We are all quite certain that we have a self. When you say "I like chocolate" or "I vote progressive," no one asks what you mean by "I." That task was left for centuries to philosophers and theologians. "Know thyself" is an axiom worth heeding, but what is there to know? If one camp of modern science has its way, the answer is "nothing." The self, we are told, is an illusion created by the complexity of brain functions. As thousands of inputs bombard each other every second, forming an almost infinite tangle of neural messages, a ghost was created whose name is "I."
Thus, in one stroke the problem that has intrigued humanity's greatest minds -- "Who am I?" -- is reduced to a mirage or fairy tale. The search for the self has proved fruitless when brain scans are consulted. There is no known location for "I" in the brain, and this lack leads one of two ways: Either the self is pervasive or it doesn't exist. Claiming that "I" is an illusion would seem like a cheap way to shrug off a very difficult problem. Yet there is some backing for this position in the Buddhist concept of "emptiness," which holds that all transitory events, including all of our personal experiences, are fabricated by the ego-personality. If we give up our cherished clinging to "I, me, and mine," freedom lies in the realization that there is no fixed self, no fixed mind, not even such a thing as consciousness.
Yet when they combine their efforts, Buddhism and neuroscience can't convince the ordinary person that "I" is a ghost, and there's another tradition that considers the self the richest part of who we are, the source of unlimited potential for creativity, intelligence and evolution. In short, there's a contest between the higher self and no self. Until a small band of scientific skeptics and atheists stepped forward, waving the banner of absolute materialism, the no-self camp was decidedly in the minority. But materialists see an advantage in denying that "I" exists. For them, it isn't an exotic minority position with little bearing on daily life. No-self falls in with a larger notion that consciousness is just a byproduct of chemical reactions in the brain.
How did chemicals learn to think? Why is the sugar that feeds brain cells capable of writing Shakespeare, while the sugar cubes in a coffee bar are not? Materialists have no answer. They assume, with religious conviction, that chemicals learned to think somewhere in the long evolution of the human brain. This is really a form of animism, like worshiping the spirit in a rock or tree. It seems like a nice trick to go a step farther and call consciousness an illusion, since that strips all metaphysics and spirituality of any validity. But no one has come remotely close to explaining how chemicals create the illusion of thought, which is not very different from "real" thought.
I think the higher self position is the valid one, but it's not monolithic. There are unambiguous claims among devout Christians that everyone has a soul that will be redeemed by God; this is the higher self as a person's true core, the part made by God. But in the Indian tradition, there is room for ambiguity. The Buddhist position that the ego-personality is the cause of suffering is echoed in Vedanta by the doctrine of Maya, which holds that "I" is trapped in an illusion of its own making, the illusion that the material world is the ultimate reality and that we are defined by all kinds of external things: money, status, possessions, job, family ties. These props keep the everyday "I" going, but they are actually like waves in the ocean. A wave looks separate and individual when in reality it is nothing but an event in the ocean; its true nature is nothing but ocean.
This search to find our true nature raises the mystery of "I" above arcane arguments among philosophers and neuroscientists. Matters of suffering are at stake, not to mention psychological disorders, relationships, crime and anything else where the self either goes wrong or behaves in inexplicable ways. If we are machines that harbor the delusion of personal dignity, why not sweep away "I" and treat criminals, the depressed and anyone else with a problem by injecting different, better chemicals into their brains? That goal has become standard practice in medicine, yet more and more we are witnessing the dire effects of re-engineering the brain chemically. The alternative is to find out who this "I" really is, because that knowledge, which seems pretty important to begin with, leads to a redefinition of what crime, suffering, mental disorders and relationship problems actually mean. It's the most fascinating mystery anyone can face, standing at the very start of the spiritual quest.
For more by Deepak Chopra, click here.
For more on consciousness, click here.
For more on the spirit, click here.
Follow Deepak Chopra on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DeepakChopra
Laura Schocker: How Living Alone Can Be Good For You
Dan Roberts: Why Do We Feel Sad, Angry or Scared?
MeiMei Fox: The Life Out Loud: The Importance of Community
Gabrielle Bernstein: Become Conscious of When You're Out of Your Truth
Personal Development | Create a plan to know, heal and expand ...
Spirit and Self - Happiness and Self-Help Advice - Oprah.com
Buddhist practices may or may not lead to a similar state, but the EEG and self-reports of practitioners suggest that portions of the brain that are strengthened by TM are actually subdued by certain buddhist practices, leading to two similar descriptions of what may be two distinct physiological states.
The fact that both pure consciousness found in TM practice, and "emptyness" of Buddhist techniques are devoid of mental content may just be a limitation of language, and not some underlying unity of outcome.
In any event, I wanted to say that I don't know much (anything) about TM, but you have certainly inspired some research. Thanks!
Oh, and did I mention bragging about donating 10% of your income to charity when originally you used to work for a non-profit organization and all your speaking fees went directly to said non-profit?
A most savored moment from I to me.
But there is something between these two points of reference, these two states of consciousness. It's something that exists outside of the ego's judgments, beliefs, expectations, demands, need for validation, etc., and yet possesses a quality of....coherence?...that stops it from dissolving entirely and permanently into unity. No matter how enlightened one is (i.e., no matter how completely one's egoic self has ceased to exist), unique qualities and preferences still exist. The heart is still captivated by some more than others. One may still be a "dog person" and most definitely not a "cat person." One may still find that the ocean evokes in them something deeper than does the mountain. Particular talents and abilities are still present.
This, I think, is the true "I," the one that is freed when the ego dies, freed to both more fully express itself and to more fully experience its connection to all that is. This "I" (the higher self, the soul) survives death and may experience many lifetimes, but it is not infinite; eventually, it allows itself to be taken back up into the whole.
We enter into a paradox of self/no-self that cannot be known in the conventional sense.
But that is for you and me to explore..
It's obvious to me that the captalized pronoun "I" is not just a "figure of speech." It's actually the name every one of us calls our Self--so we're really all the same person clothed in a multitude of bodies, personalities, and foci.
It seems that there is a "biological relationship between metamemory monitoring and control is its connection the the prefrontal cortex or the frontal lobe of the brain." p109 "The Taxonomy of Metacognition".
Research on the physiological correlates of pure consciousness found during TM practice:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7045911
Breath suspension during the transcendental meditation technique.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10512549
Pure consciousness: distinct phenomenological and physiological correlates of "consciousness itself".
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9009807
Autonomic patterns during respiratory suspensions: possible markers of Transcendental Consciousness.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10487785
Autonomic and EEG patterns during eyes-closed rest and transcendental meditation (TM) practice: the basis for a neural model of TM practice.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19862565
A self-referential default brain state: patterns of coherence, power, and eLORETA sources during eyes-closed rest and Transcendental Meditation practice.
Research on the physiological correlates of the stabilization of pure consciousness outside of meditation in long-term TM meditators:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12406612
Patterns of EEG coherence, power, and contingent negative variation characterize the integration of transcendental and waking states.
http://www.tm.org/american-psychological-association
Abstract for the 2007 Conference of the American Psychological Association
Brain Integration Scale: Corroborating Language-based 
Instruments of Post-conventional Development
Research on the physiological correlates of the stabilization of pure consciousness outside of meditation in non-meditators:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.01007.x/full
Higher psycho-physiological refinement in world-class Norwegian athletes: brain measures of performance capacity
Smyls
It is the paradox of nature...we must transcend the "I" but only by fully expressing it is this possible...
It is helpful when this "I" is developed and discovered through service to humanity...this leads to such ripeness that has no choice but to fall from the tree...
It is also important to note, that the "I" disappears (even if just temporarily ) when one pays close attention to the breath
Breathe
Things do not define me. I am not things or ideas. You are not things or ideas. The person down the street (or w/ in your own home) you disagree strongly with is not things or ideas. The world we live in tells us constantly that it is exactly the opposite when we fall over ourselves in the midst of a famous person, a person of wealth, a person of some perceived piety or holiness or when we drool all over the latest toys, etc., or get angry and/ or exalt ourselves when others differ from us because what we know is right, and, well, they are simply wrong.
The world is lying to us. For untold centuries humanity has remained unwittingly complicit in it all. We participate in it w/ out understanding what we are really doing. Awareness would mean inevitable change, waking up and fixing what is broken.
I wait for more than what I see at present. I wait. Appreciate your post. Take care. =)