|
Post by enigma on Sept 12, 2011 12:00:30 GMT -5
You've gotten right to the heart of the matter. 'Something' is aware that mind comes and goes. Mind is an appearance appearing to YOU, which is why you can talk about it coming and going. If you were mind, you couldn't be aware of mind coming and going. You are even aware that consciousness comes and goes. It's more subtle because without consciousness you don't have a story to tell about this coming and going, but if you were consciousness you would have no sense at all of your own coming and going. Whatever you are watches consciousness come and go. You are aware of that, so what are you? I think that when we say "my mind is coming and going" it's actually mind that is making the assertion. The assertion is made by thinking about memories. Mind doesn't remember what happened in deep sleep but it has a memory of a time before the memory gap occured and so mind has to imagine a story where it went away into sleep and then came back into consciousness. Mind calls it sleep, it could also call it death, but really the most immediate conclusion is that there is simply no memory about what happened in deep sleep. Nothing happens in deep sleep, there's just the going and coming of consciousness, and 'something' knows this. Mind concludes that there is evidence of this incident, and that this is how it is known. Almost as an aside, have you ever 'programmed' yourself to wake up at a specific time? If so, who is watching the clock? And if you did, we would have to ask who is aware of seeing this awareness. Right, it wouldn't be possible as a conclusion derived from memories. Obviously, there aren't any. No, mind is just used to formulate the statement. Nothing at all happens in deep sleep. Ceasing the questioning is all that is necessary. The problem is in the ideas that lead to the questions, not in the lack of answers. If the question 'Are you, me and the chair a different awareness?' is seen as silly, you may be able to confidently assert that separation is not true.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Sept 12, 2011 12:20:17 GMT -5
There is no biological without awareness and no awareness without biological. I wouldn't say awareness is dependent upon form. Yes, awareness isn't dependent upon form, but it seems that when consciousness returns as a perception of the awareness, it always returns to where the story left off. There seems to be an association between awareness and the appearance of a particular manifestation, TRF and not Enigma. It's like the DNA code that manifests as a predetermined and particular biological organism, a human or a cat. I'm not sure, but perhaps there is a spiritual aspect to the biological code, that links the awareness to a particular bundle of energetic configurations, in this scenario a human configuration. And that's why the awareness only see's the appearances that it is associated with and not the appearances of say a Cat's spiritual and biological configuration. Maybe Question you can look at my logic here and see if it passes the smell test. Peace
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 12:29:06 GMT -5
What do you think happens when you touch or see something? Something from outside comes inside? Yes, I’m pretty much a consensual reality bot. I’m not very well versed in the neural pathways and such but it’s basically a magnificent chain of reactions that happens when I touch or see something. The apprehension of the resulting mental model that is formed from all that input is done using the key ingredients of brain and awareness. It’s my belief that that awareness is dependent on the brain, etc., not the other way around. No brain, no awareness. Seems pretty convincing to me but I am absolutely amazed and in awe of the articulate beings here at ST who object to this. And perhaps this is because Awareness knows that it is consensual reality that is the joke. I’m definitely open to that possibility.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 12:31:39 GMT -5
I'm with ya, sort of. Right now, living this life, it is the one thing that does not come and go. But when I croak I'm guessing that max's awareness will be gone too. And somewhere along the line between fertilization and now awareness started happening. Max doesn't have awareness. Max is an object that you are aware of. There is a body, thoughts, feelings, perceptions, memory that you are aware of. None of these things that you are aware of, has awareness, though in another sense, you could say it IS awareness. Oops, I said “Max’s awareness.” You’re right, that’s not true. Max (third person warning!) is just an assemblage of identification encrusted thoughts that sometimes assert themselves and sometimes don’t. It’s not like those identification encrusted thoughts have awareness, they’re just another upwelling of conditioning playing out on the screen of consciousness, where the light provided is awareness. Is that the other sense you meant? Yea, that’s right -- I pretty much have a mechanical notion of life -- one of the backstories of consensual reality. And it’s that notion that I’m fully willing to abandon ...but not without some due process. This notion of matter arising from consciousness... I can sort of wrap my head around it if I think of science and subatomic phenomenon and E = mc^2 and the actual, physical illusory nature of matter . But then calling whatever matter arises from, consciousness, well that’s one of those leaps that is either believed or realized or whatever you call it. Since I’m not in the business right now of adding beliefs, I guess this is just another one of those ‘I’ll see it when I see it’ thingies.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 12, 2011 13:31:47 GMT -5
Max doesn't have awareness. Max is an object that you are aware of. There is a body, thoughts, feelings, perceptions, memory that you are aware of. None of these things that you are aware of, has awareness, though in another sense, you could say it IS awareness. Oops, I said “Max’s awareness.” You’re right, that’s not true. Max (third person warning!) is just an assemblage of identification encrusted thoughts that sometimes assert themselves and sometimes don’t. It’s not like those identification encrusted thoughts have awareness, they’re just another upwelling of conditioning playing out on the screen of consciousness, where the light provided is awareness. Right, and as such you are the one watching the screen, right? You're obviously aware of what's on the screen, so you're prior to that. You're 'further back' than that. You're 'behind' that, and everything you see is in front of you. What's on the screen is all perceptions, thoughts, feelings, everything you are aware of. I meant that ultimately the screen is not outside of you but inside, and so you ARE the screen. Cool, we're not looking to add any belief systems here. The important thing is not what matter arises from, but that it never escapes it's source. Once again, the nightly dream analogy. From within the dream, there appears to be physical matter 'out there', but in reality there is neither physical matter, nor is there an 'out there'. There's just stuff happening on the 'screen' of your awareness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 13:42:16 GMT -5
You've gotten right to the heart of the matter. 'Something' is aware that mind comes and goes. Mind is an appearance appearing to YOU, which is why you can talk about it coming and going. If you were mind, you couldn't be aware of mind coming and going. You are even aware that consciousness comes and goes. It's more subtle because without consciousness you don't have a story to tell about this coming and going, but if you were consciousness you would have no sense at all of your own coming and going. Whatever you are watches consciousness come and go. You are aware of that, so what are you? <drumroll>....Awareness (or whatever). But is that Awareness the same exact thing that watches enigma consciousness come and go? To say yes to this seems like speculation to me right now. Or else it is some form of knowledge that I can only imagine (and doing it poorly). Well if you say so, boss. It seems like an inference however. If there's no consciousness, nothing about being FULLY aware can be anything but speculated about (I feel the dark side of question influencing me at the moment ) -- unless you're Jan Esmann. I agree with that. But they're separate in a similar way ocean water is separate from an ocean wave. Yet, an ocean wave can't happen without ocean water. And if one looks at an ocean wave from afar, one is apt to also call it ocean, the same as ocean water. They are separate concepts -- one perspective -- but the same from another perspective. No, they're not separate. They're dependent on that mind. But one can differentiate the dreamed mashed potatos from the dream-mind. Is differentiating not a form of separation? feeling confused. Here's when Darth says: FEEL the confusion, Max.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 13:46:41 GMT -5
And what are some examples of these thoughts that you consider "obsessive" and "based on separation"? Are they not all base on separation? I'm asking because I'm curious which thoughts should dissolve, and which are okay (for lack of a better word). what the heck are these ST going on about?? am i getting it now?? maybe I just need to spend more time observing the observer? i'm not enlightened...no way Jose. I'm mashed potatoes??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2011 13:52:04 GMT -5
Max please be careful of this kind of thing.... very dramatic! It's like "Pandora, don't open that lid. Whatever you do, don't open it....Bye, see you later, I'll be back in a half hour." I hereby welcome you and anyone else here to mercilessly poke me if I become intellectually stinky. I'm in it for the direct experience. A lot of this banter helps me formulate questions. Besides, I don't feel even close to intellectually understanding this -- matter arises from consciousness? I am a spoonful of mashers?
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Sept 12, 2011 14:13:17 GMT -5
Oops, I said “Max’s awareness.” You’re right, that’s not true. Max (third person warning!) is just an assemblage of identification encrusted thoughts that sometimes assert themselves and sometimes don’t. It’s not like those identification encrusted thoughts have awareness, they’re just another upwelling of conditioning playing out on the screen of consciousness, where the light provided is awareness. Right, and as such you are the one watching the screen, right? You're obviously aware of what's on the screen, so you're prior to that. You're 'further back' than that. You're 'behind' that, and everything you see is in front of you. What's on the screen is all perceptions, thoughts, feelings, everything you are aware of. I meant that ultimately the screen is not outside of you but inside, and so you ARE the screen. Cool, we're not looking to add any belief systems here. The important thing is not what matter arises from, but that it never escapes it's source. Once again, the nightly dream analogy. From within the dream, there appears to be physical matter 'out there', but in reality there is neither physical matter, nor is there an 'out there'. There's just stuff happening on the 'screen' of your awareness. That's true of course, but what is happening on the 'screen' doesn't seem to be random, anything but actually. If we agree that awareness is similar to the beam of a flashlight, then consciousness must be what the light shines onto. It seems reasonable to me that there are different consciousness configurations. Otherwise why would my particular conscious configuration keep returning to where it left off the night before? There seems to be a continuity of consciousness that is different than anybody elses continuity of consciousness. So what is the mechanism for creating and maintaining a particular consciousness? I think a brain would certainly fit that criteria of a code or programing organism, that simultaneously links to the consciousness, forming a coherent and sequential reality. It seems like the individual play of reality is co dependant, on a brain, a coherent consciousness, and awareness. Something is holding the consciousness in an predetermined position and linking it to a particular configuration, so really what is observed in itself, is self organizing...hmmmm So does the consciousness arising in the awareness, come complete with both a biological and spiritual imperative or code? If so, then how many separate waves of consciousness are arising in the awareness. 14 Billion?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 12, 2011 14:36:54 GMT -5
You've gotten right to the heart of the matter. 'Something' is aware that mind comes and goes. Mind is an appearance appearing to YOU, which is why you can talk about it coming and going. If you were mind, you couldn't be aware of mind coming and going. You are even aware that consciousness comes and goes. It's more subtle because without consciousness you don't have a story to tell about this coming and going, but if you were consciousness you would have no sense at all of your own coming and going. Whatever you are watches consciousness come and go. You are aware of that, so what are you? <drumroll>....Awareness (or whatever). But is that Awareness the same exact thing that watches enigma consciousness come and go? To say yes to this seems like speculation to me right now. Or else it is some form of knowledge that I can only imagine (and doing it poorly). Okay, that's fine. Is awareness form? Does it occupy space? Is it located somewhere? Is it here as opposed to there? Don't focus too much on what you think it is, look to see what it isn't. The dark side of Question, Hehe. I'm not, but I'm likely staring at the same thing Jan is staring at, and trying to talk about. Imagining is dangerous, but it can also focus the attention. Imagine that right now all sensation, thought and feeling ceased. Does this mean that alert attention ceases, or are you still present and fully alert, fully aware as being, but with no thought about it? Did YOU go away along with the sensations, or are YOU still here? I suggest that deep sleep is precisely that. Right, but the wave/ocean analogy doesn't really point to some fundamental substance out of which different objects can form. It refers to a movement, an expression, inseparable in any substantial way from the ocean except as a distinction in mind. To stretch the analogy further, perceiving separation would be like staring out over a pond, and noticing a glint of sunlight reflected from the surface, and saying "Hey, a light just appeared separate from the pond!" Of course, nothing is there other than pond (and maybe a frog or two). Not pond in it's energetic form as the positron nuclei of the subatomic collapsing probability wave of the blah, blah,....... just pond, right now. You only imagine you see something else. Yes, one CAN differentiate, but is it true or just imagined? What do you mean when you say 'mind'? Are you referring to an object or a process of dreaming mashed potatoes?
|
|
|
Post by tathagata on Sept 12, 2011 14:44:52 GMT -5
Max please be careful of this kind of thing.... very dramatic! It's like "Pandora, don't open that lid. Whatever you do, don't open it....Bye, see you later, I'll be back in a half hour." I hereby welcome you and anyone else here to mercilessly poke me if I become intellectually stinky. I'm in it for the direct experience. A lot of this banter helps me formulate questions. Besides, I don't feel even close to intellectually understanding this -- matter arises from consciousness? I am a spoonful of mashers? Max to be clear, I agree with enigmas statement above that BOTH experience and contemplation are needed, I wasn't trying to say that contemplation is a pandoras box that should not be opened, I was saying that it can become one if your not careful LOL...what I was saying is that you can become trapped in the success of contemplation become satisfied with your conclusions, ego can then take over... Both contemplation and direct intimate experience are needed for understanding....but i've always found that its better to experience first, then contemplate, versus contemplate first then experience....this is why I have said techniques are for doing not talking LOL.... My advice, observe the observer as much and as often as possible, I.e. experience...and then contemplate....often the direct and intimate experience portion will bring much needed clarity to your contemplation, and it will often also bring intuitive leaps in your contemplation...I.e. direct intimate experience will often bridge the gaps in your intellectual understanding. This is what is meant when we say all the answers and all truth is already there inside you. Use technique to get to the direct experience of your true nature, then contemplate this experience to adjust your worldview...wash rinse repeat LOL.
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Sept 12, 2011 14:55:46 GMT -5
Hey Ivory, The most dominant set of thoughts that block clarity, is the belief that we are a body, we're going to grow old, we're going to get sick, and of course the biggy, that we are going to die. If it is not possible to die, because we were never born, just think what that realization does to all the other problems we 'think' we have in life...hehe Another thought is how we think that we have no control over life. And yet that which we are 'is' the ultimate power in the universe. We never see the grandeur of this life, instead we look at the thoughts of littleness and then we believe them into existence. Peace TRF, I've really enjoyed your comments as of late. I don't know why it was that I failed to recognize what you were saying earlier on when I first joined this board. You seem to point rather directly, and emphasize the major beliefs as opposed to the smaller egoic issues and such. I find that interesting. I bookmarked this post you wrote a while back. With the exception of ego, I haven't spent much time investigating with the intention of seeing through what I am not. I suppose that may be why I never found the question, "What am I?" all that interesting. I suppose that if I was uncertain of what I was the inquiry would be much more focused as it would come from a place of curiosity. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=misc&thread=1184&page=1#12810Anyways, is it really that easy to see through the belief that "I am the body?" One quick look? I'll def spend some time with this one.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Sept 12, 2011 15:30:18 GMT -5
Hey Ivory, The most dominant set of thoughts that block clarity, is the belief that we are a body, we're going to grow old, we're going to get sick, and of course the biggy, that we are going to die. If it is not possible to die, because we were never born, just think what that realization does to all the other problems we 'think' we have in life...hehe Another thought is how we think that we have no control over life. And yet that which we are 'is' the ultimate power in the universe. We never see the grandeur of this life, instead we look at the thoughts of littleness and then we believe them into existence. Peace TRF, I've really enjoyed your comments as of late. I don't know why it was that I failed to recognize what you were saying earlier on when I first joined this board. You seem to point rather directly, and emphasize the major beliefs as opposed to the smaller egoic issues and such. I find that interesting. I bookmarked this post you wrote a while back. With the exception of ego, I haven't spent much time investigating with the intention of seeing through what I am not. I suppose that may be why I never found the question, "What am I?" all that interesting. I suppose that if I was uncertain of what I was the inquiry would be much more focused as it would come from a place of curiosity. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=misc&thread=1184&page=1#12810Anyways, is it really that easy to see through the belief that "I am the body?" One quick look? I'll def spend some time with this one. Wonderful to hear from you again Ivory... No, it is not easy, because you are in effect denying the core belief you've held, ever since you looked into a mirror and realized you had a body. It's taken a lifetime to reinforce that belief, but rest assured it won't take another life time to un learn it... Peace
|
|
|
Post by tathagata on Sept 12, 2011 15:55:22 GMT -5
Hey Ivory, The most dominant set of thoughts that block clarity, is the belief that we are a body, we're going to grow old, we're going to get sick, and of course the biggy, that we are going to die. If it is not possible to die, because we were never born, just think what that realization does to all the other problems we 'think' we have in life...hehe Another thought is how we think that we have no control over life. And yet that which we are 'is' the ultimate power in the universe. We never see the grandeur of this life, instead we look at the thoughts of littleness and then we believe them into existence. Peace TRF, I've really enjoyed your comments as of late. I don't know why it was that I failed to recognize what you were saying earlier on when I first joined this board. You seem to point rather directly, and emphasize the major beliefs as opposed to the smaller egoic issues and such. I find that interesting. I bookmarked this post you wrote a while back. With the exception of ego, I haven't spent much time investigating with the intention of seeing through what I am not. I suppose that may be why I never found the question, "What am I?" all that interesting. I suppose that if I was uncertain of what I was the inquiry would be much more focused as it would come from a place of curiosity. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=misc&thread=1184&page=1#12810Anyways, is it really that easy to see through the belief that "I am the body?" One quick look? I'll def spend some time with this one. it can be as easy as one quick look, and sometimes not, this is becuase habitual belief can be a very powerful force, and sometimes it takes some effort to undo it. try a little imagination game that can help with the realization that you are not only your body...imagine like in one of those movies where people switch bodies that you switch bodies with someone, if you did this, if you switched bodies somehow, would you still be you? of course you would, so you are not just your body, if you changed bodies you would still be you, but your mind would be in a differant body. but to go a little deeper, you have your identity that is more than just your body, it is also your mind. I define mind as the accumilation of all your memories and thoughts and beliefs and ideas that make you an individual, but the mind as defined in this way arises in your awareness, it arises in your pure "I amness" and this i amness shapes into I am ivory, I am this person, I am am this mind, I am this body, I am these thoughts etc. the truth is that you are your body but thats not the whole truth, you are also your mind that is more than just your body, and you are also awareness/I amness that arises from the stilness of unbeing being. your mind and your body arise from awareness/I amness, but to go a step further you have to go beyond I amness into the silent stillness that is the unwitnessing witness. When you die your mind dies and your body dies, the individual characteristics that your I amness/awareness shaped dies, but you I amness/awareness ((edit) manifests) another body and mind and reforms another life...but just as you are not your body and not your mind, you are also not your awareness...or rather you are all these things but they are parts of a whole. Awareness is a happening, a doing, an isness that is not manifested into anything, it is pure "I am" without any descriptors following, it is the being of unformed potential, but it is still "being". This is not all of you just as your body and mind are not all of you...beyond pure awareness, beyond I amness, is unbeing being, the eternal stillness that is unmoving and unbeing. That which is beyond awareness, it cannot be grasped or understood or shaped from inside awareness, it is the void in which awareness IS. You cannot experience this with awareness, you can only let go of, or surrender awareness and enter without entering. this is the essence of all technique, and it is the essence of ramana maharshi's technique...observe the observer, observe the awareness, observe the I amness. Observing something is in some ways moving outside of it to gain a broader view. You cannot observe awareness from inside awareness. You cannot do this from awareness, to observe the i amness, to observe the awareness, you can only do it by moving beyond, but there is no thing beyond awareness, there is only the eternal nonbeing being, the eternal stillness where awareness is no more, where the i amness is no more...so when you observe the observer you stop observing, there is no thing, no i amness to observe. When you observe the observer you move beyond creation to that which is changeless, unmoving, and eternal, this is the union with god or brahma described in the vedas, and it is what jesus was talking about when he said I and the father are one. Awareness both observes and creates in the same instant, observation is the means of creation by the awareness...the jewish mystics say we are the hands of God for just this reason...becuase our awareness observes, and by observing creates. Our awareness is the hand of god, the means of creation, but awareness is not god just as you are not your body...god, which is your true full nature, is the eternal stillness that awareness arises in. Herein lays the paradox that cannot be grasped, awareness arises in eternal stillness. How can anything arise in eternal stillness? it is a paradox, and this paradox cannot be solved by the mind, it can be excepted and surrendered to, but it cannot be solved.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 12, 2011 16:42:43 GMT -5
TRF, I've really enjoyed your comments as of late. I don't know why it was that I failed to recognize what you were saying earlier on when I first joined this board. You seem to point rather directly, and emphasize the major beliefs as opposed to the smaller egoic issues and such. I find that interesting. I bookmarked this post you wrote a while back. With the exception of ego, I haven't spent much time investigating with the intention of seeing through what I am not. I suppose that may be why I never found the question, "What am I?" all that interesting. I suppose that if I was uncertain of what I was the inquiry would be much more focused as it would come from a place of curiosity. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=misc&thread=1184&page=1#12810Anyways, is it really that easy to see through the belief that "I am the body?" One quick look? I'll def spend some time with this one. it can be as easy as one quick look, and sometimes not, this is becuase habitual belief can be a very powerful force, and sometimes it takes some effort to undo it. try a little imagination game that can help with the realization that you are not only your body...imagine like in one of those movies where people switch bodies that you switch bodies with someone, if you did this, if you switched bodies somehow, would you still be you? of course you would, so you are not just your body, if you changed bodies you would still be you, but your mind would be in a differant body. but to go a little deeper, you have your identity that is more than just your body, it is also your mind. I define mind as the accumilation of all your memories and thoughts and beliefs and ideas that make you an individual, but the mind as defined in this way arises in your awareness, it arises in your pure "I amness" and this i amness shapes into I am ivory, I am this person, I am am this mind, I am this body, I am these thoughts etc. the truth is that you are your body but thats not the whole truth, you are also your mind that is more than just your body, and you are also awareness/I amness that arises from the stilness of unbeing being. your mind and your body arise from awareness/I amness, but to go a step further you have to go beyond I amness into the silent stillness that is the unwitnessing witness. When you die your mind dies and your body dies, the individual characteristics that your I amness/awareness shaped dies, but you I amness/awareness moves into another body and mind and reforms another life...but just as you are not your body and not your mind, you are also not your awareness...or rather you are all these things but they are parts of a whole. Awareness is a happening, a doing, an isness that is not manifested into anything, it is pure "I am" without any descriptors following, it is the being of unformed potential, but it is still "being". This is not all of you just as your body and mind are not all of you...beyond pure awareness, beyond I amness, is unbeing being, the eternal stillness that is unmoving and unbeing. That which is beyond awareness, it cannot be grasped or understood or shaped from inside awareness, it is the void in which awareness IS. You cannot experience this with awareness, you can only let go of, or surrender awareness and enter without entering. this is the essence of all technique, and it is the essence of ramana maharshi's technique...observe the observer, observe the awareness, observe the I amness. Observing something is in some ways moving outside of it to gain a broader view. You cannot observe awareness from inside awareness. You cannot do this from awareness, to observe the i amness, to observe the awareness, you can only do it by moving beyond, but there is no thing beyond awareness, there is only the eternal nonbeing being, the eternal stillness where awareness is no more, where the i amness is no more...so when you observe the observer you stop observing, there is no thing, no i amness to observe. When you observe the observer you move beyond creation to that which is changeless, unmoving, and eternal, this is the union with god or brahma described in the vedas, and it is what jesus was talking about when he said I and the father are one. Awareness both observes and creates in the same instant, observation is the means of creation by the awareness...the jewish mystics say we are the hands of God for just this reason...becuase our awareness observes, and by observing creates. Our awareness is the hand of god, the means of creation, but awareness is not god just as you are not your body...god, which is your true full nature, is the eternal stillness that awareness arises in. Herein lays the paradox that cannot be grasped, awareness arises in eternal stillness. How can anything arise in eternal stillness? it is a paradox, and this paradox cannot be solved by the mind, it can be excepted and surrendered to, but it cannot be solved. I like this. I think youve just earned yourself some more good karma hehe
|
|