|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 9, 2014 5:34:06 GMT -5
You seem to be a rather self-reliant - independent type, as well, 'bum. I wasn't saying anything negative about self reliance, I was just expanding on my interpretation of the still-mind. The still mind, looks and sees and experiences, with the realization that what 'is happening' is a 'work in progress', the evolution of consciousness.. so, the still mind engages what is happening without becoming attached to what 'was', remaining fluid in the ever changing evolution of self-discovery..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 9, 2014 5:42:32 GMT -5
That notion that consciousness is evolving is an explanation of an active mind about what it thinks is happening.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 9, 2014 8:40:38 GMT -5
That notion that consciousness is evolving is an explanation of an active mind about what it thinks is happening. Niz makes a clear distinction between consciousness and Awareness as the Ground in which consciousness arises. This is an extremely radical thing to say, but indeed he is saying it. The implications, if true, are utterly mind blowing, if you'll pardon the pun. "Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not, one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all – being as well as non-being."
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 9, 2014 9:29:35 GMT -5
I wasn't saying anything negative about self reliance, I was just expanding on my interpretation of the still-mind. The still mind, looks and sees and experiences, with the realization that what 'is happening' is a 'work in progress', the evolution of consciousness.. so, the still mind engages what is happening without becoming attached to what 'was', remaining fluid in the ever changing evolution of self-discovery.. I think I've become so desensitized to your writings about "still mind" by now that it may as well be a text block about how to beat mario kart while upside down. Given, I don't have a problem with the advice. Really, I'm just wondering if you can engage in conversations without the mantra.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 9, 2014 9:30:15 GMT -5
That notion that consciousness is evolving is an explanation of an active mind about what it thinks is happening. Niz makes a clear distinction between consciousness and Awareness as the Ground in which consciousness arises. This is an extremely radical thing to say, but indeed he is saying it. The implications, if true, are utterly mind blowing, if you'll pardon the pun. "Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not, one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all – being as well as non-being." Yes, individuated consciousness comes and goes while awareness remains. The fact that you are aware of being conscious tells you that awareness is prior to consciousness. It is, however, a realization and not a conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 9, 2014 10:27:01 GMT -5
The still mind, looks and sees and experiences, with the realization that what 'is happening' is a 'work in progress', the evolution of consciousness.. so, the still mind engages what is happening without becoming attached to what 'was', remaining fluid in the ever changing evolution of self-discovery.. I think I've become so desensitized to your writings about "still mind" by now that it may as well be a text block about how to beat mario kart while upside down. Given, I don't have a problem with the advice. Really, I'm just wondering if you can engage in conversations without the mantra. Seriously? a site that drones non-duality mantras, and you find what i write to be mantra-like? try engaging me in open minded conversation, conversation that isn't predicated on special imagined experiences where it is believed that everything is an illusion..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 9, 2014 14:31:28 GMT -5
That notion that consciousness is evolving is an explanation of an active mind about what it thinks is happening. Niz makes a clear distinction between consciousness and Awareness as the Ground in which consciousness arises. This is an extremely radical thing to say, but indeed he is saying it. The implications, if true, are utterly mind blowing, if you'll pardon the pun. "Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not, one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all – being as well as non-being." The way he's using the terms is really useful to bring the attention of his listeners to what it is they can attend -- their consciousness, what appears to them as the witness -- and to put them on notice by way of indirection of what is beyond (or prior-to) that, and thereby not expressible by conception. My guess is that Niz would say that awareness is open and formless ... empty, and consciousness arises with any initial distinction, with the first thought or emotion ... but that is not to say that consciousness arises within awareness, as awareness isn't objectifiable and as such not subject to the dichotomy of within or without. I understand his reference to God as related to the common association of God with creation, and here again, what he's referring to by awareness isn't subject to the notion of creation, as it has no boundary, no beginning and no end. The 'pilgrim's references to SOI or En Sof get into this idea, as, from casual reading, did some of the Gnostic Christians before they were slaughtered after Nicea. Niz was raised a Hindu, and what I've read suggests that to conceive of Hinduism as polythiestic is to fall into a trap of literalism. My guess is that there's likely a Vendatic tradition of challenging the student to let go of the notion of whatever God head he'd been conditioned to show devotion to.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 9, 2014 14:34:15 GMT -5
Niz makes a clear distinction between consciousness and Awareness as the Ground in which consciousness arises. This is an extremely radical thing to say, but indeed he is saying it. The implications, if true, are utterly mind blowing, if you'll pardon the pun. "Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not, one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all – being as well as non-being." Yes, individuated consciousness comes and goes while awareness remains. The fact that you are aware of being conscious tells you that awareness is prior to consciousness. It is, however, a realization and not a conclusion. nice.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 9, 2014 17:32:51 GMT -5
Niz makes a clear distinction between consciousness and Awareness as the Ground in which consciousness arises. This is an extremely radical thing to say, but indeed he is saying it. The implications, if true, are utterly mind blowing, if you'll pardon the pun. "Consciousness is an attribute while awareness is not, one can be aware of being conscious, but not conscious of awareness. God is the totality of consciousness, but awareness is beyond all – being as well as non-being." The way he's using the terms is really useful to bring the attention of his listeners to what it is they can attend -- their consciousness, what appears to them as the witness -- and to put them on notice by way of indirection of what is beyond (or prior-to) that, and thereby not expressible by conception. My guess is that Niz would say that awareness is open and formless ... empty, and consciousness arises with any initial distinction, with the first thought or emotion ... but that is not to say that consciousness arises within awareness, as awareness isn't objectifiable and as such not subject to the dichotomy of within or without. I understand his reference to God as related to the common association of God with creation, and here again, what he's referring to by awareness isn't subject to the notion of creation, as it has no boundary, no beginning and no end. The 'pilgrim's references to SOI or En Sof get into this idea, as, from casual reading, did some of the Gnostic Christians before they were slaughtered after Nicea. Niz was raised a Hindu, and what I've read suggests that to conceive of Hinduism as monothiestic is to fall into a trap of literalism. My guess is that there's likely a Vendatic tradition of challenging the student to let go of the notion of whatever God head he'd been conditioned to show devotion to. It's a pointer, of course, and I actually like the image of stuff arising within awareness cuz it implies nothing is outside or separate.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 9, 2014 18:03:03 GMT -5
The way he's using the terms is really useful to bring the attention of his listeners to what it is they can attend -- their consciousness, what appears to them as the witness -- and to put them on notice by way of indirection of what is beyond (or prior-to) that, and thereby not expressible by conception. My guess is that Niz would say that awareness is open and formless ... empty, and consciousness arises with any initial distinction, with the first thought or emotion ... but that is not to say that consciousness arises within awareness, as awareness isn't objectifiable and as such not subject to the dichotomy of within or without. I understand his reference to God as related to the common association of God with creation, and here again, what he's referring to by awareness isn't subject to the notion of creation, as it has no boundary, no beginning and no end. The 'pilgrim's references to SOI or En Sof get into this idea, as, from casual reading, did some of the Gnostic Christians before they were slaughtered after Nicea. Niz was raised a Hindu, and what I've read suggests that to conceive of Hinduism as monothiestic is to fall into a trap of literalism. My guess is that there's likely a Vendatic tradition of challenging the student to let go of the notion of whatever God head he'd been conditioned to show devotion to. It's a pointer, of course, and I actually like the image of stuff arising within awareness cuz it implies nothing is outside or separate. (** flicks ashes on nearby frog statue **)
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 9, 2014 18:40:09 GMT -5
It's a pointer, of course, and I actually like the image of stuff arising within awareness cuz it implies nothing is outside or separate. Amen Brother!
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 9, 2014 19:14:02 GMT -5
Awareness is not something that other things happen within, awareness comes and goes.. while you were sleeping, and unaware of what was happening, other people were aware and they recorded those happenings so that when awakened and your awareness returned you could fill in the information that you missed while your awareness was absent..
Awareness is the process through which the experiencer becomes informed. sometimes though, people build conceptual beliefs around the imagined meanings for a word like awareness, creating specialized linguistics for the illusion that their conceptual belief system is valid..
When the mind is still there is no conflicting understandings about the meanings of awareness.. there is the happening and the experiencer's interaction with it, the evolution of consciousness.. the experiencer acts in accordance with the happening, rather than the beliefs they have imagined about the happening, and the stories they are attached to 'about' their beliefs..
Liberation happens when the experiencer lets go of beliefs and stories, when the experiencer can share their experience of the happening without embellishing that sharing to represent their imagined meanings and beliefs..
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 9, 2014 19:51:43 GMT -5
Awareness is not something that other things happen within, awareness comes and goes.. while you were sleeping, and unaware of what was happening, other people were aware and they recorded those happenings so that when awakened and your awareness returned you could fill in the information that you missed while your awareness was absent.. What do you suppose is the nature of the Intelligence that digested your food, beat your heart, and breathed you while you were absent?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 10, 2014 19:09:53 GMT -5
Awareness is not something that other things happen within, awareness comes and goes.. while you were sleeping, and unaware of what was happening, other people were aware and they recorded those happenings so that when awakened and your awareness returned you could fill in the information that you missed while your awareness was absent.. What do you suppose is the nature of the Intelligence that digested your food, beat your heart, and breathed you while you were absent? 'That' which is me is also that nature, that intelligence.. 'I' was not absent, awareness was..
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 10, 2014 19:13:21 GMT -5
What do you suppose is the nature of the Intelligence that digested your food, beat your heart, and breathed you while you were absent? 'That' which is me is also that nature, that intelligence.. 'I' was not absent, awareness was.. OK, fair enough.
|
|