Written by Mathew Naismith
I thought I would share another private exchange I had with another bloke, with his permission of course, concerning oneness being the big “I”, this of course means we are little”I’s” of the big “I”. We also relate the big ‘”I “to being consciousness itself or pure consciousness as well. It’s quite an interesting exchange which brings more to light to what my last post titled Spirituality-What’s What was about.
You might also like to visit James’s blog as well as it does put a slightly different emphasis on what I’m about mainly because I’m a little less educated than James obviously.
Oneness being an “I” & as soon as we are aware of ourselves is expressional of the ego is just a thought I had however if you would like to fill me in more I would be so pleased to hear from you.
Nice to hear from you. It’s sundown on the California coast here and I’m about to unplug from the net for the day. I’ll share some thoughts on your interesting Noetic post soon and you can let me know your thoughts.
Here are a few thoughts which I’ve laid along side yours.
“In our individual human form we make many references to the ego “I”, what is oneness, is it not also an individual therefore of the ego “I” ?
I’m thinking it would be a Transcendent I, that qualifier lifting it above the mundane sense of identity…
“It was said to me, “any reference to just being an “I” is of the ego…”
…so I am an ego is not equal to I am the Transcendent I.
“… there is only one oneness which would have to be an “I” so this is inferring that oneness is also of the ego.”
Some esoteric literature distinguishes these by capitalization, i.e. by using “self” and “Self” and by using “ego” and “Ego.” In the ageless wisdom, then, all little egos or I’s or selves are relatively illusory extensions of the great Self or Identity which is Unity. Our sense of I or identity is derived from, borrowed so to speak, from the One Identity, and is a reflected or vastly stepped down version of the spiritual Self. “As above, so below” (but the below is the distant and limited echo of the “above.”)
“So many people these days make reference to either feeling at one or being at one (oneness), seen as we only have one oneness this oneness must be an “I” which is saying these people are being egotistical is it not or is it”
My point above is to suggest that it would be a mistake to equate the Transcendent Self with the little ego by using a single term for both, and most especially since a term like “egotistical” carries the wrong baggage.
“I think the ego goes beyond human perception; would it be, as soon as we are aware of ourselves being at one or not we are of the ego? The very act of awareness seems to relate to the ego”
I think it would be more correct to say that moving toward higher awareness leads to the transcendence of ego and the discovery that we are not the limited, isolated and embodied self we thought, but vastly more than that.
“…but I was a vastness somehow, that in no way contradicted or conflicted with my limited individuality… I was both my individual self and in some greater way,
‘I’ was also everything.” The Sound of Light, Irina Starr
This is well explained & quite legible James, thank you.
All I am doing is going by my own experiences. The big “I” isn’t of egotism but it still of the ego as soon as the big “I” became aware of itself I feel. As soon as it became aware of itself smaller “I’s” appeared so that the big “I” could experience itself in-depth.
I do have the understanding that the Big ”I” isn’t of time so everything has always existed including the ego & egotism however this doesn’t mean we have always physically existed because we are of time which has a start & end point but everything we are experiencing has always existed in pure conscious form. Egotism & everything else we are experiencing has always existed otherwise it wouldn’t exist for us to express I believe but the big ”I” didn’t know of this until it expressed itself through us. I believe it didn’t know of its own existence until time was used to help it become aware of itself even though it always existed. I’m not saying here that the Big “I” as opposed to us little ‘I’s” is egotistical it’s just nothing can exist without it having always existed, egotism has always existed within the depth of the big ”I” as has everything.
It’s a strange concept but when I go into certain conscious states I feel what I have explained here is true however I am aware that the human psyche can play tricks on us.
but everything we are experiencing has always existed in pure conscious form.
That rings right.
Egotism & everything else we are experiencing has always existed otherwise it wouldn’t exist for us to express
I’m thinking the “everything,” including “egotism,” “existed in pure conscious form” (or formlessness), but that this archetype or essence or existing potentiality was just that, and as such, was not actually the “formal” egotism we experience. Spirit or divinity lives in timelessness and is absolute. Forms arise in time and are relative.
I also think that things like egotism or selfishness, in the absolute sense, serve a divine purpose, are part of freedom, and are a natural part of the divine play. Yet, in the relativistic sense, they become–as we cling to them–wrong, bad, evil, or whatever word we like. It is the evolutionary, the relative, out of which good and evil, right and wrong arise. For a primitive man, who has little sense of ego, of identity, egotism is good and his divinely ordained future. For most of us however, no so much.
Excellent stuff indeed. I was also thinking that the ego isn’t what we would perceive the ego to be in pure consciousness, the ego has no form or meaning as pure consciousness, nothing does. Time therefore beings are what give it form & meaning which of course a lot of people couldn’t possibly comprehend because of set ideologies sadly enough. I feel the ego is given form using time which of course also has always existed. Time doesn’t separate, as we would presume, but identifies portions of consciousness & creates them in individual form thus giving ego form & meaning & of course this also goes with all human traits/emotions even love which is also of the ego. The funny thing is we are pure conscious no matter what portion of consciousness we are playing out.
Yes, it’s all has a divine purpose within the game we play however being beings with attachments we turn these traits into something sinister or encouraging & the more extreme the attachments are the more sinister or encouraging these traits are going to be I believe. No extremism in my mind is a good thing. The writings on the wall but very few people can see it.
You inspired me to write a post for my blog earlier on today which didn’t go down well at all when I posted it unlike my previous post which I thought was in line with what I wrote today, it just went a little further. It does however debunk a lot of ideologies & views out there at present within the spiritual community.
If you are interested here is the link to the said post: http://spiritualityscience.aussieblogs.com.au/2013/11/13/spirituality-whats-what/
All my blessings,
If you are interested here is the link to the said post:
I read the post in your link. Below are some pieces on my blog where I address many of the same issues that you were grapping with in your post.
Haha, we do write about the same thing but in a slightly different way, I’m not as educated obviously so I will explain what you have written here in a simpler manner. I couldn’t agree more in what you have written here, good one indeed, great blog period.
Do you mind James if I blog what we have discussed in our emails to each other, I love to share as it just might get the subconscious motivated in the people who read this stuff. We are indeed about acceptance & concord with our environment it would seem however to get people thinking outside the square one must step on some toes to get them thinking about their discord & non-acceptance as it does affect us all.
Av a good one,
Sure, feel free to share our exchanges…
We are indeed about acceptance & concord
with our environment it would seem however to get people thinking outside
the square one must step on some toes to get them thinking about their
discord & non-acceptance as it does affect us all.
R. W. Emerson agrees with you:
“People wish to be settled; only as far as they are unsettled is there any hope for them.”