What EXACTLY is relationship between I and That?

[goody]

Hello everybody, I am new to this forum. I joined the forum because I have lots of questions that keep bogging me down on the path. My biggest question is:

What EXACTLY is the relationship between I and That?

If you say "I am part of That" i totally agree; if you say "I am exactly 100% That", I am so confused.

I really feel that the idea(or fact?) of "selfhood is an illusion" is hard to swallow, since illusion must be gone like a broken bubble after you are awakened. After that, what are you? The Oneness itself, or nothing? Is the enlightenment of individuals necessarily the intention or purpose of That?

I am a big fan of Eckhart Tolle, when I saw his words "You are here to enable the divine purpose of the universe to unfold. That is how important you are!", my heart felt warmed so much. But again, the same question remains: If I find I am an illusion how can an illusion serve the purpose of universe?

[jeff]

Hi! I'm fairly new to the forum (at least I haven't posted on it much). I don't know if it helps from a standpoint of an intuitive feeling (which is all I have) but it seems there isn't a difference between I and That (no seperation between them). From observing this the issue that arises is "where does the I stop and the That start?" The ego/self/whatever is the illusion that creates another illusion (seperation). So, to say you're part of the whole is to say how the universe is experiencing things through the ego structure called "you". To say you are 100% That is what Tolle and other teachers seem to point at.

As to the purpose or intention of THAT, it is an interesting question but my instinct and experience seems to point to there not being even a question of intent, purpose or meaning. Not to be confused with nihilism, it's just that the question of meaning or purpose never comes into play. Those are ideas and values assigned by thought.

"How can an illusion serve the purpose of the universe?" I don't see that the universe has purpose in this way and it's hard to imagine it having purpose in any way. If there is an answer to the purpose of the universe it remains a secret to me. It seems to me it is uncaused and directionless (directionless isn't exactly the word I'm looking for in the sense that there is somewhere for it to go, maybe volition is closer).

Jeff

[goody]

Jeff: thanks for your reply. I also have the same feeling these spiritual teachers point to that we are 100% That. I read Tolle's Power of Now many times, he mentioned in his book "That presence is essentially you and at the same time inconceivably greater than you.", which seems to imply that I am not 100% That. What a big puzzle!

There are too many flavors in religions regarding this topic, one of sayings in Buddhism is that all Buddhas(enlightened Ones) share one divine body(also called embodiment of Truth and Law, true body...), so I think this divine body is "That", the little self(ego) as most people have in this world is an illusion, I totally agree with that, but I think the enlightened Ones should have some selfhood(which is not ego of cause). Am I wrong on this? My question seems a very fundamental one, it should have a very clear answer...

[zendancer]

Goody: Temporarily imagine it this way. You are a drop of ocean spray flung into the air. As such, you appear to be something separate until you fall back into the ocean. Upon re-joining the ocean you realize that you are totally one-with the ocean, and have always been one-with the ocean, but you are not ALL of the ocean.

The truth is even simpler than this visualization. You are like a drop of water in an ocean that never got flung into the air. It is only your imagination that makes you THINK you are something separate from the action. If your thinking stopped, all of your questions would stop, and all of your ideas of being separate would come to an end. What would it be like to see the world without imagining anything? It can't be imagined. The only way to know is to stop imagining and see the truth directly. To understand you will have to come out of the mind. This is what the Bible is pointing to in Psalms 46:10 when it says, "Be still and know that I am God."

Look at the body. Who you THINK you are isn't pumping blood, growing hair, shedding skin, or moving muscles. The body is being animated by who you REALLY are. The body is coextensive with the entire universe because there are no boundaries. All boundaries are imaginary. Your real body is the entire universe, and if imagination stops, this fact will become viscerally obvious.

All of your questions have very clear answers, but the answers cannot be attained by the mind--by thinking. There are two kinds of questions, questions concerning consensual reality and questions concerning absolute reality--the real. If someone walks up to you and asks, "What's going on?" you might reply, "Well, after work I'm going to a party at John's house," or something like that. If, however, someone asked you, "What's going on, REALLY?" this is a totally different type of question, and it cannot be answered in the conventional way.

To answer the questions you have you must stop and be still. Stop thinking and contemplate what you want to know. Look at the world in silence. If reflective thoughts appear (and they will), ignore them and return to looking. What's going on, REALLY? You already know, but thoughts are temporarily obscuring that deep direct body knowledge. The truth is prior to thought. Take care.

[ashtavakra]

ZD.... very well explained.... !!!

[unveilable]

Beautiful ZD!

[goody]

ZD: Wow! I feel Zen is really dancing in your words! I believe mind cannot find Truth but can be convinced by Truth, and I am partially convinced. I have been thinking about Tozan's koan (I guess you will like it!), which is related to my question, I quote the story here:

"Once, following a dialogue with his teacher, Ungan, Tozan was still harboring some doubt in his mind when, crossing a stream, he saw his image reflected in the water and experienced a great awakening. He then composed this verse:

Earnestly avoid seeking without,

Lest it recede far from you.

Today I am walking alone,

Yet everywhere I meet him.

He is now no other than myself,

But I am not now him.

It must be understood in this way

In order to merge with Suchness."

My understanding is that image in the water is I, the stream is I, the earth is I, even the universe is I... But I am not any one of manifested things(image, water, stream...). When I read Maharajia's words "I appear to depend on everything, but in fact all depends on me", "For to be, I don't need the world, the world needs me", I just couldn't help laughing when Tozan' verse popped up in my mind at the same time.

Unfortunately I know it is all mind's work in me, some doubts are always there. One of them is: since everybody is That, but I still cannot see why "I am you", "you are me", is it just another way of saying "we are all That"? How are we actually related in deepest level?

ZD, could you help me on this one?

[zendancer]

Sure. Check your email on the website. ZD

[enigma]

"Unfortunately I know it is all mind's work in me, some doubts are always there. One of them is: since everybody is That, but I still cannot see why "I am you", "you are me", is it just another way of saying "we are all That"? How are we actually related in deepest level?"

One perspective: It's not actually useful to try to see how one individual is somehow another individual because one has already begun questioning from beneath a couple of layers of illusion. It begins from a place where there is a 'you' and a 'me' and tries to see them as one, and they can't be superglued together because they were never pulled apart to begin with. From that perspective, we would have to say one individual is not another individual and never will be.

What is looking through your eyes is already one. This wholeness imagines it is a part and seeks to know how that part is the same as another part that it perceives outside of itself. The parts are all appearances happening to wholeness. The appearances are illusions being experienced by you, and you are wholeness. Hencely, no parts have to be superglued together.

[michaelsees]

I have found that "hunting the "I" to be a intellectual endeavor.
The "I am" is part of consciousness. Some feel it's possible to think through the "I am" and arrive at a answer point or a awakening.

The only thing I can say for sure is the real "you" is beyond consciousness and the " I am"
This is found in Silence . My experience is t happens when anyone is sincere enough in their desire for the ultimate that they just stop and become the silence.
peace

[zendancer]

Goody: You wrote, "Unfortunately I know it is all mind's work in me, some doubts are always there. One of them is: since everybody is That, but I still cannot see why "I am you", "you are me", is it just another way of saying "we are all That"? Yes.

You also asked, "How are we actually related in deepest level?" E. has already answered this. We are not related because there are no separate entitities that can be in relationship. There is no you, me, or we; there is only wholeness.

[zendancer]

Oct 25, 2010 9:24:18 GMT -5 @michaelsees said:

I have found that "hunting the "I" to be a intellectual endeavor.
The "I am" is part of consciousness. Some feel it's possible to think through the "I am" and arrive at a answer point or a awakening.

The only thing I can say for sure is the real "you" is beyond consciousness and the " I am"
This is found in Silence . My experience is t happens when anyone is sincere enough in their desire for the ultimate that they just stop and become the silence.
peace

Correct. The only thing I would add is that although searching for the "I" starts off as an intellectual endeavor, the inquiry itself can sometimes stop the mind and lead to silence from which realization can arise. This is why self inquiry was Ramana's main teaching.

One Zen Master used to tell his students to never start the self inquiry koan unless they were willing to spend at least ten years working on it. He considered it the hardest koan of all.

[michaelsees]

[quote author=zendancer board=misc thread=1035 post=10465 time=1288021370

Correct. The only thing I would add is that although searching for the "I" starts off as an intellectual endeavor, the inquiry itself can sometimes stop the mind and lead to silence from which realization can arise. This is why self inquiry was Ramana's main teaching.

One Zen Master used to tell his students to never start the self inquiry koan unless they were willing to spend at least ten years working on it. He considered it the hardest koan of all. [/quote]

Good point ZD I tend to agree. Once again we are being presented with a odd paradox of sorts. The intellect will never get you there by using the intellect however from what I have seen and witness it takes a "Janni"(sp?) to be able to shut down his system to let the silence manifest. As we know RM gave many teachings as one size did not fit all. From my own research those that sat with RM in just silence , not even listening to RM instructions but just sitting made the most progress.

peace

[klaus]

Concepts to be thrown in the garbage.
The question is mute, it begs for an answer, ha,ha.

[michaelsees]

here's a question
How large is our garbage can?
ha ha

peace santa