Jeff

Yes, exactly. Fits perfectly with the Parabrahman definition. Just not with many other tradtitions.

“I am” is the vestige of the conscious aspects (local) of mind. Beyond that is the subconscious aspect that feels “non-dual” (as described) as one has not yet expanded to make it conscious. It is the same as with Nirvikalpa samadhi. The limit “moves” relative to clarity/energy. With your definition, one person’s non-duality, is another person’s personal bathtub.

I think you raise some excellent points. One without a second = Parabrahman, but does not equal zero. Similarly, the One emerges from the Dao, it does not equal the Dao. I am not saying a particular view is better, just saying they are different.

What is fact? If one is simply “all”, there is no such identification with objects as you are describing. Everything is just a subset, so all such identification breaks down. Or, if you prefer, you can play your same logic game with “I am nothing”, shut down, and get to your same non-dual concept. Also, given your above comment, I think there may be some confusion on what I tend to call “light level” or “non-local”, it is not at all the same as what I would call emptiness as described in the heart sutra.

This is where I would have to disagree. “I am” is more like a step. I am is not “being” or “residing”. I Am is of the mind. To truly be, one must also realize “I am not”. This is why the Heart Sutra, has emptiness definitions of Form = Emptiness and Emptiness = Form.

I don’t see how you make that logic jump to “I am” being stillness/awareness? One can meet all of the criteria that you have defined and still just be in (local) mind.

Thank you both for an extremely impressive back and forth discussion the point. It is one of the best intellectual discussions I have seen on the bums in a long time. Hopefully, adding a little to conversation, I would like to say that I do not see the logic to your opening point Dwai regarding how fast can you say that you are something. One could simply say “I am all”, then being all, everything is a subset of you, and hence no subject or object separation any more. Also, with that, one meets S1va’s point of being “One without a second”. Hence, under your criteria, “non dual”. The challenge is that the definition of “all” may only be a subset of some larger “all”, that was beyond the one’s perception (and hence unknown). One turns out to have only been “nondual” in their own bathtub, rather than the ocean itself.

I think that the bible helps with the understanding of this one... 1 Corinthians 15:42-49 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man. Any thoughts?

Ok. Classical Buddhism is wrong about mind streams all being separate with no overlap.

I think the Tao Te Ching is very clear on the problem with get caught up in desires and pretty much completely agrees with Buddhism on the point... Chapter One The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth. The named is the mother of ten thousand things. Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. These two spring from the same source but differ in name; This appears as darkness. Darkness within darkness. The gate to all mystery. I guess the question if one wants to see the mystery, or instead be caught up with the manifestations of those desires...

Sending love to others sounds like a good practice, but hard to realize oneness when there are others to send stuff to. The words that I posted may sound esoteric because the true meanings have mostly been lost, but actually they are also very practical to apply. Here are a few excellent verses giving details, and I will add my translation for fun... John 5:53-58 53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. 53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. The flesh is energy, blood is Spirit/clarity. Unless you find a realized teacher and share presence with him/her, you are unlikely to find the light. 54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. Connect into me and access the light and you have the basis that you need. 55For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. For I/Jesus provides a human level channel to the light. 56He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. When connected with an open heart (and trust like a child), oneness is established. 57As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. And since I reside in the light, though oneness with me, you have access to the light. 58This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. And this light is not the old food (or teachings) from the Old Testament, but the truth that will lead you to your inherent heavenly body.

Jesus taught many better ways than daily suffering, the challenge is that his teachings have been lost in the institutional church framework. Touching on the method here... And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full. This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. (1 John 1:4-7 KJV) If one connects into the “light”, one has “fellowship” (joint energetic connections) that “cleanseth us from all sin” (clears out all of the issues and fears). Basically, oneness in Christ is like a joint purification network/loop when one resides in the light.

In the descriptions, Jesus more talking about the realization that one is suffering, and more importantly the letting go of the issues and fears that drive the perception of suffering. The “glorified” is the clearing process to find the “heavenly body” that is within us all. 1 Corinthians 15:42-49 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lordfrom heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bearthe image of the heavenly Man. The suffering is part of that earthly dust. Clear away the crap (issues and fear) and see the heavenly within...

Sorry, no.

No neophyte ignorance at all. You can feel that your heart is open and currently transmitting, so the divine is definitely accessible to you. While I am sure that you can feel your own local body energy movement, your next step is beginning to connect more broadly with others and your environment. In Taoist terms, you have filled the middle and it is now time to open the upper dantien. You could also describe it as starting to move on to shen, from your current chi. Pick your teacher wisely, as many talk about it, but few truly have refined it. Maybe read chapter 28 from the Tao Te Ching and invert it a little. As you know the heart of a woman, but need to learn the strength of a man (balancing energy flows), before you can touch the stream of the universe (beginning divine). In Buddhist terms, you may want to consider some father tantras. Also, I apologize in advance if I have been rude with saying too much with my comments.

What about them? Also, how does something like “Deity Concepts Among the Semites” from your book link relate to my post/comment?

While institutions may describe differently, Jesus is actually very clear on the point... Luke 17: 20-21 20 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”

Your heart was more broadly opening and you felt the flow streaming down into and thru your crown. In christain terms, you would say the power of the Holy Spirit descending. Spots or rashes are common signs of body purification with the increased energy flows (happened to me too). Can explain the next stages (mystical Christian path) too, if you are ever interested.

Maybe there is no difference. Guess it depends on your definition of I Am. My point is simply that what Moses describes is not the same as what Jesus describes. Jesus brings new wine that does not fit in that old wine skin.

Thanks for sharing. My background is similar in many ways. Grew up active in the Protestant (Lutheran) Church. In my case, it was that I started feeling vibrations in my head. Those vibrations were accompanied with a great sense of “peace”. Soon found that I could move those vibrations all over my body. Since that didn’t fit with the mainstream Christian view, I started diving deep into my self and exploring. Things sort of expanded from there.

My guess is that you are referring to Jesus’s words in John 8. If so, you will find the same Greek words used in the following chapter of John 9. “The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.” ‭‭John‬ ‭9:8-9 The Greek words are not the one for God. The translation of “I am” is that Jesus is talking about himself as the person being identified. Now if we look at your actual quote in context... ”Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” ‭‭John‬ ‭8:53-58‬ ‭KJV You can see in context Jesus’s statement is in response to being questioned about how it was possible that Abraham could have rejoiced about Jesus coming (to see my day) and being glad. Jesus is saying that he is “beyond time” and also sort of proclaiming that his realization is higher than Abraham, and hence higher than the father of Jews (and the Jeswish tradition). That is why they go on to want to stone Jesus in the next verse.

The psalms are not part of the gospels. It is again the Old Testament. So I assume you do not know of any place where Jesus teaches the I am concept that you described or it is described anywhere in the gospels? Also, the original Greek versions of the gospels are still available.

It is taught or described differently in each system, but access of true divine beings is well beyond what many call 3rd eye (or astral) stuff. Hence, one would already be familar with visions, energy and things like that. A divine being will be felt (or sort of stream in) at the crown. Additionally, it is not just an energy feeling (or seeing stuff), it will be combined with powerful mental clarity (or quieting of the mind). For those familar with more astral like experiences, the difference is very noticeable.

Where does Jesus say anything like the name of God is I Am in the gospels?

A mantra or password is a concept or mapping in local mind. A true deity is not something that can be translated into words. This is why they say the Dao that can be named is not the Dao. Additionally, in most of the traditions you described (Christianity, Islam, etc...) they specifically say that one cannot name God. For a deity and mantra to be one, that deity would have to be a (local) mind conception. One can call spirit beings with a “phone number”, but must surrender (or open) to a deity, and the deity may come (or not).