I AM THE WAY....

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

it even makes sense in a non religious way. if we are all a part of this collective consciousness, any part harming another part would need to be corrected in some way, brought back into the harmony of the whole. the recognition of i am you and you are me.

I disagree with this too. But won't argue this either.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

i think they can't work in harmony. (and the bibles view of course, see the temptation of jesus in the desert) they fight for dominance. one or the other is king of the castle, in charge of perception and experience.

i think one cannot know christ with an existing identification with one's ego

now what would i do with this? "Jesus is the ego of Christ"

that's a puzzler! i don't think i can make any sense out of it.
you got three words there, jesus, ego, and christ..which is the thing that leaves the body when the body dies? i think you need different words.

how about 1. consciousness 2. ego 3. that change in experience and perception that occurs with consciousness is no longer identified with ego

so i would say:

jesus was a man, a consciousness, that ceased to identify with his ego and so experienced and perceived truth. he gave up body/mind consciousness for christ consciousness (or found his true self or identity)

Ego is an aspect of the whole personality, the one you're focused in while awake-alive. The inner-self is another aspect of the same personality, the one you're focused in while focused in the non-physical.

Jesus Christ personality had an ego, the Jesus people interfaced with, and a non-physical aspect, the Christ. In other words: "Jesus is the ego of Christ".

I don't subscribe to the opinions that the ego is bad, you have to kill / destroy / ignore / whatever do to it.

I find this Gospel of Thomas quote extremely relevant:

#106: Jesus said:
[1] When you make the two into one, you will become sons of man.
[2] And when you say ‘Mountain, move away,’ it will move away.

That's exactly what we (people) are here (on Earth) to do:

[1] Harmonize one's ego with their inner self and become "functionally" whole (in other words "son of man").
[2] In order to be able to consciously create reality.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

i would not divorce the ego from the human body. it's quite a machine. our brains, bodies, thoughts, memories, all of it very complex. the brain makes feelings and emotions using chemicals. we perceive and experience what the brain creates. thoughts too, mental images, come from the subconscious and brain. so asking why we have an ego does not make much sense when looking at the total picture. better maybe to ask why we have come into this human body for a short life. the ego comes about due to this entire set up with the body and form. the body is designed to make an ego and we entered this body and live with it, in it, for a short life. babies don't have egos. they form slowly over time. a baby just has physical instinctual needs and actions. some adults adapt well to their egos, more or less! very debatable. others grow tired of them and want freedom! and to experience what lies beyond.

The brain doesn't do those things. The mind isn't in the brain. We are neither our bodies, nor our brains.

We see things quite differently here.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by sky123

Obviously ' Ego ' is not mentioned because it wasn't part of the Language then

Jesus talked about it, just didn't call it "ego".

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

If "I" is the 'Ego', why is it that there are so many discussions on
Spiritual Forums trying to define the 'Ego'?

Some people would like to understand. Others want to teach. There was some saying about those who don't know, teach.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Perhaps because know thy self, is not such an easy task as it sounds.

The ego is only what the mind thinks 'I' to be, its model of self. What else, if anything else, 'I' is, is part of what is discovered along one's spiritual journey. IMO

The way I see it, ego is the mind focused in the physical framework, when awake-alive.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

It's very interesting that, in all the documented cases of Near Death Experiences and After Death Communications, there is virtually no mention of the judgment day of which you speak.

We don't have to take ad litteram all those quotes. They were symbolical. There is no judgement for punishment.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

It's very interesting that, in all the documented cases of Near Death Experiences and After Death Communications, there is virtually no mention of the judgment day of which you speak.

We don't have to take ad litteram all those quotes. They were symbolical. There is no judgement for punishment.

NDE's are no proof of what happens when one dies. They are translations of non-physical experiences in the language of our five senses (to be perceived by our egos). The non-physical isn't perceivable through our five senses.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

I love your point about random acts of kindness and I try to make a habit of that with at least one such act daily.

I have a friend whom I met in Transylvania and who still lives there now with his wife and 4-year-old son. He lost his job in the tourist industry for obvious reasons during the pandemic. Although he has managed to find another lower-paying job, he was barely making ends meet. Without being asked, I sent him funds through Western Union yesterday and he was able to collect the cash this morning.

That random act of kindness made my day !

Very nice!

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

i would say another helpful thing is to stop imagining all these things in us that are conscious beings. there is only one thing that is conscious in us, me/you/i

the mind can't come to see. it is not a conscious being. we are the only thing self aware

then people go into abstract ideas, my mind chose this, my ego chose that, only a conscious being can consciously choose, and if it is not a conscious choice, it is a mechanical one, a programmed one. the program can be complex with a lot of either/or statements, but it is still a program, not conscious

the results of that programming are fed to us, consciousness, and we do with it what we want. our relationship with the programming is up to us. identify with it, don't identify with it, up to us. the program does not decide. but the program can be designed in such a way to make you more likely to identify with it and to require a leap in awareness to notice it's tricks

Hmmmm....yes and no. I agree it is the I, consciousness, that is behind it all, but it does create this ego and come to feel as if that is what it actually is. I think the mind is a part of this conscious being, a function of it. It is through the mind that choice is examined and made. Thinking may be going on at the conscious level, but decisions are generally made at the subconscious level. Experiments with MRIs have actually been able to predict the subjects decisions before they become aware of what they intend to do consciously. Often only less then a second ahead, but in some cases as far as 7 seconds ahead of time. As far as saying the ego did x or the mind did y, I see these as just ways of talking about it. As far as what we do and don't choose, how much free will we actually have to exercise, this I see as much more of a gray area. There is room for free will in science, but it is not a settled question. The universe may not be deterministic in the clock work sense of the word, but it may actually be a matter of random chance at play. Or perhaps it may be deterministic, but all possible outcomes are actually happening, and then if there is free will, perhaps the choice is which outcome consciousness remains conscious of. Hard to say, but I like to believe I have some kind of free will and choice, else I don't see how I can say I really exist as an "I" at all....else I am just an eddy in the flow of energy in the universe.