Purifying the I-Am
“Bentinho, from the bottom of my heart, thank you. I have been actively searching for such clarity and direction for years and you managed to put everything in the right place and perspective with such precision, conciseness and clarity. Blessed to be here.”
~ FP, No Limits Mentorship participant
This blog post is a transcript from a teaching dialog between Bentinho and “FP,” a member of his No Limits Mentorship group. More information on how to become involved in the No Limits Mentorship program is provided at the end of this post.
Question to Bentinho from FP, a No Limits Mentorship Participant:
I am having difficulty purifying the I-Am or trying to find my deepest sense of I-Am. I had felt that the I-Am was everything, including my sense of ME [...] Is the I-Am not everything? When you say, “Find your innermost sense of I-Am,” are you saying that “I” have to identify with this sense as my own? Or can it be more in the sense of “all that is manifest is this, and there is nothing apart from this; it includes everything. And the Absolute is beyond this.” Is there individuation of the “I” or is there just one “this”? Thank you.
Bentinho’s Response
Beautiful, advanced stage of questioning. But also partially intellectual, which is often a trap for intense seekers when they start thinking about the “me,” “I-Am,” “There is no me,” etc. This whole exploration—especially to those on the more intellectual end of the spectrum—can become quite a maze and can also result in a dim sense of relief, often being mistaken for truth or freedom... just because the seeking energy is subdued.
Rule #1: You exist. There is no denying this.
What this existence or “I-Am” looks like or what it is exactly, or to whom it belongs, is unclear (to the mind), and isn’t nearly as relevant initially as the simple fact THAT you are... THAT there is (an) existence of some kind.
We can have endless dialogues about what this existence is, if there is a “me” in it or not, what it is made of, if it has free will, etc. But none of that changes the bare minimum indisputable fact that there is an existence of some kind—otherwise how could we have experience at all? How could you ask this question if there was not some kind of existence?
So initially, or when these types of non-dual teachings confuse you, it is important to return to the bare minimum basics of what you can say for sure is true, without adding any assumptions or attaching any name or form to it just yet (if ever or at all).
What you can always safely return to is the direct observation THAT (you) ARE, or: THAT life IS.
It is tempting to add an image or philosophy to this, or something you’ve heard me or another teacher say. But to clear your confusion, relax the need to attribute any further form or realization to this bare minimum observation that there is existence of some kind.
Just that. Simple. Formless. Indisputable. Non-dogmatic.
The next step then—after you are able to be relaxed about this and just rest in the direct, experiential, observational acknowledgement of existing—would be to become more aware of what this existence is and what it isn’t, by separating the naked acknowledgement of existence (I-Am) from whatever assumptions your form-dependent mind and senses project onto it or associate with it.
An analogy: Let’s say you have acknowledged the existence of ink. Instead of painting a picture with it and associating the ink with your drawing, simply stay with the acknowledgement of the presence of ink, and resist the temptation—and the linear, conditioned, hasty mind’s almost inescapable need—to give that ink a name, or attribute to it some definable form.
This is similar to Nisargadatta’s, as well as my own, repeated instruction to purify the Beingness/Consciousness from its associations and attributes. To become familiar with naked awareness in its natural state of pure Isness. It is similar also to the instruction of not associating the citta (the essential knowing-nature of mind/heart) with any appearance or perception.
These are the basics to return to. It is a rigorous, simplifying, repetitive and essential approach to stay as close to the undiluted, naked, experiential truth of simple, formless being as possible. Keep your recognition of it simple and true, as free as possible of associations, memories, desires, fears or ideologies.
In other words, transcend your dependence on, or “used-to-ness” of, the form-dependent mind and senses. Just BE, but see/be/know this essential Being-Knowingness clearly and let it rest and be recognized in its essential nature, without adding anything.
Me Versus No-Me
The above-mentioned basics apply to everyone. Now I will get into your case/question more specifically, FP. But if you don’t first understand and prioritize the simple, basic approach above, the following will not be nearly as effective. So make sure you understand the importance of keeping it simple and direct, as I stated above.
Before I get into this in a more philosophical way, which is harder to verify experientially, let me clarify the practice you were asking about. You mentioned being confused or having opposing/conflicting definitions within yourself about the practice of “Recognize your innermost sense of me/self.”
Paradoxically, I will share my view on this topic of “me vs. no-me” with you, using words to attempt to point at a most intimate, intrinsic level of understanding. Just remember that the map is not the territory; the words are not the truth. Even your innermost perspectives derived from my pointers are not the truth itself. My pointers are not the truth itself either. Truth can never be reduced to a conclusion or a perspective. Keep this in mind/no-mind.
Also keep in mind that this is just my view—and you are free to choose another view. My view is not “the truth"—it is simply the most current accurate description of what I think I know about what I experience/am.
Can you already see, after what I just said, that the entire questioning/philosophy of “me vs. no-me” is intellectual at best? You see, whether you land on the perspective of me or no-me, both are filters added on top of the bare essential obviousness of existing. So always prioritize the mysterious, obvious nature of the bare essentials—the undeniable—over conclusions of what it is or what it isn’t.
No matter what I end up concluding about life, it won’t change life. It will only alter my personal experience of it; my shard of the seemingly shattered mirror of the One will be filled in with a distorted perspective, further separating/distorting me from a more direct understanding of truth.
The idea behind tuning into your most direct, most interior sense or feeling of “I” or “me” is simply to make you focus experientially and nakedly, rather than maintaining an intellectual frame of reference. Any time you tune in to your innermost sense of “me,” you let go of the world of concepts a little bit more; you become more anchored in Awareness/Being itself. This is extremely helpful on the path for many reasons, which I won’t go into right now.
Two Stages to the Practice
There are two main stages to this essential path to your Self, which I will elucidate upon. The first stage is a spectrum or gradient, and is experienced more gradually. Few people ever go beyond it, which is something to keep in mind. The second stage or aspect of this pointer is more binary or black/white and typically only opens up to the adept after sufficient practice has been applied in the first stage.
Stage 1: Purifying the I-Am
This is the stage of the I-Am, the innermost sense of “me,” existing, awareness, or the citta—the essential knowing nature of being—purifying itself from its projections, concepts, assumptions and perceptions. I assume you are all familiar with this by now.
It is important to remember that this practice is meant to be practiced continuously, rather than to try and come up with an answer or conclusion to it. This is much like Ramana Maharshi’s question/practice of “Nan Yar” or “Who Am I?” which is not really meant to be answered, but rather is the waterslide that should be followed until an experiential realization occurs and one finds oneself swimming in the obvious brightness of formless Being, which is the experiential answer to the question.
A picture of a pitcher of water cannot quench your thirst. So always be resolved to go beyond concepts, philosophies and conclusions.
Again, the first phase or aspect of this practice is a gradient or spectrum. It is an ongoing process of purification of the individuated mind portion. It is about making one’s individuated shard of the seemingly shattered mirror of the Universal One more transparent to that Universal One.
Examples of this practice include disassociating the essential and indisputable experience of “being” or “I exist” from associations such as the perception of the body, senses, thoughts, emotions, world, and others—as well as ultimately even the teachings, teachers, deities, pointers and scriptures themselves.
With continuous practice of “What is me/self vs. what is not me/self,” also known as Neti Neti (“I perceive this thing, therefore I am not this thing”), the I-Am purifies itself from form, name, sensation, ideology etc.
The more one purifies the essential and bare I-Am from its associated perceptions and sensations, the more the sense of space, time, location, physicality, solidity, etc. begins to be rendered non-existent, or is at least seen as unreal or insubstantial. I could give many more descriptions of this stage of the path, since it is the main teaching for most adepts, but I will keep it concise.
By now I assume you understand the basics of the suggestion to become aware of the innermost, most basic, essential sense of “me,” and to see that this sense of “me” does not have any form or name. It is just the formless, undeniable principle THAT you are, without conclusions about what it means or does not mean. Keep your mental images aside as best you can.
So, see if you can soften the need to intellectually understand the truth of I-Am, and just commit to the ongoing adventure of deepening your experiential understanding of naked Awareness. Just as it is. With as little mind added as possible.
For you specifically FP, it is important that you have the insight now that it is not helpful for the deepening of your experiential practice to indulge in the mind’s desire to arrive at some kind of definitive conclusion regarding “there is a me vs. there is not a me.” Again, any such conclusion will not change the truth of Being. It will only solidify the mind and its projected sense of identity. Many fall into this trap; it is very common. In fact, it is an almost unavoidable stage of the seeker seeking its own source.
Stage 2: Beyond the I-Am
Once you have purified the essential, undeniable awareness of pure Being (without name and form) to a sufficient degree, you may begin to inquire into the Beyond—the truly, utterly, formless and qualityless truth of the Absolute you.
Intellectual garbage won’t help you here either. It is to be perceived most intimately and directly, without a dependence upon or need for coming to any conclusion about it with the mind.
God does not come to conclusions about anything, ever. It is in an infinite free-fall of its own mystery.
Here is what the threshold may “feel” like between the first phase or aspect of the suggestion “recognize the innermost sense of self or me” and the second phase of this practice:
You have become able to identify the formless, innermost sense of “me,” and you can see clearly that there is no perception of the senses or the mind that could ever reach this essential nature of I-Am or Awareness itself.
When you are in this “simple state” of recognizing the formless freedom of the innermost, purest sense of “me” (or “existing”), you can continue the exact same inquiry: “What is me vs. not me?” But this time, you apply it TO that innermost, purified, space-like, formless, original, ever-present “background”—the essential sense of “me.”
In the first phase of this practice you cling to the innermost formless quality of Being, at the expense of all other perceptions, attributes, mental imagery and other form-making assumptions...
But now that you’re able to stay with the pure sense of empty “me” or “existing,” without much distraction or interruption from your assumptions and perceptions, you can begin to work this same practice on the I-Am sense itself.
The I-Am is like a trampoline or a mirror for the Unexplainable One to jump into a realization of itself from. Read that again.
Just like in the first phase, where the world of form and name was a mirror or jumping off platform for the original essence of Isness to recognize itself, in the second phase, the Absolute is using the mirror of Pure Being as a trampoline to bounce back into its utterly formless, qualityless mystery.
Chances are high in my opinion and experience that you cannot make this leap into the Absolute without first getting used to being super subtle and pure in your recognition of Being.
The heavy, mind/senses-based feeling of self that most people carry around all day long is simply too crude a tool to realize something as qualityless and formless as the Source of even God (God being Pure Beingness-Awareness).
We need to refine the tool of our individuated sense of consciousness first, by making it subtler and subtler in its ability to directly sense its own beingness; closer and closer to the God state of Pure, Formless, Unassociated (and therefore universal or non-individual) Beingness-Knowingness.
So now that you’ve arrived at a pure sense of the unassociated I-Am essence (which is not a substance or “thing”—it’s subtler than that), you can begin to see that even this pure sense of unassociated, universal Isness is still not the Absolute you.
How can you know? Because this pure aware-Isness does not know you... you know this essential aware-Isness. So, there is an element of you—or rather, you itself—that is prior to the perception or direct knowledge of “emptifull” Being, or pure Awareness.
Many teachers suggest that it is Awareness that is aware of itself. I say this only appears to be the case. In the final jump into Source-Realization, it is perceived clearly that it is ME that is aware of Awareness/Beingness—Awareness is not aware of itself. The I-Am is known by what’s before the I-Am; it is not technically known by itself. In fact, the I-Am is an illusion, just as your thoughts are illusory in nature.
What remains is purely You. The One. Source. Absolute. Indescribable. Prior to all sensations, perceptions and experiences. Prior even to the perception of the universal state of “experiencing.”
Do you see how nowhere in this journey do you need to ponder whether or not there is a you? Of course there is a you. Or rather: of course you exist. Why make intellectual observations about this, when instead you can continue to purify your direct perception of Being, and the fact that you exist even before Being/without Being/beyond Being?
The whole tedious and trap-prone exploration of, “Is there a me?” is just intellectual garbage, and the “you” that you are referring to or trying to pin down or dissolve, is only ever the “not-you.” It’s only ever an image of “you” or a sensation of “you.”
This is why, when you stop associating the essential knowing nature of Self with all of your associations and images, there is no question of whether there is a “me” or not. Being is obvious.
The “me” that could be there or not be there is only ever an image, sensation or thought with which the real you has associated itself. The real you can never not be there, but also, once it is purified from its associations with name, form and sensations, it is also clear that there is not a “you” that exists separately or as a thing.
Metaphysically/philosophically, I agree the most with The Law of One material by Ra. When it comes to the nature of individuation and free will and such, I find it the least distorted, least interfered-with-by-human-minds piece of metaphysical teaching available to us. Nothing else comes close to its accuracy, in my opinion. None of the non-dual teachers or New Age teachers I have come across have been able to deliver as sound and consistent a philosophy as this when it comes to describing the nature of this Grand Illusion.
In short: Individuation does exist, and even in the Absolute state or the “merged with God/dissolved state” before the Absolute state, the capacity for individuated consciousness still exists in potential because it can never be destroyed. However, at the same time, this individuation does not negate Oneness, Allness, etc., and it does not mean separate existence. Individuation and separation are two different topics. Many teachings conflate the two into one. Just because there is no separation, that does not mean individuation is not enabled by this Infinite Potential as one of its ways of experiencing itself.
This is a paradox that far transcends the intellectual mind’s ability to comprehend. This is why it’s best to stick with the practice itself, rather than ask for conclusions or teach philosophical conclusions you bump into along the way as if they are final truths. Here’s a short side tip: if a realization you have feels like an insight, it is not the truth; it is merely a positive speed bump. Don’t arrive at conclusions during the speed bumps.
Even the most experiential and liberating sense of “There is no me, there is only the One Power doing everything,” is still a super subtle conclusion that Source does not affirm. It is a human, or individuated conclusion. The realization, “There is no me or free will,” is still a bias—ironically coming from the subtlest remnants of the individuated/distorted essence of the One.
I hope this clarifies things. Peace and sheer joy be with you in your deepening.
FP’s Response
Bentinho, from the bottom of my heart, thank you. I have been actively searching for such clarity and direction for years and you managed to put everything in the right place and perspective with such precision, conciseness and clarity. Blessed to be here.
No Limits Mentorship Program
On January 7, 2021, Bentinho initiated his new program, No Limits Mentorship. The No Limits Mentorship program consists of Bentinho’s high-level teachings and personalized instruction for a small private group of participants. While all of the spots for the initial group of 24 have been filled, you are welcome to fill out an application to be on our Waiting List. We anticipate that participants in this program will come and go monthly, allowing space for new participants.
In addition, we will be offering a Level 2 version of this program, starting sometime in February. Level 2 will not have direct access to Bentinho, but will receive the chat-based teaching conversations in real-time—as they occur—as well as recordings of Zoom sessions. If you are interested in the Level 2 version of No Limits, please join our No Limits email notification list.