Ego, realization, conceptual and nonconceptual

[Guest guest]

Beautifully and clearly laid down by one who has attained realization of self

!. I come to this site to share and learn wisdom and love. I am a kriyaban

student of Self Realization Fellowship ( Sri Yogananda ) for several years

and will attest that when by certain techniques be they Kriya or others used

by many god realized masters... when the body system (organs, heart,lungs

etc.) are slowed down so that the spirit (YOU) can completely turn inward

toward your higher self (God) and contact the source of all----- then you

will know the ineffable ! ----- You must have the contact and know--- not

just intellectually or through the senses..... but Intuitively, which is a

spirit quality.

Peace and God realization to all ! -------------- Jerrio ----------------

[Guest guest]

When the individual's nervous system is experiencing the least state

of excitation required to remain alive—this is defined as pure-Being,

samadhi, etc. (India is replete with stories of saints who are

sealed into caves and only come out once a year for a breath and then

back to samadhi—no food or water is needed by such quiet systems.)

The ego is said to be perfect in its unity with Being when the

body/mind is in this quiescence, and that the ego's status is equal

to that of the so-called Cosmic Ego, God's Ego, The Ego of Universal

Consciousness (Being.)

 

Despite its unity-status, until " realization, " ego's re-emergence

from Being is due to a samskara that is not " burnt by the fires of

knowledge " and that thus remains during samadhi that then again

founds the ego's potential-to-manifest out of this " perfection of

Being. " " Perfection " here means, " as if nondual " in that the unity

of Being, samadhi, is unsullied by motion/thought/feeling—which, if

present, would mean that the ego had become the doppelganger for

the " absentee Absolute " and thus assume its role as the subjective

aspect of relative manifestation.

 

Being/samadhi is " as close as possible " to being a perfect symbol of

the Absolute in that 1. No thing-ness exists (ignoring the special

case of Being having thingness in that it has the characteristic

of " existing without a manifest observer,) and 2. Being has the

potential to symbolize sentience once it manifests creation.

 

When we use the reflection/mirror analogy, we immediately understand

that though the Relative is a " mirror " that might " reflect, " it

has " no one " to reflect " to " since the Absolute is beyond any quality

or non-quality—including the quality of " the ability to receive a

reflection from a non-thing. "

 

Thus is the " Mexican standoff " created.

 

We have no egoic actions during samadhi, and the Absolute, of course,

does no actions (and does no not-doing either.) What then, is the

recognizer of the nonconceptual during samadhi or out of samadhi?

 

Only when immersed in Being do we have an " experience " that

intellectually satisfies us (after the experience not during it) when

we use it as a symbol for the Absolute, but when the ego manifests--

becomes a recognizer--then it must necessarily be dualistically

appreciative (limited,) and relegated to the status of being

a " reviewer of the past " which then juggles qualities that are

bogusly proffered as symbols of the experience of pure Being. This

is merely a case of the ego recognizing " mental actions outside of

samadhi " that are resonant with the ego's " sense of self, " during

samadhi, and in no way is the ego " reliving " or " remembering " the

experience of Being but instead is recalling the experience of its

emergence from the " absoluteness " of Being. This emergence is " done "

at the finer levels of consciousness (subtle, very quiet body/mind

movements.) The experience of the finest level of consciousness is

bliss, and you must slip " through " bliss as you enter samadhi and

once again as you emerge from it. During samadhi, it is like

dreamless sleep—which itself is considered by Ramana as another " fit "

symbol for the Absolute. Emergence from samadhi is a true birth

process, a true re-incarnation of the ego occurs.

 

The ego pretends to be sentient, a real observer, the " absolute

witness " of that samadhi experience when, in fact, it is merely an

editing-of-memory function of the nervous system.

 

The ego is NEVER in a position to recognize anything but, well,

things, and even then the ego is a part of the recognition process,

not the knower of the recognition process. The best that can be said

is that the ego pretends to relive experiences, via memory, of

entering or leaving pure Being and that these become symbolic of the

entering-unity experience. There is no way for ego or any other

process to directly experience anything—being a process and non-

sentient. This whole process is as dead as it would be if it were

observed in a Hollywood conception of a futuristic robot's mind. No

sentience is found—only processes that can be used as limited symbols

of it are found.

 

So, again, what is the recognizer? The manifest ego pretends and

does not actually recognize, and the Absolute is beyond action/non-

action and never is/isn't a recognizer.

 

Thus, no enlightenment is possible—there being no entity that could

somehow " suddenly get a whole bunch more sentience " or whatever other

poetic expression that might come up to justify that some " thing "

becomes enlightened. The ego is annihilated when it enters samadhi,

and only by " pure grace " does the so-called " Big Self disidentify

with the small self. " Spontaneously—beyond causality—grace " flows "

and suddenly what? Suddenly the samskara that is the basis of the

ego's emergence is burnt by the true fire of knowledge—grace, a gift

from the beyond. Suddenly, the whole nervous system shifts

paradigms, and the egoic processes begin to speak of the illusory

nature of manifestation, of the non-ness of itself, of the wholeness

of Being's infinite correlation with itself, etc.

 

Suddenly the ego speaks with authority as it denies its authority.

Suddenly the ego is guru who says, " Within is the guru—I'm only here

to tell you you're looking in the wrong direction for me. "

 

What happened? How did this come about that suddenly the ego

has " gotten it? "

 

Nothing happens, of course, when we see the world through Advaita

tinted lenses, but on a grosser level of existence, we strain the

limitations of language to assign meaning to this circumstance. The

blind ego suddenly sees the REAL, everywhere, and yet maintains the

illusion of the conceptual. Why is the ego so certain?

 

Here's how I am presently talking about this to myself: the nervous

system gradually gets thoroughly saturated with the Advaita

Concepts. All the masters suggest that " hanging out with the

enlightened " is a powerful technique; also, Ramana and Nisargadatta

both did the Hindu rituals with bajans and pujas etc., and they had

dialogue with their devotees in which all the forms of yoga and other

paths to enlightenment are thoroughly discussed over and over and

over and over and over. The practice of self inquiry leads to

samadhi that burns up the samskaras, and when the mind/body system is

thus purified, THEN, grace " can finally withdraw identification with

the small self. " This means that the body/mind is now in perfect

accord with the " intent of Universal Consciousness " and the " lineage "

of all experiences of that body/mind is such that it is directly

flowing, untouched, unedited, straight out of Being. This is the

status that allows the ego to " let go of the notion of doership. "

The ego, in such a mind free of samskaras, finally has a nervous

system that has the clarity to see the utterly mysterious nature of

manifestation, finally can see that causality is a crock, finally can

see its own impotency, finally can adore spontaneous right actions

that are unwavering true to their most subtle origins, and in the end

can " retire " when it sees that all the jobs of doership are filled

by " God " and that its role of subjectivity is proper but

identification with that subjectivity no longer is present and the

illusion of sentience is evaporated.

 

Once you see the snake as a rope, the fear of the snake is gone, and,

so too, the ego can retire from being " that which can be harmed by

snakebite " —that which never was snake-bitable even if a real snake

has been there.

 

In the end, we are left with the Absolute and with (without too) a

mind/body system that is wholly automatic (it always was but the ego

had not surrendered to this fact due to lack of saturation/clarity.)

 

The mind/body now glorifies the Absolute as the source of Being that

has no explanation for itself….and no need to have one. The ego

never gets enlightened but it begins to act in the ways that only the

enlightened act. Knowing its own thingness, the ego, properly

aligned at last in a harmonious, unified mind/body system, has no

pretensions of sentience. The Absolute did nothing; Being's ego

finds out it " is nothing " and is satisfied to know that it is as

close to being Absolute as it can get, and that while it no longer

thinks of itself as the Absolute, the Absolute is understood to never

have identified with it in the first place—that being a delusion of

the ego's grandeur.

 

Realization, then, is a misnomer. Nothing is realized—meaning the

nothingness of the conceptual is finally integrated into the

perceptual, the mental, the psychological, the physical, etc. to such

a degree that it is taken as truth by the WHOLE mind/body system with

such certainty that clarity is present at the most subtle levels of

the thinking processes. It is not a clarity about the Absolute but

rather of the non-ness of the conceptual.

 

The ego, after realization, is not working overtime to conceptually

designate all experiences as illusory or anything else to " maintain "

realization. It is truly convinced of the illusory nature of

manifestation, and so, it has no need to shore-up its opinions

anymore with constant dogma-lessons. Hence, no egoic functions come

up. The mind/body, now relieved of the pressures of the ego to

support the " I'm sentient " stance, is an automaton that is EXACTLY of

the same ilk as we happen upon in our night dreams. In our normal

dreams we have many " other characters " and also our " dream self " that

interacts with these other characters. These other characters are

being manufactured by the sleeping-REM-state brain and are considered

by us, when we awaken, to have never been anything but a mental

processing of autonomic functions of the dreaming mind. Just so,

does the realized mind/body slough off identification—in exactly the

same manner that we disidentify with the life-intent of the dream

characters we " are " in dreams. When we awaken, no matter how

important the actions of the dream character seem to be, we do not

regret the unfinished business of the dream once waking consciousness

is upon us. We don't pine away our morning hours worrying about our

dream children who no longer have our dream parenting. Why? Because

we see the non-ness of those children with such clarity that

identification cannot take place.

 

When the ego realizes that it cannot realize, then the ego realizes

that the REAL never goes through a process in order to be REAL, and

in fact, the REAL has not manifested ever—no REAL-ization took

place. The REAL always is, the ego never is. The whole seeking

process was merely the ego finding out its true status—illusory non-

entity-ness—and having the common sense from that point to stay out

of God's way as the body/mind now fulfill a cosmic purpose beyond the

ken of the ego.

[Guest guest]

Mark

I guess i made a mistake !...... I thought he got it...... thanks for

pointing that out to me........ I can only speak for myself , I know i am a

spiritual being , not the body, not the mind, not the physical universe.

Thanks to the masters of before,including the one this site is dedicated

to... We have the opportunity to know now in this life who we are and our

connection to God........ God has become Me !......we have to meditate until

we have his presence..... How do you see it Mark ?...I would love to hear

your awareness on this.

Peace to all who are sharing this communication !...... Jerrio ........

[Guest guest]

Jerrio,

 

> Beautifully and clearly laid down by one who has attained

realization of self

 

Not according to Duveyoung himself. If you read the post again you

will see that he says no enlightenment is possible. He also says

that realization is a misnomer, for nothing is realized.

 

Mark

[Guest guest]

Jerrio,

 

It has been said by many sages that in the ultimate sense nobody is bound and nobody is liberated. This is beyond my present understanding. Therefore I am proceeding under the assumption that liberation is possible. It may be that liberation is equivalent to the realization, or understanding, that we are now and have always been free. If this is true, then any efforts undertaken with the thought "I am going to get something I do not now have" are doomed to failure. They will only result in more baggage added to the ego. So my effort, if you can call it that, consists of simply looking at thoughts, sensations, the felt sense of 'I' and all arisings honestly and without evasion, rather than in trying to cultivate some state or other with a technique. I am not looking at these things with the attitude "I am not not these things." I am trying not to impose a division between the looker and things that the looker is looking at. I am simply looking. Something may eventually come of this effort, but there are of course no guarantees. And the more I think about the results of my effort, the less likely will there be any results.

 

I will also add that it seems to me that any effort undertaken in the spirit of "I am God" or "I am neverending bliss, happiness, etc." is also fraught with problems. It is imposing a condition upon realization. It is saying that if it doesn't feel good, this can't be it. So we will be diverted into looking for the truth in blissful states and ignore any other states that arise. We must be willing to face What Is courageously and with the willingness to see and accept whatever comes, no matter how terrifying. Indeed, some have said that realization is impossible without going through a terrifying period, called by some The Dark Night of the Soul.

 

One seeker's perspective.

 

Mark

[Guest guest]

Dear hovila

I say what I say because I have gone through the " dark night of the

soul " ..... I realized along time ago ..that when you seek or desire happiness

you are really only finding the other set of the pair of opposites (duality

of this universe)... but when you by his Grace go beyond that and see that

any searching for happiness is really a search for the true nature of God,

which is bliss as the manifestation that we can experience at our humankind

level here in this consciousness , as we go forth evolving lifetime after

lifetime until we are free to not return , or by choice and his Grace return

to help others out of the trap as other Masters have and are doing as we

speak. I am as little as the dust on your shoes, without his light flowing

through me I could not humbly share the truths he has allowed me to see

through techniques of God communion I have learned...... Namaste.....

Jerrio.......