Though reality does not change, it is a shift of perception that changes us.
It is this shift of perception that is self-realisation.
It is not reason, nor is it information. It is interpretation.
Last article, I discussed the necessity of self-realisation.
Now we will talk about what it looks like and how we may get there.
Self-realisation, is knowing our place in the universe. Although, comprehending may be a better term.
Take the Rubin Vase optical illusion as an example. We may see the vase and be convinced the picture is of a vase. However, by chance we may catch a glimpse of the two faces and have difficulty seeing the vase again. It is only when we understand both the vase and the faces that we recognise that there is just squiggly lines, interpreted as either a vase or faces. This is comprehension.
Such it is so with self-realisation. It is not adding knowledge onto what we already know. Nor is it approximating vague rules to match up our understanding. It is to see things as they are. To see reality as clearly as possible, putting aside all notions of words, of beliefs, of concepts and of attachments. When we do this, we come to recognise that in this moment, there is not a single thing that is out of order.
Day to day we carry around with us these faculties of speech, values, etc. that, while helpful for our conduct, are impediments to our comprehension. There are no words in the physical reality. There are no such things as colours or measurements in nature. There is no green in the physical world. It is only when we see something which has the property we call green that it invokes the term within us. Same goes for units of measurement. If this is the case for what we consider “base” properties, how much more so for abstract values such as equality, peace, good and evil?
Yet we tend to believe these values are present in reality.
We see this quite clearly in our attitude towards nature. We tend to criticise nature for being cruel and harsh, as we are under the impression that there is no equality in the natural order of things. The old and slow get eaten while the predators are relentless and cold-blooded. While we are so equal and compassionate. This is a human-centric point of view. We are projecting our values onto nature with the feeling that things ought to be different. But what we fail to consider is that we arise out of nature. We came from this state of affairs we come to call cruel, without realising that we are still part of this order. And this is easily evidenced by our exploitation of natural resources, whether it be wood, fur, or merely space through deforestation. By doing so, we demonstrate that we are really still in line with nature, and we prey on nature. So, if we really were in line with our views of how nature ought to be, we would assign equal rights and values to the animals, the fish and the plants. Clearly something is mixed up here!
The above is an example of a common pattern in our sensibilities. I am not trying to push a perspective. I am merely pointing out inconsistencies in our ways of thinking.
Further to this issue of values is our attachment. We all have values we hold onto strongly. When these values are challenged by others, we tend to become defensive, because somehow it evokes a feeling of insecurity. We know this very well, to the point where we avoid discussing things that may lead to values being challenged. When we want to get along with people we tend to avoid discussing politics.
So we come to realise that one of the major impediments to self-realisation is our dependence on naming, beliefs and attachments. Logically speaking, the solution would be simply to let go of naming things, values and attachments. But this is very hard to do. Because fundamentally, it all links back to our ego. This ego holds these beliefs. For somebody who has not attained self-realisation, get them to let go of their values is very hard to do. Because by doing so, they feel they have lost a part of themselves. They identify so strongly to the ego that they cannot let go of their attachment to their values, and subsequently, the things that define their values, such as words and categorisations.
Therefore, this ego is the thing that prevents us from shifting our perception so that we may see the world in this way. Hence, self-realisation is a comprehension of the state of things, arrived by interpreting things in a new way. A way that is non-reliant on logic, nor of additional information more than what we already know. There is no “hidden” knowledge any more than the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle hide the final picture.
I am not putting down the ego, for it serves a very important function in our psyche. In fact, it is not necessary to have undergone what the psychologists call ego death in order to achieve self-realisation. What is necessary however, is to de-identify our sense of self with the ego. This is an extraordinarily hard task, especially since we have been conditioned to rely on it so long. We are bought up in a culture where we must find and maintain a consistent image of ourselves. A culture where we make purchase decisions based more on what the product will do for our image more so than what functionality it has. Some people even make decisions on what they do and who they get involved with based on this need to maintain a consistent image.
Because of all these difficulties, the first part is completely dedicated to a discussion on the source and function of the ego. It should be read first. Only once you have completely separated your sense of being from your ego can the other sections be of value.
Be content.
– Dai
Freely Contained 