Kill the Ego
If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him • Zen proverb
First cast out the beam out of thine own eye and then thou shall see clearly to cast out the mote out of the eye of another • Sermon on the Mount
Burning, burning, burning, burning, O Lord Thou pluckest me out • TS Eliot The Waste Land
Listen to this reading of Simone Weil’s writings on the spiritual awakening process of deconstructing the personal self-concept or ego, the I-concept, that is emotionally constructed in the mind:
Selected passages read from the text Gravity and Grace — specifically from the chapters on ‘The Self’ and ‘Decreation’.
Simone Weil (1909–1943) was a French philosopher, mystic and spiritual writer whose short life was devoted to the search for truth and God. Although born into a secular Jewish family, she was profoundly drawn to Christianity and experienced several deep mystical encounters with Christ.
Her spiritual writings explore attention, prayer, suffering, grace, compassion and the surrender of the ego. She called this radical self-emptying ‘decreation’ — the relinquishment of the self so that divine love might enter.
Weil never formally entered the Catholic Church, but remained deeply influenced by Christ and the Christian mystical tradition. She died in England in 1943, aged only thirty-four, leaving behind writings that have become highly regarded for their spiritual depth and originality.
Adverse Effects of Mindfulness and Meditation
The process of mindfulness, as it takes place in meditation, can lead to a profound change in identity, which is alluded to as the “adverse effect” of depersonalization. A personal identity or ego, which is considered “normal”, is really a product of Darwinian evolution. The evolutionary purpose of the ego is to defend body survival in the sense of the survival of the fittest body. That’s what the ego or personal self-concept that’s emotionally constructed in the mind does.
With mindfulness you discover another identity that is more fundamental than a personal identity. That is the process of depersonalization. You discover a spiritual identity. You discover that your true spiritual identity is a presence of consciousness. You come to know yourself as the perceiving point of knowingness at the center of your own world. You discover that your true spiritual identity is as a spiritual presence of consciousness at the center of your own world. That is what you know yourself to be, which in spiritual traditions around the world is called the sense of I Am.
This discovery of a spiritual identity can be very disconcerting, which is why it is called a psychosis. It is only psychotic in the sense of abandoning a false personal identity. It is that so-called “normal” personal identity that is abandoned. The process of depersonalization is called psychotic, but in reality you are only abandoning a false personal identity and discovering a true spiritual identity. The process of abandoning that false personal identity can be depressing and anxiety provoking. You become depressed when you realize that you’ve spent almost all of your life identifying yourself with a false personal identity. As you begin to abandon that false personal identity, you may begin to panic and suffer from anxiety.
That anxiety is the fear of death. It is not so much the fear of body death that generates that anxiety, but the fear of the death of your ego. The evolutionary purpose of your ego is to defend the survival of your body as though your existence depends on it. That anxiety is all about the fear of ego death through a process of depersonalization.
The Role that Psychic Trauma Plays in Constructing a False Personal Identity in the Mind
I’ve previously written about the role psychic trauma plays in constructing a false personal identity in the mind, as a personal body-based self-concept is emotionally constructed in the mind, but the whole thing has to begin with the I Am consciousness.
In previous essays, I’ve written about the ontology of the I Am consciousness that emotionally identifies itself with the personal form of its body through a process of emotionally constructing a personal body-based self-concept in its mind. The reason this has something to do with the ontology of what really exists or has real being is due to this emotional process being like a virtual reality movie that the I Am consciousness is watching from its own point of view as the projected and animated images of its own world are being displayed on the screen of its mind. The personal form of its body is only the central form that appears in that virtual reality world, like the form of an avatar or the central character of the movie. The emotional construction of a personal body-based self-concept in its mind is only like the self-referential narration of the movie by the central character, which are just more forms that appear on the screen of its mind.
The key thing to realize is that forms are being displayed on the screen of the mind, and as the projected and animated images of the virtual reality movie, they have no true being. Forms only have a fleeting, momentary appearance. They only appear to have continuity in time because of the illusory effect of memory. Memory creates the illusion of continuity, but memory is really nothing more than the self-replication of form in a recognizable way over a sequence of events. Any particular form that appears in the virtual reality movie only has a momentary existence and has no true being. The only thing that has true being is the presence of I Am consciousness, which is always present at its own point of view outside the screen of its mind as it perceives whatever appears to happen in the virtual reality movie. The I Am consciousness is timelessly present in an eternal now, which is a reflection of the true nature of timeless spiritual being.
The unreal has no being; the real never ceases to be • Bhagavad Gita
I’d like to expand this idea with an emotional dissection of the ontology of shame, which brings up several very interesting points about the nature of the emotional self-identification of the I Am consciousness with the personal form of its body. The first thing to realize is that the body is emotionally animated, and this emotional animation of the body is a direct result of the emotional conditioning of the body by the influences of Darwinian evolution, natural selection and the survival of the fittest body. It’s key to realize that the expression of emotions by a body is all about the fitness for survival of that body. Bodies only survive in the world as they express survival emotions, like fear and desire, which are inherently self-defensive as they defend the survival of the body.
The Emotional Construction of the Human Self-Concept in the Mind as a Personal Story that Our Minds Tell Ourselves about Ourselves
The next key thing to realize is that the personal body-based self-concept is always emotionally constructed in a social context. This idea of the human self-concept as a social construct, which is really nothing more than a collection of personal stories we tell ourselves in a social context, makes the clear distinct between the “I am” consciousness that perceives or knows about the story and the “me” that is the central character of the story. We are telling ourselves this story as the story is emotionally constructed in our minds in terms of a personal self-concept.
The essential idea is that someone has to know about the personal story that our minds tell ourselves about ourselves, which is the “I am” consciousness, while all the events of the story revolve around the central character of the story, which is the personal self-concept called “me”. This story is always created in a social context since the “me” central character of the story is always emotionally related to other characters that appear in the story. The very nature of that social context is emotionally constructed out of the expression of emotions that emotionally relate the “me” central character to other characters in the story.
As has long been recognized, as in the psychoanalytic work of Freud, that “me” central character is always body-based. The human self-concept can only be emotionally constructed in the mind as a body-based emotional construction, as one’s personal body is emotionally related to other bodies. The expression of emotions relates one’s body to other bodies, and in the process, creates the emotional context of this emotional construction.
This is a very good way to understand how the human self-concept is emotionally constructed in the mind in a social context, as one’s own body is emotionally related to other bodies, but this social context has an even more fundamental biological basis, which can be understood in terms of Darwinian evolution, natural selection, and the survival of the fittest body.
At the level of the human life-form, human behavior is determined by Darwinian evolution and natural selection. The behavior of the human life-form is driven by Darwinian evolution in the sense of the survival of the fittest body. The bodies that survive, which are the bodies that self-replicate and reproduce their forms, are the bodies that are best able to express the survival emotions of fear and desire, which leads to the survival of the fittest bodies. The expression of the survival emotions of fear and desire are in turn driven by the pleasure-pain principle. Whatever promotes body survival feels good and gives pleasure, while whatever threatens body survival feels bad and gives pain. At the simplest level of human behavior, the human life-form is pursuing whatever gives pleasure as it expresses its desires, and is avoiding whatever gives pain as it expresses its fears.
In essence, this is a system of reward and punishment that rewards the human life-form with pleasure when body survival is defended and punishes the human life-form with pain when body survival is threatened. This system of reward and punishment is how the behavior of the human life-form is conditioned to express fear and desire. In the sense of Darwinian evolution and natural selection, the bodies that are best able to express survival emotions of fear and desire are selected for survival, and are the fittest bodies that survive. Out of this self-defensive emotional expression, a body-based personal self-concept is emotionally constructed in the mind that has as its only real purpose the defense of body survival.
The emotional conditioning of the mind, which results in the emotional construction of a body-based personal self-concept in the mind, is being conditioned by a system of reward and punishment that is the essential nature of the pleasure-pain principle. Whatever promotes and defends body survival feels good and gives pleasure, while whatever threatens body survival feels bad and gives pain. The mind is being conditioned to emotionally construct the body-based personal self-concept in defense of body survival by this system of reward and punishment. This emotional conditioning occurs whenever a person is rewarded with pleasure when body survival is defended and is punished with pain when body survival is threatened. This emotional conditioning of the mind causes a person to defend body survival as though its existence depends on it. This emotional conditioning is being put into effect as the person expresses desires in the pursuit of pleasure and expresses fears in the avoidance of pain.
Even to say that the person and its mind are being emotionally conditioned to defend body survival as though personal existence depends on it is not exactly right. The spiritual presence of consciousness that perceives the behaviors of the body and mind, which can be called the mind’s eye that is the observer of the mind, is being emotionally conditioned to defend the survival of the body as though the existence of the observer depends on it. This is the essential lie at the heart of personal self-identification. The observer is emotionally identifying itself with the form of its body due to its perception of feelings of emotional self-limitation to the body that arise as body survival is defended.
The emotional expression of fear and desire is always being driven by the pleasure-pain principle. Whatever feels good and gives pleasure, like eating, promotes body survival, while whatever feels bad and gives pain, like being eaten, threatens body survival. When fear and desire are being expressed, a life-form is only pursuing whatever gives pleasure through the expression of desire, and that life-form is only avoiding whatever gives pain through the expression of fear. There is an inherent emotional conflict when the same thing sometimes gives pleasure and sometimes gives pain.
The human life-form is a social animal, and not only expresses the primitive survival emotions of fear and desire, but also the social emotions of emotional attachments. The immature body of a child cannot fend for its own survival, but must emotionally attach itself to the body of its caregiver in order to survive. At the level of the body, the expression of an emotional attachment is as self-defensive as the expression of any other survival emotion, as the purpose of the attachment is the defense of body survival.
There is one more important emotional expression at work in the defense of body survival, which is the fear of death. The fear of death is a very unpleasant experience, which most people don’t want to look at. Most people will try to push that fear of death out of their conscious awareness and keep it unconscious through a process of denial. The number one way people deny their fear of death is through their desire to be in control and have power over things. If you have absolute power over things, then you have nothing to fear, not even from death.
The problem is that whether people live or die is not really under their control, and so when they try to deny their fear of death by expressing the desire to be in control, they only create more frustration for themselves when they try to control what can’t really be controlled. The desire to be in control can only lead to frustration and a sense of futility.
People are not really in control of whether they will live or die. There is a universal power in control of whether any particular life-form lives or dies, which can best be understood as the normal flow of energy through the universe that animates all things. You can call it God’s will if you like. The expression of personally biased individual will only interferes with the expression of unbiased God’s will. This personally biased expression of individual will, expressed as the desire to be in control and have power over things, which is expressed as a way to deny the fear of death, only interferes with the normal flow of things and creates an emotional disturbance in that flow. When people try to control what really can’t be controlled, they only end up creating feelings of frustration for themselves and making things worse for themselves.
This problem is well summarized in the stages of death and dying. When confronted with the fear of death, people will first try to deny it through their desire to be in control, and when that fails, they become angry, and when that fails, they try to bargain, and when that fails, they become depressed. The final stage in the process of death and dying is surrender and acceptance when death is finally accepted.
The desire to be in control as a denial of the fear of death is the ultimate self-defensive expression that defends the survival of the body. Surrender is the ultimate antidote to this self-defensive expression, as body death is accepted.
What Determines Human Behavior?
Human behavior can best be understood in terms of two fundamental influences that determine human behavior. The first is the human ego, which is the body-based personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in the mind. The human ego is only a result of the Darwinian conditioning of the mind. There is no other way to understand the human ego except in terms of the emotional conditioning of the mind that is a result of Darwinian evolution, natural selection and the survival of the fittest body. That emotional conditioning has as its only purpose the emotional defense of body survival. That’s why human behavior is characterized by the expression of selfishness, self-defensiveness, and the defense of body survival through the expression of emotionally driven ego-defense mechanisms as though one’s existence depends on it.
The second determinant of human behavior is not really human at all. The second fundamental influence is the spirit. The spirit can only be described as a spiritual presence of consciousness that is present for the human life-form. It is present for the human body/mind. It is often called the Self, I Am, or the witness. Although it is present for the human life-form, it is really present at the center of its own world. That world is like a virtual reality movie that it is watching on the screen of the mind, and the body of a human life-form is only like the form of an avatar that appears in that virtual reality movie. The spirit does not really exist in the virtual reality movie. It is always outside the screen of the mind, only watching whatever appears to happen in the movie. That’s why the spirit is called the mind’s eye.
The spirit has its own spiritual existence or being, called I Am, that is independent of whatever appears to happen in the virtual reality movie. That spiritual being is independent of whatever appears to happen to the form of its avatar in the virtual reality movie. That spiritual being is independent of whatever appears to happen to its avatar, such as when that body appears to be born, appears to live a life in the world, or appears to die. That spiritual being can only be present for the human body/mind as it perceives whatever appears to happen in the virtual reality movie.
We acknowledge the influence of the spirit on motivating the behavior of the human life-form when we say things like how the spirit moved me. This acknowledges that the behavior of the human life-form is ultimately being driven by the motion of the spirit. The motion of the spirit is what emotionally animates the behavior of the human life-form. This naturally happens as the spirit focuses its attention on the behavior of the human life-form and that emotional animation of behavior naturally arises due to the inherent motion of the spirit. In a very real sense, the emotional animation of the behavior of the human life-form that appears in the virtual reality movie the spirit is watching arises due to the motion of the spirit as the spirit focuses its attention on that behavior.
There is only confusion about that state of affairs because the spirit is emotionally identifying itself with the emotionally animated form of its body. That emotional animation of the body always creates perceived feelings of emotional self-limitation to the body as that personal form is emotionally animated relative to all other forms that appear in the world that the spirit perceives. As the spirit perceives these feelings of emotional self-limitation to the form of its body, it tends to emotionally identify itself with that personal form. This tendency for personal self-identification is emotionally reinforced when personal bias arises in the spirit’s focus of attention that leads to the expression of personally biased emotions that have as their only purpose the defense of body survival as though the spiritual existence of the spirit depends on it.
This personal bias that arises in the spirit’s focus of attention really represents nothing more than a false personal self-identification that occurs as the spirit emotionally identifies itself with the emotionally animated form of its body. The spirit’s focus of attention becomes fixated on emotionally defending the survival of its body as though its spiritual existence depends on it. This personal self-identification is false because the spiritual existence of the spirit does not depend on body survival. This false personal self-identification of the spirit with its body is only the result of the Darwinian conditioning of its mind that results in the emotional construction of a body-based personal self-concept in its mind.
This discussion of the self-defensive nature of emotional expression is important in that it goes a long way toward explaining how the personal self-concept is emotionally constructed in the human mind. The personal self-concept is only constructed in the mind as a personal body-based self-image is emotionally related to the image of some other thing that appears in the world the observer perceives, which is typically the image of another person. These mental images are constructed out of memory in the sense of an emotional projection to a remembered past or an anticipated future. This emotional projection to a remembered past or an anticipated future always takes the observer out of the events of the present moment.
Where and when does the observer really exist? The observer is only a focal point of consciousness at the central point of view of its own world. The observer can only know itself to be that presence of consciousness. The observer only really exists here and now, in the present moment. Any personal self-concept emotionally constructed in the observer’s mind can only take the observer out of the present moment as a personal past is remembered or a personal future is anticipated.
The observer can only find itself in the present moment, here and now. This is the problem that no idea the knower can ever know about itself can ever be the true nature of the knower. The personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in the observer’s mind is only an idea that the observer has about itself. The observer knows about that idea, but the true nature of the observer can never be reduced to that idea.
The personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in the observer’s mind is really just a false belief that the observer believes about itself. Believing a false belief about yourself is the problem of delusion. The observer believes a false belief about itself, which is delusional, when the observer believes what its personal self-concept is telling it about itself, which is that the observer is a person in the world that it perceives.
Why does the observer believe this false belief about itself? The problem comes down to the self-defensive nature of emotional expression, the only purpose of which is to defend the survival of the body in the Darwinian sense of the survival of the fittest body.
When self-defensive emotions are expressed, the observer really feels emotionally self-limited to the form of its body as its body is emotionally animated relative to all other forms that appear in the world it perceives. That feeling of emotional self-limitation to the body causes the observer to emotionally identify itself with its body, which essentially is a false belief that the observer believes about itself, as emotionally constructed in its mind with the emotional construction of a personal self-concept.
Once emotionally self-identified with its body, the observer feels compelled to defend body survival as though its existence depends on it. Underlying the expression of self-defensive emotions is personal bias in the observer’s focus of attention that leads to the expression of more personally biased self-defensive emotions, which only perpetuates the vicious cycle. This personal self-identification is a lie since the observer is a spiritual presence of consciousness, and nothing the observer can perceive in the world can threaten the spiritual existence of the observer. The observer can only know itself to be that spiritual presence of consciousness, which has its own timeless spiritual being that is called I Am, and that depends on nothing it perceives in the world, not even whether its body appears to live or die.
The observer itself can only be understood as a focal point or presence of consciousness at the center of its own world. The observer has to be present to perceive its own world as it focuses its attention on that world. Everything the observer can perceive in that world is like the projected and animated image of a virtual reality movie that is being displayed on the screen of its mind. Even the observer’s body is only like the form of an avatar that appears in that virtual reality movie.
The screen of its mind displays both external sensory perceptions of that world, like sight and sound, and internal sensory perceptions of its mind, like thoughts, memories and emotional body feelings. All these perceptions are being displayed on the screen of its mind.
The observer is only confused about the difference between external perceptions of its world and internal perceptions of its body and mind because the observer is emotionally identifying itself with its body. The observer is creating an arbitrary boundary between external and internal perceptions in terms of the boundary of its body.
This arbitrary division of external perceptions of its world and internal perceptions of its body and mind in terms of the boundary of its body allows the observer to create the dualistic illusion of self and other in its own world. The observer is dividing up its world into self and other by emotionally identifying itself with the form of its body. This emotional self-identification with the form of its body naturally happens as the observer perceives feelings of emotional self-limitation to its body as the form of its body is emotionally related to all other forms that appear in its world. By dividing its perceptions into external and internal in terms of the boundary of its body, the observer is creating the illusion of self and other in its world. In reality, all its perceptions are being displayed on the screen of its mind.
The observer’s body is only the central form of information that appears in that world, like the form of an avatar in a virtual reality game. The dualistic illusion of self and other is only created as the observer emotionally identifies itself with its body due to feelings of emotional self-limitation to the form of its body that arise as its body is emotionally animated relative to all other forms that appear in that world. That emotional animation of form divides the observer’s world into self and other due to the motion of the observer itself, which is what makes the whole thing feel real as the observer perceives that expression of emotional energy and emotionally identifies itself with its personal form. Every expression of desire, fear, anger and blame creates a sense of separation and division due to that personal self-identification.
Unintegrated Trauma and the Human Condition
At the root of the human condition is unintegrated trauma that pervades human society, especially patriarchal societies, where that unintegrated trauma is passed down from generation to generation. This unintegrated trauma only becomes possible when we identify ourselves with our own bodies, which is always a personal identity. That personal identity can only develop in our own minds when we mentally construct a personal self-concept. That mental construction of a personal self-concept or a personal identity is always emotionally driven, and the prime emotion that drives the mental construction of a personal identity in the mind is the fear of death and its denial through the desire to be in control. The expression of these emotions is self-defensive, as they have as their only real purpose the defense of body survival. By defending your mentally constructed personal identity, you are also defending the survival of your own personal life-form.
This self-defense of your own personal identity that underlies the defense of the survival of your own personal life-form is at the root of the unintegrated trauma that pervades human society. This is all being driven by the fear of body death as though your existence depends on it. Body death is being falsely equated with non-existence.
The mentally constructed personal self-concept first begins to develop in the minds of children around 18–24 months of age. That’s when the unintegrated trauma pervading patriarchal societies is passed down from generation to generation. That unintegrated trauma is all about controlling the behavior of the child. The very act of control is traumatic. Personal identity is born out of this unintegrated trauma.
At the root of all this unintegrated trauma is the fear of body death, which is being falsely equated with non-existence. The inherent problem of the human condition is the problem of the human ego, personal identity, and the mental construction of the personal self-concept, which is being emotionally driven by the expression of fear and self-defensiveness, and not by the expression of love. It is the problem of identifying yourself with the form of your body and then feeling compelled to defend the survival of the body as though your existence depends on it. Self-defensiveness arises from the fear of body death, which is falsely equated with non-existence. It can be called the original trauma, or it can be called the original sin, just as the Bible calls it. The ego always says Blame it on anything other than me, but there really is no one else to blame except for the ego. It is the ego with its insane need to be in control as a means to deny the fear of its own death that is creating this unintegrated trauma.
Parents are people, and people become controlling, even with their own children, due to their fear of body death and their need to defend body survival as though their existence depends on it, which is their ego. At the root of the desire to be in control is the fear of body death. The desire to be in control is always a denial of that fear, and the very act of control is traumatic. As long as there are parents and people who identify themselves with their bodies and are under the sway of the fear of body death, which is the sway of their ego, their actions will be self-defensive and controlling. That’s not a condemnation of parents. That’s just an observation about the nature of the human condition and the ego. It’s just the willingness to see the human condition truthfully for what it really is.
The desire to be in control is a denial of the fear of death. Everyone denies their own fear of death through their desire to be in control. Patriarchal societies are how that control is imposed on others most forcefully and in its most traumatic way. This is especially problematic for a child between the ages of one and two years old when the personal self-concept is developing in its mind. This unhealed wound or unintegrated trauma, which is unconsciously stored as a memory in the mind, underlies the development of the child’s personal identity.
An Emotional Dissection of the Ontology of Shame
This brings us back to the problem of shame. The expression of shame is an unfortunate result of the observer emotionally identifying itself with the form of its body and then feeling compelled to defend body survival as though its existence depends on it, which is how unintegrated trauma is passed down from generation to generation.
It all begins as a child is socialized to behave in a way that is socially acceptable to its parents. Socially acceptable is all about defending body survival with the expression of emotions that feel good. If the child behaves in a way that is deemed bad by its parents, the parents tend to label the child as being bad. The child is labeled as being bad for behaving in a bad way, which is a kind of behavior that threatens body survival. The child is shamed as the child is labeled as being bad. Since this kind of labeling feels bad, in effect, the child is being punished for behaving in this bad way. On the other hand, when the child behaves in a way that is deemed good by the parents, which is the kind of behavior that promotes body survival, the child is being rewarded with this good feeling, and feels good.
The child eventually learns to internalize this system of reward and punishment, and learns how to reward itself with good feelings when it engages in good behavior and learns how to punish itself with bad feelings when it engages in bad behavior. The feeling of shame is really nothing more than this feeling of being bad that arises as the child engages in bad behavior, which the child first learns from its parents, but then learns to internalize into itself as a way of regulating its own behavior.
This internalized system of reward and punishment is all about how the child learns to regulate its behavior, and thereby achieves self-control. Self-control is all about the child learning to regulate its behavior so that only good behaviors that feel good are expressed, while bad behaviors that feel bad are repressed.
Underlying this desire to be in control is the fear of death. The desire to be in control is all about the denial of the fear of death. When the child engages in bad behaviors that feel bad, the child is living in the fear of death. There is always the fear of rejection by its parents and the fear that its parents may allow the child to die by not taking care of its needs if the child continues to engage in bad behavior. On the other hand, if the child engages in good behavior, the child is accepted by its parents and the child is allowed to continue living as the parents take care of its needs. The child’s desire for self-control is a way of defending the survival of its body.
The child’s parents also went through a similar process of emotional conditioning during their childhood as they learned to self-regulate their own behavior. This process of the child learning to self-regulate its own behavior is always a process of learning the system of reward and punishment that rewards the child with good feelings for its good behavior and punishes the child with bad feelings for its bad behavior.
Shame is the essential socializing emotion that enforces this system of reward and punishment. Shame is the essential socializing emotion that emotionally conditions the behavior of the child to behave in a socially acceptable or good way. Shame is really nothing more than the feeling of being bad that arises when the child behaves in a socially unacceptable or bad way. The feeling of shame is to be avoided at all costs since underlying that bad feeling is the fear of death. Self-control is the way the bad feeling of the fear of death is denied.
Shame is internalized when the child learns self-control and learns to regulate its own behaviors in a socially acceptable way. As long as the child only behaves in a socially acceptable way, the child does not have to experience shame. Only when the child begins to behave in a socially unacceptable way does the experience of shame return.
Underlying the bad feelings of the shame of being bad is the fear of death, which is denied when the child engages in socially acceptable good behavior. The good feelings of socially acceptable behavior are the carrot and the bad feelings of socially unacceptable behavior are the stick in this system of reward and punishment. The only real purpose of self-control is to defend the survival of the body. All expressions of the desire to be in control, by parent or child, are ultimately only a denial of the fear of death.
The human self-concept emotionally develops in the human mind between the ages of one and two years old. This is the same age that potty training occurs. In nature, an animal can poop on the ground and that is not a problem because the poop becomes fertilizer for new growth. In human society, if a child poops on the floor of the family’s house, that is a big problem. The family is highly invested in teaching the child to poop in the toilet and not on the floor of the house, and the way the child learns that lesson is by being shamed for its “bad” behavior.
Shame is the socializing emotion. The process of potty training is being emotionally driven by shaming the child. The child is called “bad” by its caregiver if the child poops on the floor. That “bad” feeling emotionally conditions the child to poop in the toilet instead of on the floor. The child learns self-control as the child learns to poop in the toilet instead of on the floor. That self-control is about learning to avoid “bad” feelings of shame.
Self-control, like any other form of control, is a denial of death. The “bad” feeling of shame is emotionally driven by the fear of death. The child is afraid that the child’s parents will not care for the child if “bad” behavior continues, and without that care, the child cannot survive. The child learns self-control as a survival strategy, which is driven by the fear of death.
Around the same time that shame is used as a way to emotionally condition the behavior of the child in a socially acceptable way, the child’s personal self-concept is emotionally developing in the child’s mind. That personal self-concept is really nothing more than a personal self-image that is emotionally related to the image of another. Shame is the socializing emotion that is emotionally incorporated into the development of the child’s personal self-concept. That is how the child learns self-control.
Get James P. Kowall’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
The child’s parents learned to internalize shame in a similar way from their parents when they were children, but then learned to externalize shame onto their own children when they became parents. This passage of shame down from one generation to the next is the unintegrated trauma of the human condition that is largely responsible for the emotional conditioning of the human mind and emotional construction of a personal body-based self-concept in the mind.
The important point is that shame can either be internalized or externalized. The child internalizes shame as a way to achieve self-control. Shame allows the child to distinguish between socially acceptable good behavior and socially unacceptable bad behavior. The parent externalizes that shame as a way to control its child’s behavior.
People who live in total denial of their own shame and who can only externalize that shame onto others have become shameless. Shameless people who can only externalize their shame onto others is in large part the unfortunate state of affairs that the world has come to.
The answer isn’t to live in a state of shame. The answer is to examine that shame and see to whom that shame really belongs. That shame belongs to a person in the world who emotionally enacts behaviors in that world. The first step in overcoming shame is always to look within and make a critical examination of how that shame has become internalized within yourself.
That shame is internalized in terms of how your personal body-based self-concept is emotionally constructed in your mind as your own personal form is emotionally related to other forms in a social context. That social context is being displayed on the screen of your mind. Your personal form is only the central form that’s emotionally related to all other forms, like an avatar that appears in a virtual reality movie. Shame is one of the ways your avatar is emotionally related to other avatars in that virtual reality world.
The important point to realize is that you are not your avatar in the virtual reality movie that you’re watching that is being displayed on the screen of your mind. You are the presence of I Am consciousness that is out in the movie audience only watching the movie. The only true thing you can ever know about yourself as you watch the movie is your own sense of timelessly being present in an eternal now as you watch the movie, which is a reflection of timeless spiritual being.
The Emotional Conflation of Human with Being
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience • Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
What do we mean when we use the term human being? My basic argument is that the term human being is a conflation of terms. We are merging two distinct ideas into one idea. The first idea is human, which only has to do with the behavior of a human life-form in the world. This is a complicated idea because it has to do not only with what a human life-form can appear to do in the world in terms of human behavior, but also the behavior of a human mind in terms of the formation of thoughts, memories, emotional experiences and a human self-concept. The mental formation of an idea is also a behavior, and may be the most fundamental behavior.
The second idea is being, which can be argued really has nothing at all to do with the behavior of a human life-form in the world. It can be argued that the idea of being only refers to spiritual being. When we use the word human being we are only conflating the idea of spiritual being with the behavior of a human life-form in the world. The easiest way to understand this is when we understand that spiritual being is what is perceiving the behavior of a particular human life-form in the world. In reality, spiritual being is only the perceiver of that human behavior for a particular human life-form. What we call spiritual being is really only a presence of perceiving consciousness that perceives those behaviors. Whatever behaviors a human life-form enacts in the world, including the formation of all mental behaviors in the human mind, spiritual being is what is perceiving them.
We are only conflating this idea of spiritual being as the perceiver of the behaviors of a particular human life-form in the world with the idea of being a human life-form into the term human being because spiritual being is identifying itself with the emotionally animated form of a particular human life-form. This self-identification is always emotionally driven in the sense of spiritual being feeling emotionally self-limited to the form of a human life-form as it perceives the emotional behaviors animating that human life-form. That conflation of spiritual being with the behaviors of a human life-form is only possible because spiritual being is emotionally identifying itself with the emotionally animated form of a particular human life-form as that human life-form enacts its behaviors in the world. In reality, spiritual being is only perceiving the behaviors of that human life-form.
This conflation of spiritual being with the behaviors of a human life-form in the world is only possible because these very distinct ideas are being merged together. That merger is what happens when spiritual being emotionally identifies itself with the emotionally animated form of a particular human life-form in the world. That merger is always emotionally driven in the sense of an emotional self-identification of spiritual being with a particular human life-form that enacts its behaviors in the world. In reality, spiritual being is only perceiving the behaviors of that human life-form. In reality, spiritual being is only a spiritual presence of perceiving consciousness at the center of that world that is perceiving the whole thing as those human behaviors are enacted in the world.
There are many people who won’t like this explanation for what is really going on here in the world. They won’t like it because it conflicts with the idea they already have of what the world really is. It conflicts with the idea they already have of what they really are. It conflicts with the idea they already have of being a human being in the world. For those people, I’d strongly recommend you stop reading this essay right now. Reading any further can only make you more angry and self-defensive, as you defend the idea you have of yourself as being a human being in the world. Nothing good can come of that anger and self-defensiveness, and so it’s for the best if you stop reading right now. There really is no point in reading this essay any further until you’ve developed some insight and have made a thorough examination of your own self-defensiveness and can get beyond it.
On the other hand, for people who are open to the idea of spirituality, and who have a longing for spiritual truth, keep reading as long as what’s being described here resonates with you. This essay is only a way to approach an understanding of spiritual truth. Spiritual truth can never really be conceptualized, but there is a way to approach an understanding of spiritual truth in conceptual terms that has a very long spiritual tradition that is found in many diverse spiritual traditions. It’s important to realize that all these spiritual concepts are only like a roadmap or signpost you follow that point the way as you make your own journey to spiritual truth.
The only thing different about these essays is that scientific concepts will be used to approach that spiritual understanding. For those who want to understand how spirituality can be totally consistent with science, and how spiritual concepts can be translated into scientific concepts, keep reading if this is of interest to you.
To go back to why the term human being is a conflation of the idea of spiritual being, which is the idea of the consciousness that perceives the behavior of a human life-form in the world, with the idea of that human life-form, we have to clearly define what we mean by the terms human life-form, the behaviors that human life-form enacts in the world, the idea of the world, and the idea of spiritual being. Each of these topics has to be discussed. This will be a scientific discussion since science will be used to understand what all these terms actually mean. For example, biology will be used to understand what we mean by the idea of a human life-form and the behaviors that human life-form enacts in the world, and modern theoretical physics will be used to understand what we mean by the idea of the world. Once we have a clear idea of what that world actually is, it then becomes very clear what the nature of spiritual being is that perceives that world and all the behaviors a human life-form can enact in that world.
The True Nature of Love and Existence
In its purest form, which is called agape, love is not an emotional expression. All emotional expressions of the body, like fear, desire, anger, blame and shame, are survival emotions that defend body survival. They can all be understood in Darwinian terms in the sense of the survival of the fittest body. Fitness for survival is all about defending body survival.
Agape is an ancient Greek word that describes unconditional, selfless, and sacrificial love. Unlike romantic or friendly affection, agape is a deliberate choice to prioritize the well-being of others without expecting anything in return.
Most people call sexual desire or emotional attachment love, but this is not true spiritual love. These emotional expressions are simply a reflection of Darwinian evolution and the survival of the fittest body. These expressions defend body survival, and as a spiritual presence of consciousness emotionally identifies itself with its body, they are self-defensive. Sexual desire defends body survival through the reproduction of the body. Emotional attachment is necessary for the survival of the body of a child that cannot fend for its own survival and must attach itself to the body of its caregiver to survive. The kinds of self-defensive emotional expressions are always immature, are personally biased, and are possessive and controlling.
True spiritual love is neither possessive nor controlling. It has no personal bias and is best understood as a state of spiritual maturity. True spiritual love occurs in a state of surrender, which is the willingness to give up the self-defensive desire to be in control. It is the willingness to come into alignment with the unbiased expression of God’s will and the normal flow of things, in which there are only feelings of connection to all things.
True spiritual love only occurs with the willingness to let go. It requires a state of emotional detachment. One only comes into alignment with the normal flow of things if one lets go and allows all things to freely come and go. Suffering only occurs when things are being lost. The unwillingness to let go leads to suffering when highly valued things are being lost and one can’t let go. True spiritual love is free of suffering because it is the willingness to let go.
How do we understand agape or the purest form of spiritual love? The answer is surrender, which leads to a state of mystical union of the Self with its Source, within which only feelings of connection are perceived.
To be alive, emotions have to be expressed. The expression of emotions implies motion. It is literally the point of view of the Self that is moving relative to its motionless Source. The Source has no life in it because the Source is motionless. Only the Self moves. The Source is like a motionless ocean of pure consciousness, infinite, timeless and undivided. The motion of the Self creates the screen of the mind, which is like the surface of the ocean. The screen of the mind only arises due to the observer’s own motion. The waves that appear on the surface of the ocean only arise because of the motion of the Self. That motion creates all emotional experiences, which are necessary for the experience of life. The motionless ocean has no emotional experiences, and so has no life in it.
The motionless ocean creates life and all emotional experiences by first differentiating itself into the point of view of the Self, like a drop that is differentiated from the ocean, and then creating the emotional energy that underlies the motion of the Self. That motion creates the surface of the ocean and the waves that appear on the surface of the ocean. An emotionally animated life-form is only a wave that appears on the surface of the ocean. Underlying the emotional animation of a life-form is the motion of the Self.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters • Genesis
This also explains the nature of the mystical union of the Self with the Source. Mystical union only arises when the motion of the Self comes into alignment with the normal way the Source creates all the energy that animates all things. The Self has a limited ability to move in its own way, which arises from personal bias in the focus of attention of the Self when the Self emotionally identifies itself with its emotionally animated personal life-form. That personal bias in the focus of attention of the Self leads to the expression of personal biased emotions that have as their only real purpose the defense of the survival of that life-form. The Self is defending the survival of its life-form as though its existence depends on it. The expression of self-defensive personally biased emotions only interferes with the unbiased expression of the divine will of the Source, which creates feelings of disconnection and personal self-limitation that reinforce the tendency of the Self to emotionally identify itself with its personal life-form, which leads to the expression of more self-defensive personally biased emotions, which perpetuates the vicious cycle of personal self-identification and self-defense. That personal self-defense is really only an ego-defense mechanism that occurs in the mind as the ego is emotionally constructed in the mind as a body-based personal self-concept.
The only way to break this vicious cycle is through surrender. The Self surrenders the expression of its own personally biased self-defensive emotions or individual will to the unbiased expression of the divine will of its Source. This naturally happens when the Self turns the focus of its attention away from its personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in its mind, looks within, and refocuses its attention on its own sense of being present as the spiritual presence of consciousness that is the perceiver of its own world. The Self naturally surrenders when it realizes the true nature of its own spiritual being, and that it really has nothing to defend in the world it perceives. Its personal life-form that appears in that world is only an illusion of what it really is. That illusion of personal identity is created in its mind as a personal body-based self-concept is emotionally constructed in its mind, which only happens as personally biased emotions are expressed. That emotional process of constructing a personal self-concept in its mind comes to an end when the Self surrenders and personally biased self-defensive emotions are no longer expressed, which naturally happens when the Self realizes the true nature of its own spiritual being that needs no defense.
When the Self surrenders the expression of its own personally biased self-defensive individual will to the unbiased expression of the divine will of its Source, the animating flow of energy through its life-form comes into alignment with the normal flow of all things, and there are feelings of connection to all things rather than feelings of disconnection and personal self-limitation. There are also expressions of creativity and right actions.
This is the natural state of a presence of consciousness that has surrendered to its Source. This is the mystical union of the Self with its Source, which always represents a death-rebirth transformation, as the false personal identity of being a person in the world, as emotionally constructed in the mind in terms of a body-based personal self-concept, dies away, and the true spiritual identity of being a spiritual presence of consciousness at the center of its own world is reborn. This is the normal way to live a life in the world, which is an awakening within the dream.
On the other hand, the ultimate state of spiritual enlightenment is a kind of death that has no life in it because it has no expression of emotions in it. This is an awakening from the dream. When the dreamer awakens from the dream, everything in the dream, including life itself, disappears from existence and only the true nature of the dreamer remains. The true nature of the dreamer can only be described as the infinite nothingness of No-Self, which is really the infinite potentiality for the creation of life and the creation of the emotional energy that animates all life-forms.
The Role of Suffering in Spiritual Awakening
Suffering plays an important role in spiritual awakening. The Buddha acknowledged this role for suffering with his statement Life is Suffering. In reality, only the ego suffers. The body can experience pain, but only the ego can suffer. This description is not quite right. The presence of consciousness that is present for the body/mind suffers when that presence of consciousness emotionally attaches itself to things it perceives in the world and emotionally identifies itself with the personal form of its body through a process of emotionally constructing a body-based personal self-concept in its mind.
This experience of suffering is only possible if the presence of consciousness emotionally attaches itself to things and emotionally identifies itself with its body. With that emotional attachment and self-identification, there is an unwillingness to let go and move on, which leads to suffering when that emotional attachment and self-identification causes psychic or physical pain. This is primarily the pain of things being lost. The unwillingness to let go leads to psychic pain when highly valued things are being lost.
Underlying this unwillingness to let go is emotional attachment, which always represents an emotional fixation of the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness on the things it has emotionally attached itself to. The number one thing that the presence of consciousness emotionally attaches itself to is its personal form, which occurs as it emotionally identifies itself with the personal form of its body and can’t let go, even when the body is sick or is about to die. That unwillingness to let go is the emotional fixation of the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness on its body and its mentally constructed and emotionally energized body-based personal self-concept. The focus of attention of that presence of consciousness has become emotionally fixated on the behavior of its body/mind, and in the process of that emotional attachment, can’t let go.
Suffering plays a role in spiritual awakening when that presence of consciousness has had enough suffering and becomes willing to let go. It wants out. It no longer wants to play the game. It becomes willing to give up, let go and move on. This willingness to give up, let go and move on always represents a cessation of the emotional fixation of the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness on its body and its body-based personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in its mind.
This willingness to give up, let go and move on is always a kind of death. It is not necessarily the death of the body, but it is always the death of the ego. Severing an emotional attachment always feels like something is dying inside because the ego is dying away. When the presence of consciousness finally severs its emotional attachment to its ego and personal form, its ego becomes dead to itself. This process of ego death always goes forward with the willingness to surrender and sever emotional attachments, which is the process of giving up and letting go. Pain can be experienced in the body, but suffering can only be experienced through the emotional construction of the ego in the mind. Spiritual awakening is always a process of surrender and detachment, giving up and letting go, which is the end of that suffering as it is the end of the ego, which takes place through a process of ego death.
The Three Key Steps in the Process of Spiritual Awakening
Spiritual awakening in large part is the process of cleansing the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness of its personal bias. This is the process of ending the fixation of the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness on the personal self-concept emotionally constructed in its mind. Until this fixation of its focus of attention on its personal self-concept comes to an end, that presence of consciousness cannot spiritually awaken.
The power of witnessing is in its power to cleanse the focus of attention of the consciousness that is present for the body of its personal bias that underlies its emotional self-identification with its body. That presence of consciousness is only emotionally identifying itself with the personal form of its body due to that personal bias in the focus of its attention that leads to the expression of personally biased emotions that are incorporated into the body-based personal self-concept that is emotionally constructed in its mind.
Spiritually awakening only becomes possible when the personally biased emotions that underlie the mental construction of a personal self-concept in the mind are no longer expressed, and that requires cleansing the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness of its personal bias. This is the process of that presence of consciousness losing the personal bias that is contaminating its focus of attention, and in the process, stopping the expression of those personally biased emotions that underlies the mental construction of its personal self-concept. There is no other way to spiritually awaken.
Spiritual awakening only becomes possible when one looks within and realizes the true nature of one’s own timeless spiritual being. As one looks within and focuses attention only on one’s own timeless spiritual being, one also turns one’s attention away from the world one perceives. When one totally withdraws one’s attention away from the world one perceives, one also totally withdraws one’s investment of emotional energy in that world that emotionally animates one’s personal form in that world. Ultimately, that is how one severs the emotional attachment to one’s own personal form, and in the process, cleanses one’s focus of attention of all personal bias, which allows one to stop emotionally identifying oneself with one’s personal form.
The only way this personal bias that contaminates the light of consciousness and the focus of attention of that presence of consciousness can be cleansed of that personal bias is if one stops expressing personally biased emotions, which are inherently self-defensive as they defend body survival as though one’s existence depends on it. One has to clearly see that the true nature of one’s existence is spiritual and does not depend on body survival. One has to become aware of the true nature of one’s own timeless spiritual being. In reality, that timeless spiritual being depends on nothing that one can perceive, and certainly not on whether one’s body appears to live or die.
Everything that one can perceive in the world is constantly changing over time and has no truth of spiritual being in it. Only one’s own sense of being present as the perceiver of that world is changeless and has the truth of timeless spiritual being in it. If one is to spiritually awaken to the truth of what one really is, one must turn one’s attention away from the world one perceives, look within, and refocus one’s attention on one’s own sense of timelessly being present as the perceiver of that world, one’s sense of beingness and presence.
There are three key steps in the realization of the true nature of one’s own timeless spiritual being. The first step is to turn the focus of one’s attention away from the world one perceives, look within, and refocus one’s attention on one’s own timeless sense of being present as the perceiver of that world, which is called I Am. One has to look within and realize that the only true thing one can ever know about oneself is that sense of timelessly being present. One has to bring oneself into focus through awareness of that timeless sense of beingness and presence, and realize the true nature of one’s own timeless spiritual being that depends on nothing that one can perceive in the world.
The second step is surrender. One has to surrender the expression of one’s personally biased individual will to the unbiased expression of divine will. This naturally happens when one realizes the true nature of one’s timeless spiritual being and that one really has nothing to defend in the world one perceives.
The third step is detachment. One ultimately has to sever the emotional attachment to everything that one can perceive in the world, including one’s own personal form. Again, this naturally happens as one realizes the true nature of one’s timeless spiritual being and that there really is nothing in the world that one perceives that one can call one’s own or that belongs to oneself.
When you sever your emotional attachment to everything you perceive in the world, including your character that appears in that world, you externalize and depersonalize yourself. You stop emotionally identifying yourself with your personal form that appears in that world. You see that world from the outside, with a sense of distance and detachment, like a movie that you’re only watching that’s being displayed on a screen.
When you depersonalize yourself and see your character as an image that’s being displayed and animated on the screen, you see that your character and all its anxiety ridden ego-thoughts is only an illusion of what you really are. When you see the illusion as an illusion, you lose interest in paying attention to the illusion. When you lose interest in the illusion, you then naturally turn your attention away from the illusion. That’s when you can really look within and refocus your attention on your own sense of beingness and presence, which is the only true thing you can ever know about yourself.
When you surrender, you can only know yourself to be a spiritual presence of consciousness at the center of your own world. Beyond this state of surrender is detachment. When you see the life your character appears to live in the movie of the world you’re watching as an illusion of what you really are and lose interest in paying attention to that illusion, you stop emotionally animating the illusion. You withdraw your attention away from the illusion, withdraw your investment of emotional energy in the illusion that animates the illusion, and sever your emotional attachment to the illusion. You sever your emotional attachment to the illusion and do nothing. You stop caring about the life your character appears to live in the world you perceive. When you stop caring about that life and sever the emotional attachment to that life, your character becomes dead to you. Your world becomes dead to you. You become empty of all emotional feelings about your character and the world your character appears to live in. When you sever the emotional attachment to everything you can perceive, you are only left with emptiness. Every sense of life is being drained from you. You become empty of all emotional feelings about your character and the world. That emptiness is what you must enter if you are to discover the truth of what you really are.
When you do nothing at a personal level, you awaken within the dream. You know yourself to be a spiritual presence of consciousness at the center of the world you perceive. That world is like a movie you’re watching that’s being displayed on a movie screen, and you’re only watching the movie from your seat out in the movie audience. This naturally happens as you surrender and lose all personal bias in the focus of your attention.
When you do nothing at an absolute level, you awaken from the dream. You totally withdraw your attention away from the illusion of living a life in the world, and that illusion disappears from existence. If you can remain aware of your own being, the sense of timeless spiritual being, while your world disappears from existence, you awaken from the dream.
As you turn your attention away from the world you perceive and look within, you become aware of your own sense of timelessly being present as the perceiver at the center of that world. As you look deeper and deeper into the emptiness of your own being, eventually that sense of presence fades away, the emptiness explodes into infinity, you fall into and dissolve into the emptiness, and all that remains is the infinite emptiness of your timeless spiritual being.
Spiritual Enlightenment is a Timeless Experience
Spiritual enlightenment is inherently a timeless experience because all motion comes to an end. All emotional expressions come to an end. Life itself comes to an end. It is the ultimate experience of death, as the spiritual being of the Self comes to rest in the peace of the pure timeless spiritual being of its Source. It is the ultimate experience of that motionless, timeless spiritual being. That is what one ultimately experiences when one awakens from the dream of living a life in the world. Although it is experienced as infinite nothingness or emptiness, empty of all things and all emotional experiences, it is really the infinite potentiality for the creation of life and emotional experiences.
The experience of spiritual enlightenment really can’t be discussed because it can’t be conceptualized. There is no description in terms of concepts that can describe it. The timeless experience of unlimited and undivided timeless spiritual being can’t be conceptualized. The best that one can ever do is to describe it by way of an analogy, as in the timeless experience of individual spiritual being, which is called the Self or I Am, dissolving back into its Source of unlimited and undivided timeless spiritual being like a drop of water that dissolves back into an infinite, undivided, motionless ocean of pure being. Since spiritual being is what one calls consciousness, individual consciousness, which is always present for a body/mind at a point of view, is dissolving back into its Source of unlimited and undivided pure consciousness, which is called nondual awareness, like a drop of water that dissolves back into the motionless ocean.
That individual presence of consciousness, present for a body/mind at its own point of view, is always differentiated from its Source of undifferentiated consciousness, like a drop of water that is divided from the undivided ocean, but must ultimately return to its Source by dissolving back into the ocean.
You are not a drop in the ocean. You are the entire ocean in a drop • Rumi
Relational ontology is only operative at the level of the mystical union of the Self with the Source, which can be understood as an awakening within the dream. At this level, the flow of life is inherent in the union of the Self with the Source in the sense of the normal flow of animating energy through all things. This normal flow of energy inherent in life is the essential aspect of mystical union, as one surrenders the expression of one’s own personally biased individual will to unbiased divine will and the flow of energy comes into alignment.
At the level of spiritual enlightenment, there is no flow of energy and there is no life. There is no union of the Self with the Source, only the dissolution of the Self into the Source. This is an awakening from the dream. When the dreamer awakens from its dream, everything in that dream, including life itself, disappears from existence and only the true nature of the dreamer remains, which is another way of saying that life is but a dream. The absolute nothingness that remains when one awakens from the dream, which is the true nature of one’s timeless spiritual being, has no life in it. Instead, it can only be understood as the infinite potentiality for the creation of life, which only happens when it creates life in the flow of animating energy.
The Eternal Mystery
Of course, there is a mystery wrapped within an enigma here that cannot be unraveled for the simple reason that absolute nothingness cannot be conceptualized. How can the absolute nothingness that has no energy or life in it create energy and life? How can the timeless create the experience of time? That of course is the mystery of infinite potentiality, and no matter how hard we work at trying to conceptualize it, we will never succeed because it can’t be conceptualized. It will forever remain an eternal mystery.
It’s important to point out that although the mystery of absolute nothingness and infinite potentiality, which is the mystery of One undivided, unlimited, and timeless consciousness, which is also called nondual awareness, can never be conceptualized, it can be directly experienced through the experience of spiritual enlightenment.
Continue Reading:
