Wisdom Is Bliss Session Seventeen with Robert A.F. Thurman 

Can you explain how you came to that conclusion ?

@@Shashankaadiga In saying "there is no self" (alternatively, "there is no soul") that understanding is made in the dualistic context of, or in reference to an appearing objectively "real" thing called a "self" or "soul." That is what the vast majority of people mean when asking such a question as "Is there a soul/self? or is there not?" The question is based in the context of a dualistic view. From the other (ultimate, nondual) perspective, BUT IN ADDRESSING those who grasp and hold onto that "dualistic" view of the possibility of an "ultimately real" or absolutely real & permanently existing self/soul, the idea of a self/soul is merely the conventional (constructed) experience that we have within the context of duality - ie, a mind perceiving a self in juxtaposition to other than self. We see a "I, me mine" (or ego-self) in opposition to the appearing external world, but that "duality" is not how things really are. So do I exist? I appear as "I" but what is that truly? What is its nature? I cannot deny its appearance, that appearance is REALLY an appearance. But, when we look into the nature of this "I" you find its nature is nonduality or "wholeness." What is "wholeness?" It has many names, all of them are dualistic, mere concepts. Wholeness is "Brahman" and "Brahman" is just a name or concept for the reality of no self, no ego. ❤🙏