bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 17, 2009 4:35:04 GMT -5
I read what you posted and it surprisingly described ego very well.
Hiya Izzy, glad you found it clarifying!
But the idea of going back to nothingness just does not sit right with me.
The idea of going back to nothingness shouldn’t sit right with you, as long as it’s just an idea, an imaginative fantasy of interpretation, a mental fabrication. The real deal, so to speak, is nothing the imagination can conceive, however. In fact, it is actually the case right now, but that’s a big secret, so forget about it. In the meantime, I do like Rumi’s take on the subject:
If you are eager to be nothing before you know who you are, you rob yourself of your true being.
Even if it is a joke I still want to be able to laugh at it.
"We think that there is something hiding our reality and that it must be destroyed before the reality is gained. It is ridiculous. A day will dawn when you will yourself laugh at your past efforts. That which will be on the day you laugh is also here and now."
- Ramana Maharshi
There are a lot of egotistical illusion I want to enjoy. Like having children, a wife to love and be loved by, persevering through some struggles in life, relaxing after a hard days work.
Why not have children, a wife to love and be loved by, persevere through some struggles in life, and relax after a hard day’s work, but without adding some fictional egotistical illusion to the mix?
I think one of the worst jokes out there is how in all religious texts all the buddhas and the Christs takes things to far. Some get nailed on a cross and others die fat from indigestion.
You must be a voracious reader to have examined so many texts! ;D
Here's a little text for ya tonight, my Friend:
"Nothing stands in the way of your liberation and it can happen here and now, but for your being more interested in other things. And you cannot fight with your interests. You must go with them, see through them and and watch them reveal themselves as mere errors of judgments and appreciation. Discard every self-seeking motive as soon as it is seen and you need not search for truth; truth will find you."
~Nisargadatta
Blessings!
|
|
|
Post by Izarith on Sept 17, 2009 18:45:02 GMT -5
Hiya Izzy, glad you found it clarifying! What is still a bit unclarified is why ego is meant to be done away with. I too like Rumi's take on this subject, just a bit differently: This Love is beyond the study of theology, that old trickery and hypocrisy. If you want to improve your mind that way, sleep on. ;D Well yeah, very true. Fear, doubt, and the general lack of guarantees. Have your pick. Adding some fictional egotistical illusion to the mix helps dull the pain of actually being nothing. I smoke pipe tobacco too. Only the ones that I have read, what else can I go by? Here is one for you that says just as much... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JengaIzzy.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 17, 2009 23:44:07 GMT -5
What is still a bit unclarified is why ego is meant to be done away with. Hiya Izzy- Yeah, that’s why most of us are still hanging around in this sandbox realm, learning rather basic protocols and so forth. Regardless, how can you do away with that which has no intrinsic existence from the beginning? Only by recognizing its truly empty, interdependent nature, and then stabilizing in that recognition, which is admittedly quite a daunting challenge for most, but always possible for the earnest. Nor is that the end of the matter, more like a half-way point. After all, form is emptiness, but emptiness is also form. So there ya go, back where you started and right where you are! Now what? How will you behave? Will you be generous or selfish? Adding some fictional egotistical illusion to the mix helps dull the pain of actually being nothing. I’d keep a closer eye on that assumption, my Friend, see if it is true. That does require some integrity – to stare into the face of your own non-existence and not flinch a jaw muscle. What’s revealed is not of time, not of schemes and concepts, faith or belief. It is prior to and beyond both existence and non-existence. Too marvelous for words!
“All arising phenomena are intrinsically empty, and yet this Mind with which they are identical is no mere nothingness. By this I mean that it does exist, but in a way too marvelous for us to comprehend. It is an existence which is no existence, a non-existence which is nevertheless existence. So this true Emptiness does in some marvelous way ‘exist’.”
Huang Po, The Zen Teaching of Huang Po, John Blofeld….what else can I go by? Well, you seem to like that game from the link you sent, so stick with what works for you, and do your best!
A Rose of Sharon from our garden today:
www.pbase.com/1heart/rose_of_sharon
Blessings!
|
|
|
Post by Izarith on Sept 18, 2009 1:40:33 GMT -5
But why is the elimination of Ego a rather basic protocol in this sand box realm? What is the point of building a beautiful home only to earnestly reveal through examination that the beautiful home is really only wood and stone and then upon further examination find that the wood and stone is nothing more than dust and then atoms and then nothing? Why would we do that if we came from nothing, if we were nothing and later developed the Ego enough to enjoy the beautiful home? You seam to imply that doing away with that which has no intrinsic existence from the beginning is not an admittedly daunting challenge for yourself. But what I find a daunting challenge is understanding why you would want to. This is what I am attempting to undertake because if I can understand why you would rather diminish your Ego rather than expand it, why you would chose earnestly to return to nothing rather than expand the empty form, then and only then would I be able to go one way or the other. From what you have said both do not matter. They are both empty and only with Ego can we give them form. so from an egotistical standpoint I will be which ever I chose. I will behave as I have made myself. Right? What other option am I not prevalent too? My assumption is true. I could not cope with what I really am and I have seen what I really am to the best of my current knowledge. But just like a drug junkie Ego helps me get out of bed in the morning, It gives me a friend to talk to, and it turns this shoebox of a house that I live in into my prosperous estate. Don't tell anyone......I'm also Batman. ;D My Ego is my beloved, it is the presence that is always with me and it too is to marvelous for words. You see this is where things get so confusing for me, Huang Po has adequately described my beloved. Explain that LOL! Well, you seem to like that game from the link you sent, so stick with what works for you, and do your best! I have never played the game myself but it look like 15 minutes of fun trying to do the impossible. Those are really good photos! How did you get the dark background? Izzy.
|
|
|
Post by Eevee on Sept 18, 2009 4:00:46 GMT -5
Hi Bob, I just wanted to say that I love the photos of the rose in your garden that you posted, it's absolutely beautiful! Which part of the world do you live in if you don't mind me asking? I've been having a bit of a bad week this week, at first I thought that everyone in my life was treating me like crap, but I've just realised that it's been me that's had the bad attitude and people around me were picking up on it (whether they were aware or not), and were responding negatively. A friend of mine has just sent me this video that they made including some of their own photography and poetry and some quotes, you seem like a lovely soul Bob, I'm sure you will appreciate it as I did.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 18, 2009 4:28:18 GMT -5
But why is the elimination of Ego a rather basic protocol in this sand box realm?
Hiya Izzy -- If I wasn’t clear, I apologize, but ego is not an entity, it’s an activity -- the activity of grasping and aversion -- which I sort of delved into in my original post or thereabouts back in the intro when you engaged in this inquiry. It’s only when we project or superimpose a separate and enduring self-identity onto the functioning that we create the grounds for our own resulting amnesia/confusion, as well as suffering for others. Here I am referring to egoic consciousness as selfishness, commonly witnessed in children's play, and manifesting in life after life of conflict, envy, and hate.
‘Empty’ simply refers to the fundamental nature or quality of the activity, a dependently-arising expression of the totality of manifestation – a play of consciousness. Consciousness manifests itself as form ( that's its play, creation), but then comes to believe it is that form -- the original case of mistaken identity -- and down the line you get Democrats arguing ad nauseum with Republicans and saints and demons squaring off and so forth.
What is the point of building a beautiful home only to earnestly reveal through examination that the beautiful home is really only wood and stone and then upon further examination find that the wood and stone is nothing more than dust and then atoms and then nothing?
The point of building a beautiful home is building a beautiful home, not validating quantum physics.
Why would we do that if we came from nothing, if we were nothing and later developed the Ego enough to enjoy the beautiful home?
Desire --> attachment --> and a whole bunch of homeowners are finding out the rest of that story these days, it appears. In any case, there’s a whole chain of causation based on this case of mistaken identity, aka ignorance. It's an endless loop, and it will wear you down until you finally wake up and take a close look at the critter you've been feeding.
You seam to imply that doing away with that which has no intrinsic existence from the beginning is not an admittedly daunting challenge for yourself.
Not at all, that’s why I used the term ‘admittedly’. And once again, I am not suggesting doing away with anything, just understanding, as I’ve tried to make clear. From right understanding flows right action. I'm talking about recognizing who’s the Guest and who’s the Host in this masquerade, for one thing.
But what I find a daunting challenge is understanding why you would want to. This is what I am attempting to undertake because if I can understand why you would rather diminish your Ego rather than expand it, why you would chose earnestly to return to nothing rather than expand the empty form, then and only then would I be able to go one way or the other.
How about not going anywhere or taking anyone else’s word for it, but simply stay aware of being aware, during whatever activities you are already involved in. Just keep that awareness, and though initially you get distracted, keep returning to that simple awareness, and you will inevitably see clearly for yourself, like knowing that the water is cool by tasting it for yourself.
From what you have said both do not matter. They are both empty and only with Ego can we give them form. so from an egotistical standpoint I will be which ever I chose. I will behave as I have made myself. Right?
You have some idea about “empty”, but that’s not the emptiness I am referring to, and again, apologies for not being clearer in that regard. There is an emptiness in the midst of the drama, but it's not the threatening, empty emptiness that the mind thinks it is. When one finally gets the courage to go into it – the unknown -- it's found to be empty and at the same time pregnant with every possibility there is.
What other option am I not prevalent too?
Most of our problem includes believing that we have a lot of options. When one whittles it down a bit, through life and some clarifying insight/recognition gifted along the way, one might come to recognize that there’s no option for them that will truly satisfy their heart’s deepest longing but the absolute truth. That’s when things get interesting, and that’s when there’s some possibility of awakening from the dream of ‘I and mine’, the endless desperate alternation of grasping and aversion that characterizes the ego.
My Ego is my beloved, it is the presence that is always with me and it too is to marvelous for words.
That’s why I suggested a while back just staying with this sense of “I am”, keeping your attention there, though I think you took it to be sarcasm as I recall. In fact it is indeed a marvelous and authentic practice, one recommended by one of my true benefactors, Nisargadatta Maharaj. I’ll share a bit of his comment on the matter:
“On waking up, was it not the sense 'I am' that came first? The sense 'I am' is always with you, only you have attached all kinds of things to it -- body, feelings, thoughts, ideas, possessions, etc. All these self-identifications are misleading. Because of them you take yourself to be what you are not. What is mine is mine and was mine even when God was not. Of course, it is a very tiny little thing, a speck -- the sense 'I am', the fact of being. The light by which you see the world, which is God, is the tiny little spark: 'I am', apparently so small, yet the first and the last in every act of knowing and loving.
'I am' is ever afresh. You do not need to remember in order to be. ... At present your being is mixed up with experiencing. All you need is to unravel being from the tangle of experiences. Once you have known pure being, without being this or that, you will discern it among experiences and you will no longer be misled by names and forms.
The 'I am' in movement creates the world. The 'I am' at peace becomes the Absolute. In the immensity of consciousness a light appears, a tiny point that moves rapidly and traces shapes, thoughts and feelings, concepts and ideas, like the pen writing on paper. And the ink that leaves a trace is memory. You are that tiny point and by your movement the world is ever re-created. Stop moving and there will be no world. Look within and you will find that the point of light is the reflection of the immensity of light in the body, as the sense 'I am'. There is only light, all else appears.
The 'I am' is at the root of all appearance and the permanent link in the succession of events that we call life...Human beings die every second, the fear and the agony of dying hangs over the world like a cloud. No wonder you too are afraid. But once you know that the body alone dies and not the continuity of memory and the sense of 'I am' reflected in it, you are afraid no longer.
People differ, but all are faced with the fact of their own existence. 'I am' is the ultimate fact; 'Who am I?' is the ultimate question to which everybody must find an answer. Delve deeply into the sense 'I am' and you will surely discover that the perceiving centre is universal, as universal as the light that illumines the world. All that happens in the universe happens to you, the silent witness. On the other hand, whatever is done, is done by you, the universal and inexhaustible energy.
Before the mind -- I am. 'I am' is not a thought in the mind; the mind happens to me, I do not happen to the mind. And since time and space are in the mind, I am beyond time and space, eternal and omnipresent. You are not this, there is nothing of yours in this, except the little point of 'I am' ... . 'I am this, I am that' is dream, while pure 'I am' has the stamp of reality on it. You have tasted so many things -- all came to naught. Only the sense 'I am' persisted -- unchanged. Stay with the changeless among the changeful, until you are able to go beyond. When the 'I am myself' goes, the 'I am all' comes. When the 'I am all' goes, 'I am' comes. When even 'I am' goes, reality alone is.”[/i]
Those are really good photos! How did you get the dark background?
Thanks, I use a piece of dark cloth and hold it up with one hand while shooting with the other.
Blessings!
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 18, 2009 4:43:32 GMT -5
I just wanted to say that I love the photos of the rose in your garden that you posted, it's absolutely beautiful! Thanks, Eevee, it's in the Hibiscus family, and a first-time bloomer in our garden. Btw, my daughter-in-law is named Evie. We just talked with her today after a long time. She likes crop circles too -- what's not to like, eh!Which part of the world do you live in if you don't mind me asking? Paradise, in California's Sierra Nevada foothillsI've been having a bit of a bad week this week, at first I thought that everyone in my life was treating me like crap, but I've just realised that it's been me that's had the bad attitude and people around me were picking up on it (whether they were aware or not), and were responding negatively. That's along the lines of what I was pointing to when I was talking to Izzy about dependent origination -- we only seem to be separate individuals, but that's really just a small part of what's actually happening. In reality, there's no distance, and this 'no-distance' is sometimes called in Zen, 'not two'. We are all creators and creatures of each other, causing and bearing each other's burden.A friend of mine has just sent me this video that they made including some of their own photography and poetry and some quotes, you seem like a lovely soul Bob, I'm sure you will appreciate it as I did. Thanks so much, Sister!
Blessings!
|
|
|
Post by Izarith on Sept 20, 2009 21:01:17 GMT -5
Hiya Izzy -- If I wasn’t clear, I apologize, but ego is not an entity, it’s an activity -- the activity of grasping and aversion -- which I sort of delved into in my original post or thereabouts back in the intro when you engaged in this inquiry. It’s only when we project or superimpose a separate and enduring self-identity onto the functioning that we create the grounds for our own resulting amnesia/confusion, as well as suffering for others. Here I am referring to egoic consciousness as selfishness, commonly witnessed in children's play, and manifesting in life after life of conflict, envy, and hate.
‘Empty’ simply refers to the fundamental nature or quality of the activity, a dependently-arising expression of the totality of manifestation – a play of consciousness. Consciousness manifests itself as form ( that's its play, creation), but then comes to believe it is that form -- the original case of mistaken identity -- and down the line you get Democrats arguing ad nauseum with Republicans and saints and demons squaring off and so forth. But what if Ego is a presence? What if Ego is our own version of creation of our own likeness? What if in this sand box we are not meant to eliminate ego but rather learn how to strip the emptiness from it? Think about it for a moment. Would not our ego need it's free will in order to fall, get lost in emptiness, in order to miss home? LOL! I"m glad to hear that, I never really liked the old cartoon film "Flight Of The Dragons". When born in ignorance some times it takes losing all you thought you had in order to see you never had it at all. Well when I make a reading mistake, luckily I end up making an ass out of myself. That's good for the Ego. ;D I see what your saying now. But still I just don't see how Ego itself is the sours of it's frowned upon view. I still think Ego gets a bad rap. That's what I've been doing. ;D No need to apologies for anything my friend. It's not your job to be clear. And from what I understand only when you are lost in the woods will you see the clear path. But I'm starting to understand what your talking about. But I think we are calling the same thing it's perceived complete opposites. Ego could just be the lack there of. ;D I see. But again could it not be that Ego is just the victim of our own selfish characteristics? I just see Ego as the possibility. We are the ones who use Ego and then later blame it for our bad characteristics. Oh well I see now that you were not being sarcastic.....*Facepalm* Yea it looks like we are on the same page aside from what EGO is. The only way I could describe the beauty of Ego is with the new film based on the very, very, very first book I ever read. WHERE THE WILD THING ARE. Thanks Bob, Gerald.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 20, 2009 23:55:37 GMT -5
Cool
Experience, however sublime, is not the real thing. The possibilities of narrative and experience are endless (though we come from nowhere and go nowhere), and yet if you were to suddenly realize how much you’ve already seen in the game, you’d be flat on your back with shock and awe! Whew – and it keeps changing, and changing, and changing, being born and dying, and as long as we’re continually seduced by the fascinations of the passing parade and its central character – the “me-story”, we’ll continue to remain ignorant of our actual nature and condition. That’s just the way it works.
Consider, on the other hand -- what is the one thing that has not changed in this limitless play of consciousness? Returning attention here is being aware of being aware. If practiced earnestly, the questions and concepts about ego and so forth dissolve like a salt doll in the ocean. What remains when the stories fade is what has always been. That is the bliss of the real, prior to the masquerade of consciousness.
Speaking of stories, night before last I went out to look at the stars and a small bat fluttered around over my head for a while before heading off into the night, and I remembered then that you had called yourself Batman in an earlier post, so there was a chuckle! Btw, I’ve a brother named Gerald, and in fact I just mailed him last night. Haven’t spoken in years. I left home at 13 this time around, never really looked back much.
Blessings!
|
|
|
Post by Izarith on Sept 21, 2009 1:01:39 GMT -5
You don't sound to convinced. ;D Awe, I love awe. It's the main reason I go to the theater. It's why I wish it would rain down here in Rosarito. It's why I stare at the stars at night. If Ego is so bad why dose it feel so good when it is made small? Is it truly just the liberation from our Ego that creates the awe. Or is it an entirely separate entity revealing itself to us. An entity that we smother with our own characteristics time and time again. A gift we do not know how to use beyond our own selfishness and desires, nonetheless a gift that can not be taken from us. If lack of ignorance toward the emptiness of our illusions diminishes Ego, where is this knowledge being stored? Once Ego is gone what is made to feel small? Yes I agree, But my question is why the masquerade? If we can create own consciousness, and we do, why the need for an external one? Life finds ways of making a person feel small, dirty, insignificant and evil. Our young healthy bodies shrivel up and die in a puddle of their own shit. It is a very humbling experience to be turned back into the helpless infant you once were, except this time with out the cuteness of it all. If anything this realm we are in is made to take away your Ego. By whose authority is this happening and why? We are all told that we should do this, this and this, and we are always told that we should do it for a big fat treat in the end. Even your explanation of returning to nowhere, the bliss of what we always were sounds promising. It sounds to me like something out there really, really is going through a crap load of trouble to get me to do things their way. Does that not merritt a little Ego on it's own? Well your Rose of Sharon had a similar effect. ;D And so did this. My dads name is Gerald and he left home around the same as you. He made a website with his name and some info on it and one of my uncles found it about a year ago. I'm glad to see your doing better than he is. Izzy.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 21, 2009 2:56:25 GMT -5
Hiya Izzy!
To your questions:
1. If Ego is so bad why dose it feel so good when it is made small?
“Feeling good” is something you’re adding to experience. A woman who is sold a zirconium ring and assured that it is a priceless diamond will be feeling pretty good until she realizes the mistake. Likewise, the craving for “feeling good” and the avoidance of not feeling good both loose their juice with the dawning of recognition. Both interpretations on perception are seen as and for what they are -- conditional responses, mere reactions, plain attractions and repulsions, based on memories or preconceptions. Usually pleasure and pain are experienced when expected. It is all a matter of acquired habits and convictions.
2. Is it truly just the liberation from our Ego that creates the awe. Or is it an entirely separate entity revealing itself to us. An entity that we smother with our own characteristics time and time again. A gift we do not know how to use beyond our own selfishness and desires, nonetheless a gift that can not be taken from us.
You can apply some sense of separate entification or deity-figure bestowing gifts if that helps you to stay aware of being aware, though eventually even the divine duality is seen through as a more subtle mental projection, a deeper fantasy, if you will. Reality has never been separate from you.
3. If lack of ignorance toward the emptiness of our illusions diminishes Ego, where is this knowledge being stored?
In reality, everything is known, nothing is stored to be remembered.
4. Once Ego is gone what is made to feel small?
Ego goes nowhere, any more than someone who is dreaming at night of travelling awakens in the morning to find themselves in some other place (unless of course they’ve been off with Milton or his ilk).
5. If we can create own consciousness, and we do, why the need for an external one?
Actually, it’s more like, consciousness is creating you, expressing itself in form as you, which is fine, until it begins to believe it really is you – that’s the case of mistaken identity I’ve been speaking about.
6. If anything this realm we are in is made to take away your Ego. By whose authority is this happening and why?
The real happiness of consciousness is in the rapture of its own dissolution. The closer things approach nothing, the more exquisite they become.
Fire is whispering the secret in smoke's ear This aloe's wood loves me because I help it live out its purpose
With me, it becomes fragrance and then disappears altogether
The knots untie and open into absence as you do with me, my friend
Eaten by flame and smoked out into the sky
This is most fortunate
What's unlucky is not to change and disappear
~Rumi
7. It sounds to me like something out there really, really is going through a crap load of trouble to get me to do things their way. Does that not merritt a little Ego on it's own?
The sense that there is an “in here” as opposed to an “out there” is merely an error of appreciation – an incomplete view (though certainly understandable). What looks out looks in, or as Meister Eckhart wrote, “The eye by which I see God is the same eye by which God sees me.”
Blessings!
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 21, 2009 16:14:32 GMT -5
Hiya No Face!
I began here answering to your post of today, but then your post disappeared, so before I head off to work, I'll share with you some responses that came up to the first part of of your comments that I had copied. The quotes are all from Nisargadatta, and I've added no commentary due to time constraints. If you'd like to pursue further, I'll be back later.
You wrote: This is where I think the confusion, or mistake in understanding occurs. ALthough one's concept of oneself disappears, it doesn't mean you don't exist as an individual period.
"There are many persons who have a great attachment to their own individuality. They want first and foremost to remain as an individual and then search, for they are not prepared to lose that individuality. While retaining their identity, they want to find out what is the truth. But in this process, you must get rid of the identity itself. If you really find out what you are, you will see that you are not an individual, you are not a person, you are not a body. And people who cling to their body identity are not fit for this knowledge."
Only God can say, "I AM." - Meister Eckhart
"When ‘I am’ and ‘God is’ become in your mind indistinguishable, then something will happen and you will know without a trace of doubt that God is, because you are -- you are, because God is. The two are one."
But, have you ever started to see out of another's eyes? If you were in a crowded area do you ever see through all of the being's eyes that are within your field of awareness? Now, I'm not limiting any possibilities, but I never have. And I don't think Buddha, or Krishna, or Jesus, or Nisargadatta, or RamaKrishna, or Ramana Maharshi, or anyone else did either.
"I find that somehow, by shifting the focus of attention, I become the very thing I look at, and experience the kind of consciousness it has; I become the inner witness of the thing. I call this capacity of entering other focal points of consciousness, love; you may give it any name you like. Love says "I am everything". Wisdom says "I am nothing". Between the two, my life flows. Since at any point of time and space I can be both the subject and the object of experience, I express it by saying that I am both, and neither, and beyond both."
Blessings!
|
|
|
Post by noface on Sept 21, 2009 18:30:47 GMT -5
Hiya No Face!
I began here answering to your post of today, but then your post disappeared, so before I head off to work, I'll share with you some responses that came up to the first part of of your comments that I had copied. The quotes are all from Nisargadatta, and I've added no commentary due to time constraints. If you'd like to pursue further, I'll be back later. Hey Bob, You caught that. ;D I decided to delete it, but I guess I was too late. Here is the full version. Fire is whispering the secret in smoke's ear This aloe's wood loves me because I help it live out its purpose
With me, it becomes fragrance and then disappears altogether
The knots untie and open into absence as you do with me, my friend
Eaten by flame and smoked out into the sky
This is most fortunate
What's unlucky is not to change and disappear
~RumiThe sense that there is an “in here” as opposed to an “out there” is merely an error of appreciation – an incomplete view (though certainly understandable). What looks out looks in, or as Meister Eckhart wrote, “The eye by which I see God is the same eye by which God sees me.” Hi Bob,
This is where I think the confusion, or mistake in understanding occurs. ALthough one's concept of oneself disappears, it doesn't mean you don't exist as an individual period.
Only God can say, "I AM." - Meister Eckhart
Although the experience of higher states of consciousness, samadhi, satori, turiya, etc., gives one the God-like perception of being one with the objects of awareness, it is a misunderstanding to conclude this is the case. This misunderstanding is due to that fact that once one is aware of their true identity as subjective awareness, which has no qualities whatsoever - no thing ness - , then all a being can identify themselves with are the contents within that field of subjective awareness. Hence, it seems as if one is the objects one is aware of. The experience is one of total intimacy because the concept of being a separate entity in a physical body has been seen through. Now one is identified with whatever one is aware of, be that a wall, a paper cup, or another physical body.
But, have you ever started to see out of another's eyes? If you were in a crowded area do you ever see through all of the being's eyes that are within your field of awareness? Now, I'm not limiting any possibilities, but I never have. And I don't think Buddha, or Krishna, or Jesus, or Nisargadatta, or RamaKrishna, or Ramana Maharshi, or anyone else did either.
My point being that you are a point of awareness that, by its own nature, is perfectly intimate with whatever is within its field. But, you are an individual point of awareness and since you have become a conscious individual you will always remain an individual. You have metaphoriacally eaten of the tree of knowledge, recognized your selfhood, and will eternally grow in that direction towards ever greater states of existence. You were an individual before eating of the tree as well. You just didn't recognize it without conscious awareness.
Maybe the dudes in the east, with all of their intense earnest devotion to the concepts of their gurus got it wrong. Maybe it is as Lou says and even those beings go into some great spaceships at night, get their minds wiped and wake up the next day continuing on with their good karma of experiencing high states of intimate consciousness - and they are assuming they are "one" with everything they are aware of becasue that's what they have been taught since birth.
Personally, I don't think any being on earth ever actually became God - omniscient, omnipotent, etc. Sure they recognized they were made of some of God's Stuff, so in a sense God, or God's children so to speak. But they never became Omnieverything. sure they might have accessed knowledge bases that are inaccessible to regular humans, or even some higher beings, but they never became All Knowing, All Powerful, Ever Present beings. They also didn't stop to exist as an individual having the experience they were having of intimate awareness of all others within their field of awareness.
I'm not saying I know with absolute certainty. I'm just saying this is how I see it now that I honestly reflect on my experiences. You wrote: This is where I think the confusion, or mistake in understanding occurs. ALthough one's concept of oneself disappears, it doesn't mea "There are many persons who have a great attachment to their own individuality. They want first and foremost to remain as an individual and then search, for they are not prepared to lose that individuality. While retaining their identity, they want to find out what is the truth. But in this process, you must get rid of the identity itself. If you really find out what you are, you will see that you are not an individual, you are not a person, you are not a body. And people who cling to their body identity are not fit for this knowledge."Only God can say, "I AM." - Meister Eckhart "When ‘I am’ and ‘God is’ become in your mind indistinguishable, then something will happen and you will know without a trace of doubt that God is, because you are -- you are, because God is. The two are one."But, have you ever started to see out of another's eyes? If you were in a crowded area do you ever see through all of the being's eyes that are within your field of awareness? Now, I'm not limiting any possibilities, but I never have. And I don't think Buddha, or Krishna, or Jesus, or Nisargadatta, or RamaKrishna, or Ramana Maharshi, or anyone else did either. "I find that somehow, by shifting the focus of attention, I become the very thing I look at, and experience the kind of consciousness it has; I become the inner witness of the thing. I call this capacity of entering other focal points of consciousness, love; you may give it any name you like. Love says "I am everything". Wisdom says "I am nothing". Between the two, my life flows. Since at any point of time and space I can be both the subject and the object of experience, I express it by saying that I am both, and neither, and beyond both."Blessings!Yeah, even in Lou's book a soul can look through another's eyes. But, they still remain an individual looking from what would be another's perspective. Just as in the quotes you supplied. The guy is still an individual point of awareness that can experience the perspectives of other points of awareness. He doesn't become those points of awareness. He becomes intimate with what their experience and perspective is. It is "as if" he becomes them. But, then he returns to being himself from his own perspective of a unique individual. Just not an individual in a way that can be conceived, or imagined, because awareness is prior to conceptualizing and imagination, good dude.
Also, he doesn't become All Knowing All Powerful Omnipresent God. He simply realizes, or as Lou would say, "is gifted" with a little more God-like capabilities. He probably is done with planets like this.
|
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 216
|
Post by bob on Sept 22, 2009 0:58:45 GMT -5
Hello, my Friend!
Let’s try another tack for a change, like inspecting what it is about the concept of some continuously enduring individual identity that provokes in us the felt need to assert and defend its reality. Simply said, if there’s that sense for you, then that’s what it is, at least until the recognition dawns that its clearly transitory nature is itself proof of its unreality. For the lot of us, it invariably comes down to a primal fear of its presumed alternative – falling through the unknown, the void, with nothing to grab hold of and cling to, no place to pitch a tent and plant a flag of “me”. This is especially true of folks who’ve gotten a quick partial glimpse -- entered the parlor, so to speak -- and who immediately beat a speedy path out of there like the Roadrunner with a tail on fire.
Why? Whatever we’re holding on to begins to be seen as insubstantial, like smoke, with predictable consequences. The open secret is in clinging to nothing at all, all self images released, let go, the internal conflict about the existence or non-existence of any real “Numeral Uno” now a vague memory, just whistling while you work and being kind to all you meet as the dream plays itself out, until what remains is nothing we could have imagined, though its been here all along. That’s why we laugh!
Blessings!
PS: Archi-text for the Day:
“What an Awakened One sees is this:
'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is perception... such are mental fabrications... such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.'
Because of this, I say, an Awakened One — with the ending, fading out, cessation, renunciation, and relinquishment of all speculations, all conceptualizations, all I-making & mine-making and obsession with self-images — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released."
~Buddha
|
|
|
Post by noface on Sept 22, 2009 1:57:18 GMT -5
Howdy Bob, For the lot of us, it invariably comes down to a primal fear of its presumed alternative – falling through the unknown, the void, with nothing to grab hold of and cling to, no place to pitch a tent and plant a flag of “me”. This is especially true of folks who’ve gotten a quick partial glimpse -- entered the parlor, so to speak -- and who immediately beat a speedy path out of there like the Roadrunner with a tail on fire. I can distinctly remember the moment. I remember the need to think about anything at all. I just had to think. If only my evangelical Christian boss knew what I was going through at the time. ;D Yeah, it was where I "imagined" my face was the entire time. Check the avatar. Sweet Although all speculations, all conceptualizations, all I-making & mine-making and obsession with self-images is released, that still doesn't mean he is not an individual. He is just free of all imaginary concepts that are the source of his false identity, bud. Wouldn't that be nice? There is nothing wrong with his true identity as an individual point of subjective awareness.
|
|