Talk to yourself, write to yourself: Instant channeling

[Cyanatta]

If everything is one, then you can only ever channel yourself.

If everything is empty there is nothing to channel.

Attachment to the the idea of a self is the issue.

Attachment to the idea of no-self can be equally detrimental, imo.

How so?

Both are true, so why cling to one or the other? I view self and no-self as a duality and thus accepting both I find them balanced. What is more curious to me is to consider what it is that is the actual substance of what we call 'self', of which no-self is an apparent lack thereof. Does a complete lack of self get one something a complete fullness of self doesn't, or vice versa? It appears to me rather, like walking a tight-rope, you must balance yourself between them, carefully and delicately.

You're basically just repeating what you said, which makes sense as far as balancing is concerned, but I'm still confused. I was asking more along the lines of if you see being selfless versus selfish as being equally detrimental, as in causing harm or damage. By the same token, do you believe it is equally detrimental to give in fully to the ego as opposed to completely letting go of the ego? I think I was just confused by the language and how you defined "self" and "no-self."

Could you clarify what you mean by "self" and if there's any distinction between "no-self", "selfless", or even "ego-loss" ? What makes them harmful or damaging?

As far as relationships go, are you possibly referring to being by yourself versus being with others? In the sense that one would cling to oneself or others for reasons of insecurity? Then I completely agree.


Otherwise I'm still confused.