Ego Dissolution & “I, AM”

[JimBo]

In 2018, completely sober and at random I had a full ego dissolution experience that was extremely temporary. The ego returned within about 30 seconds.

During that experience, the “I” completely disappeared. The illusion of James no longer existed. There were no thoughts and no subjective identity - just pure awareness, along with a direct realisation of non-duality and the absence of separateness.

Once the illusion of “I” disappeared, the illusion of separateness disappeared with it.

Having experienced this, something that has never quite made sense to me is the phrase “I am.”

To me, “I” and “am” feel like two completely different things.

“I” is the illusion of ego.
“AM” is the underlying pure awareness.

So when the “I” disappeared during that experience, what remained wasn’t “I am” - it was simply AM.

I’d genuinely love to hear other people’s thoughts on this. Preferably from people who have experienced their own ego dissolution firsthand, rather than simply repeating something they’ve read online or in a textbook.

I’m particularly interested in how the phrase “I am” makes sense from the perspective of someone who has actually experienced the disappearance of the “I.”

 

[Verdesbird]

I dont believe in ego

[kavaris]

33 minutes ago, JimBo said:

I’m particularly interested in how the phrase “I am” makes sense from the perspective of someone who has actually experienced the disappearance of the “I.”

Quoted / reinterpreted — "How does the phrase 'I AM make sense (assuming we know what sense means too)"

Another way to ask this is to say "My name is X, so how is your name Y",

.... Or yet, another way to ask this, is to say "What does Beingness imply"... Or yet another way to ask it is to say "Everything is one. So if everything is one, can you give me the answer?"

The question itself doesnt ask anything particuarly relevant (if directed to others, unironically, and not rhetorically), However... Its the rephrasing of it that leads you out of the simplicity of the initial question, cause your not bogged down w/ all this surface layer talk that sounds nice. Its all experientially driven, perspectival synopsi... questions that circulate in the body, mind, soul, self... dreaming a dream that youd have to otherwise prove is real, otherwise we are to ask each other to prove it too. Its asking alot. Or in another sense, its not asking anything at all. Consider that you also wouldnt solve a paradox by flagging down the paradox, Like thats just "Step 1" towards whatever function you ultimately want to represent.

Edited 13 hours ago by kavaris

[VeganAwake]

AM is just the bodily senses 

[Mixcoatl]

One day, with medicine, I became fractals. I was the sound around. I became experience. But I was still I

[Joseph Maynor]

Let's do an interview with @Natasha Tori Maru.  I feel like this is worthwhile for the community.  

[Carl-Richard]

Never thought about it like that, it's also just words.

Edited 10 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Mellowmarsh]

6 hours ago, JimBo said:

I’m particularly interested in how the phrase “I am” makes sense from the perspective of someone who has actually experienced the disappearance of the “I.”

What kind of a word is “I”? To what does it refer?

[Anonym]

I seem to laugh a lot having rediscover what it means to know "I Am", I think any 'I' is already defined, so there's basically no badge in discovering this. It is the same here and now.

 

Now I am much more inclined to how do I make sure I don't fool myself, ever more acknowledging, ever more be there to others.

Nice depiction:

 

(Ben Zank, resource: 2018)

Edited 6 hours ago by Anonym

[Hyperion]

 

 

 

[Breakingthewall]

10 hours ago, JimBo said:

In 2018, completely sober and at random I had a full ego dissolution experience that was extremely temporary. The ego returned within about 30 seconds.

During that experience, the “I” completely disappeared. The illusion of James no longer existed. There were no thoughts and no subjective identity - just pure awareness, along with a direct realisation of non-duality and the absence of separateness.

Once the illusion of “I” disappeared, the illusion of separateness disappeared with it.

Having experienced this, something that has never quite made sense to me is the phrase “I am.”

To me, “I” and “am” feel like two completely different things.

“I” is the illusion of ego.
“AM” is the underlying pure awareness.

So when the “I” disappeared during that experience, what remained wasn’t “I am” - it was simply AM.

I’d genuinely love to hear other people’s thoughts on this. Preferably from people who have experienced their own ego dissolution firsthand, rather than simply repeating something they’ve read online or in a textbook.

I’m particularly interested in how the phrase “I am” makes sense from the perspective of someone who has actually experienced the disappearance of the “I.”

 

I’ve had that experience of the total dissolution of the subject-object duality, let’s say, 200 times, mostly sober, to pick a number. I think I understand quite well how it works.

Let’s see: at a certain point, you empty your mind completely, and there is only "I am". the fact of a center that perceives an experience and knows that it exists. This "I am" is exactly the same in me, in you, or in any other reflective structure. It's just a structure. Two limits: subject and object. 

Then you focus on the subject, on the perceiving center. What is it? Is it someone? If you maintain that focus long enough, at a certain moment the subject-object duality collapses. Reality loses its boundaries, since "I" and "am" are two boundaries, and opens up.

It is total, and within that totality, its essence manifests: limitlessness. It is beyond thought. At first, it feels like your brain is going to fry, and tears stream down your face. A single second of this opening changes your life.

Afterward, the habitual structure returns. So, is the "I" an illusion? No; it is a real structure that reality assumes. it’s just that the substance of the "I" is the same as the substance of the "am." What changes is the structure; that structure is real, it exists. Because reality without structure is non existence. Always any structure is, no structure is "never". Doesn't happen. Then call the structure illusion is confusing. Better calling it "structure". 

Edited 3 hours ago by Breakingthewall