|
Post by silence on Jan 17, 2014 10:23:39 GMT -5
just a question WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS ?? anyone ? The ability to experience.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2014 22:04:52 GMT -5
The process is this first we can't explain the world then we invent idea about consciousness so that we _feel_ like we can explain the world of course we didn't actually explain anything, but its important for us at least to feel as though we did because then we can ignore the nagging not-knowing and uncertainty. The best indicator to see that the ideas about consciousness is redundant is that it has not a single practical application. For example science can completely ignore consciousness and science would still work the same way as if nothing hapened. That's because consciousness is the ground on which science stands to do it's work. Specifically, the assumption of an objective observer apart from it's subject. Not only does science not need to question the ground in order to walk it's walk, it dare not.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2014 22:20:23 GMT -5
With the caveat that all words are made up and don't mean the same thing to everyone, or the same thing to one person in two contexts, some would define consciousness in the biological sense as the ability to perceive. In a larger spearichool context, we might say there is just one consciousness perceiving in infinite ways. As such, it is prior to form and is not driven by form, but merely expresses in form. Consciousness, and the expression of consciousness, are not separate any more than a ball, and the rolling of the ball are separate. Hencely, consciousness, which has no form, IS form. Formlessness is form, or maybe we could say consciousness is it's content.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 17, 2014 22:57:21 GMT -5
Greetings.. With the caveat that all words are made up and don't mean the same thing to everyone, or the same thing to one person in two contexts, some would define consciousness in the biological sense as the ability to perceive. In a larger spearichool context, we might say there is just one consciousness perceiving in infinite ways. As such, it is prior to form and is not driven by form, but merely expresses in form. Consciousness, and the expression of consciousness, are not separate any more than a ball, and the rolling of the ball are separate. Hencely, consciousness, which has no form, IS form. Formlessness is form, or maybe we could say consciousness is it's content. That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening? Based on our common application of language, and the struggle people have with understanding 'consciousness', i can describe in those terms my understanding of consciousness.. it is the capacity to store and recall memories/information, to organize information, and recognize patterns and cycles of information.. from which, all thought, conceptualization, intelligence, awareness and self-awareness originates.. that is the difference between chaos and order, the absence and presence.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2014 23:08:21 GMT -5
Greetings.. With the caveat that all words are made up and don't mean the same thing to everyone, or the same thing to one person in two contexts, some would define consciousness in the biological sense as the ability to perceive. In a larger spearichool context, we might say there is just one consciousness perceiving in infinite ways. As such, it is prior to form and is not driven by form, but merely expresses in form. Consciousness, and the expression of consciousness, are not separate any more than a ball, and the rolling of the ball are separate. Hencely, consciousness, which has no form, IS form. Formlessness is form, or maybe we could say consciousness is it's content. That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening? Well, then I wouldn't be able to answer his question, would I? That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 18, 2014 0:32:33 GMT -5
Greetings.. With the caveat that all words are made up and don't mean the same thing to everyone, or the same thing to one person in two contexts, some would define consciousness in the biological sense as the ability to perceive. In a larger spearichool context, we might say there is just one consciousness perceiving in infinite ways. As such, it is prior to form and is not driven by form, but merely expresses in form. Consciousness, and the expression of consciousness, are not separate any more than a ball, and the rolling of the ball are separate. Hencely, consciousness, which has no form, IS form. Formlessness is form, or maybe we could say consciousness is it's content. That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening? Based on our common application of language, and the struggle people have with understanding 'consciousness', i can describe in those terms my understanding of consciousness.. it is the capacity to store and recall memories/information, to organize information, and recognize patterns and cycles of information.. from which, all thought, conceptualization, intelligence, awareness and self-awareness originates.. that is the difference between chaos and order, the absence and presence.. Be well.. A substantial argument could be made that this definition would imply that any one of a number of complex software systems were conscious.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 18, 2014 1:18:24 GMT -5
just a question WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS ?? anyone ? There are different levels of consciousness. Animals have a certain degree of consciousness, a certain ability to respond to the environment. Sleep is a certain state of consciousness, especially dream sleep. We are in a certain state of consciousness, now, reading (or writing). We could call it ego-consciousness, being aware of the functions, thinking, feeling or acting (doing stuff physically vs just merely sitting, thinking or feeling). Franklin Merrill-Wolfe would call it consciousness with an object. Merely operating through the functions is not real consciousness, not what is possible. An then there is a deeper level of consciousness, a third state of consciousness. The third state is not ordinarily accessible. As we normally function we have "swiss-cheese" memory, stuff comes up mostly via associations. But in the third state of consciousness we can access, know all at once everything we know, we have self-knowledge. In the beginning this is not so comfortable as we have multiple contradictions within, in self-consciousness we are aware of the contradictions. So, something is present which is aware of functions, aware of thoughts and feelings (and actions). And this something can be present even without thoughts, feelings or actions. Franklin Merrill-Wolfe called this consciousness without an object. I'm not sure he is talking about the same thing, but you can have consciousness without the functions. Our ordinary state is to have functions without consciousness, that is, the third state is the real consciousness. I think this is where the Socratic injunction "Know thyself" comes in as well as an unexamined life is not worth living. But anyway, you know your self objectively, the good and the bad, in the third state of consciousness. You can know your functions as well as the third state of consciousness, that is simultaneously. The third state of consciousness is consciousness of the whole of oneself, all at once. And then there is a fourth state of consciousness where you know what's outside objectively, the exterior world, the universe (let's just say, theoretically.....not that you know the universe theoretically, but, it's theoretical for me)..... So, we are all on a continuum.....somewhere. ......Now, you can say all you want that these distinctions don't matter....that ALL is ONE..... .................... where ever any one person is on the continuum, a higher level of consciousness would be 'further'...... The fourth state of consciousness can be accessed very rarely by chance, but nothing really is remembered, one only knows something immensely significant occurred. Some people call this cosmic consciousness. It's the Whole, accessible, all at once. To be accessed, and remembered, the fourth state of consciousness must be through, that is, while in, the third state of consciousness. ...... further, besides knowing oneself intimately, can encompass more space than is ordinary......knowing....experiencing greater areas of space, that is, encompassing further distances, taking in more that is.....and time, also....reaching into the future........And these eventually by will, everything depends upon energy, a finer energy. There are 3 gates, attention, consciousness, will. sdp
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 5:37:37 GMT -5
Greetings.. With the caveat that all words are made up and don't mean the same thing to everyone, or the same thing to one person in two contexts, some would define consciousness in the biological sense as the ability to perceive. In a larger spearichool context, we might say there is just one consciousness perceiving in infinite ways. As such, it is prior to form and is not driven by form, but merely expresses in form. Consciousness, and the expression of consciousness, are not separate any more than a ball, and the rolling of the ball are separate. Hencely, consciousness, which has no form, IS form. Formlessness is form, or maybe we could say consciousness is it's content. That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening? Based on our common application of language, and the struggle people have with understanding 'consciousness', i can describe in those terms my understanding of consciousness.. it is the capacity to store and recall memories/information, to organize information, and recognize patterns and cycles of information.. from which, all thought, conceptualization, intelligence, awareness and self-awareness originates.. that is the difference between chaos and order, the absence and presence..
Be well.. Tzu, arent you confusing mind and consciousness what you describe are properties of mind mind is a derivative(?) (my english.., sigh)of consciousnes, a function, an organizer,among others, of consciousness and a very bad one at that...as we can see all around us consciousness being the source of knowledge, mind the organizer, storing is another function altogether, which is a function of the brain/body which, as is mind, is a function of consciousness..there are many levels of memory, right?, our evolutionary past is stored..where..in the cells?? or are you implying (as recent science seems to indicate) that consciousness is a storage facitity outside of the body?(google dean radin, time) they also now concede that thoughts come from outside the mind/body (candace pert, what the bleep), (as Aurobindo has been saying the past 100 years) so, as all is consciousness,vibrating at different levels of intensity, you are technically right, but the answer is much larger than to what you limit it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 6:22:22 GMT -5
i gave this reply to Enigma in the god particle thread, the yogi i mentioned has written records of thousands of experiments he did, more meticulous than a scientist, understanding the nature of the universe and consciousness.It is subjective...but he invites everyone to find out for him/herself sorry about this quote, but you may find it enlightening i bolded some comments of my own ´´When we discover consciousness, we find it is a force. Remarkably, we even start noticing it as a current or inner force before realizing it is a consciousness. (this i know as fact) Consciousness is force, consciousness-force, as Sri Aurobindo calls it, for the two terms are truly inseparable and interchangeable. The ancient wisdom of India knew this well, and never spoke of consciousness, Chit, without adjoining to it the term Agni, heat, flame, energy: Chit-Agni (sometimes also called Tapas, a synonym of Agni: Chit-Tapas). The Sanskrit word for spiritual or yogic discipline is tapasya, that which produces heat or energy, or, more correctly, consciousness-heat or consciousness-energy. Agni, or Chit-Agni, is the same everywhere. We speak of descending or ascending Force, of inner force, of mental, vital, or material force, but there are not a hundred different kinds of forces; there is only one Force in the world, a single current that circulates through us as it circulates through all things, and takes on one attribute or another, depending upon the particular level of its action. Our electric current can light up a tabernacle or a bar, a schoolroom or a restaurant; it is still the same current, though it illuminates different objects. So too, this Force, this Warmth, Agni, is till the same whether it animates or illuminates our inner recesses, our mental factory, our vital theater, or our material lair; depending on the level, it takes on a more or less intense light, heavier or lighter vibrations: superconscious, mental, vital, physical, but it does link everything together, animates everything. It is the fundamental substance of the universe: Consciousness-Force, Chit-Agni. While consciousness is a force, the reverse is also true: force is consciousness; all the forces are conscious. 53 Universal Force is universal Consciousness. This is what the seeker discovers. After coming in contact with the current of consciousness-force in himself, (this i know as living experience, S.)he can attune himself to any plane of universal reality, at any point, and perceive or understand the consciousness there, and even act upon it, since the same current of consciousness is everywhere with only different modes of vibration, whether in a plant or in the thoughts of a human mind, whether in the luminous superconscient or the instincts of an animal, whether in metal or in our deepest meditations. (it would explain why i can know--not always,mind you-what folk are thinking, or why i can feel their energy, even when they are on the other side of the planet)If a piece of wood were not conscious, no yogi could displace it through concentration, because there would be no possibility of contact with it. If a single point of the universe were totally unconscious, the whole universe would be totally unconscious, because there cannot be two things. With Einstein we have learned – a great discovery indeed – that Matter and Energy are interchangeable: E=mc2 ; Matter is condensed Energy. www.aurobindo.ru/workings/satprem/adventure_of_consciousness_e.htm#017 page 53-54
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 6:23:25 GMT -5
i gave this reply to Enigma in the god particle thread, the yogi i mentioned has written records of thousands of experiments he did, more meticulous than a scientist, understanding the nature of the universe and consciousness.It may be subjective...but he invites everyone to find out for him/herself...so far he does not dissappoint me sorry about this quote, but you may find it enlightening i bolded some comments of my own ´´When we discover consciousness, we find it is a force. Remarkably, we even start noticing it as a current or inner force before realizing it is a consciousness. (this i know as fact) Consciousness is force, consciousness-force, as Sri Aurobindo calls it, for the two terms are truly inseparable and interchangeable. The ancient wisdom of India knew this well, and never spoke of consciousness, Chit, without adjoining to it the term Agni, heat, flame, energy: Chit-Agni (sometimes also called Tapas, a synonym of Agni: Chit-Tapas). The Sanskrit word for spiritual or yogic discipline is tapasya, that which produces heat or energy, or, more correctly, consciousness-heat or consciousness-energy. Agni, or Chit-Agni, is the same everywhere. We speak of descending or ascending Force, of inner force, of mental, vital, or material force, but there are not a hundred different kinds of forces; there is only one Force in the world, a single current that circulates through us as it circulates through all things, and takes on one attribute or another, depending upon the particular level of its action. Our electric current can light up a tabernacle or a bar, a schoolroom or a restaurant; it is still the same current, though it illuminates different objects. So too, this Force, this Warmth, Agni, is till the same whether it animates or illuminates our inner recesses, our mental factory, our vital theater, or our material lair; depending on the level, it takes on a more or less intense light, heavier or lighter vibrations: superconscious, mental, vital, physical, but it does link everything together, animates everything. It is the fundamental substance of the universe: Consciousness-Force, Chit-Agni. While consciousness is a force, the reverse is also true: force is consciousness; all the forces are conscious. 53 Universal Force is universal Consciousness. This is what the seeker discovers. After coming in contact with the current of consciousness-force in himself, (this i know as living experience, S.)he can attune himself to any plane of universal reality, at any point, and perceive or understand the consciousness there, and even act upon it, since the same current of consciousness is everywhere with only different modes of vibration, whether in a plant or in the thoughts of a human mind, whether in the luminous superconscient or the instincts of an animal, whether in metal or in our deepest meditations. (it would explain why i can know--not always,mind you-what folk are thinking, or why i can feel their energy, even when they are on the other side of the planet)If a piece of wood were not conscious, no yogi could displace it through concentration, because there would be no possibility of contact with it. If a single point of the universe were totally unconscious, the whole universe would be totally unconscious, because there cannot be two things. With Einstein we have learned – a great discovery indeed – that Matter and Energy are interchangeable: E=mc2 ; Matter is condensed Energy. www.aurobindo.ru/workings/satprem/adventure_of_consciousness_e.htm#017 page 53-54
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2014 6:32:41 GMT -5
Greetings.. That's a lot conceptualizing about imagined ideas.. suppose the mind were still, and those thoughts you posted were silent, and you were simply paying attention to what is happening? Based on our common application of language, and the struggle people have with understanding 'consciousness', i can describe in those terms my understanding of consciousness.. it is the capacity to store and recall memories/information, to organize information, and recognize patterns and cycles of information.. from which, all thought, conceptualization, intelligence, awareness and self-awareness originates.. that is the difference between chaos and order, the absence and presence..
Be well.. Tzu, arent you confusing mind and consciousnesswhat you describe are properties of mind mind is a derivative(?) (my english.., sigh)of consciousnes, a function, an organizer,among others, of consciousness and a very bad one at that...as we can see all around us consciousness being the source of knowledge, mind the organizer, storing is another function altogether, which is a function of the brain/body which, as is mind, is a function of consciousness..there are many levels of memory, right?, our evolutionary past is stored..where..in the cells?? or are you implying (as recent science seems to indicate) that consciousness is a storage facitity outside of the body?(google dean radin, time) they also now concede that thoughts come from outside the mind/body (candace pert, what the bleep), (as Aurobindo has been saying the past 100 years) so, as all is consciousness,vibrating at different levels of intensity, you are technically right, but the answer is much larger than to what you limit it. No, i'm not confusing and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 6:46:53 GMT -5
Tzu, arent you confusing mind and consciousnesswhat you describe are properties of mind mind is a derivative(?) (my english.., sigh)of consciousnes, a function, an organizer,among others, of consciousness and a very bad one at that...as we can see all around us consciousness being the source of knowledge, mind the organizer, storing is another function altogether, which is a function of the brain/body which, as is mind, is a function of consciousness..there are many levels of memory, right?, our evolutionary past is stored..where..in the cells?? or are you implying (as recent science seems to indicate) that consciousness is a storage facitity outside of the body?(google dean radin, time) they also now concede that thoughts come from outside the mind/body (candace pert, what the bleep), (as Aurobindo has been saying the past 100 years) so, as all is consciousness,vibrating at different levels of intensity, you are technically right, but the answer is much larger than to what you limit it. No, i'm not confusing and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos.. Be well.. No, i'm not confusing (mind?)and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos..
that sound more like it i hate to ask but there was never anyone that showed you this ??This is typical Vedanta stuff...Aurobindo could have stated it as such...much more concise than your earlier contribution. is this really all your own discovery? it matters, since you seem to deny your past (your own process/experience of awakening--combat related)and expect from us to get your message without having gone through something similar. BUT chaos is a judgement, isnt it...i´ve had instances that the (temporary) chaos in my room was absolutely PERFECT...everything had deeper meaning, layers of meaning an experience far mor real than anything i usually live, which on the whole is not bad at all.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2014 7:10:39 GMT -5
No, i'm not confusing and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos.. Be well.. No, i'm not confusing (mind?)and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos..
that sound more like it i hate to ask but there was never anyone that showed you this ??This is typical Vedanta stuff...Aurobindo could have stated it as such...much more concise than your earlier contribution. is this really all your own discovery? it matters, since you seem to deny your past (your own process/experience of awakening--combat related)and expect from us to get your message without having gone through something similar. BUT chaos is a judgement, isnt it...i´ve had instances that the (temporary) chaos in my room was absolutely PERFECT...everything had deeper meaning, layers of meaning an experience far mor real than anything i usually live, which on the whole is not bad at all. It is the result of living Life, experiencing many paths/beliefs, and realizing/understanding an underlying fundamental actuality.. many teachers have added to my understanding, but i have no familiarity with your guru, Aurobindo.. i follow no particular teacher other than Life itself.. I don't expect you to 'get my message', i hope that you will get your own message.. all i hope to do is help you find the 'way' to your own clarity.. 'combat' was but a small contributor in the 'process' of realizing/understanding that paying attention without attachments is the most likely source of clarity.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 7:19:35 GMT -5
No, i'm not confusing (mind?)and consciousness, and i'm not separating them, either.. you/me/we/us/them/Life are consciousness happening.. consciousness makes itself known, to itself, through self-organization, order emerging from chaos..
that sound more like it i hate to ask but there was never anyone that showed you this ??This is typical Vedanta stuff...Aurobindo could have stated it as such...much more concise than your earlier contribution. is this really all your own discovery? it matters, since you seem to deny your past (your own process/experience of awakening--combat related)and expect from us to get your message without having gone through something similar. BUT chaos is a judgement, isnt it...i´ve had instances that the (temporary) chaos in my room was absolutely PERFECT...everything had deeper meaning, layers of meaning an experience far mor real than anything i usually live, which on the whole is not bad at all. It is the result of living Life, experiencing many paths/beliefs, and realizing/understanding an underlying fundamental actuality.. many teachers have added to my understanding, but i have no familiarity with your guru, Aurobindo.. i follow no particular teacher other than Life itself.. I don't expect you to 'get my message', i hope that you will get your own message.. all i hope to do is help you find the 'way' to your own clarity.. 'combat' was but a small contributor in the 'process' of realizing/understanding that paying attention without attachments is the most likely source of clarity.. Be well.. thank you, that helps a lot would you care to comment on the post earlier today where i quote a page ?it was a quick reply post, you may have missed it. (I´ll be gone soon, until monday or tuesday--i depend on public internet/state computer) have a nice
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2014 11:52:46 GMT -5
Greetings.. It is the result of living Life, experiencing many paths/beliefs, and realizing/understanding an underlying fundamental actuality.. many teachers have added to my understanding, but i have no familiarity with your guru, Aurobindo.. i follow no particular teacher other than Life itself.. I don't expect you to 'get my message', i hope that you will get your own message.. all i hope to do is help you find the 'way' to your own clarity.. 'combat' was but a small contributor in the 'process' of realizing/understanding that paying attention without attachments is the most likely source of clarity.. Be well.. thank you, that helps a lot would you care to comment on the post earlier today where i quote a page ?it was a quick reply post, you may have missed it. (I´ll be gone soon, until monday or tuesday--i depend on public internet/state computer) have a nice Simple phenomena spun into mystical language.. strip away the embellishments, 'get' the message, apply the message, and.. if the message works, your awareness is increased/expanded, then.. move on with living Life, rather than remaining attached to the message or the messenger.. How does the guru's message improve your experience of living your existence? if the guru is genuine, they send you on 'your own way' to your own self-discovery.. the problem is the variety of teachers/gurus wanting their special brand of mystical knowledge to be 'the' answer for everyone, or.. conversely, the student wants their teacher's special brand of mystical knowledge to be 'the' answer for everyone, but.. it is rare that the someone lets go of attachment and identification with 'their' special brand of mystical knowledge and genuinely seeks to find a way to 'give it away', without authorship, ownership, or qualification.. an analogy is like giving people very special mystical fish, without teaching the people to fish, because if the people could fish, they would find out that there's nothing special or mystical about the fish, and no special mystical hierarchy would distinguish the teacher from the everybody else eating fish, too.. Be well..
|
|