How do we use the concept of “self” (attā)? Broadly speaking, in two ways. The first is conventional, when we refer to ourselves in a normal, everyday way — “I went shopping today …;” “I don’t like the smell of fish.” All this is obviously empirical. The word “I” points to my sense of personal unity, bounded by this body. “That wasn’t me — I was at home at the time!”

The second is when we refer to something much more mysterious — the unseen entity at the core of our being. This entity is mysterious because it is not empirical. Unlike the body I identify with, we never see it. It remains hidden beneath the various ways in which I express my personal nature. Sometimes I am happy, sometimes sad; sometimes good, sometimes bad; sometimes I like this, sometimes I don’t. While I retain a sense of personal unity throughout these changes, I cannot pinpoint the one who undergoes these changes — the one who is sometimes good, sometimes bad. This one — the “metaphysical” rather than “empirical” self — remains hidden. It’s more an inference than an experience. My empirical self refers to something reassuringly physical — the one typing (or reading) these words. But my metaphysical self is only a concept. It has no more reality than that. Read More...