clyde wrote:At the beginning of the paragraph you state that the impermanent soul is â€œnot your true self either, but it is truer than your body selfâ€. Does this imply that there is a â€œtrue selfâ€
Not necessarily, as the "self" is just an artificial construct, whether you consider the self to be a one inch slice of the pie or a two inch slice. The last sentence in this post will seem to contradict this, but the concept is beyond what words can point to really well. One might say that the self is the whole pie, or any size slice - but that isn't really accurate either.
clyde wrote:what is your â€œtrue selfâ€?
we are all part of the greater Whole, which is where "true" points to.
clyde wrote:In any case, in what ways is the impermanent soul â€œtruerâ€ than the body self?
Anything closer to being whole is truer to the Whole. For example, you are your present manifestation. It is truer that you are the sum of all of your manifestations in this lifetime. When you were 5, that was still you. When you are 85, that will still be you. You are all of those selves in between and more, which is truer to the whole than your present manifestation, which is only truest to the moment. The Whole includes all of time, so that is the difference in these two kinds of truth.
Therefore your impermanent soul is truer to the whole, as it includes all of those, and it includes any other lifetimes, and the manifestations of your consciousness energy in between.
You are also all of the components of all of these things. Like a fountain in which the water evaporates, and requires more water to be added, you are those composites of your self, however you wish to define that. Although it is not conventionally considered that the parts that emit from the self, like the evaporated water off of the fountain, are still part of the thing, in a sense, they are - just as our whole self is more truly the Whole. By the time you get to that concept, the word "self" essentially loses meaning though.
clyde wrote:In the body of the paragraph you argue that â€œa soulâ€™s continuity is longerâ€ than a single human life. On what basis do you make this statement?
It is going to take me awhile to compile adequate evidence for all that (and I'd rather not compile it as a marathon endeavor), so the short answer is personal knowledge and observed evidence. That sucks as an argument, so please be patient while I compile a response that truly points.