"I am" is not a Delusion

[Dodo]

"I am" is the first person singular of "To be". 

Being, or "Iam-ness", is verifiable by present moment experience. What is not verifiable is the identification "I am this" or "I am that" / being this or that mental or physical object.  That is what we call Ego. But being / I-am-ness is not Ego, because it is not made out of thought, it is made out of awareness - instant knowingness. 
 

[Moreira]

Ego depends on memory (brain) if not, the consciousness recognising self-awareness would forget the concept of self existance 2 seconds later. Like the people with alzheimer, they live the moment, they think I am, but dont know who I am.

[Dodo]

1 minute ago, Moreira said:

Ego depends on memory (brain) if not, the consciousness recognising self-awareness would forget the concept of self existance 2 seconds later. Like the people with alzheimer, they live the moment, they think I am, but dont know who I am.

That depends where you are looking for yourself when you ask the question "Who am I". Are you looking at the past for the answer, or are you looking at the present moment? 

[blazed]

Yes you need a mind to self reflect and appreciate being, but being happens first and regardless.

An animal is being but cannot appreciate it as such.

I think this is what they mean when they say be "intensely" in the moment. you have to put your awareness on existence itself.

Edited June 5, 2018 by blazed

[Dodo]

Just now, blazed said:

Yes you need a mind to self reflect and appreciate being, but being happens first and regardless.

An animal is being but cannot appreciate it as such.

If you've ever seen an animal, you would know they thoroughly enjoy being.  To say they don't appreciate it is a delusion. 

The mind doesn't always help in appreciating being, it usually works in the opposite direction in fact, that's the reason spirituality is needed in the first place.

 

[blazed]

3 minutes ago, Dodo said:

If you've ever seen an animal, you would know they thoroughly enjoy being.  To say they don't appreciate it is a delusion. 

The mind doesn't always help in appreciating being, it usually works in the opposite direction in fact, that's the reason spirituality is needed in the first place.

 

Jesus everyone wants to argue, a plant is being but doesn't appreciate it as such, it doesn't realize it in a logical way it just is being.

A person with alzheimers disease in final stages is also being, but they won't talk about it, or think about it, or appreciate it.

Edited June 5, 2018 by blazed

[Dodo]

6 minutes ago, blazed said:

Jesus everyone wants to argue, a plant is being but doesn't appreciate it as such, it doesn't realize it in a logical way it just is being.

A person with alzheimers disease in final stages is also being, but they won't talk about it, or think about it, or appreciate it.

Trees are my spiritual masters

[blazed]

1 minute ago, Dodo said:

Trees are my spiritual masters

There is a pure being, in the silent emptiness, where there are no questions and no answers but then you need to accept that also right now you're having a human experience. I think this is what they mean when they say you need to keep playing the game or illusion.

[MarkusSweden]

@Dodo Trees teach the highest teachings - silence.

6 minutes ago, Dodo said:

Trees are my spiritual masters

 

[Dodo]

Just now, blazed said:

There is a pure being, in the silent emptiness, where there are no questions and no answers but then you need to accept that also right now you're having a human experience. I think this is what they mean when they say you need to keep playing the game or illusion.

Have you ever stared at a tree for a long period of time and feel the stillness in that, feel the completeness and perfection of a tree? Feel it within you? Do it! do it!

[blazed]

Just now, Dodo said:

Have you ever stared at a tree for a long period of time and feel the stillness in that, feel the completeness and perfection of a tree? Feel it within you? Do it! do it!

I find that it is the same with anything, meditate hard and well enough and the whole thing dissolves away. The stillness is anywhere. I think thi is what they mean when they say you can find liberation anywhere, even in solitary confinement.

[Dodo]

2 minutes ago, MarkusSweden said:

@Dodo Trees teach the highest teachings - silence.

 

Absolutely so. Trees are more still and silent than even Eckart Tolle  

[MarkusSweden]

@Dodo

[B_Naz]

2 minutes ago, Dodo said:

Have you ever stared at a tree for a long period of time and feel the stillness in that, feel the completeness and perfection of a tree? Feel it within you? Do it! do it!

I wouldn't say perfection, but I would say complete. I can't be complete without the tree and the tree can't be complete if it wasn't for me. We're all in one existence that can't escape because there is no where to escape

[eputkonen]

5 hours ago, Dodo said:

"I am" is the first person singular of "To be". 

Being, or "Iam-ness", is verifiable by present moment experience. What is not verifiable is the identification "I am this" or "I am that" / being this or that mental or physical object.  That is what we call Ego. But being / I-am-ness is not Ego, because it is not made out of thought, it is made out of awareness - instant knowingness. 
 

I am this or that is thought.  But thought started with the "I".  There is only AM...verifiable by present moment experience.

[MarkusSweden]

5 hours ago, eputkonen said:

I am this or that is thought.  But thought started with the "I".  There is only AM...verifiable by present moment experience.

There is not even "AM", because "AM" refers to presence, and it suggest in a subtle way that there is something which is "not present" or "not being"

"AM" has no contrast, there is no such thing as "not being", there is nothing that is 'not present'

that which is never ceases to be, that which is not never come into existence

Ever the idea of presence or being(AM) is made out of a subtle reference to a believe that there is something that disappears, something that was real and has now vanished, but that is never true, that is never experienced 

In saying 'I AM' you make a reference to 'yourself' as presence/being, in contrast to something that is not, but there is no such thing.

Therefore the 'AM' vanish.  

You see how you must let go of 'AM', just as you let go of self/time? 

Can you see this?

 

Edited June 6, 2018 by MarkusSweden