You are not logged in.

#1 2021-12-02 15:08:18

THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Pronounce the word "I" and your mind will be agitated in an ocean of thoughts and desires that will plunge you into a quagmire of doubts that will overshadow your true SELF. This "I" that can only be named by dividing its appearance into multiple shadows, tries to hide its fragile existence by presenting itself as legion; it raises the arm of wrath against itself and a myriad of subjects run faithful to satisfy its message with accomplished accuracy because all that this "I" creates is equal in measure to its creator.

You release this "I" every time you remember its name in the atoms of the appearances of matter, because its builder is architect and at the same time forger of chains that bind your souls to the gravity of the weight of its works which are your hands in its hands, your feet in its feet, and your mind in its mind.

If the arrows of pain have pierced your heart, do not raise your voice pleading for Divine clemency to relieve it, for it has nothing to do with your sorrows and afflictions and is blind and deaf to your appeal. Ask yourselves rather in which messenger you have deposited the debt of your bond, because what is lent with usury, will have to be returned to you with the interest of the nonsense with which it was deposited in the delivery.

As is the creator so is the creature, there is no measure in this "I" more equanimous nor more disproportionate in its metric than that which lies in its creations. If your "I" is confused you will become entangled in your own decisions without ever reaching clarity of purpose. If your "I" is blind, the gloom will plague with shadows the valleys and mountains of your world obfuscating your vision. Thus, Unify this "I" and you will smooth out all the contradictions that prevent you from understanding your sole purpose, which is none other than to raise heaven on earth and lower earth in heaven, making them One until their boundaries vanish in the ocean of Eternal Love.

Yes, your "I" is unchangeable, but only in the instability of your thoughts. Your "I" is sensitive, but only in the sentimentality of your emotions. Your "I" is persevering, but only in the sporadic nature of your actions. And your "I" is unquestioning, but only in the falseness of its appearance.

In your world that pronounces "I", death is the midwife in your cradles and the guardian of your sepulchers. She lulls your hopes, encourages your projects, excites your libido, blesses your unions with the other sex, maintains your offspring and shows you her white face in your last breath and thus seals the circle of what you call life; this is her deception, to make you believe that you are the children of death and that life can be circumscribed to time, that announcing its chronos, the day devours the nights and the nights vomit the days.

This "I" that you have divided into multiplicity, is but the reflection of the sieves that are in your judgments, whose words are the sieve that encourages your contradictions, which then refute the incoherence of your acts. And so, in this confusion, you shed tears as you attempt to sift that which cannot be sifted and sift that which cannot be sifted.

It is only in the Sacred Union that this "I" vanishes like the mist as the sun of truth shines upon your hearts and so you live in peace with yourselves. For that which is but a chimera in your minds, nothing can alter this Eternal Wedding of Union with the Love that you are and which cannot be divided by this famished "I".

@QUIETpuddle

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-12-02 15:41:47)


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#2 2021-12-02 18:41:23

Robert369
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

This goes along Swaruu's words of "There is nobody else in the universe but you" - something that one truly needs to ponder until one understands it.

And what are interactions with "others" ? Either fictions/tulpas or agreed-on interactions with other people's universes, similar to you sitting at your PC in your clone of a game world, which receives data of other players' actions to create a seeming interaction.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#3 2021-12-02 19:29:31

Robert369
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Brahman wrote:

THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Or if you do not have I, you are UNBOUND.
It's scary, right? I mean for the gamers aka GF.

"I" cannot bind one to all densities, because at sufficiently high densities there is no more dedicated "I" but instead a collective of consciousnesses where the "we" is predominant - see NA's elaborations on this topic. So, this at best is valid in lower densities, and it doesn't consider that "there's only me in my universe" either.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#4 2021-12-02 19:49:19

Robert369
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Brahman wrote:
Robert369 wrote:

"I" cannot bind one to all densities, because at sufficiently high densities there is no more dedicated "I" but instead a collective of consciousnesses where the "we" is predominant - see NA's elaborations on this topic. So, this at best is valid in lower densities, and it doesn't consider that "there's only me in my universe" either.

I hope NA knows that "we" is also identity.  This is about non-identity, like EFFI.

I am sure he knows, but the word "we" clearly is not "the word 'I'", which is the topic claim of this thread.

There's always an existence and by that identity of some sorts, even for Source/EFFI. It is only that we at our lower standpoint cannot identify nor less properly describe that which is beyond our grasp.

Nevertheless those are related yet different topics, and as explained above, none of this makes the phrase "The word 'I' binds you to all densities" of this thread right - at least not in my view.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#5 2021-12-02 21:08:50

HiddenSquid
Banned

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

The I and We are one. Is your "I" not the sum of your cells and energies? Hence your "I" or "I Am" is bound to all densities. The "We" is comprised of "I"s that are operating within the illusory "We". Even at higher densities or collectives/societies, there is an I at the helm. Ultimately "We" and "I" are illusory/imaginary.

Offline

#6 2021-12-03 00:37:07

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Brahman wrote:

in other words, the universe appears with the word I, because without I there is no one who exists somewhere.  But this is related to one of your previous topics about non-existence, that is, without an idea of I.
at least that's how I understand it.
Thanks for the topic.

Correct. smile

Yes, all topics are related and linked with the "common thread" of "non-existence". This idea of "non-existence", does not refer to "nothingness". NO. Nor to the idea of "existence" as we understand "the existence of things" which includes the universe, with all the connotations implied and represented by this objectifiable idea or even the abstraction your mind can extrapolate from a universe in increasingly subtle and impersonal non-material densities, extraterrestrials included. NO.

That which IS, is before the idea "I". This, IS, is not rhetorically linked to the idea of Source because it is beyond Source. Nor to the idea of ether because it is beyond ether. All these attempts to nominalize the unnamable are impositions of dialectics and the rhetorical resources of language to try to cross the frontier of words and ideas which are only symbols of other symbols and therefore doubly divided and doubly distant from what they are intended to describe.

The absence of "I" is the presence of its absence. That means, that in the absence of "I" there is "something" that witnesses its absence, but it is NOT "I", and it is NOT nothingness. That which witnesses its absence is BEFORE "I". That is to say, when this "I" is not, it is at this very moment that there remains this PRESENCE (which is not "I" ) which comprises all that IS NOT now with this PRESENCE. And what is not in this Presence in the absence of this "I" and which is NOT nothingness?....

When I ask you to witness this absence of "I" I am not saying that "you do not exist" I am only pointing out to you that which was NOT with you in the absence of this "I". If the "I" is not there, the world/universe is not there. But it is precisely when this world/universe is NOT there that "you" EXIST. The world/universe DOES NOT SEE YOU. The world/universe DOES NOT CONTAIN YOU. The world/universe does not reveal to you that you exist because it HAS NEVER BEEN WITH YOU.

When I expose to you these propositions that question the reality of this "I", its response comes from a REALITY where words are not necessary. That is why the answer we hear is "I do not know"... "I do not know what I did not know in the absence of this "I". It is only in the absence of this "I" that this ETERNAL Understanding is revealed in you. In this ETERNAL Understanding, you did not feel yourself to be "I". In this ETERNAL Understanding, you did not hear the self-affirmation "I". You had no sound reflexivity listening to "I am". How is this state in which the self-affirmation "I" was not heard...?


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#7 2021-12-03 19:11:09

Vega
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

@QUIETpuddle

*silent applause*

That was very beautifully written.

"I" pretend that "I" don't understand WHO wrote this and WHO am "I" applauding. smile Is there a point in "me" applauding if there is NOONE to applaud? 

So "I" take that applause back and "I" am gonna choose to see it as if this message wrote itself, it was just a happening and NOONE wrote it. Otherwise "I" run the risk of losing "my" mind(or should "I" say "I" run the risk of losing "my" "I") with all this nondual talk. lol smile Just like all the other non-dual spiritual teachers "I" try to avoid listening lol.

Why won't NOBODY leave "us" alone and let "us" play "our" illusions of duality. "I" am trying so hard to pretend that "I" don't understand what NOBODY is talking about. lol smile NOBODY is like "our" moms and dads yelling at "us" to stop playing "our" illusory games and DO NOTHING in the real world and just BE. The final attachments before liberation are the hardest to let go OK? So NOONE should leave "us" alone and let "us" play our illusion games just a while longer. The cosmic drama soap opera illusions can be fun to play for a while, until they are not. At least outside this reality bubble, cause this reality bubble is not very fun to play at this moment.


big_smile I just thought of something really funny big_smile

Just like we accuse each other from time to time here in this forum about who we suspect is behind some member names, I wanna officially claim that I suspect that there is NOONE behind the CHARCOtranquilo name. lol

That account just happened to create itself, and there is noone behind it writing these messages haha. And I strongly suspect that NOONE happened to infiltrate this forum and I am accusing NOONE big_smile that they may have an agenda of ruining our illusory cosmic soap opera games in our illusory cages.


Anyway, I haven't found time to continue talking to the quiet puddle about sth I bookmarked, and there is SOMEBODY named Grivehn I haven't replied to yet too, so I'll prioritize him cause at least he is SOMEBODY, as opposed to a bunch of nondual NOBODYs. big_smile Sigh... sorry if I overdo it with the jokes, I tire myself sometimes too with my joking monkey.

smile ♥️

PS
And just FYI to all members, I am not crazy my mother had me tested, well not really but all this nondual talk is hard for "our" mind, and if I start talking to her like this maybe she will. lol

Last edited by Vega (2021-12-03 19:15:37)


I am not posting using the name Vega anymore, my new forum account is Jupiter.

Offline

#8 2021-12-04 15:17:21

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

@Vega

On the occasion of the birth of the "I", seeing that his existence was being questioned, he decided to approach the house of a "master of non-duality" to prove to him that he was real and thus try to ridicule him.

So, this "I" set off until he arrived at the door of the master's house where with  determination he knocked insistently on his door.

knock, knock, knock ," knocked on the door with insistent determination.

- Who is calling," asked the master of non-duality?

- I am the "I" and I have come to prove to you that I am real.

- Well," said the master, "but there is no one here to answer you.

- The "I" who was an "I" versed in dialectic and rhetorical studies, upon hearing the answer of the master of non-duality smiled with satisfaction. 

- If there is no one to answer me," said the "I", "who is that one behind the door who just answered me that "there is no one here"?

To which the master replied, "I am only the product of your mind.

At that very moment, the "I", upon hearing the words of the "master of non-duality", disappeared into the nothingness from which it had never arisen.


Vega wrote:

"I" pretend that "I" don't understand WHO wrote this and WHO am "I" applauding. smile Is there a point in "me" applauding if there is NOONE to applaud?

Remember, this "nobody" that you applaud, just like your "I" is only the product of your mind.

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-12-05 20:59:45)


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#9 2021-12-04 17:39:38

Vega
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Is there a fictional QUIETpuddle character or should I say a fictional self, through which the real SELF is perceiving through?

If I have understood(intellectually) nonduality correctly I think the answer is yes.


So have I understood correctly that there is a fictional character and there is a fictional "you" through which the real SELF is perceiving through?

And the only difference between "you" and us dual folk, is that in "your" case the real SELF is completely dis-identified with that fictional character,
while in our case the real SELF is still identified with that fictional character? (or should I say the real SELF is under an illusion of being identified?)


And "you" didn't laugh at my jokes... smile So I'll try to cut the stupid jokes to a minimum and get more cerial.   




I think I understand nonduality on an intellectual level.

So some serious (intellectual smile ) rhetorical questions: 


Who is identified with the fictional/illusory "I"?

Is there a real "I" and a fictional/illusory "I"? Or are there two fictional/illusory "I"s identified with each other?


Is there a ONE undivided real "I" which is under an illusion of having fragmented into multiple fictional "I"s?

Or is the ONE undivided "I" the core/prime/root illusion/fiction? A dream that "Source" happened "to dream"? The prime/core/root idea in the infinite mind from which all the other ideas or "I"s fragmented from?

Is that ONE undivided "I" the real SELF? And does that undivided "I" or the real SELF have a boundary?


So is "Source" the unbound undivided infinite NO-I, NO-one, NO-thing, void, empty space
and is the "real SELF" / "God/dess",   the ALL-"I"s, the one undivided ALL-thing, the All-That-Is, the full space?

Or is this distinction BETWEEN Source/void/empty space/no-I/no-one/no-thing AND God-dess/undivided fullness/one undivided all-thing/All-that-is/All-"I"s, 
the prime/core/root duality idea in the infinite mind? Or is there no distinction between them?

(And when I say "SELF" or "God/dess", I mean that it has a boundary. While when I say Source I mean the all-thing/no-thing that has no boundary)



Anyway, these are rhetorical intellectual questions, but if anyone has anything to comment I am interested to what you have to say.

NOT_SO_QUIET_YET_vega_puddle lol smile

Last edited by Vega (2021-12-04 17:47:51)


I am not posting using the name Vega anymore, my new forum account is Jupiter.

Offline

#10 2021-12-05 16:08:01

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Vega wrote:

And "you" didn't laugh at my jokes... smile So I'll try to cut the stupid jokes to a minimum and get more cerial.

 


His jokes put a laugh in my mouth. Please don't lose your sense of humor with me, I am one of those who think it is a symptom of intelligence when it is not used as sarcasm to disqualify people. I do not want you to have a false image in your mind, that I have in my mouth the expression of having a broomstick up my ass.

I responded to your sense of humor with the tale of the master of non-duality...perhaps I was too subtle in empathizing with you in my laughter. wink






Vega wrote:

I think I understand nonduality on an intellectual level.

So some serious (intellectual smile ) rhetorical questions: 


Who is identified with the fictional/illusory "I"?

Is there a real "I" and a fictional/illusory "I"? Or are there two fictional/illusory "I"s identified with each other?


Is there a ONE undivided real "I" which is under an illusion of having fragmented into multiple fictional "I"s?

Or is the ONE undivided "I" the core/prime/root illusion/fiction? A dream that "Source" happened "to dream"? The prime/core/root idea in the infinite mind from which all the other ideas or "I"s fragmented from?

Is that ONE undivided "I" the real SELF? And does that undivided "I" or the real SELF have a boundary?


So is "Source" the unbound undivided infinite NO-I, NO-one, NO-thing, void, empty space
and is the "real SELF" / "God/dess",   the ALL-"I"s, the one undivided ALL-thing, the All-That-Is, the full space?

Or is this distinction BETWEEN Source/void/empty space/no-I/no-one/no-thing AND God-dess/undivided fullness/one undivided all-thing/All-that-is/All-"I"s, 
the prime/core/root duality idea in the infinite mind? Or is there no distinction between them?

(And when I say "SELF" or "God/dess", I mean that it has a boundary. While when I say Source I mean the all-thing/no-thing that has no boundary)



Anyway, these are rhetorical intellectual questions, but if anyone has anything to comment I am interested to what you have to say.

NOT_SO_QUIET_YET_vega_puddle lol smile

I will try to answer your "multiple and rhetorical questions" in a simple and self-evident way. This "scheme" has only arbitrary value in the exposition of the different descriptions of the "I" and its attributions in the different "stages" of understanding.  In fact, once this "schema" has been established, it is necessary to demolish it because the map is never the territory and it must be considered that it may be subject to variation according to each individual case. This means that the different descriptions of the "I" until its definitive extinction may overlap, although they cannot be avoided.

What we determine by "I" is a psychological construction that is formed through the internal and external ideas that we assume, adding to this the experiences that are filtered and interpreted by these ideas that we have previously assumed as ours and that will give rise to new ideas, and again to new experiences and new ideas in constant feedback. All this is to be understood as a dynamic process, that is, in a continuous change of consciousness. 

This dynamic construct called "I" totally externalized is the one that allows us to be able to function in daily life and "relate in consensus with other "I's" "out there".   This "I" is sustained by a multiplicity of ideas amalgamated in facets that psychology calls "personality" being this "I" the epitome of the most obscure ignorance and by itself has no reality of its own due to its intrinsic mutable nature.  That is, it is the "I" that says: "I am... a man or a woman, a father, a mother, a son or a daughter, or also "I am..." funny, amusing, intelligent, silly, or also president, lawyer, broker, judge, engineer, contactee, extraterrestrial, terrestrial, reptilian, lirian, andromedan, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The next state of the "I" is what is called the "I" without attributions. This "I" is linked to the same sensation of existing, but exempt of attributes, that is to say, of all nominalization or adjectivation. In other words, it is the self-consciousness "I exist" which is associated with the sensation of "being" of "existing" and physiologically linked to breathing. It should be noted that this "I" is still a psychological construction, which, although closer to the physiological aspect (identification with the body) is still linked to "an idealized construction of existing".

The next "I" would be the "observational I". It is the one associated with meditative states also called "the observer". This "I" has the characteristics of the "I without attributes" but with the difference that the mind is not externalized to the outside, but the attention is focused on the inside of the mind itself. That is to say, it is "the space" where thoughts appear and disappear, but in a presential state, without identification. This "I" is still subject to the laws of duality since there is still the idea of an "observing I + that which is observed + that which "thinks it observes". But this observational state is not permanent since any distraction takes the mind out of the idea of the focus of attention. The mind remains in an unstable and changing state subject to the laws of duality and ignorance as it remains deeply identified with the constructed psychological idea "I".

From here we enter the "I" with a capital "I", which does not think it observes", but is the observation itself, without the intervention of thought. Here the focus of attention ceases to be placed on "an idea of someone who observes" and passes to the direct experience of BEING: observation without an observer. I am talking about a very advanced and mature "I", already free from the image of the personality identified with the "psychological I" and from the complexity of the intellect. This "I" is looking at the Origin of Stillness, Peace and Silence which it is able to experience without any effort and which are not its own property.

This "I" is also directly linked to what Yazhi has called and describes as the "Source" or "Ether", that means, that one lives an experience of Unity and at the same time of totality or integration, where the borders of "the material" vs "the immaterial" have vanished opening a unified field that allows the development of "mental powers" or "parapsychological capacities", such as levitation, bilocation, transfiguration, etc.

These capacities need to be developed within a practice, although exceptionally in some cases, they can occur spontaneously.  However, this "I-know" must disappear because the idea of individuality has not yet been extinguished, so that the ABSOLUTE emerges and all individuality is extinguished.

Thus, the next and final step is the REALIZATION OF THE ABSOLUTE which is beyond the Source or/and Ether. This entails the TOTAL EXTINCTION OF INDIVIDUALITY in all its "spiritual" forms. Which also supposes the ABSOLUTE TRANSCENDENCE OF ALL DENSITIES.  That is why this realization does not emerge if there is still the idea of individuality "I" or "ME" or "BEING" aspects still of a "pseudo-spiritualized individuality; what is to be understood, is that the "ego-mind" because it shares the essential attributes of unity of mind "allows it to create a whole pseudo-spiritual" but illusory world in a progression in ever more subtle densities which makes it difficult to detect this perverse ego-spiritualized trap. This transcendence to the ABSOLUTE, cannot be brought about by any practice, metaphysical understanding, or spiritual progression, for when this Understanding emerges there is NO ONE AT HOME to bear witness to it. 

NOBODY_ AT_HOME_QUIETpuddle


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#11 2021-12-05 21:45:22

Vega
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

This is one great answer to exactly what I was asking with those rhetorical questions. This is a very helpful map/model to what I am asking about and trying to understand better.



I believe the "I" with a capital "I" is what Yazhi is talking about in the last video.

What happens after Death? Why is there no Material World? Yazhi Swaruu talks about "Higher Planes"

"Robert: And where do these Taygetean "souls" that do not want to be in the physical go? Do those higher planes have a name?

Yazhi: It´s just that it is no longer a place to go. In those planes there applies already a principle of non-locality. They can only prefer to be half in the physical in some places more than others. Places from the point of view of someone with a body.

They are "higher planes" from the point of view of the physical, but they are not higher, that is something else that is not well described, they are not even different. It is the same plane that expands more and more.

Those planes are not anywhere, but they are among this one, mixed in, as part of it. They are always "here" with that more expanded mentality. Where are those planes? Answer is Here! Wherever you are, it is always Here!

It is like living in your imagination as something totally real. Whatever you imagine has your attention and that's what you live. So you don't travel, you just imagine being on Earth and you are. Then you imagine being on Erra and you are. Erra in harsh winter, you live it, because that's what you see, because that's what you "imagine" and what you imagine is, and that's reality, and then you switch to Erra in spring, and that's it! It is spring. If you imagine nightmares, you will have them, if you don't want them, you won't have them, but you know them.

But you do not limit yourself to imagine normal things from the point of view of planes with bodies, of the so-called dense ones. Already in that state, you imagine inconceivable things, impossible to describe of what would be called "higher planes", but as I said, they are not higher, they are only more expanded, but the same. Swimming among cosmic fish, among nebulae and stars, swimming in love, in ideas, swimming in creative potential.

You are mind there, you only have a body when you imagine it. Only because that is what you want to imagine. If you don't want to, you are just mind, pure consciousness. You are your imagination and what you create. You are not something that creates something elseyou are simply what you create and you live what you are because you live what you create.

And that includes bodies, bodies that, as you imagine them, you call that incarnation, and you imagine that you are trapped in a body for the duration of an incarnation, but that is illusory, it is also your creation, your ideas. There is only mind.

From those planes yes you know. And you don't follow linear incarnations. Only your ideas. And nothing limits you, you imagine yourself to be billions and billions of creatures, all "you". Simultaneously. Everything nourishes you; everything is your lucid dream. [...]"



"Yazhi: [...]All this based on the concept that these souls (points of attention consciousnesses) have strong attachments to their Ego, to their "I", which will not easily accept their incorporation into the unified field. Because they will see it as destruction of the self. What many discarnates take or perceive as the death of the dead.

Again, this is just another illusion, because before being born one already held an idea or concept of the Self, which has been formed little by little from previous incarnations. So the return to the unified field is not a dissolution of the Self, because the concept of identity (Self) was held before birth and is held after re-entering the unified field.

This using linear temporal concepts from the point of view of the observing person. If we add factors of non-temporality, it becomes even more evident that there can be no death. From the point of view of the unified field, ether, or higher existential planes (same thing), time is only the result of local thought, or self, as a sequence of an idea. It is plastic, something controllable at will."

(And I believe when Yazhi says here the unified field she doesn't mean Source, that's why she say that return to the unified field is not a dissolution of the Selt)



I am not in this "stage" yet but this "I" with a capital "I" is not that sacry to "me". It's actually kinda like a heaven and there is already an almost total liberation.

So I have some questions:

1. Do you agree that Yazhi is describing that "stage" in this video? And am I right in assuming that you don't need to "reach" the final step of realization of the absolute first in order to "reach" that state that Yazhi is talking about?

2. Using this map/model of the "I"s, which "stage" do you get at using ACIM? And when they say "Kingdom of Heaven" in ACIM do they mean what Yazhi is describing in the above transcript or is the "Kingdom of Heaven" the way everything is experienced(?)/happening after the final step?

(I haven't read the whole ACIM but by reading The Disappearence of the Universe, I got the impression that ACIM is for getting out of the physical "3D/5D" matrixes out of the physical universe/material universe, or Uxit to use Grivehn's very funny term, or is that just a stage in ACIM before the I-xit happens lol) 

3. And I understand that the final step just happens when it happens it's not done by the "I" or does it happen when the "I" is ready to let go of even the "I"? Can the "I" do that or does the "I" only need to have the sincere willingness to fully surrender and let go of even itself, and then it's out of it's hands?


4. And also I just remembered something Yazhi said once that really caught my attention cause I have never heard it anywhere else: that you can start creating again even after you completely merge with source. And that NOTHING is not the equivalent of total enlightenment but only half way. (And I remember hearing something similar in the Conversations with God material). What do you think about this?


Duality - Suffering - Self - Source - Spiritual Chat with Yazhi Swaruu (Extraterrestrial Contact)

Gosia: For me, “I” is not Gosia. Or my 5D me. Nor a person. Just beingness. Can´t define it. Whatever I allow to be at any point, so I am. Gosia, Galaxy. All the same. And not the same, at the same time.

Yazhi: You may say that even becoming a nothing, total integration you are still something, but it still means you are contrasting it to now, who you are now thinking about this.

Some people think being nothing, null, empty void, is equivalent to total enlightenment! That is like buying a blank canvas for painting and saying it is the most exquisite masterpiece, just because there is nothing on it, therefore it has the potential to be anything! Better than a Raphael, better than a Van Gogh, or better than a Da Vinci! But no. I don't agree! There is more. Do something with it! Create!

Gosia: And again, why is nothing not the state of enlightenment?

Yazhi: Because that is halfway! From there, with no misconceptions tying you back limiting you to rules! Then you create worlds! From scratch. New ideas, totally awesome experiences can come out of it! And that is exactly why the Universe exists as it is, with all its galaxies and everything awesome that is going on inside them all! To be something. To create. To have a self! Some people climb to the mountain and at the very top they call themselves enlightened. I say there is another side to the mountain, go over, create!

FOLLOWING CHAT

Yazhi: About losing individuality, you do and a lot as you go "up" in awareness consciousness. But only at the very top you lose all sense of anything. Becoming all, everything, and nothing at all. So, the very last awareness realization before total destruction is: “I am Source”. Still holding Source and not Source. But not yet Source. Once you become Source, nothing remains.

Gosia: And from there you start creating again no? You said NOTHING is not the end of it.

Yazhi: Yes. You never end, creating, that is the description of eternity.

Gosia: Do you start creating something totally new or do you still carry ideas from ¨before¨?

Yazhi: All beyond anyone's comprehension. Any idea "from before" is not Source, only close to. Another thing I will always sustain is that... even from below, you do lose identity. Even me. You see me as a someone. I'm not sure I am someone. Because I'm very, and too aware that I'm all the Swaruu’s existing together. So that's why you are talking to me and I remember everything as if I was the one from before. But I can remember all the others as well. And I am them. And not only. So, I'm no longer someone, I feel more of a composite. A collage of souls. And others not being Swaruu’s as well. So, my point is you do lose individuality, and precision. And even though I may be portrayed as almost a super woman, with incomprehensible powers, I am also very fragile. And sometimes wishing I were simpler. Being only one. Any expansion does cause you to lose individuality. It is a heavy price to pay. [...]

(bold emphasis mine)

(If this is how it is, this letting go of ABSOLUTELY everything is scary for the "I" but knowing that you can reemerge and create a new "I" and start all over again from scratch, makes it easier for the "I" to let go ABSOLUTELY everything and dissapear merging with Source)


These are a lot of questions again but I am posting them together cause they are related and you can get an idea about what I am trying to get at. I am interested in what you (or anyone else) have to say about about these when you find time.


COSMIC_CHICKEN_Vega smile


PS

CHARCOtranquilo wrote:

I responded to your sense of humor with the tale of the master of non-duality...perhaps I was too subtle in empathizing with you in my laughter. wink

Oh good, cause I was worried that the image of you in my mind might have missed the subtle play with words. And don't take this personally lol I am talking about the image of you in my mind not you the product of my mind. smile

(And just FYI I noticed the 1o 2o too smile )

Last edited by Vega (2021-12-05 21:51:26)


I am not posting using the name Vega anymore, my new forum account is Jupiter.

Offline

#12 2021-12-07 21:05:04

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Vega wrote:

1. Do you agree that Yazhi is describing that "stage" in this video? And am I right in assuming that you don't need to "reach" the final step of realization of the absolute first in order to "reach" that state that Yazhi is talking about?

Yes, this is the world of the "I" with capital letters. It is still the "world of illusions", of the mutable, that which is subject to disappear. It is important to remember that the mind in its "expansive progression" shares the attributes of a unified field that grants in the measure of "this expansion" the capacity of "creation" from instant to instant that in function of the speed in which this information is projected will depend its immediacy in that which you imagine. As Yazhi said, you are time, and this is only AN ILLUSION.

On the other hand, this "I", we can frame the so-called "paranormal capacities" or psychic powers, since in themselves do not exist "unnatural capacities", since they are intrinsic qualities of the unified mind, but they are NOT an end in themselves since they can become a real obstacle when confused with the same enlightenment "experience" which has no comparison in the ineffable fact of the definitive fusion with the Absolute.

I am not stigmatizing such psychic abilities that may arise "spontaneously" in the "process" to enlightenment for these, although they represent a pale reflection of the true expression of an "expanded mind" clearly demonstrate that precisely because they are AN ILLUSION the only separation between the possible and the impossible depends only on an idea of limitation.

Vega wrote:

this map/model of the "I"s, which "stage" do you get at using ACIM?

Remember that the stages I have just described are arbitrary, they are not intended to represent a rigid model that describes such "states of self" invariably. The ACIM, however, is a "manual" to enlightenment as described by the author himself and is designed to clear the obstacles that prevent the awareness of the Presence of Love.

Vega wrote:

And when they say "Kingdom of Heaven" in ACIM do they mean what Yazhi is describing in the above transcript or is the "Kingdom of Heaven" the way everything is experienced(?)/happening after the final step?

The so-called "Kingdom of Heaven" is an expression with Christian connotations of what would represent "The experience of fusion with the Absolute".

Vega wrote:

(I haven't read the whole ACIM but by reading The Disappearence of the Universe, I got the impression that ACIM is for getting out of the physical "3D/5D" matrixes out of the physical universe/material universe, or Uxit to use Grivehn's very funny term, or is that just a stage in ACIM before the I-xit happens lol)


"The Disappearance of the Universe" is only an explanatory guide for those people who have difficulty understanding the terminology used by ACIM. But ACIM is a treatise on TOTAL enlightenment. Its "metaphysical" approach is non-dual within the schools of pure non-duality. What is meant by "pure non-duality"? They are those that make no concessions to illusion.

For ACIM the world in all its infinite extrapolations, ["material or spiritual" (not world matter)] i.e. in all forms of perception "from the most material levels" or what is the same, "more material densities", to those "densities considered spiritual where "less duality is perceived" ALL are illusory. On the other hand, in the CIM it is insisted and emphasized to the fullest extent that WHILE PERCEPTION EXISTS THERE IS ILLUSION, and to be aware of a density however spiritual or subtle, evanescent, or "less dual" (a term enormously contradictory to the definition of non-duality) it may be, implies the obligatory need to perceive. That is to say, WHILE THERE IS PERCEPTION THERE IS ILLUSION.

Vega wrote:

3. And I understand that the final step just happens when it happens it's not done by the "I" or does it happen when the "I" is ready to let go of even the "I"? Can the "I" do that or does the "I" only need to have the sincere willingness to fully surrender and let go of even itself, and then it's out of it's hands?

To say that "there is a final step to enlightenment that the "I" cannot take" is only a metaphor for what actually happens.

1. Certainly it is that the "I" cannot take this step, since first of all the "I" DOES NOT EXIST and therefore there is no one to become enlightened and as a consequence there is neither authorship nor author nor doer of this final step. Simply what is NOTHING, does nothing, offers nothing, because it shares nothing and therefore understands nothing. 

2.    To be rigorous with this affirmation that appears in ACIM, it says that "the last step is God who gives it". This statement is a metaphor (it is not literal) because it goes on to say:

[...]"God does not take steps because His Achievements are not gradual.  He does not teach, because His Creations do not change. He does nothing at the end, because He was first to create and created forever.  It must be understood that the word "first"-when applied to God-is not a temporal concept." That Which is eternal is always there because His Existence is eternally immutable.

And yes, the only thing "I" can do is to cease to be a hindrance to itself. Something extremely difficult because the idea of disappearing represents for him his death. That is why any sincere surrender of the "I" to disappear is never total because it will always try to preserve itself in one way or another by its atavistic instinct of survival anchored in the unconscious. Nevertheless, in ACIM, it is said that.

"The Holy Spirit" (symbol of that part of the mind that has not lost the connection with the Absolute and that "its function is to serve as a bridge between the world of illusions and the REALITY of the Absolute") only needs from that "I" a small dose of good will so that, surprisingly, like a thief in the night, the ineffable Revelation (Understanding) of the Absolute may emerge.

Vega wrote:

4. And also I just remembered something Yazhi said once that really caught my attention cause I have never heard it anywhere else: that you can start creating again even after you completely merge with source. And that NOTHING is not the equivalent of total enlightenment but only half way. (And I remember hearing something similar in the Conversations with God material). What do you think about this?

Of course, "NOTHING" is NOT the equivalent of enlightenment. When one becomes enlightened, what disappears is precisely "the nothingness" which is the "I" and what remains is the PRESENCE OF ITS ASSUMPTION which we could call the ALL, very crudely described, because it is neither "nothing" nor is it "the all". All these are unsuccessful attempts to describe with a dual language that which is "not two" i.e. non-duality. (way of describing ONENESS, in advaita vedanta).

Nor is it true that "to complete" enlightenment one must "set about creating". As Yazhi describes it, this "act of creating" (galaxies, galaxy worlds) would represent falling back into the state of ignorance... because he adds "to have a self". This is an enormous contradiction. That is to say, I enlighten myself to transcend the "I" and once enlightened and transcended, to create, I create a new "I". This is a dialectical pirouette with a somersault backwards.

Personally this is something I do not agree with, and it must be remembered that Yazhi so far is a skillful describer of the illusion, but she has not yet described from a practical approach how to get out of it.

As I have said on other occasions with respect to what represents the true act of "creation" of the Absolute is that IT DOES NOT NEED TO CREATE ANYTHING TO BE ABSOLUTE. IT IS. All creation as understood by the "I" (density) implies an evolution, a progression, and this implies a DIMENSIONALITY OR DENSITY which carries with it the concept of mutability and GOD, could not impose changes on Himself and therefore limitations. The "act of Creation" is eternally immutable which means that it DOES NOT CHANGE as it increases and extends to Itself, from Itself, for Itself and by Itself.


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#13 2021-12-10 01:42:14

Vega
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Thanks for your detailed reply QUIETpuddle, I was wise enough to prioritize doing the inner work and working on the spiritual foundation. And intuitively knew that prioritizing and focusing on pursuing the superpower abilities, would slow my progress in my spiritual path instead of helping. I see those like using drugs to access states that you are not spiritually prepared for can lead to problems instead of help.

And I understood that those states are arbitrary and not rigid and I understood that they also can overlap and are not a linear rigid sequence of stages.

And that's a good point that the "I" can not be fully sincere in it's willingness to surrender. And I am sincere and committed on my spiritual "study" and in living embodying what I study so I have experienced many times subtle, light like a feather, realizations or revelations, that come like a thief in the night. Of course not about the "final" ineffable revelation realization of the Absolute, smile  but about smaller realizations that are huge leaps and milestones in my spiritual progress. I loved that bridge between the two worlds concept that ACIM calls "Holy Spirit"(it even has the same initials as Higher Self), knowing about it is extremely helpful and offers some peace of mind cause I realized that there is a part of me that has not lost the connection and I can never be lost forever inside the illusion. And it understands my illusions and my symbols in the illusion and I can recognize sometimes "it's" hand in using my own illusions to guide me towards a gradual liberation from my illusory cages.

I believe Yazhi is saying that once you merge with source and "you" disappear then eventually an "I" happens to re-emerge and start the cycle all over again in a different variation this time(and I am wondering whether other souls with their unique soul journey are exactly that). And that makes sense to me cause I am and I and how the heck did I happen to enter in the world of time and illusion and if it happened once why not happen again.

And I understand the non duality perspective on this but this is something that non duality can't explain and give a satisfactory answer to my mind. How did "I" or the Whole get inside the illusion in the first place. And what does make sense to me is that the complete is not complete without the world of illusions. The entering into a "state" of illusion happening being a part of the changeless timeless eternal creation that just is, makes sense to me.   


Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to reply, I'll read this again when I find time and your other posts that I have only read without studying them and see if there is anything I wanna discuss.

PS
One last thing that I just thought, my mind is having a hard time putting you in a little box so would you say that the closest symbol/metaphor I can think of using to understand you with my mind is the concept of the Voice for God/"Holy Spirit" of ACIM? Are you a bridge between the REALITY of the ABSOLUTE and the world of illusions? Or have "you" disappeared and merged with Source and I am talking to the Whole/Source directly through the tulpa of your body/mind that you were in before your disappearance?

PS2
I love your signature, it is brilliant! It conveys so much with so few words. smile

"I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking."

Last edited by Vega (2021-12-10 01:46:59)


I am not posting using the name Vega anymore, my new forum account is Jupiter.

Offline

#14 2021-12-14 22:26:05

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Vega wrote:

PS
One last thing that I just thought, my mind is having a hard time putting you in a little box so would you say that the closest symbol/metaphor I can think of using to understand you with my mind is the concept of the Voice for God/"Holy Spirit" of ACIM? Are you a bridge between the REALITY of the ABSOLUTE and the world of illusions? Or have "you" disappeared and merged with Source and I am talking to the Whole/Source directly through the tulpa of your body/mind that you were in before your disappearance?

Please don't put me on that pedestal. It does not belong to me.

What is extinguished, when the "merging with the Source/Absolute occurs is the identification with the "self". What was previously assumed without question as a living and real identity built from the perspective of education, the identity with the body, and the experiences conditioned by this perspective and also constituted the personality/character axis where the "I" was consolidated, is now only an inert bunch of ideas and experiences accumulated in the memory that are lived with disaffection because although they can still be recognized and remembered, but nevertheless, not containing the germ of the "I" that fed its consistency of reality, they are discarded as they are considered illusory.   That is to say, for psychological purposes and literally there is a disappearance of the individual "who directed this bodily biological container" without this implying the disappearance of the body, but it must be emphasized that this "apparent emptying" is not replaced by another identity or personality, but what remains of this absence of "I" is the presence of a liberating and a-personal fullness that extends permeating all levels of Consciousness. 

It is to be understood that this does not mean that when this psychological "I" has been extinguished, the consciousness that is the object of this "emptying" is exposed to possible incursions of archons, tulpas, or possessions of a psychospiritual type, on the contrary, the consciousness is shielded from possible incursions of archons, tulpas, or possessions of a psychospiritual type, the consciousness is shielded in an impregnable way to such influences or psychic violations, since being the "I" the main and only responsible for the genesis of these tulpas, archons, etc (you are the creator, as Yazhí exposes in one of his videos, but it is necessary to add: "of your illusions" because the Absolute you cannot create it because He was the first and the last to "create" and therefore, ALONE, IS) or archons this is out of play when exposed to the REALITY of the Absolute that "is the one that takes control" (understand "this taking control" outside the parameters that the ego understands) so that the equanimity of the transcendent discernment arises in which instant, instant by instant the "ego" is recognized in its own unconscious mechanisms and instantaneously vanishes without requiring in itself an effortful tension involving constant attention. On the contrary, the act of discernment is absolutely fluid, spontaneous, liberating and fully integrated in the consciousness.

Now, if you ask me "if I am the voice of the Holy Spirit" or the "bridge between the REALITY of the ABSOLUTE and the world of illusions, I will say that: all these are metaphors of symbols on which the mind "I" needs and seeks to rely on as a representation of "a transcendent something/someone" that is the accompanying part of a path that protects an unknown teaching that gives sense and meaning to existence. With this I do not mean to imply that symbolizing the inscrutable and giving it a form close to the understanding of a limited mind to facilitate an assimilation of an apparently unattainable "knowledge" necessarily means falling into a literary iconography that can give rise to an anthropomorphism and a risky idealization achieving the opposite didactic effect with the merely instrumental purpose with which such symbols were established. It is fundamental to understand that the objective of every symbol is only instrumental and that to reach the REALIZATION of the Absolute it is necessary to ABSOLUTELY abandon every symbol and every representation in all its forms and contents.

Therefore, when words move, it is because they are summoning the recognition of a true proposition. How is a true proposition recognized? When the truth speaks to us of ourselves, from within ourselves, and puts us in our center, from where we contemplate our empty interiority and ourselves contemplating it.  This is the beginning of remembrance, the beginning of coming back to ourselves, the beginning of what is called THE RETURN HOME.

Understanding that what we hear/read speaks of us, we have to understand that the bridge is never an individual. The bridge is our true real nature that is NEVER held by an individual that also means that it is NEVER held by the "I" that you think you represent.

So, how to discover the true Master?......

It is not the listening, nor the reading of the texts that identifies the Master or reveals him in his wisdom of Understanding. It is the nectar of eternity that is drunk from within you as a sap that gushes unceasingly from itself submerged in the abyssal depths of the most intimate of silences. It is there that you must direct your scrutinizing gaze so that in that depth you will be moved in your heart, and in this way the false foundations of the lethargy of the "I" that overshadow your days and nights will be removed.

Loyalty to the recognition of the Master is not his words, nor his most eloquent texts, nor even his present figure. Loyalty and recognition is to yourselves in your True Nature which lurks within yourselves in the darkest of nights of those who, finding themselves alone, feel quiet, deep and vast as the night itself, whose countenance shines in all the faces of your diverse humanity.


I opened the door
and your Presence entered
like a sword,
without asking.

Offline

#15 2021-12-17 00:53:23

Vega
Member

Re: THE WORD "I" BOUND YOU TO ALL DENSITIES

Thanks, QUIETpuddle.

I don't have time now, I will read this again when I have more time and see if I have anything more to say.

And the way I understand it is that we are all the absolute currently being under an illusion of being a person. I am not embodying and living this yet but on a mental/understanding level I consider everyone to be Source, so it didn't even occur to me that I am casually asking you if I am talking to God directly as if it's nothing lol, until you commented about the pedastal smile. I just am trying to figure out a way to make sense of all the nondual teachers that I listen to sometimes. If their body disappeared too when they disappear/merge with Source that would make more sense, so I thought that maybe you and all the other nondual spiritual teachers that still have a body, have one foot in the absolute and one foot in the world of illusions and your foot in the world of illusions is your body.

Last edited by Vega (2021-12-17 00:55:51)


I am not posting using the name Vega anymore, my new forum account is Jupiter.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB