When will "I" cease to be?

[Henosis]

When does subjectivity end/begin?

At what stage of evolution will I cease to think or feel in terms of "I"? Perhaps the second half of seventh density, when the looking backwards stops? Or maybe upon the completion of the Logos? When does the "I" dissolve into unity? Between Logos, does "I"/subjectivity first dissolve into unity, before beginning a new creation?

The octave density seems to be so far beyond any possible manifestation, yet Ra mentions the council of Saturn is of the octave density and dwells in its rings...this perplexes me...

I realize there is no correct answer, but I would love to hear some thoughts.

[Aion]

My thought is, why do you want to know?

Is it the "I" that wants to know?

[anagogy]

When does subjectivity end/begin?

At what stage of evolution will I cease to think or feel in terms of "I"? Perhaps the second half of seventh density, when the looking backwards stops? Or maybe upon the completion of the Logos? When does the "I" dissolve into unity? Between Logos, does "I"/subjectivity first dissolve into unity, before beginning a new creation?

The octave density seems to be so far beyond any possible manifestation, yet Ra mentions the council of Saturn is of the octave density and dwells in its rings...this perplexes me...

I realize there is no correct answer, but I would love to hear some thoughts.

Its a good question, I conceptualize it a little differently. I see everything as withdrawing back into pure subjectivity rather than subjectivity going away. Maybe its a confusion of terms. I suppose the distinction between subjective and objective become irrelevant at this level in the same way that the distinction between space/time and time/space become irrelevant.

My understanding, which is admittedly human and imperfect, is that in the octave density all notion of ego or self is transcended. Even the 7th density Logos has an infinitely subtle proto self, whose body and mind constitute the entirety of our space/time and time/space. Self is like a bubble, creating a distinction between inner and outer. When that is transcended, consciousness moves into a state of pure Being, which is essentially nirvana -- our natural state of blissful awareness of awareness (I am-ness or perhaps just "am-ness"), yet with no center of self (center is everywhere, circumference is nowhere). It is essentially the relaxed state of unpotentiated intelligent infinity, awaiting potentiation through the use of free will. Of course, it is impossible for us to truly imagine infinity while en-mired in the illusion of finity.  

However, I have heard its pretty sweet.  =)  

The statement about the council of Saturn confused me as well. My intuition is that what Ra was intending to communicate is that the council members are so spiritually pure that they are in contact with intelligent infinity to a very pronounced degree (which is what warranted the placement in such an important office in the first place). It is also possible that these beings are the "lightbringers" from the octave 'to be' that come to aid our octave in its logos completion.

[Infinite Unity]

When does subjectivity end/begin?

At what stage of evolution will I cease to think or feel in terms of "I"? Perhaps the second half of seventh density, when the looking backwards stops? Or maybe upon the completion of the Logos? When does the "I" dissolve into unity? Between Logos, does "I"/subjectivity first dissolve into unity, before beginning a new creation?

The octave density seems to be so far beyond any possible manifestation, yet Ra mentions the council of Saturn is of the octave density and dwells in its rings...this perplexes me...

I realize there is no correct answer, but I would love to hear some thoughts.

I iii
<o>

[Infinite Unity]

When does subjectivity end/begin?

At what stage of evolution will I cease to think or feel in terms of "I"? Perhaps the second half of seventh density, when the looking backwards stops? Or maybe upon the completion of the Logos? When does the "I" dissolve into unity? Between Logos, does "I"/subjectivity first dissolve into unity, before beginning a new creation?

The octave density seems to be so far beyond any possible manifestation, yet Ra mentions the council of Saturn is of the octave density and dwells in its rings...this perplexes me...

I realize there is no correct answer, but I would love to hear some thoughts.

When you are purely balanced and crystalized with energy rushing through unimpeded, the self, can become...unconscious, in a sense of logical egoic self. When your having fun time can really fly...

[Henosis]

Hmmmm. I suppose I see it a little differently. The way I see it is that the unpotentiated intelligent infinity isn't quite subjective. It is the Self, yet not in the sense of having a "Self". It is consciousness without perception. Am-ness as anagogy put it. I see the feeling of "I" as coming with the limitation of the viewpoint. Perhaps as coming with the potentiation of infinity.

It's as if we have our little ego, and the Logos is the Divine Ego. The source of the Logos would be that unpotentiated intelligent infinity. Pure divinity beyond objectivity, and perhaps even subjectivity. Consciousness without subject or object.

I believe this very subject is the cause of much contrast between Hinduism and Buddhism. Hinduism emphasizes the Supreme Self, which is selfless. Yet Buddhism emphasizes the lack of a Self.

All opposites are reconciled in unity

[sjel]

There once was a monk whose name was Gutei. And when ever people came to ask him questions about Buddhism, he'd hold up a finger. That was the only answer he would give.

Well, he had an attendant. And one day, somebody came to the temple to inquire about the teaching being given there. The master was apparently out, only his attendant was there.

So the investigator said, "what is your teaching here?" And the attendant held up a finger.

But actually the master had been there! He was peeking from behind the screen.

He came out to the boy, and asked, "What is the fundamental teaching of Buddhism?" And the boy held up a finger.

Instantly the master drew a knife and cut it off. And the boy was very dismayed and went and rushed away, yelling.

So the master said, "Hey, come back!" The boy came back.

The master said "what's the fundamental principle of Buddhism?"

He went to hold up a finger but it wasn't there. And he was enlightened."

- Alan Watts

[Majana Silvo]

but I would love to hear some thoughts.

Maybe there is an "I" as long as we identify with this what we call "I"?
Who are we...where does this "I" stop and where does another "I" begin?
Wile in the end we are all the same "I" experiencing existence though different eyes (I's) of different bodies.

[Sacred Fool]

Well, what is your "I?"  Is it something gets lost along the evolutionary pathway?  What is it?

Is it a state of partial consciousness that eventually opens out into a state of full consciousness?  And then that full consciousness opens out again into a larger consciousness, etc.?

This is Q'uo from April 14, 2006.

What is the “I” of a person and of a soul? When consciousness itself is the “I” of you, then shall your heart be free to open and blossom and radiate infinitely. And from that perspective alone shall you at last be able to march from the sanctum sanctorum, fed and strengthened, in full knowledge of who you are for the first time and ready at last to do serious work upon balancing the wisdom which you offered to yourself as a gift and as catalyst.

I'm presenting this out of context, but the embolden line is worth considering.  Long story short, the pathway there runs though the heart, according to that text.

Here's another thought from the same session.

We speak as if there is a “we” and a “they,” a “you” and an “I.” And this is not precisely correct. For there is an ever-flowing movement of energy along lines of force which are created by your thoughts and feelings rather than there being a dynamic of two.


You are experiencing ways of structuring the self so that it may be known to the self. We do not wish to take away every structure of your thoughts in an instant. Rather, we would that you would conceive of this journey as a dance. It is a dance in which your movements express a gradual increase in your ability to be naked and without personality.


In the privacy and the intimacy of your silent meditation, allow all to fall away as it will and sit with that which is left until it, too, falls away. And then sit with that which is left until it, too, falls away. Repeat this process until when you sit, you simply sit.

So, maybe the I you dream is mere costumery which will eventually wear away revealing that what your I is is what exists around you an within you as you perceive and accept it?  

Perhaps a fair answer to your query is that you stop thinking in terms of I when your sense of inner and outer are no longer experienced as separated things, but are both equally regarded as movements of energy along lines of force revealing this or that of yourself to yourself?

[APeacefulWarrior]

Well, my own take is that "I" never truly goes away, but rather expands to encompass each new level of awareness\growth while increasingly acknowledging its component parts. After all, do you think The Creator truly lacks any sense of "I"? I kinda doubt it.

But -as Peregrin's quotes and most of Buddhism allude to- one's definition of "I" will be constantly changing. It is absolutely necessary to understand that "I" am not my personality or my opinions or my clothes or anything like that. (I actually like to say that opinions are the clothes of the soul.) But that doesn't mean "I" is eliminated. Just that "I" is different from what most people suppose, and far far more subtle.

Undoubtedly, along the way, the concept of individuality itself falls away. We see that in various 5D and 6D S-M-Cs who already refer to themselves as "we" rather than "I". None the less, Ra still obviously sees himself in terms of being a somewhat separate entity as well. He is simultaneously himself-as-singular, while also being composed of all the other various intelligences contributing to his makeup. I-and-We at once, basically.

And it just makes sense to me that, during the progression through 7D to 8D Oneness, that would effectively progress to a simultaneous sense of I-and-We-and-All. And as each individual entity makes that journey back to Oneness, in merging with the Creator's vibrations, they literally become the Creator and their sense of "I" transcends yet again, shedding attachment to previous names and forms like a snake shedding its skin.

Now of course, there's also the matter of the Creator's infinite self-awareness of that point and the paradoxical (from our POV) simultaneous co-existence of all subforms as distinct-but-not, but there's a limit to what I can wrap my head around.

[Henosis]

Well, my own take is that "I" never truly goes away, but rather expands to encompass each new level of awareness\growth while increasingly acknowledging its component parts.  After all, do you think The Creator truly lacks any sense of "I"?  I kinda doubt it.

But -as Peregrin's quotes and most of Buddhism allude to- one's definition of "I" will be constantly changing.  It is absolutely necessary to understand that "I" am not my personality or my opinions or my clothes or anything like that.  (I actually like to say that opinions are the clothes of the soul.)  But that doesn't mean "I" is eliminated.  Just that "I" is different from what most people suppose, and far far more subtle.

Undoubtedly, along the way, the concept of individuality itself falls away.  We see that in various 5D and 6D S-M-Cs who already refer to themselves as "we" rather than "I".  None the less, Ra still obviously sees himself in terms of being a somewhat separate entity as well.  He is simultaneously himself-as-singular, while also being composed of all the other various intelligences contributing to his makeup.  I-and-We at once, basically.

And it just makes sense to me that, during the progression through 7D to 8D Oneness, that would effectively progress to a simultaneous sense of I-and-We-and-All.  And as each individual entity makes that journey back to Oneness, in merging with the Creator's vibrations, they literally become the Creator and their sense of "I" transcends yet again, shedding attachment to previous names and forms like a snake shedding its skin.

Now of course, there's also the matter of the Creator's infinite self-awareness of that point and the paradoxical (from our POV) simultaneous co-existence of all subforms as distinct-but-not, but there's a limit to what I can wrap my head around.  

All great points. I think what I'm mainly referring to is the absolute essence of all things. I see one of the qualities of an essence is everything being so completely nullified to it that it is unaware of itself.

The main perception/misperception I have is that objectivity and even subjectivity has an origin. Like you mentioned, this may just become more and more transcendent and subtle.

I do think there is a point where things become so infinitely subtle that you no longer think in terms of "I". Where you no longer think period.

In Buddhism they refer to the four/five formless states called arupajhanas that are increasingly subtle. I see these states as a re-merging with unity. The "progression" goes as follows.

It goes...
Infinite space
Infinite consciousness
Infinite nothingness
Neither perception nor non-perception
The cessation of neither perception nor non-perception.

The last two jhanas would be a sort of loss of subjectivity to what "Is". However, as you mentioned, these states may still have an infinitely subtle or transcendent "I".

[anagogy]

This is one of my favorite Neville Goddard quotes:

"I AM is a feeling of permanent awareness. The very center of consciousness is the feeling of I AM. I may forget who I am, where I am, what I am, but I cannot forget that I Am. The awareness of being remains, regardless of the degree of forgetfulness of who, where, and what I am."

I tend to lean towards the feeling that "I" is synonymous with consciousness. Consciousness is always a first person perspective to my understanding. I think the absolute state contains the self, but it is not defined in any way whatsoever. It is just awareness of infinity. The eye ("I") cannot see itself in this realm. If this infinite intelligence chooses, through the act of exercising will, to define itself, the Logos manifestation then emerges from that undefined infinity. It then becomes self aware -- a circumscribed boundary of consciousness with an inner mind, and an outer body. Prior to that, I think there is just awareness of infinite potential. No thoughts about self, just blissful awareness of infinite beingness.

Though, of course, there are no words to describe such a state. It is also infinite creativity, infinite curiosity, and infinite everything.

Of course, there is no way to know for sure until we're there, but its fun to share our speculations.

[Minyatur]

Of course, there is no way to know for sure until we're there, but its fun to share our speculations.

Well there's no later or elsewhere, everything is here and now and within.

You can know so long you seek to find it within, as it is there to be found, although what you will get is a 3D interpretation of the actual thing as the perception of the mind is bound to its ability to perceive and any greater perception of that same thing requires a denser mind to focus upon the very same thing.

[Henosis]

This is one of my favorite Neville Goddard quotes:

"I AM is a feeling of permanent awareness. The very center of consciousness is the feeling of I AM. I may forget who I am, where I am, what I am, but I cannot forget that I Am. The awareness of being remains, regardless of the degree of forgetfulness of who, where, and what I am."

I tend to lean towards the feeling that "I" is synonymous with consciousness. Consciousness is always a first person perspective to my understanding. I think the absolute state contains the self, but it is not defined in any way whatsoever. It is just awareness of infinity. The eye ("I") cannot see itself in this realm. If this infinite intelligence chooses, through the act of exercising will, to define itself, the Logos manifestation then emerges from that undefined infinity. It then becomes self aware -- a circumscribed boundary of consciousness with an inner mind, and an outer body. Prior to that, I think there is just awareness of infinite potential. No thoughts about self, just blissful awareness of infinite beingness.

Though, of course, there are no words to describe such a state. It is also infinite creativity, infinite curiosity, and infinite everything.

Of course, there is no way to know for sure until we're there, but its fun to share our speculations.

This is rather precisely my view. Anagogy, every response you make its like your my Self explaining something to my Self. It's pretty awesome.

[loostudent]

I see densities as stages of expanding (or better said growing over) of the consciousness: no awareness --> awareness --> self awareness --> spiritual awareness etc. --> ocean of consciousness or the Supreme Self.

I think it is posible for some people in this density to dwell with the mind in higher planes. At least for some time. Spiritual awareness (opening of the heart) is the lesson/goal in this density so it is the highest permanent state for now.

Let me quote Sri Ramakrishna:

The  Vedas  say  that  ‘I-ness’  vanishes  only  when the  mind  ascends  to  the  seventh  plane.  ‘I-ness’  only disappears  upon  attaining  samadhi.

[Sacred Fool]

Let me quote Sri Ramakrishna:

The  Vedas  say  that  ‘I-ness’  vanishes  only  when the  mind  ascends  to  the  seventh  plane.  ‘I-ness’  only disappears  upon  attaining  samadhi.

Q'uo suggests that wanderers incarnate here, not to transcend the world, but to experience themselves in it (or to experience it as them).  There seems to me to be much wisdom in that.

[APeacefulWarrior]

Q'uo suggests that wanderers incarnate here, not to transcend the world, but to experience themselves in it (or to experience it as them).  There seems to me to be much wisdom in that.

To me, that seems heavily implied by Q'uo's repeated emphasis that Wanderers are here to love Earth, rather than trying to fix it. While it's probably not a literal must and\or absolute necessity, it seems to me that loving Earth without experiencing Earth and enjoying those experiences would be very difficult.

I mean, fundamentally, if a Wanderer wanted transcendent existence, why would they incarnate on a veiled planet? Those are basically opposites.

[Henosis]

I see densities as stages of expanding (or better said growing over) of the consciousness: no awareness --> awareness --> self awareness --> spiritual awareness etc. --> ocean of consciousness or the Supreme Self.

I think it is posible for some people in this density to dwell with the mind in higher planes. At least for some time. Spiritual awareness (opening of the heart) is the lesson/goal in this density so it is the highest permanent state for now.

Let me quote Sri Ramakrishna:

The  Vedas  say  that  ‘I-ness’  vanishes  only  when the  mind  ascends  to  the  seventh  plane.  ‘I-ness’  only disappears  upon  attaining  samadhi.

I suppose my question in general is dealing with the nature of the Absolute. The absolute state of non-duality. In my understanding, the first emanation of the Absolute would be intelligence, or awareness. While this awareness is awareness of unity, there is a still a very, very subtle state of duality between shiva/shakti or being/awareness. Awareness/intelligence is still an emanation.

It seems impossible to draw a conclusion of whether the Absolute is active/inactive. If it is inactive, then there is no way for existence or creation to have ever occurred. If it is active, it seems it would be subject to change. It would still be drawing on the power of the essence and the creative force would not be the essence.

The Absolute or Unity must have two aspects, one of which is inactive or permanent, which I would equate with unity or Shiva. The other aspect must be active, which I would equate with intelligence or Shakti. It is often said the Absolute has two aspects, implying that there is some sort of fundamental duality built into the One. Many philosophies draw the conclusion that the Absolute must have overflowed in its superabundance, producing Shakti or awareness/intelligence. I tend to lean toward this approach, as it seems to be one of the only solutions to this paradox.

As it relates to this question, I believe "I" would be vanquished upon the nullification of self-awareness to awareness...I think this would likely take place upon completion of the octave.

EDIT: Ra quotes supporting the never-ending mystery...

"However, it has been impressed upon us by our own teachers that there is a mystery-clad unity of creation in which all consciousness periodically coalesces and again begins. Thus we can only say we assume an infinite progression though we understand it to be cyclical in nature and, as we have said, clad in mystery."

"The one undifferentiated intelligent infinity, unpolarized, full and whole, is the macrocosm of the mystery-clad being. We are messengers of the Law of One. Unity, at this approximation of understanding, cannot be specified by any physics but only be activated or potentiated intelligent infinity due to the catalyst of free will. This may be difficult to accept. However, the understandings we have to share begin and end in mystery.

[AnthroHeart]

When there is no I, then everything is the same. There is no change. You do not even "see" anything.

It goes beyond consciousness. There may no longer be awareness as we know it.

If you want to know what ego death is like, I recommend this video:

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

I is a letter of an Alphabet.
So it'll probably cease when all traces of that alphabet fade over time.

What the heck are you all talking about

[Nau7ik]

This is a fruitful area to question in! "Who am 'I'?" Where is this "I" at?

The teachings of Ramana Maharshi are excellent for this line of spiritual questioning.

Keep asking! Who am I? Why am I here? Answers come to those who persistently and honestly ask.

I have no answers. I am asking this myself

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

There is no I.
There is no spoon.

[loostudent]

It is often said the Absolute has two aspects, implying that there is some sort of fundamental duality built into the One. Many philosophies draw the conclusion that the Absolute must have overflowed in its superabundance, producing Shakti or awareness/intelligence. I tend to lean toward this approach, as it seems to be one of the only solutions to this paradox.

Abundance seems to be the answer. Brahman and Shakti are not separated. It's one and the same.

The Adyashakti (Primeval Power) is not different from the Parabrahman (Supreme Brahman). You cannot think of the one without thinking of the other. For example, think of the gem and its lustre! If you do not hold a gem, you cannot think of its effulgence. Similarly, you cannot think of the gem without thinking of its brilliance. (Ramakrishna)

As it relates to this question, I believe "I" would be vanquished upon the nullification of self-awareness to awareness...I think this would likely take place upon completion of the octave.

Some people are supposed to experienced this already in 3rd density as special ecstatic state.

[Agua del Cielo]

The short answer would be "never".

A more detailed view would investigate where you derive your sense of "I" from.
As humans we usually derive our sense of "I" through identification with the ego.
This egoic sense of "I" will alteady start to fade away in this density to a degree, given one grows sufficiently.

On the other side of the spectrum, the creator is the maximum possible "I"-ness, so in this sense, the "I"will never cease to be but to the contrary grow more and more.

[xise]

I think the "I" expands to include everything in creation rather than cease to exist as one polarizes. Certainly though the "I" changes from an 'egoic' "I" to a universal "I".

[isis]

Ra says there is "only identity"

[Henosis]

I believe the Absolute Infinite has no sense of "I".

It is the Absolute Self and the Absolute "I", but it has no thought or vain sense of "I". It is beyond that in purity, dignity and mystery. All consciousness, power, knowledge, and bliss are latent in the Absolute.

The Absolute Essence of all things does not know what It is. All of creation as well as the infinite realms exist from the urge to Know which emanated from the infinite whim of the primordial unity asking Itself ... Who Am I?

The intelligent infinity thus emanated awareness of Itself.

The infinite whim created BOTH infinite unconsciousness and infinite consciousness. Within the infinite unconsciousness, is the divine goal and eternal will to become conscious. The whim could be seen as a puff of wind causing ripples in an ocean. The unconscious and the conscious could be seen as a potential and a kinetic.

Once the octave completes and you return to the Kingdom of infinite consciousness, after a period of rest, the infinite consciousness (Matrix) once again reaches into the infinite unconscious (Potentiator) to create the Logos.

Thus you may see an eternal trinity of:

Unity (I)
Intelligent Infinity (Potential - Infinite Unconsciousness)
Intelligent Infinity (Kinetic - Infinite Consciousness)

Or perhaps more appropriately:

One
Infinite
Creator

Note: This is my own personal theory. Ra does not go into detail of how exactly infinity became aware.

[AnthroHeart]

Note: This is my own personal theory. Ra does not go into detail of how exactly infinity became aware.

In Infinity, kinetic and potential are the same "thing". I think when potential gave way to kinetic, the Infinity became aware.
The Law of Free Will automatically happened that allows kinetic and potential to "seem" like different things.

It was when the infinite truth became illusion, as kinetic then existed "separate" from potential.

[anagogy]

The difference between the awareness of infinity, and the consciousness of creation is similar to the distinction:

"Is the TV on?" (yes, the TV is always on in infinity). Awareness, or Beingness, is always there, bearing silent witness that WE ARE. It is an eternal affirmation of existence.

Consciousness (the kinetic manifestation) is a different question. It is similar to: "What is on TV?"

There are a lot of different channels on consciousness, from random/static (red ray), to a scintillating documentary and overview of all the channels as a whole (violet ray).

All of that spectrum is contained within the awareness/beingness (television). Awareness says unequivocally: I AM, but consciousness says, WHAT AM I?

I = SPIRIT (Being)
AM = MIND (time/space or love/light)
THAT = BODY (space/time or light/love)

[Henosis]

The difference between the awareness of infinity, and the consciousness of creation is similar to the distinction:

"Is the TV on?" (yes, the TV is always on in infinity). Awareness, or Beingness, is always there, bearing silent witness that WE ARE. It is an eternal affirmation of existence.

Consciousness (the kinetic manifestation) is a different question. It is similar to: "What is on TV?"

There are a lot of different channels on consciousness, from random/static (red ray), to a scintillating documentary and overview of all the channels as a whole (violet ray).

All of that spectrum is contained within the awareness/beingness (television). Awareness says unequivocally: I AM, but consciousness says, WHAT AM I?

I = SPIRIT (Being)
AM = MIND (time/space or love/light)
THAT = BODY (space/time or light/love)

It took me a minute to understand the analogy, but it's a great one!

Is the TV on?!?