Sam explores his ego (publicly! - open season on Sam... enjoy!)

[Chester]

Ahhh and so I must admit – I like my ego. I am ok to have an ego. I cannot know for sure but it appears to me that in 3D at least (and likely all levels within form)… all the people I have ever met or experienced (and likely all individuated expressions of "the All that Is") seem to have – an ego.

I do not see ego as “bad.” I see the ego as a naturally occurring aspect of my being that comes forth from awareness of individuation. I see that my ego might appear at times to others as well as myself to… “get out of hand.”

I am ok with this aspect of my being. Does my ego sometimes get me into trouble? Yep… Does this make me wish I could “transcend” my ego? Nope. Why? It seems to me that as long as I perceive any aspect of myself (the timeless, formless eternal one life) manifesting in an expression that not only I perceive to be different (in form) to other expressions of “the Big Me” but that others to do too (for why do folks call me Sam and not everyone Sam?) then I at all levels of “my being” as long as there is individuation and that I am aware of this illusory "separate self" then I also must deal with ego.

Now, maybe one day I get tired of lower level ego games… and emerge into an anchoring where there is seemingly less individuation and more just “the Big Me” but as of now, I am still experiencing more joy than heartache from playing a role in the grand (and hopefully eternal) yet illusory “experience (game sometimes?) of life.”

So if fear be a component that drives some of this then I know what that fear is based upon (again just speaking for myself) -

Boredom.

I did discover the other primal driving urge but that came forth via an accident and I may post about this in another post soon.

Just one thought… if this is a “free-will universe” as so many state that it is, what gives any other being the right to influence another?

Yet if all is “the timeless, formless eternal one life” and all that is within it makes up that whole (the illusory form within) then it seems impossible for one component of this illusory form not to effect the rest otherwise the whole that it is would no longer be that whole.

All lovely paradoxes which my mind loves to explore where I am at peace that I will likely never answer/ And I even ask… would I want to? My fear is that if I did, all this fun goes away!

[Aragorn]

Ahhh and so I must admit – I like my ego. I am ok to have an ego. I cannot know for sure but it appears to me that in 3D at least (and likely all levels within form)… all the people I have ever met or experienced (and likely all individuated expressions of "the All that Is") seem to have – an ego.

I do not see ego as “bad.” I see the ego as a naturally occurring aspect of my being that comes forth from awareness of individuation. I see that my ego might appear at times to others as well as myself to… “get out of hand.”

I am ok with this aspect of my being. Does my ego sometimes get me into trouble? Yep… Does this make me wish I could “transcend” my ego? Nope. Why? It seems to me that as long as I perceive any aspect of myself (the timeless, formless eternal one life) manifesting in an expression that not only I perceive to be different (in form) to other expressions of “the Big Me” but that others to do too (for why do folks call me Sam and not everyone Sam?) then I at all levels of “my being” as long as there is individuation and that I am aware of this illusory "separate self" then I also must deal with ego.

Now, maybe one day I get tired of lower level ego games… and emerge into an anchoring where there is seemingly less individuation and more just “the Big Me” but as of now, I am still experiencing more joy than heartache from playing a role in the grand (and hopefully eternal) yet illusory “experience (game sometimes?) of life.”

So if fear be a component that drives some of this then I know what that fear is based upon (again just speaking for myself) -

Boredom.

I did discover the other primal driving urge but that came forth via an accident and I may post about this in another post soon.

I agree with most (if not all) of what you say here-above, Sam. I too do not consider ego to be something bad, something which needs to be transcended. However, I do think that too many people are placing (the stroking of) their own ego first, and that this is what has seeded the idea among the members of the alternative community that ego in and of itself would be a bad thing which must be transcended.

But yes, you are Sam, and that is what gives meaning to your Experience Of Being™. You are an expression of The One Primary Consciousness™, and as such, you represent a particular and unique vantage — or viewing angle, if you will — on the concept of existence, so that The One Primary Consciousness™ can come to fully understand every aspect of its being. That's what Creation is all about.


Just one thought… if this is a “free-will universe” as so many state that it is, what gives any other being the right to influence another?

That's a complicated issue, my friend. Consciousness is best described as "the ability to exchange information with something else", and this exchange can be conscious, subconscious or even unconscious. By observing something — whether voluntarily or involuntarily — you are already being influenced by it, as that information enters your awareness, where it may then agree, disagree or remain neutral on account of the information that was already in your possession earlier. If the new information remains inert, then you will simply store it — or at least, for now, until even newer information is added which may trigger some kind of reaction — but if on the other hand it either harmonizes or creates dissonance with the information you already possess, then this will inevitably lead to contemplation. (Well, in a normal person, that is, but I see a lot of people who don't even seem capable of thinking anymore these days, and who seem to just live their lives on autopilot — everything goes right over their heads, because they appear to have been born with blinkers on.)

There is of course a huge difference between being passively influenced and being actively influenced on the one hand, and on the other hand also between the intentions of those who do actively try influencing someone. But then we endeavor into the field of ethics. And ethics are themselves a very convoluted subject. At the level of The One Primary Consciousness™ — i.e. Source — there are no ethics, because everything only serves so as to create an understanding, and the end justifies the means. But from the moment that you "drop down" to one level below that, and into the realm of individuation, there are many different types, and many different levels, of ethics.

There are so-called "universal ethics", which will apply everywhere, and which relate to a general understanding of "what is good" versus "what is evil". Then there are also cultural ethics — galactic, planetary, nation, language group, circle of friends, and even one's own family. And of course, then there are also personal ethics, which are formed by all of those levels blending in with one another, in combination with the nature of your soul — that which your gut feeling tells you would be "right" or "wrong". It stands to reason that — for want of a better description — a psychopathic soul does not have the same kind of ethics as an empathic soul would. (For that matter, I do not believe that evil would merely be "the absence of good", out of some lack of understanding. It is my personal experience that true evil does very well understand, but that it simply doesn't care, because of the way it has been polarized.)

Now, on account of influence, let's look at a teacher, as an example. A teacher conveys his knowledge onto his students, so that they too would come to understand the subject he speaks of. This is an active influence, but it is benevolent, as it is intended to spread the knowledge in order to facilitate benign applications thereof for the betterment of society as a whole, and for the betterment of the individual recipients of said knowledge. Or look at this exchange here. You are posting this because you want to hear other people's opinions and exchange ideas with them, and I'm responding to your message with my own thoughts on the matter. As such, we are already influencing each other, but also in a benevolent way. And that is quite a different thing from indoctrination, which is a forceful — and in the case of the advertising industry, often even subliminal — influence.

Furthermore, Free Will is never absolute. It has lots of nuances, depending on the situation and even the plane of existence. Free Will is also tied in with responsibility, and thus with karma. And yes, there are those who will abuse the concept of Free Will in order to impose their own will upon others, again, from subliminal advertising over indoctrination and conditioning, all the way up to the greatest violence and tyranny. That is the flip side of the coin of Free Will: it opens up the door to abuse.

But then again, from the perspective of The One Primary Consciousness™, all is allowed, as everything only exists in order to help it understand its infinite self. To Source, this is all just a game. Just like somebody writing a novel which features the most gruesome of crimes, committed by the most atrocious of individuals. In the end, it's only text on paper (or a computer screen), and nobody really got hurt.

(Not that I would be callous, because I myself definitely am polarized on account of fighting evil and letting the good prevail, but I have to acknowledge that at the grandest scale, that's how it works.)

Well, you've now posted this thread, because you were seeking to influence (by sharing your thoughs) and to be influenced (by soliciting an exchange). So, have I influenced you already? :p

[Dreamtimer]

I was recently asked to manipulate someone 'for good will'. Nice excuse. But I don't believe in that. In this case, if they can't get what they want through honest partnership & communication, there's a problem. I don't believe in manipulating in relationships.

Some people don't know how to do anything else.

We influence people when we don't want to and in ways we don't understand. The best we can do is try to be careful, aware, & as honest as possible. IMO.

[Chester]

Well, you've now posted this thread, because you were seeking to influence (by sharing your thoughs) and to be influenced (by soliciting an exchange). So, have I influenced you already? :p

So much to respond to but I will pick out only two things that have been stimulated by your closing sentence.

1.) Some folks I know once thought you were AI, Aragorn. I did not and I held that position firmly. The primary reason they had this opinion was your absolutely perfect English, grammar and spelling... well, I am glad to point out you made a human mistake and that is (I believe) that you meant to write thoughts not "thoughs." Hopefully the targets of what I am pointing out will "observe this post."

2.) Yes, I seek to influence though I doubt the all in the vast sea of humanity (and beyond) will observe my blabberings.

[bsbray]

1.) Some folks I know once thought you were AI, Aragorn. I did not and I held that position firmly. The primary reason they had this opinion was your absolutely perfect English, grammar and spelling...

By that reasoning a lot of people in the world could be AI.

:fpalm:

[Chester]

I always hold Aragorn in my heart for the time he slapped me to my senses when I really needed it. I doubt AI would do that.

[Aragorn]

So much to respond to but I will pick out only two things that have been stimulated by your closing sentence.

1.) Some folks I know once thought you were AI, Aragorn.

Now that is hilarious! :ha: :hilarious:


I did not and I held that position firmly. The primary reason they had this opinion was your absolutely perfect English, grammar and spelling... well, I am glad to point out you made a human mistake and that is (I believe) that you meant to write thoughts not "thoughs." Hopefully the targets of what I am pointing out will "observe this post."

Yes, that was a typo that I missed, in spite of my very meticulous editing and the fact that my spell checker does mark it as incorrect — it does that in the quotes from your post here-above as well — by putting a red squiggly line underneath the word. ;)

As for my eloquence, that probably ties in with my autism, and the fact that I already started teaching myself English from the age of 6 or 7 onward — my native tongue is actually (a Flemish regional dialect of) Dutch, but I've always liked English so much that I actually think in English. I also speak French, German, Afrikaans, and a few words in Spanish and Italian. And as has recently been demonstrated in the mod room — as you may know, Elen, one of our new mods, is of Norwegian origin — I can understand about half of a Norwegian text on the screen of my computer due to the similarities between Norwegian and Dutch, German and English. I doubt however whether I would be able to understand it when it is spoken phonetically, and I myself can't speak it either.

Lastly, I am very meticulous when I write, and I have OCD. So I read and re-read my posts very carefully in order to weed out any grammatical and spelling errors before I hit "Submit Reply", and especially so since I am also — surprise, surprise — mildly dyslexic. But as you noted, even my OCD-afflicted self occasionally drops the ball. And just because you noticed it and brought it up in my defense against the allegation that I would be an A.I., I will resist my OCD to go back to my original post and correct the typo. Damn, I hate that. :p


2.) Yes, I seek to influence though I doubt the all in the vast sea of humanity (and beyond) will observe my blabberings.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to share information and wanting to teach. ;)





By that reasoning a lot of people in the world could be AI.

:fpalm:

Yes, but less and less so these days. My brother is far less of a perfectionist than I am, but he spends a lot of time on Facebook, and he has noticed it too. And it's not all down to dyslexia. It's in part also due to the ever-dropping quality standards in the education system on the one hand, and due to a general increase in apathy among the younger generations on the other hand.





I always hold Aragorn in my heart for the time he slapped me to my senses when I really needed it. I doubt AI would do that.

I only did what needed to be done, Sam, and as your friend, I am honored and happy to have been of help, how little ever, in your spiritual growth. ;)

[scibuster]

Only one ego ?

No, you will have a minimum of 7 egos.
one and each for:
1. for your family
2. for your job
3. for writing into the/this forum
4. for your friends
6. for your enemies
7. when you make excursion into the exile


Wir sind viele kleine egos.
I'm only real then when I am.

[Dreamtimer]

Seven egos. I wonder, which is the lucky one?

What if you had seven Ids? Many souls in one....

Aragorn, I value your attention to detail. And I wish you relief and healing from your pains.

[donk]

Just one thought… if this is a “free-will universe” as so many state that it is, what gives any other being the right to influence another?

That depends on if you believe there is a shared reality that we can agree upon, that we experience in a way that others can relate to, if we are honest enough about it.

"Ego" is not a problem in itself. It's lying to ourselves that is a "problem". Egos tend to find ways to project that, so lies to ourselves become lies to others. That's what needs to be transcended/corrected.

It seems that reality has been manipulated, by being(s) (egos?) with more awareness/understanding than most of us, which causes confusion...emotional attachments to beliefs make it difficult to what should be the most important (if not easiest) thing we can do: find and share and agree upon as much "truth" as we can.

The idea of "rights" as you mention is one of the fundamental ones we should be thinking about. Free-will negates "rights", the whole idea of being entitled to some "universal laws" or whatever is the biggest lie we (free-will believers) could possibly tell ourselves. It would be helpful if we described the concept more honestly: call them "ideals".

[Chester]

Only one ego ?

No, you will have a minimum of 7 egos.
one and each for:
1. for your family
2. for your job
3. for writing into the/this forum
4. for your friends
6. for your enemies
7. when you make excursion into the exile


Wir sind viele kleine egos.
I'm only real then when I am.

I have traveled the journey of the mystic and discovered "who I am." Strangely though I dive back into samsara. I think i do this because I am bored and, well... knowing now who I am, there is an underlying fearlessness.

What I specualte about is this seemless line between the dreamer and... "me" - an individuated expression of "the Big Me." I wonder how many discrenable and possibly definable layers could be identified between the two. Are there any?

Well... if "I am" (this dream) simply the imagination of myself (the Big Me - the dreamer) then even the layers between are also all illusions.

Here's what I am attempting to set up.

If at some level of my imaginary soul I "connect" with another "imaginary being" in some way... perhaps at this level of the waking state (the gross level of being) I might encounter a gross realm manifestation of that other "being." And that being might smite me where, at this gross level of thinking/being, I might perceive that other being to be an evil one and that I am a victim of this evil being's doing never consciously realizing that at some other level of my being, we have agreed to play these two roles "down here."

And each individual being is likely on their own track. One being's track may have that being anchored (gross real experience) in a completely different "density" or "dimension" where I "down here" cannot perceive them with my 5 senses. The other being may be at levels where that other being can perceive the aspect of me that is anchored here in 3D 5sense linear time. And this being at his level of anchoring may perceive he could be helpful to me or may desire to use me (without regard for me) in ways that satisfy him.

All my blabbering above simply brings me back to my current ultimate truth... that all these illusions at all imagined levels of being are fluid and temporal. To get so caught up in them (as I love to do) seems to lead nowhere but certainly does eat up what illusory time I (this one life) might have...

I can only hope for individuation beyond the death of the illusory physical body. I live that this hope is true knowing I can only make it an assumption.

And above that higher level of being where we may have made agreements with other beings is where we melt back into "The One."

all I just posted is nothing but exploration, speculation and a few opinions....

[donk]

And that being might smite me where, at this gross level of thinking/being, I might perceive that other being to be an evil one and that I am a victim of this evil being's doing never consciously realizing that at some other level of my being, we have agreed to play these two roles "down here."


Doesn't free-will negate the idea of idea of "evil"...in the general sense?

Evil (as I understand it) is a free-will being choosing to knowingly harm you. If that being makes that free-will decision, is that choice not "good" (or at least not evil) to it? Else why would he/she/it make it?

[Dreamtimer]

I'm still contemplating what you said about fear being based in boredom. I'm having a hard time seeing that. People can get stuck in a rut in work or relationships. Life is always offering up something challenging and interesting.

What does boredom mean? You have nothing to do? Nothing that you want to do? Can't do what you want? Is it lack of satisfaction? Having to spend time doing something you don't want?

Is it the ego not getting enough attention?

[donk]

Furthermore, Free Will is never absolute. It has lots of nuances, depending on the situation and even the plane of existence. Free Will is also tied in with responsibility, and thus with karma.

Are you SURE about this??

I'm kind of leaning toward it IS absolute. To me: IF it exists, it means that you (however you define that) is able to choose, that's it, easy peasy..."absolute". The rest of what you are talking about seems to me to be ethics and other stuff you described right above it...

[Chester]

Doesn't free-will negate the idea of idea of "evil"...in the general sense?

Evil (as I understand it) is a free-will being choosing to knowingly harm you. If that being makes that free-will decision, is that choice not "good" (or at least not evil) to it? Else why would he/she/it make it?

as to the first sentence, I see that as a good point.

as to the second, I wonder if what is "good" or "evil" is all and only always an individual's or a group's subjective opinion?

I am at that lovely "I give up" stage.

Let's see how long this lasts until I get bored again and fluck things all up.

[Chester]

I'm still contemplating what you said about fear being based in boredom. I'm having a hard time seeing that. People can get stuck in a rut in work or relationships. Life is always offering up something challenging and interesting.

What does boredom mean? You have nothing to do? Nothing that you want to do? Can't do what you want? Is it lack of satisfaction? Having to spend time doing something you don't want?

Is it the ego not getting enough attention?

I can only speak for myself. I identified my lack of satisfaction with "what is" in what I see (from my deepest self as all and only illusion) to be. That all implies that at a particular moment in (illusory) time, "I" (the egoic self) was uncomforable with the isness of all I perceived to be at that specific moment. My reaction to that was to "do something" I believed would change things.

If I were in that "still place" and yet somehow got bored with the peace of it all, I certainly would not feel the loving thing to do would be to change that absolutely perfect peace. In my simplistic dichotomy of love or fear, I was only left with fear.

Note - today I am in this strange peaceful place. The last time I felt like this, it lasted 3 months. I then flucked it all up. My conclusion is that I feared the quiet, the stillness, the absolute.

I see this as the basis for my creation of all these illusory realms of form though I admit, I can only perceive this once I have found myself entrapped in form.

If there be any psy-op, I psy-oped myself.

[donk]

as to the second, I wonder if what is "good" or "evil" is all and only always an individual's or a group's subjective opinion?


I believe they are both are relative.

[Aragorn]

Seven egos. I wonder, which is the lucky one?

What if you had seven Ids? Many souls in one....

The voices in my head are having an argue with my imaginary friends and I can't get a word in between! :p (I read that on Facebook once. ;))


Aragorn, I value your attention to detail. And I wish you relief and healing from your pains.

Thank you, my friend. I too wish the tide would turn... <sigh>






Furthermore, Free Will is never absolute. It has lots of nuances, depending on the situation and even the plane of existence. Free Will is also tied in with responsibility, and thus with karma.

Are you SURE about this??

I'm kind of leaning toward it IS absolute. To me: IF it exists, it means that you (however you define that) is able to choose, that's it, easy peasy..."absolute". The rest of what you are talking about seems to me to be ethics and other stuff you described right above it...

What I was trying to convey is that Free Will is for most part only an illusion. By not having all the information — at least, when talking of this very plane of existence — you are forced to make choices and decisions, and as such, you bear the responsibility for those choices and decisions. (I'm not going to get into the extent to which you bear said responsibility, because sometimes the circumstances force you to make a certain decision that you would otherwise never have made. But that topic takes us into the field of ethics again, and, connected to it, the subject of karma.) However, at the grander scale, the outcome of your decision at the crossroads is already known, and was destined to happen.

And if you believe in the Many-Worlds Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation), then every possible choice or decision you could ever have made at any particular junction in your existence has already come true in some parallel universe. (I do believe that alternate universes exist, but I do not necessarily believe that they would be parallel universes. Just because at the quantum level, a certain potential exists, doesn't mean that it actually has to manifest. This is analogous to the vantage that Source is All That Is, And All That Is Not.)

[donk]

The voices in my head are having an argue with my imaginary friends and I can't get a word in between! :p (I read that on Facebook once. ;))



Thank you, my friend. I too wish the tide would turn... <sigh>






What I was trying to convey is that Free Will is for most part only an illusion. By not having all the information — at least, when talking of this very plane of existence — you are forced to make choices and decisions, and as such, you bear the responsibility for those choices and decisions. (I'm not going to get into the extent to which you bear said responsibility, because sometimes the circumstances force you to make a certain decision that you would otherwise never have made. But that topic takes us into the field of ethics again, and, connected to it, the subject of karma.) However, at the grander scale, the outcome of your decision at the crossroads is already known, and was destined to happen.

And if you believe in the Many-Worlds Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation), then every possible choice or decision you could ever have made at any particular junction in your existence has already come true in some parallel universe. (I do believe that alternate universes exist, but I do not necessarily believe that they would be parallel universes. Just because at the quantum level, a certain potential exists, doesn't mean that it actually has to manifest. This is analogous to the vantage that Source is All That Is, And All That Is Not.)

I STILL think you're AI :watch: .............. :hilarious:

[Aragorn]

I STILL think you're AI :watch: .............. :hilarious:

http://previews.123rf.com/images/clairev/clairev1104/clairev110400004/9353091-Cartoon-angry-laptop-vector-illustration--Stock-Vector-computer.jpg

:ha: :ttr: