Enlightenment: The Ego, what is it? How to transcend it.

[Wind]

Eckhart Tolle TV: What part does willpower play in awakening?

"Little to no part; instead, surrender to the moment."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=unUJPFYjhEQ

[Rich]

A few days ago it occurred to me that I do not know what the ''teachers'' mean when they say ''There is no I.''
I found this fascinating to contemplate, maybe it sounds silly to you but I asked:

What is the 'I' that supposedly does not exist? What is the definition of this 'I'?

I am not asking what the real I is or isn't, I am asking what they mean when 'they' say it.

a few shortened answers:

That is the claim to be the the author and the doer of everything
The love affair with the story of me.

the appearance of a separate self

experiencing is not known by someone or something other than itself.
It is the absence of distance, separation or otherness. There is no room for two there.

How about this explanation:

Identification with something is the ''I''.
The thought of being something - anything, is the ''I'' which does not exist?!

When we identify with something an I appears and when we don't there is no I?!

I think that is what the teachers mean with ''There is no I''?!

So another way of saying ''there is no I'' would be: ''You cannot be anything you can think of.''

Is that what is meant by it?

Any insights are welcome.

[GarethBKK]

Posted by Jake (here)
My life has taught me that experience and creation are inseparable.. In the physical world, the artist does not get to jump into the painting and live its life,,, but on the canvas of consciousness,, that is exactly what we are doing! Except that creation and experience happen simultaneously... If it is God doing the creating/experiencing,, then I (I) am part of the unfolding experience of a living God... If this is all my (our) creation,, then someone needs to help me understand who is looking out from behind my eyes!!

I can imagine that God would long for the experience of its creation,, after all,, eternity is a long moment.. lol...

And if it is true that God never leaves its 'station' as the highest consciousness, , then I will be happy to experience my life and bring back those fruits as gifts!!! Either way,, creating and experiencing are inseparable,, if not the same thing...

I like to think that if there is a God,,, then each and every one of us is who God would be if it were to live OUR lives... It makes thing remarkably easier for me... It helps me to see something much more about folks when I look them in the eye!!

Bingo! Creating and experiencing are the same thing.

The 'I' in all of this is a veil that was created and prevented the clarity of truth. In the direct approaches to lifting the veil, the invitation is to explore this 'I' in experience. There is nothing to know. This is not a thing or a concept. The true reality of 'I' cannot be found in thought. Only in direct experiencing of all that arises (including the sensation that the big toe is in charge - LOL) can all of this be understood. Eventually, the exploration of 'I' will reveal that it never had any reality. There is no identity in experiencing.

We are often told of the importance of here and now. What is often not understood is that here is not a place. Now is not a moment between past and future. Instead, in direct experience of all of this, here is an awareness where space, objects and separateness have gone. It feels like home. Time, which was only based in thought, is replaced by timelessness. 'I' simply does not arise here.

Only when direct experience has removed the 'I' veil can all of this be understood. The question is how to explore direct experience.

[Guish]

Posted by EmEx (here)

How about this explanation:

Identification with something is the ''I''.
The thought of being something - anything, is the ''I'' which does not exist?!

When we identify with something an I appears and when we don't there is no I?!

I think that is what the teachers mean with ''There is no I''?!

So another way of saying ''there is no I'' would be: ''You cannot be anything you can think of.''

Is that what is meant by it?

Any insights are welcome.

We are our thoughts. We act on beliefs and attract situations. Thoughts can be flat or may have a certain vibration to it. Buddha said few words but had very profound effects. When you are in bliss, thoughts still pop up but they are automatic and free of any bias. Who are we? We can be anything we want but we were already something pure, a presence, a void that has an infinite number of possibilities.

[greybeard]

Conscious TV

http://www.conscious.tv/

Non Duality - Awakenings (loaded 29 May 2015)
Linda Clair - 'I Am Enlightened' - Interview by Renate McNay (watch this programme)
http://conscious.tv/nonduality.html?...=4249207019001

Linda was born in Sydney in 1958. She had virtually no interest in meditation or spiritual matters until the age of 37, when she was introduced to Peter Jones, who became her first teacher. This meeting was an intense experience for her. There was a depth to the communication she had never experienced before, and it triggered a search for freedom, which was soon the major focus of her life. At this time she had two teenage children and was running a small business, but she managed to make time for intensive meditation. In 1997 she had a profound awakening during a ten-day retreat in northern New South Wales. She later described the experience as 'deeper than bliss'.There was a marked change in her after the awakening, which was really a very strong glimpse of enlightenment. She knew now what was possible, and she also knew that she would not be satisfied until that state became permanent. She maintained the humble attitude of a student and continued to practice.During this time she met the Japanese Zen Master, Hogen Yamahata, who also impressed her with his deeply enlightened presence and humility.In 2004 she travelled to Japan and spent six weeks at a Zen monastery with Hogen-san's Master, Harada Tangen Roshi, known as Roshi Sama. Her time with him was intense. She sensed she was close to the culmination of her journey. She returned to Australia in a deeply detached, peaceful state. Roshi Sama gave her the name Dai'an Jishin, which translates as 'deep peace, compassionate heart/mind'. Her search ended during a ten-day retreat with Hogen-san at Springbrook, in the mountains behind the Gold Coast in Queensland.'Everything changed. All fear disappeared. I was left with nothing and nothing to lose. The depth of peace and satisfaction overwhelmed me, and it continues to deepen every day. Life is immediate. There is no desire for anything more or different. This is enough.'

[greybeard]

Posted by EmEx (here)
A few days ago it occurred to me that I do not know what the ''teachers'' mean when they say ''There is no I.''
I found this fascinating to contemplate, maybe it sounds silly to you but I asked:

What is the 'I' that supposedly does not exist? What is the definition of this 'I'?

I am not asking what the real I is or isn't, I am asking what they mean when 'they' say it.

a few shortened answers:

That is the claim to be the the author and the doer of everything
The love affair with the story of me.

the appearance of a separate self

experiencing is not known by someone or something other than itself.
It is the absence of distance, separation or otherness. There is no room for two there.

How about this explanation:

Identification with something is the ''I''.
The thought of being something - anything, is the ''I'' which does not exist?!

When we identify with something an I appears and when we don't there is no I?!

I think that is what the teachers mean with ''There is no I''?!

So another way of saying ''there is no I'' would be: ''You cannot be anything you can think of.''

Is that what is meant by it?

Any insights are welcome.

Yes EmEx
The word identification covers this beautifully.
Its all what Paul Hedderman calls selfing.
The I, me and mine story.

Love Chris

[Innocent Warrior]

Posted by greybeard (here)

Posted by Innocent Warrior (here)
I think there's something I'm still missing with the whole "I" subject. This confusion is what led me to misunderstood

However there is Maya, the appearance of a separate self because "God" wanted to experience this.
God became all without diminishing Self---you are that Self.

I can't imagine God ever wanted/wants anything, God is all that is, and this also seems to be a contradiction of the previous quote? God exists, God BEs (I am) and therefore everything is created (automatically?), simply by God's existence?

I either disagree or I'm missing something and I earnestly don't know which it is.

Hi innocent Warrior
Some times I go up and down levels from relative truth to Truth.

Its a little complex but the sages say look for the "I" as in Ramana's classic Self Enquiry (Who am I?)
You are looking for something that is permanent, unchanging.
The I/me is ever changing---concepts, ideas, notions so from the point of Truth, which by definition does not change, its un true and does not exist.
It needs an other, to self define it self, for example "I am a kind person"--well you cant be kind without another.
What looks through your eyes is ---awareness and unchanging. That's what you are.

God is an over used word "Ultimate" perhaps is more helpful.

Its a step down principal.

God,Self,Ultimate as you say, has no desire, wants nothing, is complete perfect and One without a second and everything comes about without desire or intention.

So a step down from Ultimate is consciousness.
A further step down is limited consciousness.
That's duality.
Its some times spoken of as Divine hypnosis.
The hypnosis being that we believe we are a person.

So consciousness is evolving to know itself.

If I say any more it gets muddy and open to misunderstanding.

Enlightenment is the removal of ignorance.
The ignorance being that you/we are currently unaware of our true identity.
We may know or suspect intellectually but that's not it
Which brings us back to, we are Self (Singular) "we" is misleading--there is in reality only One here/everywhere.

Hope this is helpful I,W.
Im not saying I'm right but its my current understanding and that took years to get to.

Much love
Chris

Beautifully written, perfect. Yes, this is very helpful, got it, thank you! <3

[Rich]

Posted by Guish (here)
We are our thoughts.

I think it was Nisargadatta that said: Love says I am everything, Peace says I am nothing.

Who are we? We can be anything we want but we were already something pure, a presence, a void that has an infinite number of possibilities.

Yes Guish, Bashar has said, anything we can imagine we can be and anything we can imagine we already contain. When we see that we are nothing then we can really be anything we choose.

I suspect it was a necessary step in our evolution to get lost in thoughts to learn how to identify with something.

Posted by GarethBKK (here)
In the direct approaches to lifting the veil, the invitation is to explore this 'I' in experience.

Interesting is that Tony Parsons and a few others speak out against meditation and contemplation.
While many other teachers encourage meditation and spiritual practices.
This has probably already been posted before since it's an old article, a dispute between Tony Parson and 2 other teachers:
http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses...ism_moller.htm

[Wind]

Experience the Shift that Ends all Fear

"Could fear be something that is only felt by our egos? What is the ultimate fear of the ego and how can I use that knowledge to free myself of all my fears through meditation?

The Ego is ultimately afraid of death. Not death of the body but death of itself. Death of the individual mind. All of our fears trickle down from that original fear.

Experiencing the death of the ego is often seen as a very scary event. Sometimes when you are extremely deep in meditation you find yourself in a oneness that is often referred to as the void. Once you are in the void the ego cannot comprehend it so it becomes full of fear.

The ego cannot experience oneness reality because it is the tool we use to understand and experience separation. The separation from each other, objects, the world around us, other thoughts, and anything else you can imagine.

Once you enter the realm of absolute oneness the ego will often freak out because it has no concept or ability to experience what it is going through. What we need to remember is that our consciousness goes far beyond the ego and even though the ego is experiencing fear our true self is not.

If you fractal this concept back down into every day life it is the same thing. Just because you are feeling fear doesn't mean your soul is feeling fear. You can tap into and shift your perception into that of the soul and although you will be aware of the fear that your ego is experiencing you will not be controlled by it.

The trick that Shunyamurti talks about in the video below is that we need to remember that we are not the "me" experiencing fear. We are the oneness or higher consciousness connected to everyone and one with the universe. We must surrender to that divine essence and know that we will be safe in order to bypass the egoic fear and observe it without attaching to it.

That is where we will find peace and be one again with our soul. We are all that is and the simple fears the ego has, such as about lack and separation, do not sway the ultimate soul. Although you will have a sense of compassion for the ego fear it will no longer control you."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Zhz7Z3Qh1r0

[Rich]

Bashar has said the personality is an artificial construct (but says there is nothing wrong with it).
Maybe this is a 'better' explanation of the ''There is no I.'' statement.

[greybeard]

The challenge is to meditate without looking for an outcome or even thinking that you are the one doing meditation.
We are back to identification and also attachment.
Its a very narrow pathless path.
Bart Marshall said nothing works but through "personal" endeavour that which is sought finds that which is seeking.
That's not a word for word quote.

I find the Mooji meditations helpful and they have restarted Kundalini activity in my spine.
There are four which I use in rotation.
Will post one and other videos that I find helpful.

Chris

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=W0o0CFsIcGA

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=aKM4aVJXxo4

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=stW9Qso-vZk

[greybeard]

Posted by EmEx (here)
Bashar has said the personality is an artificial construct (but says there is nothing wrong with it).
Maybe this is a 'better' explanation of the ''There is no I.'' statement.

That's true.
The personality is not what you are but it gets you through this world.
Dr David Hawkins said that the personality was like a pet dog that followed him around.
You can be quite fond of the personality and what it attracts into "your" life.
It certainly is not an enemy.
Its just not what you are.

Nasargadatts was quite fiery--he could seem to loose the temper with a person, then moments later laugh and joke with him.
It was a pure response to whatever presented in that exact moment--it was not carried over to the "next" moment.

Mooji suggests that you dont analyse just be aware---feel.
Its easy to get into trying to understand all the small stuff, which does seem important and miss out on just being aware.
The mind will keep you busy and that's a distraction.

I remember well having the opportunity to sit alone with an enlightened sage.
I had all the questions under the sun prepared, I even had them written down.
When he and I sat together all the questions disappeared, they were totally redundant.
All I asked was "Have I far to go?"
His response met me where I stood. "A little way yet"
Then we just sat in silence.
For several days after that I was in a state of bliss---in love with everyone on the ashram that I met.
It was not an enlightened experience in that I still saw others as separate from me.

When I got back to Scotland I started to look for reasons that it happened--the guru--environment--India.
Well next day it happened again.
It was like Self saying no its not down to anything exterior to you.
Its your True nature.

I'm a bit verbose---don't know why.

Love Chris

[Wind]

Sometimes there will be an intensification of your unfolding into the Self.
Be completely open in your heart.
Don't say, 'Okay, I would like to travel in first gear.
It's nice and I'm coming towards second.'
No. When you surrender, let God's hand be your gearstick.
Let him drive.
Don't try to control, in any way, the speed of your deliverance.
Don't suggest slowing down.
Don't say, 'I can only cope with this speed.'
And don't even bother about a seatbelt.
Be in full trust.

~ Mooji

[greybeard]

When Paul Hedderman talks about selfing its not that easy to get until you have heard him a few times.

As I understand, basically he saying that anything that arises, we, a noun, claim ownership of a verb, something that is happening or happened.
It happened to a me.
As part of that you could say that the event is real before the mind gets in there and evaluates colours the experience, so we dont actually get the experience we get our personal take on it. We don't even realise its an interpretation of the event, we dont realise that in a fraction of a second the mind has altered the event to fit our concepts--mind set, the works.

If you can watch without using language then its real.

For example you can see a bird flying--so far so good--then the mind gets in there with --Oh yes its a black bird looks like one I saw here yesterday.
The moment you get into analysis of the event--naming--you are no longer seeing reality--you are in mind, in your filing system.

Perhaps Barry could explain better, he has listened to Paul more than I,

Love Chris

[Guish]

Agree Chris. That's why selflessness is important to understand reality as you'd put your beliefs in a corner. There are some universal truths which are not interpretations though.

For e.x, attachment leads to suffering.
Reality is not permanent

[Guish]

If you understand, things are just as they are; if you do not understand, things are just as they are.

[Wind]

"Once arrived [in the presence of the divine power], one is not to labour, only to let oneself be laboured through. One must have the uncommon sense to say: “I shall interfere no longer. I shall cease this endless calculation of ways and means. I shall put down my cares and duties on the ground beside me. I see now what I, in my blindness, refused to see before, that the Overself which supports and carries me, can perform all calculations, manage all affairs, bear all burdens in a manner infinitely better than I could ever do, simply because it is itself infinite in power and wisdom."

~ Paul Brunton

[gripreaper]

Posted by greybeard (here)
The personality is not what you are but it gets you through this world. Dr David Hawkins said that the personality was like a pet dog that followed him around. You can be quite fond of the personality and what it attracts into "your" life. It certainly is not an enemy. Its just not what you are.

It is for those who are at the level of consciousness around 200 or below as per David Hawkin's chart here:



At that level, as Jenny Wade has stated, one is still operating from the lower chakras and is polarized in the hemispheres of the brain. In Jenny Wade's chart, one reaches authentic consciousness when both hemispheres of the brain are in balance.



As Jenny Wade states in her book "Changes of Mind":

Affiliative consciousness is not all sweetness and light, however. Turning now to what may legitimately be considered drawbacks of right-brain processing, Affiliative people often do not perceive inharmonious elements indicative of negative emotions and difference, particularly anger. . . . They avoid conflict and confrontation. . . Right-brain-dominant people tend to be much less verbal in response to stress then left-brain-dominant people, more prone to deny problems, hold in hostility, and develop an appeasing ‘peace at any price’ approach to personal conflict.

So, not completely satisfactory then. What she feels is better is a balance between the two hemispheres. Achievement Consciousness is the more left-brain mode and is definitely not without its problems either, as its motif is ‘get it while you can’ (page 147). To do this it figures out ‘the “rules of the game” in order to “cut corners”, “play the angles,” increase [its] “odds” and gain an advantage over less able . . . . members.’ Not a prescription for the ideal personality, then, either.

Balancing these two aspects moves the person to the level of Authentic Consciousness (page 157):

Authentic consciousness requires access to the non-dominant hemisphere, but not exchanging one hemisphere’s orientation for the other’s. It is “whole brain” thinking, in which both hemispheres organize consciousness, suggesting some entrainment of EEG patterns across the neocortex.

This level would be indicative of those above the 300 to 500 level on David Hawkin's chart. I would venture that most who visit this thread and who comment, are at this level of consciousness. When one has parity between the hemispheres, then Jenny writes:

The next stage after this is Transcendent consciousness, the last one before Unity consciousness. At this stage the synchrony of the two halves of the brain goes beyond intermittent entrainment (page 198):

During meditation, EEG measurements show that both hemispheres slow from beta level activity to alpha and theta waves. Theta is the characteristic brain wave pattern of long-term meditators. Not only does synchronisation of brain waves occur between hemispheres in advanced states, but this entrainment forms harmonic patterns called hypersynchrony

This is where the Siddhis senses and the psychic abilities emerge, and the realms beyond the five physical senses become prevalent. Very few reach this level, and is indicative of 500 or above on David Hawkin's chart. Many of us have what we call "peak" experience where we are able to go into the higher states above 500, but not as full time consciousness.

It all comes down to energy, the ability to hold more of it, husband it, amplify it, and emanate it. Most choose not to because of two factors:

One, our culture sells the dissipation of energy as passion and excitement and feeling good, and we are entrained to believe this is so. Secondly, your "crap" will come up for review, and the resistance to the truth of who you are and what your beliefs are, feels like pain, and we are taught to avoid anything uncomfortable. The energy increase is agitating if you do not face your shadow and come to terms with your discordant beliefs and ideas, and your ego will tell you that it is painful and you should move away from it. You should GO TOWARDS IT if you really want higher mind.

Also, helping us along with this awakening and raising of consciousness, are the universal energies increasing, so in a sense, we are all being forced to face our crap. That is why you see so much trauma/drama around you and why you are being compelled to face your own demons. Once you reach the authentic level and the neocortex is fully engaged, the view is much more spectacular and the trauma/drama ceases.

That's where the detachment from trauma/drama and the pathology of others is released.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SbUHxC4wiWk

[greybeard]

Thanks gripreaper, that would have taken time and effort and not a little skill to put your post together.

The early pages of this thread were heavily influenced by the late Dr Hawkins work, in particularly the book
"Discovery of the presence of God/Transcending the ego."
Its all energy and his book "Power vs Force/ The hidden determinates of human behaviour" is an eye opener--Psychology, science and spirituality meet.


Love Chris

[gripreaper]

Posted by greybeard (here)
Thanks gripreaper, that would have taken time and effort and not a little skill to put your post together.

The early pages of this thread were heavily influenced by the late Dr Hawkins work, in particularly the book "Discovery of the presence of God/Transcending the ego."
Its all energy and his book "Power vs Force/ The hidden determinates of human behaviour" is an eye opener--Psychology, science and spirituality meet.


Love Chris

I do recall the early days of this thread and the influence of David Hawkin's seminal works. His thesis truly was groundbreaking in it's implications back when I read "Power v Force" almost 20 years ago now, and I've watched you continually reference his work over the years. I've tried to highlight Jenny Wade's work as a companion to David Hawkin's, as it really is helpful to see where we are in our own evolution, and it also helped me to keep proper context when discussing awakening and enlightenment, being cognizant that not everybody is above the 250 level.

As a matter of fact, David Hawkin's also stated that the collective consciousness is reaching the flash point where more people will soon be above the limbic survival consciousness and move to the authentic levels, and when this happens, great things are in store for earth.

To me, consciousness does not operate in a subjective vacuum, but emanates and vibrates all similar chords no matter what octave they are in. They do vibrate. It is hard for us to imagine how far reaching our very thoughts go out into the matrix and how we affect others, but it is true. Doing the inner work and bringing the discordant energies into balance within ourselves really is how we change the world. Until we reach the authentic stage of the neocortex and rise above the limbic survival state, we are not much help to anybody.