Everything is non-self

When asked, if their a soul or a self, Buddha reportedly answered that we should identify everything as non-self.

Self is an unthinkable thing. The previous investigation into self-reference highlights the intrinsic problems of self. If we really had any relationship with ourselves, so that we might truly be able to refer to something as "self" would not that self be non-self referential? For if that self was self-referential then it would refer to itself and not-ourselves and if it was not self-referential then it would not be ourself since we are by definition in relation to it. In other words "can the mirror image really be us?". If the reflection is us then who is it a refection of? and if it is not us then how can it be our reflection. Neither are true, but neither are false either. Can a reflection really be of itself? It defies explanation. It is dialectical in european parlance, and certainly non-dualistic.

and so is the self.

More obviously where is the world are we? Can we point to anything in the world that we call ourselves? We might begin by pointing at the body. But what if we lost a part of our body, which bit is ourself? And so begins an endless process of finding the object whose reflection we call ourself.

Basically as far as we are concerned there is no thing called the self, because all the things in the universe are not ourselves. Indeed that is exactly what we are... not all the things in the universe! That is the great realisation that atman is brahman, it is the great realisation that the self is empty, of Hui Neng that because we are empty (or negative) there is room for the whole universe to exist... of Kierkegaard (quoted excellently in Waynes world) "If i name thee, I negate thee"... of Heideggar when we says that Being hides itself in the creation of the many beings... Being (ourself) is the negation of all th things, indeed is negative by the objective things of which we are actually "NOT" any of them. This is not nihilation but a very deliberate relationship between what IS and what must therefore NOT be, the two in an inexplicable relationship and marriage.

In society to make things confusing exists the double negation. "Gosson you are late" screams my teacher. My teacher is not-me. But to him I am not-him. He is my mirror reflection and I am his mirror reflection. So my mirror reflection is pointing at me and calling me his reflection... "Gosson!!" that is to say he is shouting, gosson You are late, I am not. So I am faced with a double negation and the apparent existence of myself standing in the class room being singled out as "late". Actually the double negation is not the same as "me" who cannot be identified in the room, and the double negation, this doppleganger, is this strange imposter in the world a ghost who I can verify does not exist yet other people seem to believe in.

But they have maybe fallen under the spell of self, just as I am dicing with.

Above is the issue of existence, of life, of death, of authenticity, delusion, and evil in a nutshell.

Am I going mad? because the further down this road I go, the further away I seem and the more mad the world then becomes... a sure sign of madness. Life also gets harder. I wonder if this really is the path, which while my desire to walk it is stronger than ever, I realise is a path that I would not wish anyone else to walk because this really is into an unknown wilderness.

Do only good.
Do no evil ever.

Notes on Natural World

Excellent program on BBC's Natural world...Earth Pilgrim, a Year on Dartmoor: 28th Jan 2008

Man is not humble enough to accept that he is part of Nature.

So he wages war on Nature, seeing what he can take, rather than what it give.

In so doing he wages war upon himself.

Satish Kumar



note to self: my problem in this argument has been that if man is Nature, then what Man does is Nature... somehow Satish avoids this problem... find out how!

Life in a garage?

Regarding the changing circumstances of people who opted for houses and now face problems with mortgages I can offer some solace in the recommendation of garages as living spaces. Just one of an endless number of ALS (alternative living spaces) that we should have the guts to explore.

It is possible that on legal paper there are complex issues here (I have been unable to find out) but reality isn't made of paper and having tested it for more than 2 years I can say that this is actually a good idea.

Firstly the cost is absurdly insignificant compared with an official living space of the same size.

The only physical problems lie in sanitation and waste disposal. Sadly in urban areas the obvious recourse used by every other living thing on the planet is not available to humans, and we need to use public lavatories (20p a time, a pint in the local pub etc). Waste disposal can best be done by not creating any, which is a good environmentally friendly idea anyway. The tiny amounts created can be recycled manually in local recycling bins, a trip to the dump if its large, or for small amounts (the odd plastic bag) I'm sure this can be disposed of in public waste bins without annoying the council guys too much.

Next problem is not having a fixed address. Its an unbelievably naive feature - of UK at least - that we have become so fixated upon the issue of houses that the council has only this means of registering human beings without one. Regarding council tax hopefully we won't use any of the services anyway (except the occasional use of bins which should be kept to a minimum anyway for environmental reasons). Certainly without a house; police and fire brigade aren't really issues. Like with waste disposal , use of these services should be avoided.

For central government (and its few remaining services esp. NHS - most have been privatised so what do we still pay for?) we do still pay through income taxes etc, since not having a "house" does not interfere with work and that part of our life. However it is sadly a necessity to know someone whose address one can use to receive land-mail. In my case I am still registered at my mothers and receive mail there. (Really the government does need to wake up to the restrictions that its lazy processes enforce upon us). Hopefully that is the tedious (and irrelevant) higher social stuff dealt with. It is certainly educational though trying to live outside the "box", it highlights a lot about the world that gets missed normally.

Having done a lot of camping it is easy to see how living can be perfectly comfortable and sustainable with very little input. A warm sleeping bag is the most important part. Feeling cold for long periods of time is unpleasant. Solve this! about £80. Why people need any heating, expensive bills and the elderly die each winter when they only need buy a 5season sleeping bag for £80 has always escaped me! Get some jumpers also - its cheaper and better for the environment!

I tried tenting for a few months but I'm not sure what the government says about this. There is a sense that it isn't accepted and this pervades the whole experience with uncertainly. Altho I can't see why our existence on the land should be prescribed, there is this sense that it is. (Really I say again the government need to start looking at things with fresh eyes). There is also the issue of personal possessions, you can't keep these in a tent! So the garage does work out the best middle ground. People keep their cars in there, so its must be ok for storage!

Food is always available from shops. Cooking is a problem since we must be very aware of carbon monoxide poisoning. Ideally we can cook outside, but again (in UK at least) there is the sense that this is not acceptable so we must cook inside at risk to ourselves. A good fuel camping stove £120 does the job (not for indoor use it says so b v careful). A simple carbon monoxide meter can be bought for £5 for Woolworths (replace every year). Better than that though is knowing what to look for. A throbbing headache signals the presence of Carbon Monoxide. Ventilate if this happens, and never sleep with a flame on! Only use for 10mins at a time ideally anyway. A yellow flame = carbon monoxide producing - keep it blue! We aren't paying for the fire brigade and we don't want to trouble other people - so extreme caution with flames anyway!! We're not allowed to store fuel in garages ... which had me puzzled since the average car stores 10s of gallons?

The next big problem is moisture. I have recently solved this. Watch for where water collects (around metal normally), it will begin to drip and create wet patches. Work out where the main ones are and then rig up lengths of plastic to collect the water and channel it into cups for disposal. This way moisture is actually removed by the process of condensation that creates it! Sealable storage boxes may be necessary to keep mildew off things - it forms in cold and moist places.

Lighting is simple. Batteries are environmentally unfriendly. Rechargables can be bought for use with ED head torches. These can be recharged anywhere, but this is emergency and not sustainable. Solar panels can be fitted and run to deep-cycle batteries which can supply all the electronic energy we need. Again the problem of social acceptability limits the amount of exposure. I'm running 4 low energy LEDs from a £20 car battery recharging cell linked to a £100 deep cycle battery which gives me enough light to get around with. What cannot be done with solar is heating of any sort (uses way too much energy - its the major major portion of the house energy bill) hence the fuel stove above.

Clothes are cleaned in a laundrette which is good for these reducing local services. Personal hygiene is courtesy of the local pool, which encourages a swim as well as getting clean.

Ideally a rain collection butt would solve water problems, and a solar water heater built into the roof would solve hot water problems. But again these are high exposure installations and there is this annoying sense that many people won't accept such alternative living. Water must be bought or taken from taps and carried in.

It may take a time to adapt, and the key to comfort is organisation and planning. But with a bit of thought there is no reason why using a garage as a living space should interrupt ones life. Clearly its a batchelors lifestyle - altho my last girlfriend lived there for 6 months and said she quite enjoyed it. I'd imagine that children would love it, but again the social taboos make this so much harder than it should be.

There are many benefits. It is certainly amongst the lowest carbon foot print lifestyles, with only 12 litres of fuel used a year for everything. It naturally encourages thought and care to be taken about ones lifestyle, nothing is for granted and it enables a much deeper understanding to be formed of the components of life and what is really important. One of the highlights is going to sleep to the hypnotic sound of the rain and the wind outside, and waking to the sound of the birds in the morning - simple pleasures that the now dominating "house" experience has all but completely obliterated.

Certainly I stand for a radical rethink in the way we exist on this tiny island. A certain mode of existence has become so dominant that we can't seem to think outside the box anymore. But living in a house has been only a luxury for most of the world for most of history, and it is only here that it is considered the norm. Given the projections in population for this century, the shortage of space, the absurd cost of housing and the endless destruction to the environment that this mode of living brings - in my mind at least - it is already unsustainable and irresponsible, and especially since other much simpler alternative already exist as I hope I have explored.

Another feature of this lifestyle is the requirement to share. Certainly in transport I don't drive, and where I don't walk I share my transport with others (buses, trains). I share my personal hygiene space at the swimming pool. I share my toilet facilities in the local pub, or at work. Ideally I would share everything (share this island, share this planet) that is a good way to think, and the more I do it the more absurd it seems that it's not the obvious norm.

Anyway there are infinite possibilities, we just need people to explore them. Been thinking about Mark Boyle again today. Its a wonderful thing he does. I wish it was me, but I now know there are at least 2 of us in what I have been tempted to see as this prison of sterile minds called modern living: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7217788.stm ... genius

Mark Boyle Walking to India

Wow it's happening (at least someone is doing it) and for excellent reasons also!

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080130/tod-lifestyle-britain-india-walk-offbeat-6058bda_1.html

Attempting to make the walk without use of money. Brilliant.

Well its something I have been planning for around 10 years, but it seems it's now being done. Does this mean I don't need to do it anymore?

Anyway good luck to the man, will "follow" with interest (non financial obviously).

A line in the sand

So the sage drew a line in the sand and said to the people: those who are bright, handsome and good you should be on that side of the line, and those who are dull, ugly and bad should be on the other side of the line. And a war broke out amongst many of the people, over who had the right to be one side or the other.

And some stood away from the crowd and gossiped and bet upon who should or would end up on either side.

And still a fewer number stood back from even these and watching a beetle crawl across the sand in front of them leaving another line, commented upon how silly these folks were to be making such trouble over what was really just a line in the sand.

And yet still a smaller group stood back and realised how foolish the last group were not to notice how ironic that the beetle was drawing a line between them and the group that was fighting.

And the they realised something, and left.

Reality is our master

As King Knut discovered while every person in his kingdom would do whatever he said, the tide failed to listen. A lesson for us all because Reality listens to no man, and the man who does not listen to reality is dead.

So Mankind has often rejoiced in his apparent supremacy over Nature. His apparent ability to command the forces; build aeroplanes; build computers; build fusion reactors.

But really it is because Mankind has become so good at listening to Nature, to obeying Nature that he has reaped such a fortune. After all no amount of Science can make the Laws change, we can only discover with ever quieter ear the thoughts of our master.

Self-reference really is impossible.

I'm satisfied that it's completely impossible. Things can have no relationship to themselves. The reasons are less clear, but it is a logical necessity.

Firstly all things are made from things which they are not. A cake is made from flour, eggs, butter, sugar, mixing and heat energy; none of which if a cake. A table is made from a board and 4 legs, some nails and some work but none of which is called a table. Things that are not something come together to make something else by necessity. If they came together to make what they are then nothing could ever be made and the universe would be static with no time.

The universe is thus like a jig-saw puzzle. If a piece is missing we immediately notice that shape. But we see the "hole" made by the surrounding pieces. A hole cannot exist can it? but nevertheless it stands out according to the things which around it. In exactly the same way a single jigsaw piece on its own stands out. This is the same but in reverse. In this case the hole is the surrounding and the piece is what we see. In one case we see a hole created by surrounding pieces, in the other a piece created by a surrounding hole. In both cases hole and pieces exist!

Thus a thing cannot have a relationship with itself because it is also not itself!

Another argument is this. If a thing can refer to itself, then it is self-referential. If it is self-referential, and it refers to itself, then it refers to something which is self-referential.

Thus it is not good enough to refer to oneself to be self-referential, one must also refer to something which is self-referential to be self-referential. And that can only be self-referential by the same condition, so it can never be decided if something is self-referential.

"I have 4 words" is thus not self-referential!

This was useful in meditation because it stopped me thinking that i knew myself. This is impossible!!