Does memory reinforce my identification as a body?

Does memory reinforce my identification as a body?

Dear Rupert, 

You said that the sense we have that consciousness is located as or in the body is a result of consciousness and the cluster of sensations we call the body. In my experience there is one other factor, which is memory. For me this is the stickiest part, since is seems to be reinforced throughout apparent time. If we did not experience avery similarcluster of sensations from moment to moment or day to day, the body would not be more compelling than the fan across the room. 

But we open our eyes and see a seemingly unchanging reflection (of course, we do not notice the subtle changes), feel consistent pain if we are wounded or ill, etc. These sensations seem more captivating than the fan because they appear with much greater frequency and reliability. I understand that the evidence for the last statement is apparent memory, which is itself only thoughts and images, but somehow these memories of the body are reinforced in our circuitry through their repetitive nature. 

Best regards,
Loren

 

Dear Loren, 

Loren: You said that the sense we have that consciousness is located as or in the body is a result of consciousness and the cluster of sensations we call the body. 

Rupert: Just for clarity, it is neither the presence of consciousness nor the appearance of bodily sensations that is responsible for the sense we have that consciousness is located as or in the body. This sense that consciousness is located as or in the body is simply derived from the belief that what we are, consciousness, is located within a bodily sensation. 

If we did not experience a very similarcluster of sensations from moment to moment or day to day, the body would not be more compelling than the fan across the room. But we open our eyes and see a seemingly unchanging reflection (of course, we do not notice the subtle changes), feel consistent pain if we are wounded or ill, etc. These sensations seem more captivating than the fan because they appear with much greater frequency and reliability.

I wish that were so! I notice far more changes in my body than I do in, say, my car. My body is aging but my car is almost identical to when I bought it five years ago! 

Also, we tend to experience the car, the fan across the room, the kitchen sink and many other such things far more frequently than we experience the shoulder blades or the back of the neck, not to mention numerous internal organs which are never experienced as such. In fact the vast majority of the body is never actually experienced as such, but this doesn’t stop the mind identifying it as ‘I’.

The fact that there are many parts of the body we seldom experience as such does not stop the mind identifying consciousness with them, and likewise the fact that we experience many other things far more frequently than we do the body does not mean that the mind identifies consciousness with these things. 

As for reliability, the appearance of the kitchen floor, the car in the garage or the fan across the room is far more consistent than is the state of the mind or the body. Relatively speaking (and we are of course speaking relatively here), we have no idea what the mind will look like in five minutes but we are fairly sure how the kitchen floor will look. 

In other words, it is not the similarity, frequency or reliability of appearances that qualifies them as our ‘self’. 

 

*     *     * 

 

I understand that the evidence for the last statement is apparent memory, which is itself only thoughts and images, but somehow these memories of the body are reinforced in our circuitry through their repetitive nature. 

Again, the apparent world is every bit as repetitive as the apparent body. However, let us take the qualities of similarity, frequency and reliability with which, as you say, we normally judge whether or not something qualifies as our self and apply them to our actual experience. 

If these are the criteria with which we determine what constitutes our self, we can simply ask what, in our experience, is always the same, is not just frequent but ever-present, and is the one ‘thing’, and in fact the only‘thing’, that is absolutely stable, dependable and reliable. 

Whatever we find is, as you rightly imply, the candidate that truly qualifies to be called our self. Moreover, only those appearances of the mind, body and world that share these qualities of ‘always the same’, ‘always present’, and ‘stable, dependable and reliable’ can be considered identical with this self.

No appearances satisfy these criteria, so we can conclude that our self, consciousness, is identical with itself alone. Simply stand knowingly as that. 

With love, 
Rupert

Category

You might also like

Philosophy

Is it necessary to practice Kashmir Tantric yoga on a daily basis?

Published on 1 June 2021
Philosophy

‘Considering’ the Forms of Meaning

Published on 10 May 2022
Philosophy

Remaining as Awareness in the Presence of Thoughts

Published on 30 March 2022