I is an Emergent property not an illusion.

[Gru]

Just like time is an emergent property of space.

I is an emergent property of the cells that make up you. I is the management function required to manage said cells. Most other life forms have I. I is the characteristics of that lifeform. Depending on the development of those cells a spectrum of self awareness occurs.

Humans in particular are highly adaptable. Almost a blank slate when young, except for some personality traits. Our environment plays a huge role in who I is. There are examples of children being brought up by dogs. Without fellows humans to raise them they adopt the characteristics of there dog family.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Welcome Gru

I is an emergent property of the cells that make up you. I is the management function required to manage said cells. Most other life forms have I. I is the characteristics of that lifeform. Depending on the development of those cells a spectrum of self awareness occurs.

The ego as management function and main reality principle. This is basically the Freudian definition. This kind of primal self-awareness seems to be an integral property of complex organic lifeforms and can even include complex behavior and intelligent adaption. But Freud made the category very big and conflicts for various reasons with various notions of "self" in spiritual teachings.

Humans in particular are highly adaptable. Almost a blank slate when young, except for some personality traits. Our environment plays a huge role in who I is. There are examples of children being brought up by dogs. Without fellows humans to raise them they adopt the characteristics of there dog family.

On top of that there's something called consciousnesses. Some equal it with awareness but when consciousness is seen as an emergent property of the signal exchange or communication between complex self-aware agents, we could see another ego form.

To illustrate this view, I'd like to submit some material: Nietzsche’s Theory of Mind: Consciousness and Conceptualization which documents a more existential and experimental view on a type of consciousness, a "self" which lives at the surface of things instead of organic forms of awareness.

In my view understanding the various types of self and identification available to a modern human greatly helps to understand the experience of conflict, suffering and endless arguments. Mind you, this means most people reading this post will have to realize that what they call "me" is a by-product and merely concept fueled consciousness. It's still far away from any deeper awareness or functioning, although that goes on nevertheless. It's like the difference between a stone and a paper.

[Pam Seeback]

Diebert: On top of that there's something called consciousnesses. Some equal it with awareness but when consciousness is seen as an emergent property of the signal exchange or communication between complex self-aware agents, we could see another ego form.

To illustrate this view, I'd like to submit some material: Nietzsche’s Theory of Mind: Consciousness and Conceptualization which documents a more existential and experimental view on a type of consciousness, a "self" which lives at the surface of things instead of organic forms of awareness.

It's probably upsetting for many to encounter Nietzsche's definition of consciousness (conceptualized, articulated mental states) as superficial, distorting and dangerous, the surface "self" you mention above. However, if one considers their 'eons' of unconscious feeling-thinking experiences mentioned in the article, and then considers how this web of unconscious experiences has intertwined with conscious feeling-thinking states up to the present moment, it is not difficult to understand why Nietzsche defined consciousness in the negative (suffering) light that he does. The "self" of belief in an independent causal "I" is indeed an entangled web of seeking for an idealized world it has no hope of unearthing.

The question then becomes how to untangle the suffering mess of our conscious, multi-layered conceptual, surface, "I cause" self so what you call 'organic forms of awareness' will be intuitively 'known'. Obviously, if one could immediately drop the false idea of the "I" as a causal agent, enlightenment to one's natural causal awareness nature would also be immediate, but since the "I cause/I desire/I seek things" is a deeply entrenched thought of self-as-separate-from-things, it is unlikely that immediate enlightenment is a reality for anyone born into I-consciousness. The way out of the danger/suffering of consciousness is not addressed in the article, but logic coupled with the natural existential longing for freedom dictates that the way out of conceptual entanglement is to find the way to become untangled.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

The question then becomes how to untangle the suffering mess of our conscious, multi-layered conceptual, surface, "I cause" self so what you call 'organic forms of awareness' will be intuitively 'known'.

In this context, any organic form of awareness points simply to something more like "animal" awareness, a collection of instinct, learned behavior and some simple adaptivity. There's, depending on the animal, a deep peace and calm noticeable. It's a reptile kind of silence.

This is the main criticism you can hear often at this forum or for example with Hakuin but also Nietzsche. The "cow' enlightenment as basic trap.

Untanglement, enlightenment and genius would be about something more alive, more active, more connected and way more restless.

[Pam Seeback]

Just like time is an emergent property of space.

I is an emergent property of the cells that make up you. I is the management function required to manage said cells. Most other life forms have I. I is the characteristics of that lifeform. Depending on the development of those cells a spectrum of self awareness occurs.

Humans in particular are highly adaptable. Almost a blank slate when young, except for some personality traits. Our environment plays a huge role in who I is. There are examples of children being brought up by dogs. Without fellows humans to raise them they adopt the characteristics of there dog family.

Emergence perception is the illusion.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I is an emergent property of the cells that make up you. I is the management function required to manage said cells. Most other life forms have I. I is the characteristics of that lifeform. Depending on the development of those cells a spectrum of self awareness occurs.

Emergence perception is the illusion.

Do you think the "five aggregates" are illusions or would it be more the clinging, the supplying of any inherent form or reality for any of the proposed causes? Note that Vijñāna or discernment as aggregate would link to the earlier suggested (additional) self residing in the flow of conceptualization, interacting with basic perception, sense and the organic.

We can see many definitions of various levels and types of consciousnesses to make up the various philosophical or psychological frameworks. This is to be expected from the perspective of our self and its worlds as conception, the creating of ten thousands more definitions, streams of thing generation which creates ever more type of selves, or perhaps "creation of realities".

Against this I hold this concept of enlightenment, which is not any cessation of reality or being. It's not the stilling of the wind, preventing self, obstructing any causality underling illusion or any other negating action. It's more like a lightning strike, a feedback resonance on all layers simultaneously. And whenever it occurs, many new words, forms and crystallization will occur, creating bodies of thought and tradition of being.