Nothing is real (I AM discussion)

[sjel]

Every single thought, belief, structure... it is all illusion. It all arose at some point, and therefore must perish in time. Why not let go of it now? Cut the cord and return to the only truth: I Am. Not... "You are." No. I Am.

[Stranger]

Just to qualify that a bit: everything that has ever been, or ever will be, will exist forever in an eternal present. Things only appear to perish from the human point of view, but in reality, they're always still there.

Also, illusion is not illusion because it's not real. Illusion exists. It is illusion because it is not what it appears to be (i.e., multiplicity).

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Nothing, is still something in and of its self.  So in a sense nothing is a very real something.

[Aion]

So this seems like a good place to open up the discussion, what do you all think of the "I Am" concept, and where do you think this concept originates?

[Infinite]

Nothing is real, except love.

[sjel]

So this seems like a good place to open up the discussion, what do you all think of the "I Am" concept, and where do you think this concept originates?

I've come to believe this is the only question that matters, at all. It is an endless question. It has an infinite answer.

I AM

All experience is contemplation of I Am, is contemplation of MY BEING - My Infinite Being

Recently I've been having "flashbacks," little currents of memory or recognitions that I have been contemplating myself eternally, and will continue to do so eternally. "I" means your I, his I, her I, their I... I AM is all that exists, and to tire of contemplating MySelf is literally impossible

I AM is unchanging and eternally fresh

[sjel]

Nothing is real, except love.

I would say love is a byproduct of I AM. Love is just the truth of I Am, but even love is transcended ultimately. Transcended meaning surpassed and overwhelmed by even that which exists prior to love.

[Aion]

So this seems like a good place to open up the discussion, what do you all think of the "I Am" concept, and where do you think this concept originates?

I've come to believe this is the only question that matters, at all. It is an endless question. It has an infinite answer.

I AM

All experience is contemplation of I Am, is contemplation of MY BEING - My Infinite Being

Recently I've been having "flashbacks," little currents of memory or recognitions that I have been contemplating myself eternally, and will continue to do so eternally. "I" means your I, his I, her I, their I... I AM is all that exists, and to tire of contemplating MySelf is literally impossible

I AM is unchanging and eternally fresh

Hmm, well I've definitely seen those thoughts before and they are certainly one way of looking at it. The phrase "I Am" became prominent through Kabbalah because "Eheieh" is Hebrew for "I Am" and it is considered one of the "Names of God". It corresponds with the "Crown" or the highest self which is at the top of the Tree of Life. Another name they have for this is the Yechidah.

Now what's interesting is that this "I Am" is the 'first manifestation' or the first concentration of Light, it's like the Logos. So what might that point manifest from? In Kabbalah prior to the Tree of Life and Kether there are three interlocking concepts. The base of all things is "Negative Existence" called Ain, which means Nothingness. From Negative Existence the first extension was in to Limitlessness. Thus, the second is Ain Soph, "Without Limit", I think this is the idea of Infinity. Then from that limitlessness comes the Light. The third is the Ain Soph Aur which means "Limitless Light" and it is in this limitless light that the first concentration occurs which becomes the Crown, the 'I Am".

So I actually do not see the "I Am" as the actual Source, but rather the first extension of Source.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

I find the origination of the concept I Am comes from a Human Being who labeled Source with the most succinct thing they could think to call it's self identification.

I Am uncertain if I Am in need of Identification personally

[AnthroHeart]

There is one teacher who has taught that I-I awareness is closer to source than I-AM awareness. Then it is just I. Then Source has no identity.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Does source even really need an identity or are we just arbitrarily of our own accord looking to assign it/ourselves an identity?

[Aion]

I think that's why I go to "Nothingness" when I think of Source. Completely 'unqualified'.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

I find Nothingness very paradoxical as it is still Somethingness otherwise it wouldn't have the identity of 'Nothingness'.  I get the whole concept of 'Ain' but I just see it as an absence of differentiation.

[Aion]

The problem is words. You're talking about the word "nothingness" as being somethingness.

[sjel]

The problem is words.

Definitely haha

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

The problem is words. You're talking about the word "nothingness" as being somethingness.

Oh, I thought the problem was the concept that nothingness as a concept was still a somethingness by the means of it being a concept, a label, an identity, a distortion if you will.

[Cainite]

(Deleted)

[Aion]

The problem is words. You're talking about the word "nothingness" as being somethingness.

Oh, I thought the problem was the concept that nothingness as a concept was still a somethingness by the means of it being a concept, a label, an identity, a distortion if you will.

Those are all tied to the words, it is truly not even a concept. Even to refer to it as "it" is nonsense.

Were we in person my response would be to stare at you in silence.

[AnthroHeart]

Only experience is real.

[sjel]

Only experience is real.

I think only the experiencer is real. Experience changes and comes and goes, the Witness remains. And you are that witness.

[AnthroHeart]

Ok, I assume ego is an illusion. So what are we without ego?

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

The problem is words. You're talking about the word "nothingness" as being somethingness.

Oh, I thought the problem was the concept that nothingness as a concept was still a somethingness by the means of it being a concept, a label, an identity, a distortion if you will.

Those are all tied to the words, it is truly not even a concept. Even to refer to it as "it" is nonsense.

Were we in person my response would be to stare at you in silence.

I don't understand your logic lol

If something 'is' then it can't be nothing.  The 'nothing' you speak of I have come to believe is an incomprehensible unknowable idea that we will never be able to identify.  Like saying things go:
Nothingness < Void < What you're talking about

I find identifying that with the label Nothingness is a paradox as well, as you've now managed to identify the unidentifiable which negates its previous being as being that without being known or identifiable from which, at least according to the idea of Ain to Ain Soph, is the source from which all can be originated without actually being the origin.

It's a mystery-clad mysterious mystery of mysteries, yet isn't as that too would negate it due to being identified.

I see it as The Truth basically, and it seems to entail infinity and all that is implied by it, without the means to be measured or identified hence why I think distortions of it are needed to attempt at identifying it's mysteriousness.

[Aion]

*stares*

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

It's funny how judgmental people can be. I judge your opinion, you judge mine, but we same the same thing in two different ways.

What a funny little place this is.

[Aion]

Difference is not always judgement nor is disagreement. Maybe we are saying the same thing but maybe not, why do we have to be saying the same thing? I think variety is the spice of life.

Silence is the only way I can articulate my sense.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Maybe I was wrong to say we're being judgmental, but you have to admit that it'd be a humorous pairing to have two people discuss the same thing, and one speaks paragraphs and the other is silent.

Perhaps we are as that which we are discussing, but only in a dream, and we're trying to explain ourselves and have found there to be no bridge of understanding, only the humorous futility of shooting in the dark hoping to grant the other knowledge we do not know.