Noah, I’ve been listening to your podcast from session #1 today until this one and I must say you have a talent for clearly delivering Buddhist concepts from a secular lens. Well done as you have exceeded my expectations. Please continue your work as it is well received from people like me who are seeking truth, seeing life is it really is and not what I think it ought to be.
Boy, that letter at 8:00 is lovely yet brutal. I've listened to it a few times, and I always shed a tear. It really illuminates the transience of life and just how small of a mark we each leave on this world.
This was fantastic. I've found that I want exercise when I try to listen to the cells in my body, what they want and need. It's transforming my life. Your work in this podcast helped me understand a new layer: that is me talking. Or, rather, I am my cells, so my mitochondria are part of what makes me who I am. As they get stronger, I get stronger and healthier. I hear them celebrating their energy. And I have more energy. Because we are one in the same vessel carrying what it means to live.
Thank you. I stumbled upon this podcast. My husband and I center our marriage as being works in progress from Buddha’s teachings. I feel like it helps with preconceived notions and living in past mistakes.
Really nice podcast! I am new in Buddhist teachings but I feel like it fits so well my style of life. I am a PhD philosopher working on perception and the way you presented the problem of Ego is exactly the same way I have used in the past: there is not clear criteria to decide what constitutes the self, because the constitution of the self is nothing but a social-construct. The ego is not a real entity metaphysically speaking, it is no more than a idea, an illusion.
Your the watcher, watching the watcher. The body would be the id with all its drives and appetites your "ME". The Ego would be your soul with all it's experience and interpretations of those experiences your coditioned self your "Self". and your Super Ego would be your spirit your life force your conscience your "I" I , Self, Me.
Thank you. The mindfulness of the topic is realistic and practical as you mentioned the applications in our relationship with our self and the others, for example. I had listened to the episode twice and still can't find the definition or the answer to who am I? In psychology there are many answer to the question ( Dr. Little says we are like everybody, like some people and like us) and when it comes to psychotherapy, personality tests, and other applications at the end you work with the present difficulties of the person or you search for present skills, personality strength if it's for a work position. The past and the future of the person too is evaluated in some way.
I actually do believe that my skills, emotions, personality are me altough I know the self is an illusion. I realize they are part of me. Still I don't think I'm the same person as 10 years ago. Not even the cells are the same. And yes, dementia or amnesia would make me a different person. Then again, I am only watching shadows not the thing itself. A car may be a car without it's motor, but I do think it makes a significant whether a car has a motor or not. It's still a car, but not the same as it was with a motor.
" I am human " well, that translates to " I am this body " but " the statement " i am this body " translates to, " I am conscious of this body " so it is consciousness that allows us to have identity because if you take away consciousness. what would you know ?
Something to add to this is that if you took the whole experience of life from birth to death, then this experience could be played on just about any human brain. The only caveat is that the full immersion life movie would be slightly different if played on some brains. But it would still kind of be the same movie, only synesthesia or whatever alteration caused by how the brain perceives the input. In essence, my eyes are capable of seeing what your eyes can also see.
The specific combination of material elements that allow your brain to produce the experience of conciusness is unique to you, everything makes me who I am, even if it's not eternal and changing still thst combination of moving matter thst makes me is unique in time since everything is interdependent and ever changing I too am complex form. Of matter. But that doesn't mean there isn't a temporary equilibrium in change, just like a table was once a tree and a table can stand for some time even if the matter it's composed of isAlways changing and ultimately it will decay.
A movie tells a fictional story, the story didn't truly happen yet the movie set, the actors etc... Those were real and so is the movie even if it's made of different elements and of a story that never happened, the movie as a movie exists. So as well we exist too, briefly, we exist in a very complex arrangement of living matter, just for a moment and the we cease to be.
Quite a good podcast overall but the analogy of the hands hurting one another at the end is a bit weak. Yes, the hands, just as people, are part of a larger whole, but the hands are generally under the conscious control of a single mind, people aren’t. I’d say looking at humans on a more molecular level is far more apt. Cancer emerges from healthy cells and proceeds to divert natural resources away from the other cells. All the cells are part of a greater whole but unlike the healthy cells cancer has no harmonious relation to the other cells. Cancer is like a parasite that must be exorcised from the whole to ensure the continued function of the whole. Human relations are no different. We are part of a greater whole, and sometimes for the benefit of that greater whole we must act against parts of it. Not in vengeance, but for the good of the whole. Interdependence can under the correct conditions require retaliation against others. When corporations harm the environment for example, we are all harmed, yet they continue to do so for their benefit, for the good of the whole we should retaliate against corporate actions as a result. This isn’t a question of “an eye for an eye” or “turn the other cheek” as it would be considered in biblical terms. It’s a question of necessity, what is the necessary response to a harmful part of the whole. The question is doubly important for the parts harmed most by the whole, like the slave who must determine whether to kill for their freedom. To preach compassion for these harmful parts is no better than preaching compassion for the cancer that eats away at it’s victim.
I disagree with the premise. Yes, who are changes over time but who I was in the past is not relevant. Who I am is who I am right now. I am experiencing being me in this very moment, I am not experiencing who I was in the past or who I will be in the future.
What am I ? Answer: I am consciousness because to ask " what am I "? I have to be conscious that " I am " in order to ask " what am I " The self is different from the ego, the ego is your perception of your self, ( I am strong, handsome, a leader, etc. etc.) but the " self " is just you being conscious that you exist.
You're starting to lose me with this one. I'm trying to approach this with an open mind. I'm thinking I shouldn't let this stop me from learning the rest of Buddhism, because the principles resonate with me, but I think you went few places that are stretch too far. You told your Palestinian tour guide that your previous tour guide was a Jew, and asked him what he is, and he answered "human." You imprinted your ideology on that answer and went off on this deep pontification, and you did that because your cup is full. The people in that place do not believe in Buddhist ideology, so whatever he said has nothing to do with anything as profound as what you think it did. Empty your cup and think about what else that could mean, particularly what he might be saying about your first tour guide.
There are also plenty of people with opinions about what makes a tree beautiful. Symmetry for example. If I'm doing landscaping, I am very particular about the kinds of trees I want on my land. Maybe I like Crimson Kings because it's autumn year-round with them, and that's beautiful to me. And health is very important, because if I have a tree that's rotting, it's making a mess out of my yard, so that tree is getting cut down because by the first I of wisdom (Interdependence) it's affecting everything around it, and by the second I of wisdom (Impermanence), that tree's time has come!
Noah, I’ve been listening to your podcast from session #1 today until this one and I must say you have a talent for clearly delivering Buddhist concepts from a secular lens. Well done as you have exceeded my expectations.
Please continue your work as it is well received from people like me who are seeking truth, seeing life is it really is and not what I think it ought to be.
Thank you!
I am
A fabrication.
An extension of systematic constructions.
I am
The reflection
Of utterances I perceive through my senses.
Boy, that letter at 8:00 is lovely yet brutal. I've listened to it a few times, and I always shed a tear. It really illuminates the transience of life and just how small of a mark we each leave on this world.
Friggin scones, omg Im sobbing
This was fantastic. I've found that I want exercise when I try to listen to the cells in my body, what they want and need. It's transforming my life.
Your work in this podcast helped me understand a new layer: that is me talking. Or, rather, I am my cells, so my mitochondria are part of what makes me who I am. As they get stronger, I get stronger and healthier. I hear them celebrating their energy. And I have more energy. Because we are one in the same vessel carrying what it means to live.
I like the analogy with the hammered finger.
Your pod is a great resource for my clients, thank you mate.
If i would lose all my skills and memories, would i still be me? I think it is a very interesting question.
What. A. Letter.
Thank you so much for this channel and everything you do in it.
Thank you. I stumbled upon this podcast. My husband and I center our marriage as being works in progress from Buddha’s teachings. I feel like it helps with preconceived notions and living in past mistakes.
Great job explaining this. 👍👍
Thank you for this video.
Really nice podcast! I am new in Buddhist teachings but I feel like it fits so well my style of life. I am a PhD philosopher working on perception and the way you presented the problem of Ego is exactly the same way I have used in the past: there is not clear criteria to decide what constitutes the self, because the constitution of the self is nothing but a social-construct. The ego is not a real entity metaphysically speaking, it is no more than a idea, an illusion.
SIR, I really love your podcasts. thank you
Fantastic explanation Noah, thank you 🙏🏼
I had many light bulb moments during the teaching 💡!
Namaste 🙏🏼
Excellent episode! This is really helpful content.
Man that letter was so moving. Thank you
great video!
Your the watcher, watching the watcher. The body would be the id with all its drives and appetites your "ME". The Ego would be your soul with all it's experience and interpretations of those experiences your coditioned self your "Self". and your Super Ego would be your spirit your life force your conscience your "I" I , Self, Me.
Thank you. The mindfulness of the topic is realistic and practical as you mentioned the applications in our relationship with our self and the others, for example. I had listened to the episode twice and still can't find the definition or the answer to who am I? In psychology there are many answer to the question ( Dr. Little says we are like everybody, like some people and like us) and when it comes to psychotherapy, personality tests, and other applications at the end you work with the present difficulties of the person or you search for present skills, personality strength if it's for a work position. The past and the future of the person too is evaluated in some way.
I actually do believe that my skills, emotions, personality are me altough I know the self is an illusion. I realize they are part of me. Still I don't think I'm the same person as 10 years ago. Not even the cells are the same. And yes, dementia or amnesia would make me a different person. Then again, I am only watching shadows not the thing itself. A car may be a car without it's motor, but I do think it makes a significant whether a car has a motor or not. It's still a car, but not the same as it was with a motor.
Tnx a lot
" I am human " well, that translates to " I am this body " but " the statement " i am this body " translates to, " I am conscious of this body " so it is consciousness that allows us to have identity because if you take away consciousness. what would you know ?
Something to add to this is that if you took the whole experience of life from birth to death, then this experience could be played on just about any human brain. The only caveat is that the full immersion life movie would be slightly different if played on some brains. But it would still kind of be the same movie, only synesthesia or whatever alteration caused by how the brain perceives the input. In essence, my eyes are capable of seeing what your eyes can also see.
The specific combination of material elements that allow your brain to produce the experience of conciusness is unique to you, everything makes me who I am, even if it's not eternal and changing still thst combination of moving matter thst makes me is unique in time since everything is interdependent and ever changing I too am complex form. Of matter. But that doesn't mean there isn't a temporary equilibrium in change, just like a table was once a tree and a table can stand for some time even if the matter it's composed of isAlways changing and ultimately it will decay.
A movie tells a fictional story, the story didn't truly happen yet the movie set, the actors etc... Those were real and so is the movie even if it's made of different elements and of a story that never happened, the movie as a movie exists. So as well we exist too, briefly, we exist in a very complex arrangement of living matter, just for a moment and the we cease to be.
7:25
this screws my brain deadass
Quite a good podcast overall but the analogy of the hands hurting one another at the end is a bit weak. Yes, the hands, just as people, are part of a larger whole, but the hands are generally under the conscious control of a single mind, people aren’t.
I’d say looking at humans on a more molecular level is far more apt. Cancer emerges from healthy cells and proceeds to divert natural resources away from the other cells. All the cells are part of a greater whole but unlike the healthy cells cancer has no harmonious relation to the other cells. Cancer is like a parasite that must be exorcised from the whole to ensure the continued function of the whole.
Human relations are no different. We are part of a greater whole, and sometimes for the benefit of that greater whole we must act against parts of it. Not in vengeance, but for the good of the whole. Interdependence can under the correct conditions require retaliation against others. When corporations harm the environment for example, we are all harmed, yet they continue to do so for their benefit, for the good of the whole we should retaliate against corporate actions as a result.
This isn’t a question of “an eye for an eye” or “turn the other cheek” as it would be considered in biblical terms. It’s a question of necessity, what is the necessary response to a harmful part of the whole. The question is doubly important for the parts harmed most by the whole, like the slave who must determine whether to kill for their freedom. To preach compassion for these harmful parts is no better than preaching compassion for the cancer that eats away at it’s victim.
I disagree with the premise. Yes, who are changes over time but who I was in the past is not relevant. Who I am is who I am right now. I am experiencing being me in this very moment, I am not experiencing who I was in the past or who I will be in the future.
Not much help.
What am I ? Answer: I am consciousness because to ask " what am I "? I have to be conscious that " I am " in order to ask " what am I "
The self is different from the ego, the ego is your perception of your self, ( I am strong, handsome, a leader, etc. etc.) but the " self " is just you being conscious that you exist.
You're starting to lose me with this one. I'm trying to approach this with an open mind. I'm thinking I shouldn't let this stop me from learning the rest of Buddhism, because the principles resonate with me, but I think you went few places that are stretch too far. You told your Palestinian tour guide that your previous tour guide was a Jew, and asked him what he is, and he answered "human." You imprinted your ideology on that answer and went off on this deep pontification, and you did that because your cup is full. The people in that place do not believe in Buddhist ideology, so whatever he said has nothing to do with anything as profound as what you think it did. Empty your cup and think about what else that could mean, particularly what he might be saying about your first tour guide.
There are also plenty of people with opinions about what makes a tree beautiful. Symmetry for example. If I'm doing landscaping, I am very particular about the kinds of trees I want on my land. Maybe I like Crimson Kings because it's autumn year-round with them, and that's beautiful to me. And health is very important, because if I have a tree that's rotting, it's making a mess out of my yard, so that tree is getting cut down because by the first I of wisdom (Interdependence) it's affecting everything around it, and by the second I of wisdom (Impermanence), that tree's time has come!