Tagged: omnipresence

The “I” is the reference

merton

Note: Avyakt7 is gone. Ananda is in from now on.
No change in blog’s name this time… 🙂
———————————————————
Beliefs systems are meant to enhance the “I.”
“I” will go to heaven. “I” will become illuminated.
“I” will experience death. “I” feel pleasure, etc.

Out of all those “enhancements” a religion or a philosophy will build some sort of blueprint to take the believer “safely” to the other “side”… The “good” side..Or so goes the belief.
There is the “creator” and the “creation.” There is “I” and the Universe. There is “I” and God. Separation exists here.
Such is the world and consciousness in the belief of the “I.”

There is an “opposite” belief which states the following: “Aham Brahmasmi.” (Upanishads)
The translation is “I am the Universe.” That translation is not accurate and because of that many “new agey” groups as well as religions who preach about the “non- I” have been grossly misunderstood by book learners and guru followers alike who would like to “ascend” and become “someone.”

There is no “I,” that is all there is to “Aham Brahmasmi.”

Our language cannot convey that absence of “I-ness” so we made up a more sophisticated word: “ Omnipresence,” There is still “I” but everywhere… 🙂

Mr. Logical will affirm: “One of those 2 positions is obviously the right one. There is either an “I” or there is none. If there is an “I” and there is no-I at the same time… That is irrational.”

That belief in “holy rationality” brought logic and analysis as “reality” rather than the paradoxical experience of life. That is how we use the “world at the office” to understand life and in turn we get confused when life does not work under the hierarchies of the “office’s world.”

The above realization is not coming from quoting books, gurus and “experts” who are engrossed in rationality. This is not book learning here.
We need to experience it to understand it.
Thus, it is not a rational understanding but paradoxically, this understanding is non-rational.

Our minds have created that separation: The believers in the “I” vs the believers in “omnipresence” which is another misrepresentation by the logical mind.
It is the dichotomy of the “I” vs the “non-I” to put it in a few words, however; for those who have experienced those 2 states of being, there is no separation but it is just a different manifestation of “what is.”

God is everywhere. I am God. We are God. He is God, there is no God….
All true and false at the same time. 🙂

It just depends on the consciousness that someone is coming from.
“Your” consciousness is “your” reality.

The history of religious “thought” could be explained in the “I” separated from the Universe, which is the typical rational consciousness of the world- called “Collective consciousness,” or the “Aham Brahmasmi” which is coming from another type of consciousness. From that point many beliefs arose which gave every belief system a distinct flavor.

Ananda was “seeing” the Ocean.
There is no Ananda, there is no Ocean. The subject and the object are not separated until the “I” comes to do so, creating loneliness and attachment.
Consciousness is what binds us together and that consciousness acquires a personality when the belief of being separated arrives.
That is the experience of most and the reason for many “self-help” books and gurus.

If we want to change our experience of life, we need to change our beliefs.

On Omnipresence

truth-quotes_our-idea-about-God-tells-us-more-about-ourselves-than-about-him

When we truly understand not intellectually, but deep down in our core; that everything is interrelated and this individuality concept is “real” only under a state of consciousness, but it is not truly under another; then we could start seeing that there is not a moment in time when “I” wasn’t.

We can divide the Ocean in drops of water. When that drop acquires a personality, then that drop separates from the Totality of the Ocean. “Hey. I am ME!” 🙂 then, that drop of water could still fragment his personality into many “individuals” that is when “ME, I and MYSELF” direct the show of insanity.

Once the drop of water is not aware of a personality, that drop of water will always exist as the Ocean. Not as “part of the Ocean” but as the Ocean itself.

The same is with us. We will always be. Consciousness is always there, but we manifest that consciousness in different forms and at different times with a different consciousness according to a role.
That is the journey.

There is nothing which lives in isolation. Even our own concept of God is part of that Totality, that Drama, that Universe and that God has manifested under different forms through different times to different individuals who are under a specific state of consciousness.

So is with “you” and “I.”

The issue is the personality. That is the illusion. That is what “individuality” strives to maintain.

Just imagine how a “primitive” non-educated individual could perceive the divine in the part of that Totality. That individual could say: “God is in the tree.”

An educated person residing in the consciousness of individuality will say: “How crazy! He thinks that God is a tree. I know who God is. God is so and so… I should convert that poor primitive fellow to save him.”

As time goes by, other “followers” who have not experienced another consciousness but individuality, will start worshiping a tree. For the tree is “God.” 🙂 while more educated ones, will look for a picture or an image to worship.

That follower has not idea of who God is, but through collective consciousness, the belief becomes the “reality.” It is easier to worship something and call that “divine.” Nevertheless, very few will realize that this same act of worshiping only shows that ego.

Why?
Feeling lower than someone is a sign of that ego.

At the same time, we have the “new age” movement stating: “God is everywhere. We are God. We are part of God,” etc.

As long as that “new age” person is residing in that consciousness of individuality, the above will be senseless.
Not because the statement may not be logical or reasonable or even because that may be considered “irrational,” but simply because there is no experience of another state of consciousness, for otherwise; that person will realize that by making a statement defining God, that person is not telling the accurate truth, for words are unable to define the indefinable.

That is how those who speak about a God, those who have a definition of God or a concept of God do not know God.
Moreover, those who have a concept about who they are, those do not know who they are.
Paradoxical, huh? 🙂

Do we see why words cannot convey a paradoxical “reality”?

Nevertheless, the above topic has been the favorite issue to debate and to fight among people who has never had any other consciousness but individuality. That is how religions appeared with a dogmatic “truth” to follow (God is this) as well as a world, which supports that consciousness of individuality at all costs.

“You are German. You are Black. You are Hindu.” Let us make a division. Let us make a container where we could put everyone who looks alike in the same category. “All Jewish are this…” I am different…

In the meantime, some “individuals” could despise the word “omnipresent.” They could despise the craziness of believing that “I am omnipresent and so are you.”

Those individuals have all the right to do that. Their consciousness will not allow them to see something different.
All is good. 🙂

Ananda was riding his bicycle early in the morning to see the sun appear in the horizon. You could smell that freshness in the air, that newness which starts the day… Birds were flying and gliding by the waters of the bay, as the soothing sounds of Nature were filling that day with joy…Nevertheless, people were passing by walking, looking down, serious faces, completely unaware of the beautiful setting around them. That setting could be part of them if they just allowed that to happen… but no!…their personality has acquired such a “reality” that they may need for God to save them.

Same talk coming in. Different consciousness coming out.

It is the same talk with a different perspective and understanding.
Any Spiritual teaching coming from a teacher who has walked the path of a spiritual walker, comes with a perspective given by his own life experiences and circumstances. That background will become the way a teacher communicates his message.

Typically the problem comes with the one listening. Listeners most of the time do not understand that those words can only be pointers to a greater reality which needs to be discovered by experience. Listeners will take those words as “the truth.”

Listeners will interpret things according to their own “reality,” their own consciousness, assuming that it is the same consciousness for all.

For example in the teaching: “…You will receive a number on the basis of your remaining unshakable in the midst of an atmosphere of upheaval over a long time…. You should be able to stabilize your mind wherever you want for as long as you want.”

Robert listened to that teaching and wanted to put it in practice “right away,” to become “perfect.”
“God, my Guru, etc. is telling me that I need to practice being unshakable no matter what.” The next day Robert locks himself out of his car, he becomes distressed. Thoughts come into his mind. He is worried, angry and moody. Robert “forgets” that he needs to be “unshakable.”

The following day, someone insults Robert. This time, Robert takes his time and remembers the teaching. He appeared to remain “unshakeable” during the “test.” Robert thought that he “passed.” Nevertheless, at night he started thinking about the incident, recalling it and thinking “why” that happened. Robert changed the scenario in his mind and thought about the things that he should have said instead. Robert felt distressed.

Because Robert’s idea of change does not correspond with who he “is,” then that change is just fictitious, it is not real. It only works when Robert “remembers,” and only for a short time after that.
Because Robert does not have the experience of serenity and peace within himself, Robert will pretend all his life to be “unshakable.”

With a different consciousness, we could clearly see that feeling serene and peaceful is something that happens once we experience that inner silence and cultivate that in our lives. That is, when we prioritize these experiences so they occur often. Being at peace has many layers, many levels; perhaps at a deeper level when the “built in” personality is disappearing, at that level all fears disappear, because there is the experience of oneness with everything; there is the experience that “I” am in everything that exists. Since peace is truly my “natural” nature as it is recognized and experienced; then there will not be a need to practice anything artificial, no need to “remember” anything.

That is why all truth is in the discovery of our true nature.

This experience of oneness is explained in different ways by different individuals.
For instance, for a Buddhist it will be about “emptiness.” That is emptiness of a personality. Zen Buddhists will talk about “inter-beingness” to represent that everyone is part of that oneness, and thus; the idea of individuality is not “real.”

A Sanyassin will talk about “omnipresence.” To refer to this source of inter-beingness, to be located everywhere, “gluing” all together, they will call that “God.”
Taoist, will refer to this omnipresence, emptiness and inter-beingness as “the Tao.”
In Brahma Kumaris, that inter-beingness, that omnipresence is represented by the word “Drama.” Everything that exists is part of it. Everything. There is no sense of individuality for there is interdependence of all things.

However, when our consciousness is not ready to grasp the above, we need to rely on the sense of individuality. Then everyone is a full individual without any relationship with everything else. God is another individual, separated from everyone else. In this consciousness, there is the “other.”

There is “me,” “I” and “myself.” Three crazy guys trying to grab life for whatever “they” think is worth grabbing for. Spirituality here is about enhancing the awareness of “I” and the ego.

Avyakt7 is stating that according to our consciousness we will be able to understand. Please see that avyakt7 is not saying “mis-understand,” for every level of consciousness has its own truth, what people are able to “see,” and their “reality” is “real” for them… but no for someone else… 🙂

When a “concept” is all that matters, many individuals will get stuck with the word “omnipresence” and “individuality.” These individuals do not realize that all they see is their own physicality extrapolated into something which they are not capable to fully appreciate, and that is the extent of God or the Divine. Here is when differentiation occurs and many religions are born. Paradoxically, those religions will talk about the same experience of “togetherness,” under different perspectives of consciousness.

However, because for most believers, their talk is not consistent with their experience, their consciousness; even though the talk about “brotherhood,” “togetherness,” a “worldly family,” etc. is used; in the practical aspect, it is all a performance.

There is no honesty there.

Mathias: It is the movie of the moving Ocean. The ripple arises believing to be different than the Ocean itself. That is an illusion. That is what we call ego. That ripple will return into the Ocean again. That is death.
A different ripple will be born again. The ripple’s life time will be about enhancing ego driven illusions, that ripple will go back to the Ocean just as the other ripple who spent his lifetime trying to find his “real self.” 🙂
Ananda: Ah! There is no self!! It is an illusion…
Mathias: Self and no-self. Form and form-less. Isn’t that duality? 🙂
Ananda: Yes, that is duality.
Mathias: Words express duality. Understanding is beyond words and ideas.

Realms of consciousness – Part 1

munay 4 elementosn

In Spirituality, there has been the need to convey consciousness found beyond the physical awareness, through words.
Those words will be experienced according to the consciousness of the listeners.
“Normal” awareness typically resides in 2 states: Thinking and feeling.

Thinking is the most predominant. Here is where intellectual knowledge is used to describe how things work in the physical realm.
For example:
There is creation, maintenance and destruction as an ongoing cycle of everything which exists in the physical realm.
A human being is born (creation) then that human being will die (destruction) and in between, there is “living” (sustenance or maintenance.)

If that ever-going cycle is not understood by the masses or if there is a need to hide greater significance behind it, then “folk stories,” “myths” were built around it: For instance, you have Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar or Shiva to signify the same aspects of creation, maintenance and destruction. We can give every personality an image, a role to be distinct from the rest, when they could be viewed as 3 different aspects of the same eternal reality. Those names will differ according to cultural background.

In Christianity, that could be understood at the Father creating, the Son, maintaining and the Father, God; destroying “His creation.” The Holy Spirit’s role has been along with the Son (Jesus) as some passages from the Bible may explain. The “holy Trinity,” the Trimurti, could be viewed as a depiction of those 3 states of the physical realm.

What is forgotten is that we are eternal; therefore, that cycle is eternal as well. Repetitive. Is our eternity a belief?
Yes. As long as we have not experienced it. In that experience of our own eternity there is no need for dividing thoughts or beliefs ever again. We are free as long as there is the experience.

Some religions have emphasized destruction over everything in that cycle, for the purpose of reforming someone with greater speed, to inflict fear to motivate certain actions or simply to exercise further control over people. There is “Armageddon,” the “last judgment,” “the second coming,” “the end of the world.” etc.

Note, that avyakt7 is not going into “how true” those statements are. That is a matter of belief. Avyakt7 is just mentioning that some religions are just emphasizing one aspect of the continuous physical reality.
Creation and maintenance or sustenance as part of that cycle, are not mentioned with the same emphasis or intensity as destruction due to other reasons.

In the “thinking” realm of consciousness, “proof” is important.
However, the “thinking” realm of consciousness is unable to “know” spirituality by experience which is extremely important. Thinking is just theory, a description, a concept. Experience on the other hand, is it.

That is why we can have many people writing about “spiritual topics.” Some with Ph.D’s and other degrees. Their writings or talks will be plain descriptions with empty messages unless those individuals have “walked the path.”

Thought brings separation. Therefore, a belief system is made implying separate things. One of the main topics in most religious dogmas is the idea of being an “individual” versus omnipresence. Some religions believe in an individual God whereas others believe in God being omnipresent.

Who is right? 🙂 Great topic for a lengthy and boring debate.

There will be God and there will be “me.” Two distinct entities. Moreover, “Me” is separated from the world. Things happen around “me,” in the “movie of life.”
If someone like the Pope is in the “movie of life,” then the Pope is separated from “me.”
Is truly the Pope part of the movie of life? Or isn’t he another individual, another “me” from his perspective?
Please see the depth on that question.

Let me put that in another way: Is the Pope an individual or is he part of the movie in relationship with “me,” the indisputable “individual”?

The Pope is both. He is an individual but at the same time, he is part of the movie (and thus omnipresent; for the movie of life is everything) it just depends on the perspective, the point of reference. (Me, the movie or him.) “Normal” people cannot understand that there are 2 answers which are equally valid. “Normal” people plainly take side on one answer and make a dogma out of that. They call that the “truth.”

If you are following me up to this point, dear reader; please now do the following… It takes great courage…
Now change the word “Pope” for the word “God.” 🙂

With greater consciousness, we can see that everything, even “me” is part of the “movie of life,” and the consciousness of “me” will only exist if “I” am coming from that consciousness of individuality… which is where 99% of humanity resides.

Let me give another example of experience versus theoretical “science.”
We can think all we want about love. We can write deep discussions about it. We can have opinions about love coming from “renown” individuals… latest experiments about love, latest research about it…all of that cannot make us understand what is love. We need to experience it. We need to feel it, to know love. To “Be it.”

That is the second realm of consciousness.

Consciousness and Motivation in a Spiritual Life

Lotus_Flower

Many concepts which are supposed to help our rational being to understand things so we can self transform, several times are misunderstood when they are understood without experience and merely using our intellectual abilities to grasp them.

The battle between “free will” and “predestination” is just one of them.

Spirituality is not about intellectual understanding. Having a high IQ means nothing. In spirituality, our understanding will change as our consciousness changes. Openness of consciousness means greater understanding.

In simple words, a person without much ego; will have a different understanding than a person filled with ego.

A person without much ego will be able to sense that “his individuality” is an illusion of the mind for practical purposes. Life is a relationship. The “I” is nothing without that relationship. A person without much ego, will be able to sense the Unity of all, not as another concept, not as another label such as “omnipresence,” but as an experience of life.

As ego dissolves; then having “free will” or being predestined is no longer important for those concepts do not affect the only fact of BEING, those concepts only affect BEING when there is separation, when there is this idea of “individuality,” which exists only as much ego is displayed.

Then, my “effort” becomes important. Then, to “try hard,” to labor, to achieve, to strive are all words known by those struggling in the ego battle of “becoming better.”

When ego is left aside, the above mentioned words are no longer used. Then, we achieve by not trying, we make effort; when all effort has ceased…Paradoxes.

Why?
Because there is no “I” doing things.

In that process of seeing the “I” dissolve; there is a time when “I” need to be motivated so I do not forget to “make effort.”
Motivation becomes important, because it is the way to continue on in the Spiritual quest to self-transformation.

Many who have been involved in Spirituality, have left this path only because their motivation was lost.

When we lose our motivation to continue, carelessness arrives and with that “entropy,” which means that we will be going “back” to the old ways…

BapDada calls that motivation with 2 words: Zeal and Enthusiasm.
Without those (which I refer to as motivation) we will experience “darker days and nights,” we will experience that our purpose is gone. We will search for outside sources of motivation, such as being with the Spiritual family, the center, being busy in this and that, etc. All important items as long as there is no dependency.

Nevertheless, motivation, to be true; always comes from the inside.

As our consciousness increases, our motivation will increase as well. It cannot be otherwise, for seeing the “attainments” (As BapDada calls it) is an automatic boost to continue on.

Those attainments could be named with simple words: Experiencing the inner smile of super sensuous joy (bliss,) experiencing the light of being light in life and to finish this beautiful painting, with a bright smile in our faces.

The above cannot be “obtained” by making effort. It comes automatically as a reward of maintaining that inner motivation, as the prize of experiencing a different consciousness.

Reader Remark: Omnipresence

Dear brother Yesterday I was hearing a lesson from Maduban Jewles from 4.3.12 name is Conversation: Style of Connecting to Baba no36—(results 211 of 601) after an our and twenty minutes Morni was sayin that Baba said to her that for Brahmins God is omnipresent it is very interesting how Baba is teaching us not to be rigid in our study.

Thank you for sharing that, dear soul!

Wasn’t Baba the one who said that “omnipresence is poison?” How “logical” that is? 🙂

Dear soul,
As BKs are getting trapped in words, concepts, definitions and logic; they will not have the experience of the Spiritual subtle nature of things. They cannot for their dividing minds will not allow that to happen.

That dogmatic view of defending concepts is childish but necessary in the spiritual development of some souls.

When you love God, you see God everywhere.
That is omnipresence… well sorry about that! 🙂

Thanks again!

Best wishes!

The dividing Omnipresent mind in the Ocean of life

omnipresence

In a windy night, Ananda was looking at the Ocean. He was feeling the wind, hearing the calming sounds of the Ocean…

In a moment, Ananda lost the consciousness of being part of that “movie,” where there is no difference between the seer and the object being seeing; the difference is lacking because there is no dividing thought in between.

That realization was so strong that Ananda changed his ways. He became a Guru without wanting it. It just happened.

In that realization of “union,” some have created a religion called “omnipresence.” A name was given and thus separation arrived.

Ananda’s experience became the thing to defend as the “new guru” of that religion. Followers arrived. However, without the experience of Ananda; those followers merely recited the concepts of : “We are all One,” and “God is everywhere.”

On another night, Ananda was sitting by the Ocean again. He became mesmerized by that beauty. Ananda perceived a wave, Ananda saw how many waves made up the Ocean; a continuous movement. Ananda witnessed how a wave was being formed and then disappeared just to become another wave from the same Ocean.

Ananda called those waves “souls.” Those souls made up that Drama going on in that Ocean. High tides, low tides. High waves, low waves. Duality.

Ananda described those waves appearing as 3 different parts: Beginning, Middle and End.

Ananda went back to his disciples and told them that the Ocean is made up of waves. Every single wave is a human being, a soul. Every soul has a role. That role has a beginning. A middle and End.
God is the beginning of that movement of waves, of souls.

After listening to that description, one of his most logical disciples, Bro. “Addition,” said:
“Ananda ji, you are contradicting yourself. First you mentioned that we are all One. Now you are saying that we are all waves, souls, many. That is not logical.

I followed you for many years, but now I think that you are making up a totally different religion. Seriously.
You are confusing our logical minds. Spirituality is simple and you are making it complex.”

As life is, “Bro. Subtraction,” created his own religion out of that Ananda’s latest realization. He called it a “personal God,” the “creator of waves in the Ocean of life.”

Bro. Subtraction had many followers. Those followers didn’t have the experience of Ananda, but they used the concepts of : “God is a wave. You are a different wave,” “We are all waves, but God is the Supreme wave.”

Bro. Subtraction and Bro. Addition had the most unbelievable debates, where their logical ego minds where displayed. Many were following this as it was amusing to them and at the same time gave them something to “believe in.”

Two religions were created. Religion “Add” and Religion “Subtract.” They gave the “opposite” teachings and use to refer to the perceived opposite teaching as “poison.” “Don’t dare to take that poison” was their mutual line. 🙂

Ananda went to the Ocean once again.
He understood that His perception couldn’t be put in words. His perception was merely misunderstood by those who never had the experience but were following Him because of his “wise words.”

The Ocean is there. When Ananda is not there for his consciousness is in union, there is only oneness. On the other hand, when Ananda is aware of himself there is a separation. When Ananda is aware of the movement of the Ocean of life; Ananda can see many things making up that Ocean, many waves.

A dividing mind creates conflicts, creates definitions. Creates religions and dogmatic views.
A dividing mind can only see “logic,” when there is more to it.

Brother Addition and Brother Subtraction were referring to the same thing under different perspectives, different experiences. However, in their “truth” of division; they could see only opposite views. Those brothers were attached to pictures, when the Ocean is a “movie.” Nevertheless, a movie cannot bring the full experience of feeling the wind, smelling the waters of the Ocean and seeing the sky reflected on the water.

The full experience comes when we can experience it without words, without thoughts.

Spiritual knowledge is beyond that duality and can see more than logic. It can see paradoxes. Rather than dividing; it multiplies by embracing all, by accepting all.

The experience is what is important. Ananda’s experience cannot be put into words and if they are; then they will be easily misunderstood by those without that experience.