Ananta

The full assimilation of self-knowledge requires further effort. This is when nididhyasana kicks in. "Nididhyasana is defined as meditation on the teachings and the truth they reveal. In terms of nididhyasana, meditation does not refer to formal seated meditation. Though formal seated meditation can play a role in nididhyasana, the meditation that characterizes nididhyasana is the constant contemplation of the teachings and the application of one’s non-dual understanding to the experiences/objects/encounters one has within the context of the dualistic apparent reality." ~T. Schmidt

Yes, because who is trying to kill the ego...IS the ego! In Vedanta this is called nididhyasana the process you under go once you have Self-realized, but still need to fully assimilate and remove every ounce of ignorance that says you are a doer/enjoyer/experiencer! This is because of the mind's habitual tendencies to identify with thought, even when it knows it's unreality. Even when it knows it is awareness (The Self). That's why there is nididhyasana.

This is often the case here also, except if there was attachment for some reason, then after the fact the entire thing is seen for what it is...only "apparently" real.

Nice! Yes, seeing from another perspective! You got it. Obviously, I don't go that dramatic, your going to kill yourself route. So, I can't really comment more then I already have, except to say. Perhaps he means seeing the unreality of you, as the apparent person, could be shocking, and it is, but it wasn't scary, to me...it was freeing actually.

I don't think the ego can die or be killed at all. I just know it doesn't arise (for me) when my mind is silent or in samadhi. That's what I was trying to say. Those that speak of ego death, what do they mean, exactly? I don't know, but it doesn't seem possible to kill a thought. How would one function in the world if thought no longer arose, ever? The i-thought is the first thought and other thoughts, come and after it, even the most practical of thoughts. (Ie, I'm hungry, im thirsty, im hot, im cold, etc). Of course, "I" is not always in the thought sentence. It's just an example. Right, in my experience, its knowing/realizing it's not real..boom! So, what's the need to kill it (even if you could, which you cant) if you know/understand it not real. For me, even though I know it's not real...I still get involved with the "story" a bit more then I should sometimes, but that just means some more assimilation needs to happen. It's ok, it takes years typically to "fully" assimilate.

Ty, I see you've added to your post! Atman can be said to be the soul, by some people, but its more accurate to say that the soul or inner body, is the "subtle body" in Vedanta. (There are 3 universal bodies- subtle, gross and causal). Anyway, Atman is "exactly" the same as Brahman (both are pure awareness) and attributeless. Its just that Atman is said to be that "portion" of Brahman, that's within/permeates/illumines the individual person, at any given time. Remember Brahman/Atman is pure awareness and the "apparent" person, you appear to be (including the subtle body), is "reflected" awareness. What you seem to be referring to in your post has attributes (ie, expresses itself- in heart/head/spine), therefore can not be Atman, more likely the Subtle body, which does have attributes. Nameste ♡

Again, there is no ego death, unless someone is calling a "silent mind", the death of the ego, however the mind doesn't stay silent forever. So, when the I-thought arises again, which it always does, was it killed? No. Yes, the mind realizes that it is not the "I-thought", never was, so identification with ego starts to waver and once assimilation of that fact is complete, there is left just "association" with the person, not identification. You identify with your true nature, which is awareness. Although you continue on playing your part in the apparent world. A silent mind is extremely pleasant, calm and peaceful. Nothing to fear at all. Ego (I- thought) wants you to think there is something to fear, but that's a lie.

Yes, it is. I typically just use Brahman or awareness. Most don't understand Atman anyway, so why complicate.

The reason you have fear is because you are believing that the ego, which is just the "I-thought", can die. It can not. How can one kill a thought? You see its apparent existence as illusion and in that regard, you discriminate between you, awareness, from what appears within you, thought. So, during meditation or Self inquiry, when the mind is completely silent, you, awareness, are still there...."aware" OF the silence.

According to Vedanta- Your true nature is awareness, also called Brahman. Isvara/God is an "appearance" within awareness (Brahman), do to the power of Maya, the veil that covers our true nature. The "apparent" person, you appear to be , is an "aspect" (or part) of Isvara/God, which is the field of phenomenal existence. So, the person is a part of God, God is an appearance in awareness and awareness is your "true nature". This is an extremely simplified version.

It's the cosmic game of hide and seek. Occasionally, after much seeking, one is able to find!

Lol.

I don't know, I'm a gemini, not a psychic. Lol.

Yeah, I'm part of the human race, not interested in levels/stages. For fun, only, I'm also a gemini. Lol.

To say the "bad" reaction he got had anything to do with other peoples levels/stages not being "considered" and not everything to do with his "repulsive egotistical narcissistic" behavior is laughable, at best. I'm part of the human race, forget levels/stages.

Im not interested in it, at all. I had never heard of it until lately, because of this forum. I half-ass looked it up. I have no desire to learn it anymore then I did. I think it's a finger pointing ego classification system (ie, your green, they're blue, I'm turquoise- look at me).

Ok, this may piss off the masses, but Sadhguru is full of shit. At least what's on the back of that book you posted. He obviously believes in stories, sad thing is he's spreading wrong info.

@Shanmugam hehe..weird

Lol! Really? I only see it posted once... bizarre!

Lol! Not too mention you and I have also had discussions about this issue in the past..haha! When I saw you post I thought maybe your ears were burning.

@Dan Arnautu Hi, hopefully @Shanmugam won't mind, but in the thread he posted I found this from one of his posts- "But the truth is, Ramakrishna just had a habit of reminding himself to drink water (not to eat food) to come out of samadhi. He used water to come down from Samadhi. Osho just exaggerated this and made it to a story, IMO. Also, Ramakrishna was fond of sweets (but was not really obsessed). Osho just mixed these two to make an anecdote. He was a great story teller and he always used to do this when he talked about any historical incident. In his anecdotes you will find his own screenplay and dialogues.. " Author- Shanmugam

@Dan Arnautu I heard this from someone before, I still think it's as ridiculous today, as I thought it was then, for many reasons. It's just spiritual BS.

@lmfao lol, no, it's Jesus! Haha

I was going to laugh, then I realized I actually feel sorry for you. I think you need a slice of humble pie. ...and this post you made just might do it.