am sure that there is common ground ... I've just never quite found it.

Many believe in the Multiverse, I also believe in the Multiverse. Bubble universes, many believe in the string theory multi universes, some in the mirror universe, which I just can’t believe, I don’t want her to be another me. One of me is bad enough.

Oooh, you might be in for a surprise ...

You write “That was rather my point. The water is eternally itself. The wave is an impermanence.” no that’s what I was saying.

OK, but what I said was correct, however much I missed the point you are trying to make.

The water that was taken up by the conditions, the wind, etc.,

Still water, its 'resting' state, is conditional, determined by the force of gravity upon it. The moon draws water, the moon makes waves. A drop of water spreads and finds its level. A drop of water in space resembles a bubble, there's no force acting on it. All of it is conditional state. The molecular bond is a conditional state – break the bond and you have hydrogen and oxygen.

Still water is H2O. Steam is H2O. Ice is H2O. Water is H2O. A wave is a force, a wave is not H2O.

This cosmos is conditional by nature – there's nothing it it that isn't.

There is no true identity of that wave.

Yet no two waves are the same – each is its own thing.

Just like the conditioned mine if you looked at me at 15 and now look at me at almost 70 you would see two different things because of the conditioning throughout the lifetime. That’s my point. In the awakened mind sees past all that conditioning. But again that’s within my belief and I’m not forcing it on anyone.

But I would still see you, at 5, 15, 25, 75. It would still be you.

it was a metaphor for external conditions conditioning being illusions or making an illusion that there was an identity

And I was offering the metaphor as an example of the Buddhist context of being as just a bundle of ephemerality ...

I asked all the time “ oh when Buddha attain enlightenment, did he just poof and disappear??” of course not he’s still was in this realm, this realm of suffering. He became awaken, saw the truth, and removed himself from the cycle of rebirth and death. But he still had a central nervous system. He was still a human. So I know you understand this, but these people didn’t understand that when you maintain awakening you just don’t poof and disappear.

Exactly! That's why the drop of water in the ocean metaphor is limited ...