To who/m or what does ...

[Starman]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Like Starman, I am going to have to leave it here because you and I are coming from a totally different place (the heart has nothing to do with mind)....and Starman would also understand me.

It does not exist for those who have not experienced it, and no amount of explanation will suffice
for those who are not even open to the possibility that there is an existence beyond their thoughts,
beyond their mind, etc. It is a whole different paradigm. Another test in compassion.

[Shivani Devi]

Before I retire for the evening, allow me to put it this way...

We can go into "who is observing?" until the cows come home, but all that will happen, is "yes, but who is the observer of the observer of the observer of the observer of the observed ad infinitum?"

I mean, I could spend lifetimes navel gazing over that, or just say "forget it...It is irrelevant...let's just go into the love I feel for God instead".

Then one could ask "who is feeling that love?" and we could get "I/ego is feeling" or "God is feeling" however, when you are thinking, you are not feeling...and who it is who loves doesn't really matter in the light OF that love.

So, I will eat my dinner off paper plates tonight.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by God-Like

I think we have different understandings of self and mind and ego lol ..

Who loaded the dishwasher ?

Who is training the ego like a puppy?

Who is surrendering?

You see there has to be an association with what you think you are to relate to what any of this means .

You can't be egoless talking about what ego means .

It is the ego (what you think you are) that relates to what it means .

I understand the different aspects of the mind in regards to intellect and heart .

The heart consciousness is still of the mind tho.

The mind is the environment for your reflection / awareness of self of this world .

If you transcend the mind there is no you that operates from the heart . There is no you or heart .

Like said we probably have different takes on what constitutes what ..

What would a non egoless peep do?

Can you give me an example?


x daz x

Dazza hello there...hope it's alright if I join in.

On the one hand I can completely agree w/what Shivani & Starman are saying. Most folks just as Shivani discusses use the term "mind" to relate to What Is from pure intellect or with the focus heavily there. Often there is almost a fear or terror of the heart centre.

I don't say that callously either...I know that when the heart centre is shattered, the calm of equanimity and mind are basically all you've got. I've been there myself and the key is being honest with yourself and owning that it's all you've got and you're not well-balanced at the mo but you're doing what you can. Too many tool around in intellect and dry equanimity without that bracing self-honesty and that's where the rest of the populace can get tired of or frustrated at these folks.

I'm happy to say I'm back to a much greater place of health and balance and I hope you are there as well, of course
So assuming neither of us are purposely trying to cut out heart nor living in denial about it (LOL), then I'll continue on ;)

If you transcend the mind there is no you that operates from the heart . There is no you or heart .

Per the above, I think you may be getting at some other aspects which are as yet not commonly discussed. If I'm not getting you then please let me know. I am reading that by "mind" you mean the individuated consciousness and that you also include the heart centre, which is multidimensional (so to speak), in that it connects Source as One to each of us as individuated One.

Including all of this under "mind" may be confusing to many due to the trend of slack and avoidance that Shivani described. If you are not intending to slack or avoid the prominence of the heart centre in regard to our being and our apprehending of self and Self, I'm thinking you may just have to clarify a bit for others who can't know your intention.

The heart centre also connects Source to its physical emanation into material reality as as sentient self-aware consciousness. In the heart, we know God as we know ourselves. That is, we have the capacity to know Source directly and intimately, ultimately beyond words (though words are fine), in a place of authentic love and being. But, we also can know Source in some ways through reason and intellect. IF and when intellect is in service to heart. For example, this is how to derive ethics and norms that seek the highest good of all: when lovingkindness is manifested or expressed from a place of equanimity, i.e., from one's centre. Heart centre. With intellect (what most call mind) in service to heart.

And it seems to me that you are also saying that there is a place and even a need perhaps to live consciously centred in this awareness of self (or mind), of individuated consciousness. Meaning to know that we do it, to be aware of it and to apprehend it deeply. I would generally agree with that. There are moments of unconscious reaction, and many live largely unconscious of their hidden drivers (the unexamined life Plato spoke of) -- but when push comes to shove, we normally do have that moment or period of reflection, perhaps of struggle and hard choices, and ultimately we take a decision. If we need to remind ourselves and recentre in order to take the right course of action, it's generally held wise to do so because we are responsible for all of what we intend, think, say & do...and especially the last two.

It may be that from the view of One, all is known, but as we live our lives, we have incarnated into a reality that allows us to take decisions and experience the outcomes. That is intentional...we are intended to bring reflection, reason, heart, and conscious awareness to our choices. A large part of that involves taking ownership and experiencing the sublime joy of the struggle and of taking decisions, of taking part in the crafting of our lives and ESPECIALLY of our character. In this way, the character of our soul is ours to shape, to use a poetic term :) So will we do it consciously and thoughtfully, with meaning and dignity and intention? Or will we do so mindlessly, carelessly, self-indulgently, or with apathy, cruelty, sloth (exploitation) or anger or ??? Regardless how we view it as more free will or more fate, in some sense it's a moot point in that regardless how we view it, we are responsible If we were truly automatons whose free will had been abrogated, we would not be created in the image of One. Given that, IMO it's not too helpful to view it as meaningless OR as already decided...as in, is that going to be your excuse?, hahaha! Fact is, we are nonetheless in large part a product of that struggle and of each of those decisions taken, from one lifetime to the next.

So regarding awareness of the process of ownership and growth...I know that there is a conscious awareness or watershed decision to submit intellect to heart, to live from the heart. After that it may be much less traumatic once the worst of the transition is past, but even still we must choose repeatedly to lead from the heart centre and particularly in trying times. Ultimately, for this reason, most wisdom traditions, including Kabbalah, regard centreing in equanimity, strength, discipline, humility and awe as being closer to the heart of God.

And I think it is precisely because whenever we are tested, or when we are traumatised or even numb, our good emotions and feelings of certainty may perhaps momentarily be unavailable or not at hand. Then it is the infinite foundation of equanimity that will carry you, without fail. Humility, awe, grace, and discipline are at the heart of equanimity. where we know Source in a different way, through other heart channels that are more pervasively linked to all that is. Or differently linked. It's a failsafe. Once the crisis, the life or death situation, the tough call, hard times or bitter trauma is past, the inner heart centre can once more open to expansive lovingkindness.

Taking that conscious choice not to live from intellect and ego is variously called living from the heart centre, the sacred heart, or leading with the 4th (chakra, particularly after activating all of them). The path of this energy can be seen energetically as a singularity that is concave at top and bottom and all around, bending back into the heart centre from all directions. So, each of us being the centre of the universe is in some mystical sense true. We are each the cenre of our own singularity, which is centred in the physical and spiritual/emotional heart. Sometimes, that singularity is sourced and fed more from equanimity, the foundation of being, which yields a state of humility and grace. From there, lovingkindness allows us to fully enter our own heart centre from a more mature perspective...the lovingkindness that is centred in equanimity. This is the bliss and joy that exists regardless. It is the sublime bliss of existence that yields a deep, burnished, mellow heart centre, rather like a smooth, aged spirit in a seasoned oak cask

Whenever the personal heart centre is not fully functional, it's to the intellect, to reason, and to the sublime joy of being that we go for sustenanance. There the outer heart is fed directly by the body, by nature, and by all of existence and the awe and joy of What Is. This will nourish and heal the inner heart centre until it is ready to once again become a fully functional "singularity". Speaking for myself, I find it is valuable to be accepting of all aspects of love with regard to self (individuated consciousness, or mind), because lovingkindness has to be reborn from an entirely different process after the transition to the heart-led consciousness. It is so different as to be an entirely different thing to what has gone before, like a caterpillar to butterfly. Outside of certain mystical eddies and currents, this process or these aspects of heart centre growth and healing are probably not widely discussed and that can muddy terms & concepts even further, LOL. But I find it good and right to include and discuss the nuances of equanimity and lovingkindness, in authentic love and as they relate to the heart centre of any one of us. It just may take some time to get at the meaning we intend.

Through my long and winding trajectory( you're welcome!), I think I can understand your use of mind in this broad sense and why you overlap and include heart centre within individuated consciousness or self. Hope I've maybe also pulled out some points that needed chewed on a bit further!

Peace & blessings Daz
7L

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Before I retire for the evening, allow me to put it this way...

We can go into "who is observing?" until the cows come home, but all that will happen, is "yes, but who is the observer of the observer of the observer of the observer of the observed ad infinitum?"

I mean, I could spend lifetimes navel gazing over that, or just say "forget it...It is irrelevant...let's just go into the love I feel for God instead".

Then one could ask "who is feeling that love?" and we could get "I/ego is feeling" or "God is feeling" however, when you are thinking, you are not feeling...and who it is who loves doesn't really matter in the light OF that love.

So, I will eat my dinner off paper plates tonight.

That which can spend lifetimes navel gazing is you .

You are the doer of navel gazing .

You have said before that I AM not YOU .

There are obviously different points of perceptions had that are consciously aware of self and of others .

Call that energy / life force, God, call it what you will, it makes no difference what it is called . What is evident however that whatever that is, is navel gazing .

It doesn't happen by itself .

There are instances when peeps feel they are just observing what is happening, that is YOU also .

It always depends on your point of conscious observation that one is aware of in each moment .

No matter what, that conscious point is the doer .



x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Of course, there is always an aspect of my individual persona "doing" something...even if that "doing" is just existing on some level...However, like you said before, when it comes to the experience of Nirvana, there is ONLY the experience...and as soon as one thinks about it, the whole experience stops..."oh wow, having no thoughts is lovely.....dammit, that was just a thought". LOL

Yes this is it exactly ..

There has to be the environment for self to be . Where there is self there is the doer of doings .

When there is Nirvana or whatever word suits the self is absorbed within it / becomes it / becomes one with it .

There is no doer of anything in these instances .

The second there is a thought (like you have said) the second there I AM IS .

In that same second there is the Doer of things .

The absolute mix up is peeps who/m have read about nirvana or even experienced this have the impression there can't be a doer because there is the realization had beyond the doer / beyond self .

It's like beyond the dual mirror there is no reflection and a peep then finds themselves looking in the mirror pointing to the reflection saying it's not there when it clearly is, otherwise you wouldn't be pointing to it .


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Starman

It does not exist for those who have not experienced it, and no amount of explanation will suffice
for those who are not even open to the possibility that there is an existence beyond their thoughts,
beyond their mind, etc. It is a whole different paradigm. Another test in compassion.

You have to excuse me for putting you straight on my realizations and experiences . For you to assume what you do and put yourself on a pedestal is not a good look .

If you actually read what I quoted regarding Shiani's quote about the heart you will know that anything that involves thought and feeling is experienced of the mind .

The environment for self is the mind . The environment for heart led consciousness is of the mind .

Your welcome to explain yourself but you don't, you just say that peeps like me won't understand based upon my lack of experience / realization ..


All speculated of course and ego-led .


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Dazza hello there...hope it's alright if I join in.

On the one hand I can completely agree w/what Shivani & Starman are saying. Most folks just as Shivani discusses use the term "mind" to relate to What Is from pure intellect or with the focus heavily there. Often there is almost a fear or terror of the heart centre.

Sure join in all you like ..


This is why I explain myself . The intellectual mind is one aspect, the emotional, another, the universal mind another etc ..

It's all mind .

Mind is not just the environment for one to have an intellectual thought .

Mind is also the environment for self to entertain no thoughts .

One doesn't transcend mind just because one is not thinking or because one is expressing through the heart . lol .

Where there is self awareness there is mind .

Beyond self awareness is beyond mind .

One requires the comparison to know one's mindful self .



x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Per the above, I think you may be getting at some other aspects which are as yet not commonly discussed. If I'm not getting you then please let me know. I am reading that by "mind" you mean the individuated consciousness and that you also include the heart centre, which is multidimensional (so to speak), in that it connects Source as One to each of us as individuated One.

Including all of this under "mind" may be confusing to many due to the trend of slack and avoidance that Shivani described. If you are not intending to slack or avoid the prominence of the heart centre in regard to our being and our apprehending of self and Self, I'm thinking you may just have to clarify a bit for others who can't know your intention.

The heart centre also connects Source to its physical emanation into material reality as as sentient self-aware consciousness. In the heart, we know God as we know ourselves. That is, we have the capacity to know Source directly and intimately, ultimately beyond words (though words are fine), in a place of authentic love and being.
7L

The heart led consciousness indeed filters through to one's physical expression and becomes entwined with our true nature while in experience of the physical-mind environment .

For one to suggest for examples sake that they are operating solely through the heart and have transcended mind makes no sense while they are here of the physical aspect of mind speaking about it via the intellect lol .


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Through my long and winding trajectory( you're welcome!), I think I can understand your use of mind in this broad sense and why you overlap and include heart centre within individuated consciousness or self. Hope I've maybe also pulled out some points that needed chewed on a bit further!

Peace & blessings Daz
7L

Yes you do understand the overlap .

One has to encompass one's environment for self awareness / experience in regards to mind .

It is really quite simple to understand when there is the comparison had beyond oneself and beyond experience .

One 'can' conclude therefore that when there is self awareness within experience one is of the mind rather than not .

It is like said beyond the mind there is no mirror of self reflection, coming from the heart-led consciousness is not beyond self awareness or self reflection .

You haven't commented (I think) as I am not good at reading / digesting long posts if you see yourself as the doer of things?


x dazzle x

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by God-Like

This is key ..

Tis all mind however when there is something observed / experienced .

For the mind to take a back seat so will the awareness / observation of self of this world .

There is always a consciously aware self of the mind .

If a peep wants to say there is the washing of the dishes but there is no doer has to associate the happening with something .

Even the wisest of the wise cannot say or do (excuse the pun) otherwise .


x daz x

The body is a vehicle, so your looking at it through your vehicle/body only.
If your aware of yourself your still coming from a body/self awareness, perspective only.

But take yourself a little further, where your no longer aware of your doing or body, and ask yourself, what arises where you are "not the self"..?