The trick/ no trick: I am That

[Guest guest]

> Some ideas:

>

> Ramana told that you are the screen, you are consciousness,

>

> Niz said this too to some visitors and his claim to seek and stay

> with one's " I am " has just the same task or goal.

>

> Balsekar often said that one is pure consciousness but with Balsekar

> I suspect that he indeed believed that, but I am not sure - maybe

> Balsekar here is tricky too.

>

> In reality what this guys were aiming at when trying to find " pure

> consciousness " was just to realize sooner or later that there is no

> consciousness,

 

 

no,

 

there is ONLY consciousness, or

awareness of Niz: in action..

 

 

 

 

> that there is no " I am " ,

 

 

yes, there is

 

 

> there is no " I " .

 

 

yes, there is no I

 

 

 

> The existence of consciousness or the I am (which is the same) is an

> illusion which we erroneously take for our real self.

 

 

 

you are talking about the ego here

 

 

 

 

> Many seeker have the idea to get rid of the false self which is

> body/mind and find the real self which they believe is pure

> consciousness.

>

> The point now is that these seeker never really practiced it, dived

> deeply into it to find this " Pure Consciousness " which they believe

> is conscious of itself. Therefore they never will find out that they

> just were tricked into a practice which will bring them to the

> realization that they don't exist, neither as body-mind, nor as an

> entity, nor as a screen nor as pure consciousness nor as I am.

>

> I like this expression of Pete " Nada con carne " , and this carne

> (meat) contains the brain one of its functions is to make objects

> conscious. And the thing is:

>

> Consciousness is it's content. There is no screen or pure

> consciousness where the world is appaearing on or in.

>

> Nada ...

>

> Werner

 

 

Consciousness is at play, displayed by

us in unison

 

 

Era

 

Era