The self/I is not ego-mind. The ego-mind is not the sense of I/self.

[running]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Another way to put it...

https://krishna.org/what-is-action-a...t-is-inaction/

“One who sees inaction in action, and action in inaction, is intelligent among men, and he is in the transcendental position, although engaged in all sorts of activities.” (Bhagavad Gita 4.18)

i agree with your quote. thanks for sharing.

i would separate the real from fantasy. this below copied and posted from the link i would consider fantasy. the ego has nothing to do with the causeless and endless nature. in other words ones activities do not obstruct one from bliss and silence. it can't. why? because its causeless and endless. non dual. he or she does not suffer in the same ways because of the nature of bliss and silence. not because of ones ideas of righteousness. which is subjective anyways.

"A person in Krishna consciousness is not inactive but his activities are all performed for Krishna therefore he does not enjoy or suffer any of the effects of his work and he is naturally free from the bondage of karma. Therefore the devotee is intelligent in human society even though he is engaged in all sorts of activities for Krishna. In this way the devotees achieve the platform of a karma or freedom from the reactions to work."

Originally Posted by running

i agree with your quote. thanks for sharing.

i would separate the real from fantasy. this below copied and posted from the link i would consider fantasy. the ego has nothing to do with the causeless and endless nature. in other words ones activities do not obstruct one from bliss and silence. it can't. why? because its causeless and endless. non dual. he or she does not suffer in the same ways because of the nature of bliss and silence. not because of ones ideas of righteousness. which is subjective anyways.

"A person in Krishna consciousness is not inactive but his activities are all performed for Krishna therefore he does not enjoy or suffer any of the effects of his work and he is naturally free from the bondage of karma. Therefore the devotee is intelligent in human society even though he is engaged in all sorts of activities for Krishna. In this way the devotees achieve the platform of a karma or freedom from the reactions to work."

That's just one way to practice Karma Yoga, to approach everything as service to God and without expectation of reward of any kind. Total selflessness.

Karma Yoga is the backbone of ethics and morality in Hinduism and its practices are meant to bring about purity of mind whereas Raja Yoga's purpose is to bring about clarity of mind.

In the Advaita tradition both clarity and purity of mind are prerequisites for the knowledge of Jnana Yoga to be fully assimilated resulting in Moksha.

[running]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

That's just one way to practice Karma Yoga, to approach everything as service to God and without expectation of reward of any kind. Total selflessness.

Karma Yoga is the backbone of ethics and morality in Hinduism and its practices are meant to bring about purity of mind whereas Raja Yoga's purpose is to bring about clarity of mind.

In the Advaita tradition both clarity and purity of mind are prerequisites for the knowledge of Jnana Yoga to be fully assimilated resulting in Moksha.

if it is working. thats what matters. for me it was about going into like a trance to relive lifetimes of trauma. clearing them out. each time i did the divine mother/bliss would come to me. so it was about going backwards to relive and seemingly rewarded for doing so. until one day she never left. so i stopped. clearing through obstructions gives her a way in. clearing through enough gives her a home to reside in.

Originally Posted by running

if it is working. thats what matters. for me it was about going into like a trance to relive lifetimes of trauma. clearing them out. each time i did the divine mother/bliss would come to me. so it was about going backwards to relive and seemingly rewarded for doing so. until one day she never left. so i stopped. clearing through obstructions gives her a way in. clearing through enough gives her a home to reside in.

That sounds like a pure Bhakti approach. It's said Bhakti alone can bring about both clarity and purity of mind.

Bhakti's my weakest suit. I'm predisposed to the analytical and contemplative.

[running]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

That sounds like a pure Bhakti approach. It's said Bhakti alone can bring about both clarity and purity of mind.

Bhakti's my weakest suit. I'm predisposed to the analytical and contemplative.

thats cool you know your ticket.

[Ewwerrin]

The word selfless is funny.
Unconditional love is not bound by conditions. And it is also indicative of true self.
Non-physical source expressing through physical form. Ultimate self. Ultimate selfishness. Self beingness. Unconditional self. If the ego is fake/old self, then it is selfish to live beyond it, as the full/true self. Unconditional love.
It is not selfish to live the ego, as it is not the full true natural self.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

The word selfless is funny.
Unconditional love is not bound by conditions. And it is also indicative of true self.
Non-physical source expressing through physical form. Ultimate self. Ultimate selfishness. Self beingness. Unconditional self. If the ego is fake/old self, then it is selfish to live beyond it, as the full/true self. Unconditional love.
It is not selfish to live the ego, as it is not the full true natural self.

You really said a mouthful! I have to read it again slowly.

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

You seem to be saying Atman is the individuated being and tool of Brahman and the problem is its mind erroneously constructs the self through conditioning, hence the task at hand is to eliminate the problematic conditioning. In effect the self is really Self and thus Brahman. That's 7+ billion instances of Brahman on this planet alone, not to mention the trillions upon trillions of other critters.

Furthermore it follows if you, the individuated being is Brahman then so am I, and if this is something you truly believe and realized why be paranoid of yourself using your own words against you (I would not be surprised if you are repeating what I have said and are trying to use what I have said against me.)?

I'll state my position with an analogy. I (Atman/Brahman) am in a hall of mirrors and the reflection in one mirror is JASG and in another is MikeS80. The two mirrors are angled toward each other and one mirror seems to be giving another mirror a dirty look. I'm amused and not paranoid because there's no one to give me a dirty look. It's all just a play of light reflecting at different angles and from differently shaped mirrors. Every single mirror can be shattered, pulverized into dust, atomized and it matters not. I am still there. Always have been and always will be regardless of the presence or absence of mirrors.

So I ask, are you the being standing in the hall of mirrors or just one reflection in trillions upon trillions of mirrors?

Of course another elephant in the room is if "the individual self/Self is Atman thus the individual is Brahman" then Brahman can and will die, and before you say there will always be individuated beings there weren't any at and before the instant of the Big Bang and there won't be after the heat death of the universe. How can that be? It's anthropomorphizing Brahman. Attributing the effable to the Ineffable. In other words Brahman isn't dependent on the universe. The universe is dependent on Brahman.

Do you understand what I'm saying? We, all of us, are the one luminous being that illumines all of what we call objective reality including all these little selfs, without which there would be no objective reality, and even without objective reality there would still exist the light of Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. Absolute reality with inherent Existence-Consciousness-Bliss and relative/transaction reality merely "borrows" or "reflects" Existence-Consciousness-Bliss but limited by name, form and function. For a time...

Let go of name, form and function and rest in That inherent reality. As Swami Vivekananda would say, “Awake! Oh ye children of immortal bliss.”

What you seem to not understand is that all beliefs, including the beliefs you have are all (contents) of the mind (conscious and unconscious), this is pretty easy to understand.

The contents of my mind is and relates to Atman (consiousness, the mind, body and spirit are all parts, aspects or extensions of Atman, thus are all parts, aspects or extensions of Brahman) is the individual physical being/form and tool of Brahman. There is more to Brahman/Atman than just consciousness.

The contents of your mind is and relates to I am consciousness, My self, mind, ego and body are not my true nature, My true nature is my/the Self, consciousness/Brahman. You can argue and say your Self and consciousness are beyond mind until you die, and that they are not the contents of your mind, and it won't change the fact that they are contents of your mind.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

What you seem to not understand is that all beliefs, including the beliefs you have are all (contents) of the mind (conscious and unconscious), this is pretty easy to understand.

The contents of my mind is and relates to Atman (consiousness, the mind, body and spirit are all parts, aspects or extensions of Atman, thus are all parts, aspects or extensions of Brahman) is the individual physical being/form and tool of Brahman. There is more to Brahman/Atman than just consciousness.

The contents of your mind is and relates to I am consciousness, My self, mind, ego and body are not my true nature, My true nature is my/the Self, consciousness/Brahman. You can argue and say your Self and consciousness are beyond mind until you die, and that they are not the contents of your mind, and it won't change the fact that they are contents of your mind.

Hey Mikey ..

I think peeps really do need to just get there heads around the basics like you have touched upon .

It can get so complicated at times when this is overlooked and have seen you bang your head on the forum walls as much as I have at times

Peeps NEED to simply establish a foundation of what you are and apply that to all there is or not .

To then address the reality of that within mindful experience as an individual or beyond that .

There seems to be so many crossed wires and contradictions because none of this is understood .

It's not understood in a way where there is only what you are to then declare I am not this or that .

To not understand that there is either a realness or a trueness to that, to then declare this or that is unreal or untrue or whatever world suits .


x daz x

Originally Posted by MikeS80

What you seem to not understand is that all beliefs, including the beliefs you have are all (contents) of the mind (conscious and unconscious), this is pretty easy to understand.

The contents of my mind is and relates to Atman (consiousness, the mind, body and spirit are all parts, aspects or extensions of Atman, thus are all parts, aspects or extensions of Brahman) is the individual physical being/form and tool of Brahman. There is more to Brahman/Atman than just consciousness.

The contents of your mind is and relates to I am consciousness, My self, mind, ego and body are not my true nature, My true nature is my/the Self, consciousness/Brahman. You can argue and say your Self and consciousness are beyond mind until you die, and that they are not the contents of your mind, and it won't change the fact that they are contents of your mind.

I know that I know It (some what) well, also I know that I know It not so well. Who amongst us comprehends It both as the known and not much known, alone has the right understanding.

It's like my face. I know it's there but I can't see it. I can only see its reflection in a mirror. I also know if the mirror is shattered my face is still there.

I know that I know It - Consciousness - (some what) well. It illumines mind and all the knowing of mind is but Its illumination (reflection). I also know that I know It - Consciousness - not so well as I only know It indirectly by Its illumining of mind. Whatever I can point to - contents of mind including thoughts, beliefs, emotions, sense of I Am - is not It but merely Its illumination. I also know when body and mind are no more It still shines.

Though I can't directly point to It (I know It not so well) I know that I know It (some what) well by the very fact I'm conscious. It's self-revealing, self-evident and the only aspect of my existence that's unchanging, whereas contents of mind are ever-changing (as is the body - it's born, ages and eventually dies), mere events in the field of Awareness. The changing illumined by and within the Unchanging. The contents of Consciousness.