Belief In A Higher Self

[Antlerman]

Deva is very right. New Age is mostly just eastern religions but individualized. That is, they take the ideas of Buddha nature, for example, and then call it a "Self" so americans can buy their toys. 

 

Self is the very opposite of the point of a "higher" existence.

You misunderstand what the Self is in this context. There is the small self, the egoic self, the illusion, and then there is the True Self. This is Atman, this is from Advaita Vendanta in Hinduism.

 

"Ātman (IAST: ātman, Sanskrit: आत्मन्) is a Sanskrit word that means 'self'. Ātman is the first principle,[148] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual."

 

From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta#True_Self

 

And New Age, in reality, is little more than experimental Christianity.  What defines it and relates it to Christianity is that it externalizes everything.  Instead of the heavenly Father, up there, out there, answering our prayers to us down here, it's the Universe now doing the same thing, filling the same position in their mythic-literal views of reality.  They look outside themselves.  And so, instead of the power in the object of cross, it's now the crystal pyramid.  And so on.  It's the same approach to religion, just substituting symbols, but doing the same thing.  This also appeals to the true religion of America and that is Consumerism.  They can just buy spirituality, Buddha in a Box, and the object holds all the power to 'give them' all their good fortune and whatnot.  That defines New Age.  It's Christianity with a crystal pyramid instead of a cross.  

[directionless]

I read a book once and cannot remember the name of it for the life of me. It was several years ago but it claimed we had like several selves. Inner child, higher, etc. And that we should conversate and get to know our "other selves." I don't know, it really did make sense in the book but I always felt like I must be crazy because you try telling people that and they think you're crazy (which is why I NEVER talked about it to anyone). Supposedly it was part of psyche. I don't know, I mean, it made sense but I don't know. It was interesting.

This is a long-shot, but I stumbled on the name of a book similar to what you describe here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_OK,_You%27re_OK

 

Anyway, I think the concept you've been discussing makes sense. When I had hallucinations it seemed at the time like confused spiritual guidance, but a naturalistic explanation would be that my suppressed personalities were trying to get out.

[Ravenstar]

There is a higher self.. but as said above 'self' is a kind of antithesis word for it. I first got a good feel for what it was.. again, through meditation. I started through Transcendental Meditation ™  {sorry but it is trademarked] no crossed legs - though if that works for you you can.

 

Once I got the hang of it (it takes practice) I can do it anywhere, sitting on a bus, walking, doing dishes. Though I get the most benefit from sitting in a chair (straight backed).. and 15 - 20 minutes twice a day.

 

I practice several kinds of meditation now.. depending on what feels right at the time. For me the main stumbling block is when you learn to be quiet and then you actually HEAR your own thoughts, it's a bit disturbing at first, but they generate and then through meditation you learn to detach and let them go.. and they dissipate, like helium balloons released. They are the ego... and actually not terribly important.

 

I find people coming out of christianity have a lot of misconceptions about Buddhism.. and meditation. You can't really replace one with the other.. they aren't, umm.. parallel concepts. Buddhism isn't a religion, and meditation, though similar, is not prayer. There is no deity to speak with (or to) just ones self.. and the all that is.

 

You will face yourself.. and then you will find the higher self. It's quite an amazing thing, but it is NOT comfortable at the beginning. Not trying to scare you.. because once the ego diminishes the feeling of peace with yourself is well worth it. I think I can best describe it as 'proper perspective'.

 

If christianity teaches us to hold on tight, meditation teaches us to let go gently. It's a much less fear filled way to live. Once the fear goes then it's easy to be compassionate, understanding and kind, without losing who you are.

 

I hope I described it well... those here who also practice meditation (and Buddhism) can correct me if I'm wrong.  

 

Peace!

[Noggy]

 

Deva is very right. New Age is mostly just eastern religions but individualized. That is, they take the ideas of Buddha nature, for example, and then call it a "Self" so americans can buy their toys. 

 

Self is the very opposite of the point of a "higher" existence.

You misunderstand what the Self is in this context. There is the small self, the egoic self, the illusion, and then there is the True Self. This is Atman, this is from Advaita Vendanta in Hinduism.

 

"Ātman (IAST: ātman, Sanskrit: आत्मन्) is a Sanskrit word that means 'self'. Ātman is the first principle,[148] the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual."

 

From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta#True_Self

 

And New Age, in reality, is little more than experimental Christianity.  What defines it and relates it to Christianity is that it externalizes everything.  Instead of the heavenly Father, up there, out there, answering our prayers to us down here, it's the Universe now doing the same thing, filling the same position in their mythic-literal views of reality.  They look outside themselves.  And so, instead of the power in the object of cross, it's now the crystal pyramid.  And so on.  It's the same approach to religion, just substituting symbols, but doing the same thing.  This also appeals to the true religion of America and that is Consumerism.  They can just buy spirituality, Buddha in a Box, and the object holds all the power to 'give them' all their good fortune and whatnot.  That defines New Age.  It's Christianity with a crystal pyramid instead of a cross.  

 

 

I'm pretty sure Buddha never said much on whether we had an atman or an an-atman, but he did talk about the 5 forms of clinging, but seemed to be very careful too neither confirm nor deny the existence of atman. Re-reading your post I see your definitions come from Hinduism.... so, there ya go.

[kolaida]

 

I read a book once and cannot remember the name of it for the life of me. It was several years ago but it claimed we had like several selves. Inner child, higher, etc. And that we should conversate and get to know our "other selves." I don't know, it really did make sense in the book but I always felt like I must be crazy because you try telling people that and they think you're crazy (which is why I NEVER talked about it to anyone). Supposedly it was part of psyche. I don't know, I mean, it made sense but I don't know. It was interesting.

This is a long-shot, but I stumbled on the name of a book similar to what you describe here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_OK,_You%27re_OK

 

Anyway, I think the concept you've been discussing makes sense. When I had hallucinations it seemed at the time like confused spiritual guidance, but a naturalistic explanation would be that my suppressed personalities were trying to get out.

 

 

It does seem somewhat similar.  I think the book I linked actually WAS the book; I guess it wasn't that old.  There was another version of that same book with a different cover released in 2001 with a bunch of question marks and I do remember question marks.  I got it at a used bookstore if I remember right, so it might have been why I thought it was even older-- but I definitely read it before 2011 so it'd fit.  The old cover, though, now that book is like worth $70 (according to Amazon!).  I think my parents have it somewhere in their house, LOL!  I've been reading and rereading the site and everything I can remember matches up with it.  

 

I think I'll look into this book as well, thanks! I'm interested in the four different life positions. 

 

And, yeah, it really DOES make sense, the whole concept and everything. I remember when I first read the book, I thought I needed to read it like three more times to really get it; I even studied it some, different chapters.  And even though I was a Christian at the time, the book is very good at being open for EVERYONE, which is kind of weird, but I think I was just too emerged in untreated depression at the time to really appreciate the book as much as I should have (or had a really strong subpersonality/false self in control). Oddly enough, though, I noticed on the site, it does recommend meditating to a "Higher Power" and seems to think agnostics and atheists should try this as well, but I don't know. I mean, I guess you could put the Universe as a higher power.  That book was a correlation of various psych studies (so they say). It would make sense if some of your suppressed "false" personalities were trying to escape or something.  The author seems rather convinced that these days (especially in America) everyone is afflicted by the sickness of not knowing about or even how to access their "true self" and most everyone has a false self or multiple false selves guiding their lives instead of their "true self." (Much less discovering any higher self!)  

 

 

You know, meditation is starting to make a lot more sense in my mind now.  I'm guessing a lot of meditation is required for me to even reorganize and rewrite my existing bits into control so my true self is in control (but apparently your true self has no form because it's you, but all the other "inner family" subselves do).  

 

It's hard for the observer to see itself

 

My "I" is usually an obsessive spaz that uses a lot of words. It keeps lists, ranks items, runs the filing cabinet. It's the organizer. It's a very important part of me. When it freaks out, I start having to write down lists because I can't keep track of them all in my head. Having a list to refer to will calm it down, will assure it that it's not forgetting anything. I keep a text file open on my computer just for that. Sometimes something that I need to get done will pop into my head and I'm afraid to get back to whatever I was working on in case I forget that thing. Having somewhere to write it down assures me that it's been taken care of, so I can let go.

 

But the organizer sucks at doing anything other than organizing, like... actually doing. What the organizer is supposed to do is pass control off to other bits of me. When it doesn't do that, I procrastinate and get paralized. The parts of me that "do" have less of a sense of self, of "I". They are doers, not thinkers. Even when I'm writing code, which is a very brainy and not very physical activity, it's so absorbed in the "doing" that it doesn't think about "being".

 

Meditating is about accessing an observer that's not the book-keeping spaz. It's about turning that part off, saying "thank you for what you do; it's time for you to take a break". And for a while, you're not correlating, not passing control around, just being. And you watch all the thoughts running around trying to go about the normal business of doing, but you don't give them control, you just stay back and watch. Sometimes they'll have something important to say to you that you need to hear. Sometimes the quieter voices, the ones you don't normally listen to, or are afraid of, will come out into that quietness and tell you something. Sometimes the voices just don't know how to Be and keep trying to Do and just chase their tails. You watch them for a bit and tell them "it's not time for you right now", just gently inform them they don't need to be accomplishing anything right now, and they'll often disolve (though if you're really stressed, they may keep coming back and not believe you that it's ok to just Be for a while). You watch your thoughts, and your body, and see how all the thoughts that won't fit into your conscious mind manifest in your body instead. Or maybe your body is unhappy about something, and instead of feeling your body's pain you've been experiencing it as an emotion. I quite often find myself meditating and thinking "oh, wow, I'm in a lot of pain! No wonder I wasn't able to focus on stuff".

 

That meditation state is where you have a better view of your true self (selves?) with everything laid out in front of you, with no particular Doer running the show and blocking your ability to Be. If anything needs fixed, you probably already know about it but have been too busy to let the change happen. Kinda like how your body needs sleep in order to heal, your brain needs a rest time where it can run cleanup while not adding new things to the to-do list.

 

 

All that being said, I guess the belief in a higher self is actually pretty realistic. It's something created by each individual human, so it's not as if we're out looking for god inside us or something.

 

Once while mediating, I had the thought that this is "I AM". I'd always been fascinated by that name of god as a christian but never quite got what it was trying to communicate. Something about ground of being and timelessness. But while meditating, long after deconverting, I finally experienced what "I AM" is all about. And... that knowledge of being is complete and sufficient without the doers. It's a very stable, powerful feeling. And then the doers can grow out of that experience of being, in a way that makes them feel part of a larger whole and less likely to run out of control or get lost. That sense of Being is probably what I'd consider to be my higher self.

 

 

That makes a lot of sense--- it's hard for the observer to see itself. Thanks for summing it up like that! 

 

So, I have read and mulled over your post several times trying to let it all sink in. Everything you have said makes a lot-- a LOT of sense and has even helped me understand parts of the site that I couldn't really wrap my mind around. I didn't think about it in "Doers" sense or really even that an Organizer will organize but not "do." It'll think but not execute what it's thought out. This might explain why I'm able to plan a lot but rarely seem to complete tasks unless I consider them of the utmost importance. I'm not passing it (or my Organizing subself is not passing it on) to the other bits of me, the parts that DO. The site/book implied this as a sign of distrust of the true self and perhaps even other subselves in the inner family. Or being out of control as well (the true self not being in control). Since we started this discussion, I did attempt one short meditation ("interview") last night and believe it was successful-- it was only for this purpose and it was rather difficult to start and maintain). I also have two different "voices" in my head now versus just the one, strong, commanding one I had.  Don't hear the other one as much (and it's very soft), but it's there. Also, should I journal about meditation experiences? Is that recommended. My memory gets to be so bad, I'm beginning to worry I'll forget everything I learned just last night.  The previous meditation experience I'd had, I'd all but forgotten about. I know I definitely need to try to access my various sub selves and listen.  I have been rather negligent in this regard. 

 

It's really amazing how your experience(s) correlates so well with what the author of the site describes. I think that's awesome! I can really understand all of it a lot better when put in psych terms as well instead of religious terms. It also seems more believable to me to believe all this is more about the brain and how the brain works-- it's pretty fascinating. BUT I can see how this kind of stuff would have made it's way into religion and I have to say my hairs kind of stood on end when I read your bit about I AM.  I always thought that was odd as well and it always stuck out to me even at a young age. Your explanation makes a LOT of sense. So, let me see if I'm understanding correctly: perhaps someone (Moses- "son of") that authored Genesis was chronicling part of their experience of accessing their higher self? 

 

I'm still trying to grasp and understand the part I highlighted and italicized. Maybe that understanding has to come with meditation? 

 

But I think I understood overall. I know I need to meditate quite a bit more. A neighbor was nice enough to loan me a beginner's guide to meditation and I've been reading that site's tips on "interviewing subselves" through meditation (I guess that IS the interview, really--at least the start of it then as time goes on and I meditate more, I should be more easily able to access these bits and parts of me from what I can gather). 

 

I really hope I'm making sense. 

[VacuumFlux]

It's really amazing how your experience(s) correlates so well with what the author of the site describes. I think that's awesome! I can really understand all of it a lot better when put in psych terms as well instead of religious terms. It also seems more believable to me to believe all this is more about the brain and how the brain works-- it's pretty fascinating. BUT I can see how this kind of stuff would have made it's way into religion and I have to say my hairs kind of stood on end when I read your bit about I AM.  I always thought that was odd as well and it always stuck out to me even at a young age. Your explanation makes a LOT of sense. So, let me see if I'm understanding correctly: perhaps someone (Moses- "son of") that authored Genesis was chronicling part of their experience of accessing their higher self? 

 

I'm still trying to grasp and understand the part I highlighted and italicized. Maybe that understanding has to come with meditation? 

 

 

It is pretty neat that what I've been talking about matches so much of a book I've never read I don't talk about this side of me all that much because it just confuses a lot of people, so it's nice to know that I'm not the only person who works this way.

 

I have no idea what the original author(s?) and redactors of Exodus were thinking, but it does sound like enough people back then were like us today to have had some grasp of how powerful the I AM concept is. It's possible that the author themself didn't really get it and had never experienced it, but was writing down an old story passed on through oral tradition. But it resonated with enough people that that part of the story stuck around for generations.

 

I don't know if meditating more will give you experiences that match mine. You seem to recognise enough of what I'm saying that it's possible it'll work out that way for you too. But you may end up with a different awareness of yourself, or a different set of symbols to understand a similar experience. It's a very individual thing. I certainly wouldn't think you were doing it wrong if your meditation took you in a different direction.

 

Edit/Addendum: While we're discussing books that we get our ideas from, I should credit Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. It included some stuff about being-in-itself that was a bit over my head at the time (I read it in high school), but I'm pretty sure that some of my ideas about the importance of "being" to humans came from selections in that collection. The waiter example that wikipedia mentions was included in there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being_in_itself#Being-in-itself_for_Sartre

[gall]

Having only just come out of Christianity for the second time, I am still trying to make sense of things. I have been thinking about the notion of a Higher Self - is this New Age? I suppose it appeals because it might be akin to being in touch with your true self - a wiser self.

 

Does anyone else believe in this?

 

WIsdom is not hidden someplace inside of you waiting for you to chant the right words or meditate enough.

 

Wisdom is the culmination of knowledge temperd with experince and time. There is no other way to get it. If you know nothing that is a good starting point. I know each day I know a little less of what is out there as my world expands mentally. I take great joy in knowing that every new thing I learn is enriching me and taking me farther aways from my ignorance.

 

I believe in ME. I believe in you to and the fact you are even asking questions is a good sign you are really ready.

 

I do believe this of my own mind. I am a community within me. I have many voices that must work together and also conflict in order for me to make a decision. They are all me yet they are not all the same me. I love them all and they are my people while at the same time only me. One might call me crazy but I prefer to think of them as my brain trust.

[kolaida]

 

It's really amazing how your experience(s) correlates so well with what the author of the site describes. I think that's awesome! I can really understand all of it a lot better when put in psych terms as well instead of religious terms. It also seems more believable to me to believe all this is more about the brain and how the brain works-- it's pretty fascinating. BUT I can see how this kind of stuff would have made it's way into religion and I have to say my hairs kind of stood on end when I read your bit about I AM.  I always thought that was odd as well and it always stuck out to me even at a young age. Your explanation makes a LOT of sense. So, let me see if I'm understanding correctly: perhaps someone (Moses- "son of") that authored Genesis was chronicling part of their experience of accessing their higher self? 

 

I'm still trying to grasp and understand the part I highlighted and italicized. Maybe that understanding has to come with meditation? 

 

 

It is pretty neat that what I've been talking about matches so much of a book I've never read I don't talk about this side of me all that much because it just confuses a lot of people, so it's nice to know that I'm not the only person who works this way.

 

I have no idea what the original author(s?) and redactors of Exodus were thinking, but it does sound like enough people back then were like us today to have had some grasp of how powerful the I AM concept is. It's possible that the author themself didn't really get it and had never experienced it, but was writing down an old story passed on through oral tradition. But it resonated with enough people that that part of the story stuck around for generations.

 

I don't know if meditating more will give you experiences that match mine. You seem to recognise enough of what I'm saying that it's possible it'll work out that way for you too. But you may end up with a different awareness of yourself, or a different set of symbols to understand a similar experience. It's a very individual thing. I certainly wouldn't think you were doing it wrong if your meditation took you in a different direction.

 

Edit/Addendum: While we're discussing books that we get our ideas from, I should credit Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. It included some stuff about being-in-itself that was a bit over my head at the time (I read it in high school), but I'm pretty sure that some of my ideas about the importance of "being" to humans came from selections in that collection. The waiter example that wikipedia mentions was included in there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being_in_itself#Being-in-itself_for_Sartre

 

 

 

Wow! Yeah, it's pretty neat how well it matches up to what that author has said.  He describes it like communication with various parts of your brain (a concept I still find weird, but it does make sense to me--- in a weird sort of way). Yes, the book has always fascinated me and made a whole lot of sense to me but I always feel like it would confuse people too much to try to talk about it. Or people would just be like, "What is she going on about?!" LOL 

 

That's a good point about Exodus.  Oral tradition. I just find it fascinating that it could turn out to be a large amount of humans have basically been worshiping I AM---- which could basically be something someone once experienced through meditating and finding their higher self. This whole bit just really fascinates me. 

 

Thank you for the book link! I've been reading a book on How to Meditate and that site from the author of that book I read before. I have been briefly meditating each day.  

 

It makes me kind of sad; like maybe I would have been better at work the past year and not had so many conflicts if I had been meditating?  Or maybe I shouldn't assume that, maybe I just wouldn't have gotten as depressed with having to deal with them because I'm sure conflict would still be in life. 

[VacuumFlux]

Just came across this and was reminded of this thread:

 

http://www.selfleadership.org/about-internal-family-systems.html

 

 

 

Once I was able to set aside my preconceived notions about therapy and the mind, and began to really listen to what my clients were saying, what I heard repeatedly were descriptions of what they often called their "parts" -- the conflicted subpersonalities that resided within them.

...

in addition to these parts, everyone is at their core a Self containing many crucial leadership qualities such as perspective, confidence, compassion, and acceptance. Working with hundreds of clients for more than two decades, some of whom were severely abused and show severe symptoms, has convinced me that everyone has this healthy and healing Self despite the fact that many people initially have very little access to it. When working with an individual, the goal of IFS is to differentiate this Self from the parts, thereby releasing its resources.

[directionless]

Just came across this and was reminded of this thread:

 

http://www.selfleadership.org/about-internal-family-systems.html

 

 

 

Once I was able to set aside my preconceived notions about therapy and the mind, and began to really listen to what my clients were saying, what I heard repeatedly were descriptions of what they often called their "parts" -- the conflicted subpersonalities that resided within them.

...

in addition to these parts, everyone is at their core a Self containing many crucial leadership qualities such as perspective, confidence, compassion, and acceptance. Working with hundreds of clients for more than two decades, some of whom were severely abused and show severe symptoms, has convinced me that everyone has this healthy and healing Self despite the fact that many people initially have very little access to it. When working with an individual, the goal of IFS is to differentiate this Self from the parts, thereby releasing its resources.

That's a great article IMO.

[Rev R]

"I'm pretty sure Buddha never said much on whether we had an atman or an an-atman..."

 

Actually, there is an entire discourse on the subject.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel268.html

[Noggy]

"I'm pretty sure Buddha never said much on whether we had an atman or an an-atman..."

 

Actually, there is an entire discourse on the subject.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel268.html

 

See! Thats how I always thought it should be... just never seen any discourses of this nature. I always heard about atman and an atman discussed in a dualistic context, and that both idea were wrong. Thanks