To who/m or what does ...

[God-Like]

There is talk about I AM this and not that, there is talk about I AM the observer but I AM not the doer .

This could go on and on in this respect, I AM not the thinker of I AM the observer and not the doer lol .

What I can gather in such instances is that there is the comparison had between what you are beyond doing and what you are that does .

Things just don't get done by themselves, there has to be a doer of such things .

Peeps can say, Mr Dazzle it's the ego that does and the ego is illusory so it's not the real I AM that does anything ..

In that same vein one would have to understand and know the ego, but how is the ego separate from what you are ..

The ego doesn't exist on it's own merit, the ego is what you think you are ..

There has to be what you are 'doing' regardless of what you think you are ..


This is borderline mirroring another thread of mine that reflects integration and renouncing .

I AM integrating what I AM as the observer and I AM renouncing what I AM that washes the dishes .

To say there is no doer as explained in a post just made to Starman makes no sense ..


So I put the question/s out there .. is there 'doing' that just happens, Is there no-doer at all, is there a different I AM the that which observers to the I AM that thinks ...

and to the I AM that thinks about I AM the doer or not ..


x daz x

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by God-Like

There is talk about I AM this and not that, there is talk about I AM the observer but I AM not the doer .

This could go on and on in this respect, I AM not the thinker of I AM the observer and not the doer lol .

What I can gather in such instances is that there is the comparison had between what you are beyond doing and what you are that does .

Things just don't get done by themselves, there has to be a doer of such things .

Peeps can say, Mr Dazzle it's the ego that does and the ego is illusory so it's not the real I AM that does anything ..

In that same vein one would have to understand and know the ego, but how is the ego separate from what you are ..

The ego doesn't exist on it's own merit, the ego is what you think you are ..

There has to be what you are 'doing' regardless of what you think you are ..


This is borderline mirroring another thread of mine that reflects integration and renouncing .

I AM integrating what I AM as the observer and I AM renouncing what I AM that washes the dishes .

To say there is no doer as explained in a post just made to Starman makes no sense ..


So I put the question/s out there .. is there 'doing' that just happens, Is there no-doer at all, is there a different I AM the that which observers to the I AM that thinks ...

and to the I AM that thinks about I AM the doer or not ..


x daz x

Maybe when the mind takes the back seat then you as the doer are really just happening as you do. Its really the mind that "thinks" it is the doer. For example take some one who spontaneously acts in the moment to save someone. At those times its just all happening and often that movement is just occurring through the experience that reveals itself to move or do. "No time to think" type moments.

The mind believes pretty much everything about itself. :)

[Starman]

What you are using to understand this, your mind, is inadequate for helping you to truly understand this.
Go to the source of your being and you will experience the answer to this in ways that it could never be explained.
Our heart; the core of our being, has a different process of understanding than our head, or mind.
I had to make this transition before I could truly understand.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Starman

What you are using to understand this, your mind, is inadequate for helping you to truly understand this.
Go to the source of your being and you will experience the answer to this in ways that it could never be explained.
Our heart; the core of our being, has a different process of understanding than our head, or mind.
I had to make this transition before I could truly understand.

Tis the mind that concludes there is no doer .

There are no answers beyond the mind .

There is no-one beyond the mind ..

Who/m is at the source attaining such answers?

If there is no doer, there surely is no-one attaining answers to anything .

The doer is the one associated to the one that can attain anything .

It's impossible to be the observer and not the doer .

There is no separation to the self point of reference that observes, thinks and does .



x daz x

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Tis the mind that concludes there is no doer .

There are no answers beyond the mind .

There is no-one beyond the mind ..

Who/m is at the source attaining such answers?

If there is no doer, there surely is no-one attaining answers to anything .

The doer is the one associated to the one that can attain anything .

It's impossible to be the observer and not the doer .

There is no separation to the self point of reference that observes, thinks and does .



x daz x

The heart disagrees with you....but we have had this conversation before.

The heart has its own way of knowing, which totally transcends the mind and it is separate from it.
http://www.ukapologetics.net/biblicalheart.htm

The problem with the Neo Advaita movement (and Buddhism to some extent) is they believe that enlightenment can be found through the mind and intellect and that we can "know God" but if it were that simple, wouldn't everybody be able to "know God" by now...and yet, the existence of the Divine cannot be proven because it takes a mind to prove something to another mind.

When somebody says "I am not the doer/experiencer", they have totally detached the ego from "free will" until they see that free will is a myth, because of the fatalistic hand of consciousness, because whatever choice we make in this universe, it was sorta meant to be that way or else it wouldn't be...So we say that there was a no- body doing, being or experiencing... because it is God experiencing itself AS God without the involvement of the Mind, thoughts or ego.

In fact, we can even drop the terms "observer" and "doer" and "experiencer" because all those verbs imply there is a subject doing that action...but in the case of Cosmic Consciousness...in the case of Samadhi, words do not apply (because words come from the mind) and you exist at a level where the "grass grows by itself" and in this "suchness" nothing much is doing or looking at anything.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

The heart disagrees with you....but we have had this conversation before.

The heart has its own way of knowing, which totally transcends the mind and it is separate from it.
http://www.ukapologetics.net/biblicalheart.htm

The problem with the Neo Advaita movement (and Buddhism to some extent) is they believe that enlightenment can be found through the mind and intellect and that we can "know God" but if it were that simple, wouldn't everybody be able to "know God" by now...and yet, the existence of the Divine cannot be proven because it takes a mind to prove something to another mind.

When somebody says "I am not the doer/experiencer", they have totally detached the ego from "free will" until they see that free will is a myth, because of the fatalistic hand of consciousness, because whatever choice we make in this universe, it was sorta meant to be that way or else it wouldn't be...So we say that there was a no- body doing, being or experiencing... because it is God experiencing itself AS God without the involvement of the Mind, thoughts or ego.

In fact, we can even drop the terms "observer" and "doer" and "experiencer" because all those verbs imply there is a subject doing that action...but in the case of Cosmic Consciousness...in the case of Samadhi, words do not apply (because words come from the mind) and you exist at a level where the "grass grows by itself" and in this "suchness" nothing much is doing or looking at anything.

See when I read this from your link

Yes, the Heart Really Can “Think” and Have Emotions!

This does not reflect anything transcending the mind .

There is also nothing separate from what you are be it in experience of the mind as an individual experience or simply being one with the universe .

When you say (and this is what I touched upon slightly regarding the ego) I am no doer as there has been the total detachment from the ego then what remains that washes the dishes .

The one that remains that washes the dishes is still conscious of washing the dishes .

How do they identify what the dishes are in reflection of a self that has no self identified ego in place?

In your eyes it seems as if the ego is the doer and yet the ego only exists due to the thought of yourself in reflection of everything else .

You have stated what you want in a man on one of the other threads .

This is possible because of how you perceive yourself with ego .

Why would an egoless non doer care about cleaning the dishes or what they want from a man lol .

Cleanliness is ego in expression, wants and need in another is also ego .

What would a non doer do? lol ..

Why would an egoless non doer go to work? Brush their teeth?

One has to understand the nature of the ego in reflection of self .

This is why I said earlier that to dismiss the doer is to dismiss oneself but this doesn't happen .

All you get is a doer saying they are not doing .


x dazzle x

[JOHN44]

the essence of my beginning That'll never reach your attainable s upon me it is to think otherwise yet to seem unheard of or yet pure fiction yet I can gather you when time is forth upon a means of my gathering.

But what do I want from you all ?

DESIGN

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Starman

What you are using to understand this, your mind, is inadequate for helping you to truly understand this.
Go to the source of your being and you will experience the answer to this in ways that it could never be explained.
Our heart; the core of our being, has a different process of understanding than our head, or mind.
I had to make this transition before I could truly understand.

As you indicated, one must "go to the Source of your being and you will experience the answer to this in ways that it could never be explained".

One must make the transition beyond the self-limiting mind/head/intellect in order to "truly understand".

Well put.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Starman

Our heart; the core of our being, has a different process of understanding than our head, or mind.

That's because the 'sensibility' of (our) 'heart' is feeling (actual e-motion) based because it is 'grounded' in real-Life - not airy-fairy, mentally flight-of-thought ballooned!

Of course, a "heart's" logic can become 'warped' (most 'hearts' are!) if and as it becomes disconnected or dissociated from (its) 'Source', which is what I imagine you mean by 'the core' of (our) Being, as a result of physical (i.e. selfish or ego conditioning.

That's why so many 'hearts' end up being 'nutty' 'mental cases'! (lol)

Conundrum is: how can one get 'back' to and remain 'in contact' with (pure) Source or Core ...?

'Prayer' (i.e. wishing/desiring, while believing that it is possible, to be so) will 'lead' one in that 'direction'.

But said prayer has to be 'true' (i.e. sincere) for that to happen. Unfortunately, until they experience abject ego-defeat at least, most peeps 'prayers' remain ego-based, i.e. miss-guided, as a result of their ego-conditioning.

Selfishness is self-reinforcing!

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

As you indicated, one must "go to the Source of your being and you will experience the answer to this in ways that it could never be explained".

One must make the transition beyond the self-limiting mind/head/intellect in order to "truly understand".

Well put.

Yes we need to trace back one's steps to the origin of thought pertaining to why we experience what we do .

We have to go back to the moment .

If we associate going back to source as going back to love then everything that transpires from that moment is done so because of love ..

That's why all the poop that hits the fan has love as it's origin ..

There is only that ,



x daz x