Is the human self nonexistent?

[Ninshub]

Take your time!

Just as a parenthetical aside:

Re: Vervaeke. I didn't know this guy, and I just assumed by that podcast that he was pushing physicalism. (Indeed I misunderstood that: see my redaction in post 99). That is clearly not his agenda at all. He's a cognitive science/philosophy professor, teaches Buddhist psychology, and his main focus is quite spiritually rich and informed: the meaning crisis we are in as a culture and how to awaken from it. Notions of self-transcendence (we need to feel connected to something larger than ourselves), what we can learn from mystical experiences and why people seek them (including psychedelics), changing our way of being rather than just focusing on beliefs which our culture prioritizes (ideologies), etc. etc.

Very deep and informed stuff:
 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL...5eC1ZfZwWJ

I'm listening to the first introductory video/lecture in that very long series which I recommend.

[Ninshub]

nbtruthman just noted this about the NDE tim posted:

One thing that struck me about this was his recounting how he was communicated with by his higher self or soul. The clear implication of this is at least apparently what I have contended for some time, that for several reasons the human self and the soul must be different, separate beings, with the human self presumably temporary in some sense. Here's a first-hand account that seems to confirm this separateness, where both beings simultaneously exist and communicate with each other. This experience of communication came up at about 5:10 or so in the talk

@Laird . What do you make of this?

And I wonder what Titus Rivas would make of it?

[Laird]

nbtruthman just noted this about the NDE tim posted:

[...]

@Laird . What do you make of this?

Well, a separate self is a separate self - there's not much more to say except that it tends to imply that the self incarnated in this physical reality is utterly obliterated and annihilated at death, which I don't think many of us on this board would agree is the case based on the evidence.

[Ninshub]

Thanks Laird.

I don't know that it says that precisely, because we don't know what follows (i.e. if Josef's body had actually died and he'd completed the transition). If Josef is merged into his higher self, I gather you would conceptualize this as his being "utterly obliterated" but I'm not entirely seeing that way. But my deeper intuition about this (and referencing how experiencers continually express that they're trying to convey in human words and concepts something that goes beyond them) is that the reality is probably too complex to be understood by us with our human logic and space-time illusion constrained-reasoning.

I'd add that this NDE arguably also has to be part of "the evidence".

There is the other possibility that Josef is interpreting that being he's communicating with as his higher self. There isn't enough elaboration to see if that can be ruled out (e.g. if that higher self communicated to him that it was indeed his higher self).

[Laird]

Hi Ian,

I had in mind nothing about the NDE but specifically this part of @nbtruthman's comments which you quoted: "the human self and the soul must be different, separate beings, with the human self presumably temporary in some sense". I note in particular his use of the word "temporary". It is from that description that I in turn referenced the meaning apparently implied: the utter obliteration and annihilation at biological death of that which I referred to as "the self incarnated in this physical reality" and which nbtruthman had, in the quote you supplied, referred to as "the human self".

I draw different conclusions from the NDE than does nbtruthman.

I hope that this clarifies my response.

We've all heard this described before, the higher self (I don't know what it actually means anymore than anyone else does). He talks about a spiritual being coming towards him. Is this any different from the "being of light" ?  We don't know and he doesn't go into detail. I guess we would have to press him a lot further but what would he say differently? Probably not a lot.

[Ninshub]

I draw different conclusions from the NDE than does nbtruthman.

Thanks for the clarification Laird.

I am interested in hearing more about your own conclusions from the NDE though.

[Laird]

I am interested in hearing more about your own conclusions from the NDE though.

Given that, I rewatched it and extracted a few quotes. I'll stick to my conclusions in respect to the theme of human self vs higher self, and in particular whether the former is merely temporary, and is obliterated upon physical death, perhaps by being "absorbed" into the higher self. Obviously, there is a lot more that one could conclude from this NDE, both as a particular experience and - as tim points out - as a good representative of NDEs in general.

Here's the first quote that I think is relevant: "There is no absolute death in the conventional sense of the word. There is only the transition from an embodied to a disembodied state. When we die, we leave the body behind, and we receive clarity on what is most important in life."

Is there anything in this quote that indicates "absorption into the higher self" at death? If so, I don't see it. All I see is "transition from embodiment to disembodiment", not "transition and then you're gobbled up into the higher self and cease to exist anymore".

Next up:

"I had communication with my higher spiritual being, which I understood to be my higher self, as if a part of me had always been there, inhabiting this other world. This spiritual being or my higher self knew everything about me and had a purely benevolent, supportive, and confident attitude towards me."

This describes Josef's understanding of his higher self. It is not directly relevant to the question of what happens after death, but sets the context for the next quote, which is a communication from that higher self:

"I was told that if I were to continue into the light the energetic connection to my body would dissolve, thus, my physical body would cease to exist, and that a return to my Earthly life would not be possible."

Again, I see nothing about the absorption or otherwise annihilation of the supposedly merely "temporary" human self. I don't expect such an understanding to have been left out if in fact it was the case.

[Ninshub]

Good analysis, Laird. And you're right.

Could the hierarchy be akin to dreams within dreams?

I've mentioned it before, but I had a dream where I had an intense, hateful high-school rivalry against the actor who played Harry Potter...and when I woke up I had no idea what [t]hat was about.

But I've also had dreams where I knew people who don't exist with what seemed like memories going far back. Even dreams where tragedy leaves me sad for a time.

When we die here, is it possible that over time we "wake up" to our true self? So it isn't annihilation of self necessarily, but the attachment to this current "dream" is what fades?