To who/m or what does ...

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by JustBe

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"..?

The body is a vehicle and is also consciously aware to certain degrees .

I agree that if one has only remembered being conscious of the mind-body then there will only be that perspective had .

I am not sure I follow you when you suggest when you are no longer aware of your doing or body? Are you suggesting you can wash the dishes and no longer be aware of washing them?

I mean many have day dreamed while washing the dishes and by doing so one may temporarily stop washing them while their attention is elsewhere, one might say that they continually washed the dishes but don't remember doing so .

In these instances one would have to have all the facts at hand and know one's self potential to multitask . My understanding is that if the spirit has left the body and is astral bound temporarily while washing the dishes, the physical body will not continue to function in such a way . Therefore if there is the actual washing of the dishes continuing you are still the doer .

In regards to what arises when you are not the self, I would have to know what you mean by self and what could potentially rise that is not self (of the mind) .


x daz x

[Starman]

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by God-Like

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 .

I have no idea what you are talking about. I have no idea what the word "peep" means; is that some kind of internet social media language? My post did not mention you but you assumed I was referring to you. My post further went on to state that "no amount of explanation would suffice......" but you choose to ignore that part and only criticize that I was referring to your lack of experience. You want to refer to my ego, that's fine with me, I am not offended by it. But I am just not interested in farther pursuing this conversation with you. I wish you peace and good journey in your travels.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by God-Like

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

When it comes to the awareness of Brahman, there are two ways to perceive it; either objectively or subjectively (which is a duality within itself btw).

The objective rationalisation of Brahman is purely an intellectual pursuit, like the path you are following with this whole line of reasoning. However, with reference to Advaita Vedanta, having a "doer" who is "doing" means that a separation or DUALITY exists between the act and the performer of it....in the way of "I am totally responsible for what I do...and therefore I should be rewarded/punished for it" this is ego who believes that actions should bear fruits or consequences.

"Karmanyeva adhi(a)kharaste ma phaleshu kadachana" - Just do your duty, without any self focus on the consequence.

That is from the Bhagavad-Gita.

Now, in the modern world, using an "excuse" to shirk away from not being held accountable for personal responsibilities is seen as representing a "bad" or "sinful" character.....and therefore, surrender or subservience to a "higher power" is seen as something which should be avoided at all costs because "God" then becomes the unacceptable "excuse" for people's existence....which is a crying shame really.....but that is the way of Kali Yuga.

When the ego has been fully surrendered to the Divine, one then moves into the subjective or Non-Dual state of Brahman, whereby even if there WERE a "doer" or an "observer" the whole focus of awareness is not there anyway. I highly doubt when you are making love to your partner that you are focusing on yourself....So, to an external awareness/observer, you are still "doing" and "screwing" and all that...but when one is lost in the heat of passion, all of that doesn't matter.

When somebody embodies this consciousness, even as an act of the embodiment, there is no Self focus, even though there is still Self referral. It HAS to be that way or else one may as well take a total vow of silence for their whole lifetime....can you imagine trying to speak a language without any verbs or personal pronouns? So who is this "I" that anything my lips can speak of? My fingers can type it? That is "my mind"...pure and simple. What is this "my" that owns "my mind?" Well, that would STILL be "my mind". What is that which is beyond "I" and beyond "my mind"? Why, that would be Brahman.

Hari Om Tat Sat

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Starman

I have no idea what you are talking about. I have no idea what the word "peep" means; is that some kind of internet social media language? My post did not mention you but you assumed I was referring to you. My post further went on to state that "no amount of explanation would suffice......" but you choose to ignore that part and only criticize that I was referring to your lack of experience. You want to refer to my ego, that's fine with me, I am not offended by it. But I am just not interested in farther pursuing this conversation with you. I wish you peace and good journey in your travels.

Considering that you and shivani were the only ones disagreeing with me at the time you then spoke to her in agreement and then went on to say that no mount of explanation would be suffice through a lack of understanding had so to speak .

If it was not I that you was referring too in regards to having a lack of understanding then who/m are you referring too? Who/m else was disagreeing with you at this same time about the same subject at hand?


Shivani 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.

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 are welcome not to engage with me and continue the conversation, I was sincerely asking you questions previously about how you have derived at your conclusions .. Simple questions based upon if there was no doer then how can there be an observer or thinker ..

You went onto explain that it is not your place to make me understand your experiences and such likes .. not a very good start or way to converse is it .. *shrugs shoulders*

From my experience of conversing with peeps (short for people) who say there is no doer normally ends in a similar fashion because they can't actually answer the questions asked and quite quickly put up a wall of defence like you have .

Peeps end up either being rude or clam up and no longer want to converse .

It's a familiar pattern .

It's really quite silly when you look at it from a point where even peeps that say they are not here will defend that position as if their life depends on it .. That's odd when they don't believe they are here .. Same goes for there is no doer or that they are egoless and such likes ..


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

When it comes to the awareness of Brahman, there are two ways to perceive it; either objectively or subjectively (which is a duality within itself btw).

The objective rationalisation of Brahman is purely an intellectual pursuit, like the path you are following with this whole line of reasoning. However, with reference to Advaita Vedanta, having a "doer" who is "doing" means that a separation or DUALITY exists between the act and the performer of it....in the way of "I am totally responsible for what I do...and therefore I should be rewarded/punished for it" this is ego who believes that actions should bear fruits or consequences.

"Karmanyeva adhi(a)kharaste ma phaleshu kadachana" - Just do your duty, without any self focus on the consequence.

That is from the Bhagavad-Gita.

Now, in the modern world, using an "excuse" to shirk away from not being held accountable for personal responsibilities is seen as representing a "bad" or "sinful" character.....and therefore, surrender or subservience to a "higher power" is seen as something which should be avoided at all costs because "God" then becomes the unacceptable "excuse" for people's existence....which is a crying shame really.....but that is the way of Kali Yuga.

When the ego has been fully surrendered to the Divine, one then moves into the subjective or Non-Dual state of Brahman, whereby even if there WERE a "doer" or an "observer" the whole focus of awareness is not there anyway. I highly doubt when you are making love to your partner that you are focusing on yourself....So, to an external awareness/observer, you are still "doing" and "screwing" and all that...but when one is lost in the heat of passion, all of that doesn't matter.

When somebody embodies this consciousness, even as an act of the embodiment, there is no Self focus, even though there is still Self referral. It HAS to be that way or else one may as well take a total vow of silence for their whole lifetime....can you imagine trying to speak a language without any verbs or personal pronouns? So who is this "I" that anything my lips can speak of? My fingers can type it? That is "my mind"...pure and simple. What is this "my" that owns "my mind?" Well, that would STILL be "my mind". What is that which is beyond "I" and beyond "my mind"? Why, that would be Brahman.

Hari Om Tat Sat

The intellectual path I am following is a path where I have opened a thread about who/m or what is the doer .

Can you open a post or start a thread from the heart only? from beyond the mind?

The answer is a big fat juicy No ..

Who/m or what is the doer - doing is not necessarily reflecting separation but quite obviously the very fact that the question is presented reflects duality .

We are in experience of the physical aspect of self / mind there really is no need to compare this experience with beyond duality .

There is no you beyond but there is a you here and now .

Things go pear shaped pretty quickly like it did with starman when there is the idea that there is no you that is doing .

As explained YOU have said YOU are not ME so you are already in a mindful environment that reflects duality and intellect .

It is futile for peeps to suggest that right here and right now they are beyond that .

Wherever there is a sense of oneself there is a doer, what can happen is the sense of oneself changes ..

One minute there is the sense that I AM the person only the next there is the sense that you are much more than that .

A non dual state of Brahman reflects a peep that wants sex?

In a non dual state of Brahman does that peep see their partner as their partner or do they see themselves?

Are they desiring sex with themselves?

Desire is dual in nature ..

Doesn't make sense .


x daz x

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Considering that you and shivani were the only ones disagreeing with me at the time you then spoke to her in agreement and then went on to say that no mount of explanation would be suffice through a lack of understanding had so to speak .

If it was not I that you was referring too in regards to having a lack of understanding then who/m are you referring too? Who/m else was disagreeing with you at this same time about the same subject at hand?


Shivani 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.

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 are welcome not to engage with me and continue the conversation, I was sincerely asking you questions previously about how you have derived at your conclusions .. Simple questions based upon if there was no doer then how can there be an observer or thinker ..

You went onto explain that it is not your place to make me understand your experiences and such likes .. not a very good start or way to converse is it .. *shrugs shoulders*

From my experience of conversing with peeps (short for people) who say there is no doer normally ends in a similar fashion because they can't actually answer the questions asked and quite quickly put up a wall of defence like you have .

Peeps end up either being rude or clam up and no longer want to converse .

It's a familiar pattern .

It's really quite silly when you look at it from a point where even peeps that say they are not here will defend that position as if their life depends on it .. That's odd when they don't believe they are here .. Same goes for there is no doer or that they are egoless and such likes ..


x daz x

Or they fully realise that the whole experience is entirely "state specific" as per the definition given by Charles Tart:
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ipjp/article/view/65610

When two people have achieved a similar level of "spiritual Gnosis" a rapport is established, whereby one who has not had that similar experience would become defensive and even hostile.

Starman and myself are communicating beyond words here...even though words appear... but they can only take one so far in trying to relate a concept which another would be in disagreement with, because their level of vibration is totally different.

Then, of course we clam up and for no other reason than continued discussion would be a total waste of time and not get anybody anywhere...and for no other agenda.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

When somebody embodies this consciousness, even as an act of the embodiment, there is no Self focus, even though there is still Self referral.

Where there is referral there is a doer even if there is no focus on who/m or what they are be it God or Shiva .

The moment there is no sense of self awareness there is no doer .

Peeps that write on these forums are the one's that are doing the typing .

No point in referring to the third person in these regards or just say that typing is happening (not saying you are implying that) just giving examples .

Some peeps feel they are directing themselves through life some say that the wind just takes them wherever, but when we evaluate and realize what is this wind that carries YOU it is YOU, there is only YOU .

This is why peeps that do hold firm in that there is no doer choke on their cornflakes when asked questions about why are you eating cornflakes if you are not the doer ..



x daz x

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by God-Like

The intellectual path I am following is a path where I have opened a thread about who/m or what is the doer .

Can you open a post or start a thread from the heart only? from beyond the mind?

The answer is a big fat juicy No ..

Who/m or what is the doer - doing is not necessarily reflecting separation but quite obviously the very fact that the question is presented reflects duality .

We are in experience of the physical aspect of self / mind there really is no need to compare this experience with beyond duality .

There is no you beyond but there is a you here and now .

Things go pear shaped pretty quickly like it did with starman when there is the idea that there is no you that is doing .

As explained YOU have said YOU are not ME so you are already in a mindful environment that reflects duality and intellect .

It is futile for peeps to suggest that right here and right now they are beyond that .

Wherever there is a sense of oneself there is a doer, what can happen is the sense of oneself changes ..

One minute there is the sense that I AM the person only the next there is the sense that you are much more than that .

A non dual state of Brahman reflects a peep that wants sex?

In a non dual state of Brahman does that peep see their partner as their partner or do they see themselves?

Are they desiring sex with themselves?

Desire is dual in nature ..

Doesn't make sense .


x daz x

I don't need to start a thread about living in the heart, beyond the mind.... because if you go into the Hindu forum...see a thread about BHAKTI YOGA...It is all THERE...and in full detail. I have already "done my bit" in regards...but you missed it...not my bad.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

I don't need to start a thread about living in the heart, beyond the mind.... because if you go into the Hindu forum...see a thread about BHAKTI YOGA...It is all THERE...and in full detail. I have already "done my bit" in regards...but you missed it...not my bad.

I know about the heart and I know about the mind and I know about yoga .

I don't need to read stuff from the Hindu forum thanks for the advice tho

I don't understand why a non dual master peep wants / desires sex? if you don't answer why then I am none the wiser ..

Just trying to make sense of what doesn't make sense ..

No worries if you don't want to explain




x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Or they fully realise that the whole experience is entirely "state specific" as per the definition given by Charles Tart:
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ipjp/article/view/65610

When two people have achieved a similar level of "spiritual Gnosis" a rapport is established, whereby one who has not had that similar experience would become defensive and even hostile.

Starman and myself are communicating beyond words here...even though words appear... but they can only take one so far in trying to relate a concept which another would be in disagreement with, because their level of vibration is totally different.

Then, of course we clam up and for no other reason than continued discussion would be a total waste of time and not get anybody anywhere...and for no other agenda.

I agree there is resonance had between individuals and a rapport is established .

There however requires two individual doers to form a rapport . Duality in al it's glory .

Individuality in all it's glory .. Two doers in all it's glory .


I can also speak in terms that point to beyond words lol but that's not what's happening here .

I know about beyond self and beyond mind and beyond words and concepts ..

The issue that however presents itself is that when you are of the forums speaking about beyond words you are the doer of this .

There is confusion here because there is the merging of self / no self, doer / no doer, duality / non duality, mind, beyond mind .

This is the thing .. Peeps are pointing to the mirror at there reflection saying there is no reflection .

Non duality - no self - no mind - no doer is not what is happening here now .

The non dual supposed master horny guy that desires sex from their partner is pretending not to be here having sex .

And again in regards to resonance and rapport, one can still be open 'hearted' can they not and converse openly when they don't resonate with another's energy .. I don't resonate with peeps that are dishonest and selfish that doesn't mean I clam up and don't talk to them ..

This whole doer - non doership is crazy isn't it for when a peep clams up or puts up a wall of defence because if there is no doer there is no need to do that .

This is why this non doership of the physical mind environment is a sham ..

At least peeps who experience Schizophrenia behave like they hear voices ... They really believe that they do ..

Those that say they are not the doer or they are not here while writing on the forums don't behave or believe that .

That's the difference I am trying to illustrate ..



x daz x